annual report sugarcane

7/31/2019 Annual Report Sugarcane

1/63

Investing in Sugarcane Industry Innovation

Annual Report

200708

Sugar Research and Development Corporation


2/63

26 September 2008

The Hon. Tony Burke

Minister or Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry

Parliament House

CANBERRA ACT 2600

Dear Mr Burke,

In accordance with the requirements o the Primary Industriesand Energy Research and Development Act 1989 (the PIERD Act), I

submit the Annual Report o the Sugar Research and Development

Corporation (SRDC) or 200708. The activities o the Corporation

are reported against the objectives, strategies, outputs and outcomes

o the SRDC Research and Development Plan (R&D Plan) 20072012

and are consistent with the 200708 Annual Operational Plan andPortolio Budget Statement.

The report o operations included in the Annual Report has been

made in accordance with a resolution o the Directors o SRDC on

26 August 2008. SRDC Directors are responsible under Section 9

o the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997or the

preparation and content o the report o operations in accordancewith the Finance Ministers Orders.

SRDC is confdent that its perormance in 200708 contributed to

achieving the Corporations vision or a proftable and internationallycompetitive Australian sugar industry providing economic,

environmental and social benefts or rural and regional communities.

I commend this report to you.

Yours sincerely,

I Knop AM

Chairman



Telephone: 07 3210 0495 Web: www.srdc.gov.au Email: [email protected]

Facsimile: 07 3210 0506 PO Box 12050, Brisbane George Street Q 4003, Australia

ISSN 1039-3250 Copyright

Sugar Research andDevelopment Corporation 2008

Ofce Location

Level 16,

141 Queen Street,

Brisbane

This work is copyright. Apart

rom any use as permitted

under the Copyright Act 1968,

no part may be reproduced byany process without written

permission rom the Sugar

Research and Development

Corporation. Requests

and enquiries concerning

reproduction and rights should

be addressed to the Executive

Director, SRDC, PO Box 12050,

George Street, Brisbane Q 4003.

Cover and text design by

Graystone Studio.


3/63

Contents

1. Highlights 2

Responding to challenges ..................................................................................................... 3Investing in change ............................................................................................................. 4

2. Overview o SRDC 6

Our business ........................................................................................................................ 7Industry and R&D environment ............................................................................................ 8Project investments............................................................................................................. 10Partnering and collaboration .............................................................................................. 12Income and expenditure ..................................................................................................... 13Report rom the Chairman and Executive Director .............................................................. 14

3. Our Outcomes 16

Outcomes and outputs ....................................................................................................... 17

Research Priorities ............................................................................................................... 18Investment Arena: Regional Futures ................................................................................... 20Investment Arena: Emerging Technologies .......................................................................... 45Investment Arena: People Development ............................................................................. 52

4. Corporate Operations 62

Corporate Governance ...................................................................................................... 63SRDC Board ........................................................................................................................ 67SRDC Sta .......................................................................................................................... 74Reporting Requirements ..................................................................................................... 75

5. Selection Committee Report 77

6. Financial Statements 81

7. Appendices 112

Appendix A 113

National Research Priorities attributed to each Program 200708 ..................................... 113

Appendix B 114

Rural Research and Development Priorities attributed to each Program 200708 .............. 114

Appendix C 115

Research Project Listing 200708 ...................................................................................... 115

Appendix D 125

Final Reports Approved 200708 ...................................................................................... 125

Appendix E 128

Publications ...................................................................................................................... 128

Appendix F 133

Freedom o Inormation Act Statement ............................................................................. 133

Appendix G 134

Abbreviations ................................................................................................................... 134

Appendix H 135

Table o compliance with publishing guidelines and legislation ......................................... 135

Appendix I 136

General Index ................................................................................................................... 136

1


4/63

1. Highlights

2


5/63

Responding to challenges

Helping the industry manage smutSRDC is supporting BSES Limited in its work to

manage the threat o smut and other diseases.

In 200708, researchers were able to determine

the rate at which smut spread throughout

paddocks and regions. They were surprised

to nd that the rate o spread was a lot aster

than initially suspected. This inormation has

been used by industry to take essential early

steps to replace susceptible varieties with

resistant ones. SRDC has also supported BSES inprojects which have seen a signicant increase

in resistance levels in the breeding program,

and the release o two new smut-resistant and

one intermediate variety in 2008. (SRDC Project

Codes: BSS256, BSS265 and BSS302)

Helping industry understand and respondto climate change

As a result o a SRDC-unded and CSIRO-

led project, the sugar industry has a better

understanding o the possible impacts andeects o climate change. One o the rst

primary industries to undertake research

o this nature, the sugar industry is using

the knowledge gathered in this research

to inorm other projects. This research also

inormed the second phase o the Managing

Climate Variability Program. The ndings

and recommendations o this research were

published in the SRDC Technical Report:

4/2007 Climate change and the Australian

sugarcane industry: Impacts, adaptation and

R&D opportunities. (SRDC Project Code:

CSE019 and SRD011)

Investing in the industrys utureMany o Australias sugar growing regions

are seeing younger generations moving away

rom the cane industry, but one SRDC-unded

project is investing in the industrys leaders

o tomorrow. During the six month Advance

in Sugar program six participants had the

opportunity to invest in personal development,

team work and proessional development.

Graduates represented production, milling,

research and extension and each completed a

project which will contribute to the eciency,

proessionalism and sustainability o the

industry. (SRDC Project Code: LDI001)

Collaborating to succeedPotential gains or the sugar industry can

be achieved through collaboration. As well

as partnering with research and industry

organisations to deliver R&D outcomes,SRDC has partnered other rural research and

development corporations on joint ventures

including the Climate Change Research

Strategy or Primary Industries, Natural

Resource Management Collaborative Venture,

Managing Climate Variability Program, Lie

Cycle Assessment in Rural Industries and the

Science and Innovation Awards or Young

People in Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry.

Empowering grower groupsSRDCs investments have ocused on building

the innovation skills o the industry. An external

review o SRDCs grower group innovation

projects ound that the biggest industry gains

rom the program were in the more rapid

adoption o practices and arming systems.

In terms o individual impact, the growers

who were involved in the program reported

an increase in their condence and skills in

planning, managing and promoting on-arm

research. Through this program growers have

successully worked with researchers and

extension sta in on-arm, armer-driven trials

which have resulted in mutual and broader

industry benets.

3Highlights


6/63

Soybean investment in break cropsThanks to SRDC unding, in late 2007 CSIRO

Plant Industry announced the release o

another new soybean variety, Fraser, suited

to the Fraser coast region o Queensland.

Fraser has excellent grain quality with highprotein content, a clear hilum and is suitable

or the eed and oilseed crushing markets. With

diversication oten being the key to increased

prot, this type o research, which has given

many sugarcane growers another income

option, is paramount or industry development.

Well-grown soybeans also reduce the need or

costly nitrogen ertiliser in the ollowing cane

crop. (SRDC Project Code: CPI009)

Working out what goes on in the soilAlthough still in its early days, a project led

by the University o Queensland is showing

great promise in its ability to help growers

understand the importance o soil microbes

to soil health and crop production. Molecular

markers which are being investigated

could become important diagnostic tools

to help growers achieve healthier soils by

understanding the desired microbial conditions

or improved soil health and nutrient cycling.

(SRDC Project Code: UQ043)

Investing in change

Putting the precision into agricultureSRDC is working with researchers rom

CSIRO, BSES Limited and the National Centre

or Agricultural Engineering to provide a

coordinated approach to research into precision

agriculture options or the sugar industry. By

adopting and encouraging a collaborative

approach SRDC hopes to provide the next step

or the industry to capitalise on the advances

oered by new arming systems. The ndings

and recommendations o this research werepublished in an SRDC Technical Report: 3/2007

Precision agriculture options or the Australian

sugarcane industry. (SRDC Project Codes:

CSE018, NCA009 and SRD012)

Working across the value chain to extendseason lengthIn the Herbert, industry and researchers knew

that there were potential rewards along the

value chain through optimising the length

o the harvesting season and capitalising ongeographical variation o the sugar content o

cane. A BSES Limited-led project has industry

in the Herbert investigating options to achieve

this. The project has provided stakeholders

with the opportunity o better understanding

supply-chain issues and o investigating urther

opportunities to increase monetary returns.

(SRDC Project Code: BSS264)

Managing nitrogenAs the cost o on-arm inputs such as ertiliser

continues to rise, SRDC is working with

researchers rom BSES Limited and CSIRO

Sustainable Ecosystems to help growers

save money by determining the ideal rate o

nitrogen to apply. Growers have participated

in a number o workshops and have indicated

that the combined results o these projects

will improve industrys ability to apply the

correct amount o nitrogen, saving money

and the environment particularly the Great

Barrier Ree. (SRDC Project Codes: BSS268

and CSE011)

Break crops, such as soybean,are giving sugarcane growersanother income option.

SRDC Annual Report 2007084


7/63

Giving women the support they needA number o SRDC unded projects are

helping women gain the skills and condence

they need to take on leadership roles within

the industry. These projects are connecting

women with mentors, providing training

opportunities and giving them condence.

Importantly, these projects are helping

industry leaders and organisations capitalise

on this underutilised resource by identiying

strategies to support women. (SRDC ProjectCodes: CGH001 and CMC001)

Improving the eectiveness o mud fltrationSince 2006, SRI (QUT) have been trialling two

dierent types o lters with the aim to improve

the cost-eectiveness o mud ltration. The

team have been able to achieve dry cakes

with equipment costs signicantly below the

standard rotary vacuum lters currently in use in

Australian sugar mills. The reduction in moisture

content o the lter cake will mean cheapertransportation costs, with savings estimated or

an average sized actory o $100,000 per season.

The reduced transportation costs should lead

to reduced accumulation o heavy metals in the

cane elds near the mill, as the drier lter cake

can be transported more economically to more

distant elds. (SRDC Project Code: QUT012)

Valuing harvesting inormationHarvester operators worked with researchers

in the Burdekin to understand how operating

inormation improves their perormance. By

collecting inormation including basic operating

data, block data and inter-arm comparisons,

it is anticipated that a benchmarking system

could be created which would enable harvest

groups to measure their perormance. This

project has been instrumental in changing

harvester operators attitude to change.(SRDC Project Code: CSR033)

Deeating the autumn predictability barrierClimate orecasts are crucial or Australian sugar

industry planning. Researchers at James Cook

University are testing a climate orecasting

system that demonstrates remarkable promise

in overcoming the autumn predictability

barrier. Improving strategic systems thinking

could lead to a reduction in costs associated

with wet weather during the harvest season,improved harvest schedules, less risk o leaving

cane unharvested, better industry awareness o

productivity supply patterns and better decision

making amongst industry members when

deciding the harvest season start date. Already,

members o industry are considering this tool

when planning. (SRDC Project Code: JCU027)

Improved mud ltration technologymakes mill mud cheaper totransport and easier to apply.

5Highlights


8/63

2. Overview o SRDCOur business 7

Industry and R&D environment 8

Project investments 10

Partnering and collaboration 12

Income and expenditure 13

Report rom the Chairman andExecutive Director 14

6


9/63

Our business

SRDC invests in research conducted by

others rather than carrying out research itsel.SRDC takes a strategic view o the needs and

opportunities or R&D in the sugar industry,

based on eedback rom industry, then

identies and invests in appropriate R&D

activities to pursue these opportunities.

SRDC is part o a larger network o rural R&D

Corporations (RDCs) which similarly invest in

the conduct o R&D and implementation o

outcomes or Australian rural industries. The

eatures o the RDC model are outlined below.

Features o the R&D Corporations modelThe RDCs take a leading national roleinplanning, investing in and managing R&D

or their respective industries.

RDCs are not research grant agencies.

Their enabling legislation requires them to

treat R&D as an investment in economic,

environmental and social benefts to their

industries and to the people o Australia.

Rather than ocussing mainly on generating

new knowledge or its own sake, RDCs strive

todeliver high rates o returnon R&Dinvestment by infuencing the ull range o

interactions along the innovation chain.

Striving or high returns on investment also

leads RDCs to apply signicant resources

to translating research outputs into

practical outcomes.

RDCs are required to conduct their activities

in accordance with strategic R&D plans and

annual operational plans that take account

o the R&D needs o end-usersand otherstakeholders. The plans are approved at

ministerial level.

Although RDCs und basic research, a high

proportion o activity is applied R&D

both short-term and long-term.

RDCs are ullyaccountable to their majorstakeholders and to the wider community.

SRDCs Core Business is to oster an

innovative and sustainable Australian sugarindustry through targeted investment in

research and development.

An innovative sugar industry will build

capacity in people to capitalise on and

embrace advances in science, engineering

and technology.A sustainablesugar industry shouldcombine the 3 Ps: prot (economy), planet

(environment), and people (society).

SRDC works in partnership with industry,

government, R&D partners and associated

rural communities to underpin a vibrant sugar

industry with the object o achieving the

Corporations Corporate Outcome:

A proftable and internationally competitive

Australian sugar industry providing

economic, environmental and social

benefts or rural and regional communities.

SRDC strives to create an environment that

recognises the value o innovation change

that adds value. SRDC invests in R&D activities

to nd new and improved ways o doing things

rather than unding core or ongoing services.

The Corporation is committed to setting the

right targets, managing investments so they

succeed and making sure research delivers

impacts across the Australian sugar industry.

In short, SRDC is rmly committed to

maximising the return on industry and

Government investment into research

and development.

SRDC obtains income rom levies paid by

the sugar industry, matching unds rom

the Australian Government, and interest.

In 200708 the levy remained at $0.14 per

tonne o sugarcane harvested, divided equally

between growers and millers.

7Our business


10/63

Industry and R&D environment

Figure 2.2: Cane produced20022007 (Mt)

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

200720062005200420032002

Cane Produced (Mt )

Source: Australian Sugar Year Book 2008

Despite a smaller Australian cane harvest

(11.92t/ha in 200708 compared with 15.06t/ha in 200607), an increase in average CCS

value led to a lower decline in sugar yield than

otherwise may have been expected rom the

cane harvested.

International sugar prices can fuctuate

considerably rom year to year, and real returns

in Australian dollars are oten only marginally

above the cost o production. The gross value

o cane in the ve years to 200708 varied

between $850 million and $1,180 million.Sugar, like other commodities, has experienced

higher than normal price fuctuations with the

international economic turmoil o 200708.

Estimated total unds available or sugar industry

R&D in 200708 were $57.4 million, o which

38 per cent was contributed by the industry.

This total consisted o $13 million rom SRDC;

$32 million rom R&D providers including

CSIRO, Universities, BSES Ltd and Productivity

Services companies; and $12.4 million romthe CRC or Sugar Industry Innovation through

Biotechnology.

The Australian sugar industry produces raw

and rened sugar rom sugarcane. Incomeis also derived rom by-products including

ethanol and molasses, and rom generation o

electricity. While Australia produces only three

to our per cent o the world sugar supply, it

exports approximately eight per cent o the

sugar traded worldwide.

In 200708 production o sugar cane ell to 35

million tonnes largely as a result o unavourable

weather conditions and a reduction in the area

harvested. Excessive rainall close to and duringthe harvest produced a reduction in both cane

and sugar yields in northern cane producing

areas. Meanwhile, in addition to drought

in southern Queensland, areas o southern

Queensland and northern New South Wales

experienced periods o rost which resulted in

aected cane being cut or odder.

In the ar north o Queensland, the high prices

oered or land by MIS Forestry companies

have seen a reduction in the area o landarmed under cane. While in other regions,

especially Central, many growers have

responded to period o low grower returns by

turning to more lucrative jobs in the mining

industry, which has also seen a reduction in the

area o cane harvested.

Figure 2.1: Area o cane harvested20022007 (10,000 ha)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

200720062005200420032002

Area harvested (10,000 ha)




11/63

Figure 2.3: Gross value o product 20022007 ($100m)

5

0

5

0

5

0

5

200720062005200420032002

GVP ($100m)

Source: ABARE Commodity Statistics 2007

Figure 2.4: Sugar yield 20022007 (t/ha)

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

200720062005200420032002

Sugar Yield ( t / ha)


9Industry and R&D environment


12/63

Project investments

Figure 2.5: Proportion by unding o SRDCproject types as at 30 June 2008

Table 2.1: SRDC Project Statistics

Projects 200708 200607

Research Projects 83 87

Scholarships 13 12

Grower Group Innovation Projects 35 29Travel and Learning OpportunityProjects

43 58

Table 2.2: Project reports received 200708and 200607

200708 200607

Milestone Reports 378 414

Final reports 63 57

SRDC works closely with all research partners

to ensure an ecient and eective process is in

place to complete all research projects on time.

The target allocations or each Investment

Arena were identied in the SRDC R&D Plan

20072012 and Annual Operational Plan

200708 (Table 2.3). The distribution oproject unding across the three Arenas is

illustrated in Figure 2.6.

The Primary Industries and Energy Research and

Development Act 1989 (PIERD Act) requiresSRDC to make eective use o Australias

scientic resources, and SRDC strives to create

an environment which ensures a high return

on investment.

SRDC has adopted a competitive approach to

R&D investments and each project proposal

is assessed using an attractiveness/ easibility

ramework. This approach is explained in

urther detail in Section 5.

In 200708, SRDC continued to place

considerable eort into ensuring that the results

o research and development projects deliver

benets to the Australian sugarcane industry.

Thus, SRDC places an emphasis on partnerships

between industry sectors and within and

between regions.

SRDC invested in our types o projects in

200708:

Research Projects which comprise around

90 per cent o project unding

Scholarship Projects support postgraduate

study

Travel and Learning Opportunity

Projects (TLOP) support specic learning

opportunities or individuals or groups

Grower Group Innovation Projects (GGIP).

The proportion o unding allocated to each

project type is represented in Figure 2.5.

Tables 2.1 and 2.2 provide a snapshot o

project and reporting statistics or the periods

200607 and 200708.

TLOP 2%

GGIP 6%

Scholarships 4%

Research Projects 88%



13/63


14/63


15/63

Income and expenditure

SRDCs income and expenditure or 200708 compared with that orecast in the Annual Operational

Plan 200708 are set out in Table 2.4. Full nancial statements are included in Section 6.

Table 2.4: Forecast and actual income and expenditure or 200708

Forecast $m Actual $m

Income:

Industry Levies 5.348 5.028

Australian Government Contribution (matching levy unding) 5.348 5.283

Australian Government Contribution (Regional and Community Project Funding) 0 1.0

Other 0.500 0.847

Total Income 11.196 12.158

Expenditure:

R&D Projects 11.024 9.139

Operation o SRDC 2.039 1.954

Total Expenditure 13.063 11.093

Income in 200708 was higher than orecast because o the receipt o $1m o Regional and

Community Projects (RCP) unds rom the Sugar Industry Reorm Program or R&D to accelerate

the delivery o improved sugarcane varieties. Project expenditure with those unds will commence

rom July 2008. Apart rom the RCP unds, industry levies and government matching income

were slightly below orecast due to reduced crop size, and other income (interest and royalties)was above orecast. Expenditure both on R&D projects and operations was lower than orecast.

Reduced project expenditure was due to delayed commencement o some new projects, delays in

some milestones until 200809, and early conclusion o some projects. Operational expenditure

was slightly below orecast due to stang changes. SRDCs cash reserve at 30 June 2008 was

$8.117 million. Table 2.5 summarises the actual income and expenditure over the past ve years.

Table 2.5 Five years budget at a glance ($m)

200708 200607 200506 200405 200304

Revenue 12.158 11.134 11.125 9.438 10.940

Expenditure 11.093 10.724 10.160 8.637 8.914Operating Surplus/(defcit) 1.065 0.411 0.966 0.801 2.027

Total assets 11.273 9.236 8.887 7.714 8.010

Total equity 9.608 8.557 8.146 7.181 6.386

Industry contributions 5.028 4.887 5.342 5.131 5.312

Commonwealth contributions 6.283 5.522 5.195 3.756 5.191

R&D expenses 9.139 9.025 8.458 7.018 5.592

13Income and expenditure


16/63

Report rom the Chairman and Executive Director

Challenges and opportunities or thesugar industryThe Australian sugarcane industry was again

aced with opportunities and challenges in

200708 and as this report demonstrates,

SRDCs investment in R&D has helped

capitalise on opportunities and mitigate the

impact o the challenges.

A reduction in crop size, changes in the value

o the Australian dollar and the continued rising

costs o inputs such as ertiliser and uel have

issued a stark reminder o the need to embraceinnovation to remain competitive.

Underpinning industrys ability to remain

sustainable in the ace o these adverse

conditions is its access to, and willingness to

adopt, innovation. Innovation is the key or

industry to ensure it can withstand market

orces and environmental concerns. The role o

R&D in helping industry to embrace innovative

practices and technologies has never been

more critical.

The challenge or SRDC in 200708 was to

make sure its investments hit their mark. As

outlined in the highlights section o this Annual

Report, the Corporations investments have

helped industry prepare or and respond to a

range o challenges and issues.

For the rst time, climate variability and climate

change were included as Rural Research

Priorities (RRP) when the Governments new

RRPs were announced in May 2007.

Pleasingly, by 200708 SRDC had already

undertaken a number o eorts to help the

Australian sugarcane industry prepare or and

respond to the impacts o climate change. As a

contributor to the Managing Climate Variability

Program a collaborative Research and

Development Corporations activity SRDC

is ensuring the Australian sugarcane industry

has access to a wealth o inormation to

ensure it is positioned to mitigate the possibleimpacts o climate change. SRDCs investments

have helped industry to manage water more

eciently and make signicant improvementsin water quality.

SRDCs investments have ocused on building

the innovation skills o the industry. In 200708,

SRDC commissioned an external review o its

grower group innovation projects. Through

this program growers have successully worked

with researchers and extension sta in on-arm,

armer-driven trials which have resulted in

mutual and broader industry benets.

The review ound that the biggest industry

gains rom the program were in the more rapid

adoption o practices and arming systems. In

terms o individual impact, the growers who

were involved in the program reported an

increase in their condence and skills in planning,

managing and promoting on-arm research.

SRDC is investing in research to help the

industry adopt precision agriculture. SRDC

hopes that by encouraging a collaborativeapproach to precision agriculture research

in the sugarcane industry it will provide the

next step or the industry to capitalise on the

advances oered by new arming systems.

As a contributor to the Managing

Climate Variability Program

a collaborative Research and

Development Corporations activity

SRDC is ensuring the Australian

sugarcane industry has access to a

wealth o inormation to ensure it is

positioned to mitigate the possible

impacts o climate change.



17/63

New directions200708 marked a year o change or SRDC.

The appointment o a new Executive Director,

Chairman and Board has repositioned the

Corporation to reinvigorate its investment

in R&D activities and so meet the needs o

industry and government stakeholders.

In June 2008, the Corporation celebrated the

launch o the SRDC Research and Development

Plan 20072012 by the Honourable Tony Burke

MP, Minister or Agriculture, Fisheries and

Forestry at the Heck Groups Rocky Point Mill.Mr Burke was positive about the opportunities

available or the Australian sugarcane industry

and indicated that the plan ocussed on

meeting industrys and Governments priorities.

This plan provides the ramework in which we

now have to collectively dene specic projects

that will enable us to ace the many challenges

that currently exist and turn them into real

opportunities or a prosperous and sustainable

uture. Mr Burke pointed out at the plans launchthat the issues that we are acing are similar to

those experienced by our global competitors,

but that targeted R&D investment oers us the

opportunity to get ahead o the game.

This industry has never been at such a major

cross road. Despite the current general

negative sentiment in the industry there are

many exciting opportunities and together we

can work towards making them a reality.

The projected reduction in SRDCs budget,

which comes as a direct result o a reduction in

the crop size, means that we need to refect on

our portolio and invest in more big projects

which oer lower overhead costs and a higher

potential rate o return.

200708 marked a year o changeor SRDC. The appointment o a

new Executive Director, Chairman

and Board has repositioned the

Corporation to reinvigorate its

investment in R&D activities and

so meet the needs o industry and

government stakeholders.

Towards its goal o remaining responsive to

the needs o industry the Corporation will

adopt a more regional approach to the way

we do business.

We will have to change our R&D eorts in

many ways or the sugarcane industry to remain

vibrant. Realisation o the many opportunities

will require true leadership, orward-

thinking, vision, integration o stakeholders

and investment in new approaches. This is

something the Sugar Research and Development

Corporation is committed to working with

industry and government to achieve.

We move into 200809 with a renewed ocus

on delivering the R&D outcomes the Australian

sugarcane industry needs to advance.

Frikkie BothaExecutive Director

Ian Knop AMChairman

15Report rom the Chairman and Executive Director


18/63

3. Our Outcomes

Outcomes and outputs 17

Research Priorities 18

Investment Arena:Regional Futures 20

Investment Arena:Emerging Technologies 45

Investment Arena:People Development 52

16


19/63


20/63

Research Priorities

Rural Research and Development Priorities

The Rural Research and Development Priorities

(RRDP) are ramed within the National Research

Priorities and ocus on issues relevant to rural

industries. They are:

Productivity and adding value Improve

the productivity and protability o existing

industries and support the development o

viable new industries

Supply chain and markets Better understand

and respond to domestic and international

market and consumer requirements and

improve the fow o such inormation through

the supply chain, including to consumers

Natural resource management Support

eective management o Australias natural

resources to ensure primary industries are both

economically and environmentally sustainable

Climate variability and climate change Buildresilience to climate variability and adapt to

and mitigate the eects o climate change

Biosecurity Protect Australias community,

primary industries and environment rom

biosecurity threats.

Supporting priorities:

Innovation skills Improve the skills to

undertake research and apply its ndings

Technology

Promote the development onew and existing technologies.

SRDC investments contribute to the National

Research Priorities and the Rural R&D Prioritieso the Australian Government, which were

announced in December 2002 and March

2003 respectively.

National Research Priorities

The our broad headings o the National

Research Priorities (NRP) are:

An environmentally sustainable Australia

Promoting and maintaining good health

Frontier technologies or building and

transorming Australian industries

Saeguarding Australia.

Figure 3.1 illustrates the proportion o SRDC

unds invested in each NRP.

Figure 3.2 illustrates the proportion o SRDCunds invested in each Rural R&D Priority.

Figure 3.1 Allocation o SRDC unds byNational Research Priority

Saeguarding

Australia 4%

Frontier

Technologies 50%

Promoting and

maintaining good

health 18%

Environmenally

sustainable 28%

Figure 3.2 Allocation o SRDC undsby Rural R&D Priority

Biosecurity 5%

Innovation skills 23%

Technology 18%

Climate change 2%

Productivity 21%

Supply chain and

markets 12%

Sustainable NRM

19%



21/63

Ballina

1. Biomass value-adding

2. Breeding rost resistant canes

3. Economics, production and

environmental benets o

biochar

Bundaberg

1. Product diversication

2. Farming systems

3. Plant breeding and varieties

Burdekin

1. Water management

2. Utilisation o total biomass

3. Soil health/Capacity

building by extension

(equal rating)

Far North Queensland

1. Dene and develop energy

cane concept

2. Resource use eciency

3. More ecient harvesting

Isis

1. Improved arming systems

2. Varieties

3. Developing a united vision

Herbert

1. More value rom crops

2. Whole o crop harvesting

3. Double productivity at hal

the production cost

Mackay

1. Rigidity o current milling/

production systems or

diversication

2. Value adding

3. Survival o grower

Proserpine

1. Protability

2. Soil health and water quality

3. Input cost reduction

Tully

1. Other products rom

sugarcane

2. More suitable varieties

3. More prot

Industry Priorities

In addition to the National and Rural R&D

Priorities, SRDC is also guided by industry

priorities. Throughout 200708 SRDC consulted

with industry through regular meetings with its

Representative Bodies as well as industry wide

workshops in April and May o 2008.

The top three issues identied as priority areas

or each sugarcane growing region were:

SRDC regularly met with industry

in 200708 to keep abreast oindustry issues.

19Research Priorities


22/63

Investment Arena: Regional Futures

This research also inormed the second phase

o the Managing Climate Variability Program

a collaborative Research and Development

Corporations activity which is ocussed on

increasing Australias capacity to captureopportunities and manage risks related to

climate variability.

Building on the success o the rst phase o the

program (which was completed in 200607)

the second phase o this joint venture will

address seasonal orecasting, water resources,

agricultural applications and adaptation to

climate change. (SRDC Project Code: CVA003).

SRDC has joined a new RDC Joint Venture,Climate Change Research Strategy or Primary

Industries (CCRSPI), which includes Land and

Water Australia, Cotton RDC, Dairy Australia,

Rural Industries RDC, Meat and Livestock

Australia, Wool Innovation, Grape and Wine

RDC and Grains RDC.

An overarching strategy o six themes or

national collaborative action has been developed

and is currently being edited in the rst phase

o the venture. The six themes are: utureclimates, economic analyses, lie-cycle analyses,

adaptation, mitigation and coordination.

All RDCs have agreed in principle to continue

with a second phase o this initiative. The

primary aim o this phase will be to have a

clear path orward or a co-ordinated and

collaborative national research eort that

will prepare primary industries (agriculture,

sheries and orestry) or the challenges and

opportunities o climate change. As a result o

the dierent interactions happening around

Enhancing industry preparedness climate change

SRDCs investments are helping industry

prepare or and respond to the possible

impacts o climate change. In 200607, SRDC

commissioned a report to help the Australian

sugarcane industry identiy options, as well as set

R&D priorities, or adapting to climate change.

Researchers rom CSIRO and QDPI&F joined

orces to assess the likely impact o climate

change on the industry and to work out ways

to capitalise on the potential benets o a

generally warmer and drier climate, while

minimising the negative eects.

A publication was launched in November 2007

outlining the reports ndings Climate Change

and the Australian Sugarcane Industry: Impacts,

adaptation and R&D opportunities, along with a

review o workshops conducted as part o this

research, This publication is available rom SRDC

or on the Publications page o the SRDC website.

The R&D needs identied in this report will

better inorm the sugarcane industry on best-bet

options or adaptation to climate change. (SRDCProject Codes: SRD011, CSE019)

Researchers rom CSIRO and QDPI&F

joined orces to assess the likely

impact o climate change on the

industry and to work out ways to

capitalise on the potential benefts o

a generally warmer and drier climate,

while minimising the negative eects.

IndicatorEnhanced structure and unctioning o regional sugarcane industry value chains

Measure Demonstration o improved integration o the industry value chain within regionsdelivering increased protability and more ecient use o capital based onenvironmentally responsible and sae business practices

NRPs Promoting and maintaining good health

RRPs Supply chain and markets; Climate variability and climate change; Productivityand adding value



23/63

The project team is working with growers

and oceanographers rom Florida StateUniversity (FSU) to test the applicability o the

long lead climate orecasting model or a range

o sugarcane growing regions in Queensland

and NSW.

In March 2007 this project warned industry

about the threat o a La Nina evolving during

the second hal o 2007 which actually

happened. This was an historic moment - or

the rst time, the Australian sugar industry had

insight into harvest climate conditions beorethe autumn barrier. The project team reported

that one armer in New South Wales who

decided very early in the harvest cycle to harvest

his plant cane earlier than he normally would, to

protect the young cane rom fooding rains, was

extremely pleased with his decision.

All industry consultative groups who are part o

this project have a avourable opinion about the

FSU model. Plans are now in place to ensure

the regions represented by the consultativegroups have the local capacity and necessary

tools to deliver these orecasts ater this project

has nished. (SRDC Project Code: JCU027)

this initiative, an issue that is expected to have

some early urgent and important investmentsis emissions trading. Details o uture SRDCs

investments into this area will be set out in

uture Annual Operational Plans.

SRDC also supported CSIRO researcher Dr Sarah

Park through a Travel and Learning Opportunity

Project to investigate current and potential

environmental benets o sugarcane landscapes.

This travel covered two areas o research that

are currently highly topical within the Australian

sugarcane industry: the impacts o climatechange on the industry and the capacity to

adapt, and the identication o ecosystem

services (ecoservices) and potential mechanisms

to nancially reward landowners who acilitate

these (i.e. agricultural environment schemes).

(SRDC Project Code: CSE021)

Breaking the autumn predictability barrier

Climate orecasts are crucial or Australian

sugar industry planning. Knowledge aboutthe chance o rain during the cane harvest

season (i.e. JuneNov) made available early in

the year (i.e. JanMar) would oer enormous

scope or enhancing industry orward planning

activities. It is widely recognised that many

climate orecast systems have limited skill when

predicting across autumn however a James

Cook University-led project is changing this.

Knowledge about the chanceo rain during the cane harvestseason early in the year wouldoer enormous scope orenhancing industry orwardplanning activities.

For the frst time, the Australian sugar

industry had insight into harvest climate

conditions beore the autumn barrier.

21Investment Arena: Regional Futures


24/63

Lie cycle assessment in rural industries

All primary industries use energy and water

resources throughout their supply chains - and

all produce greenhouse emissions. In the uture

it is probable that industries will be called to

account or their emissions and energy and

water use. Already consumers in Europe are

seeking inormation on the lie cycle o primary

products and the ood miles imported goods

have travelled. Energy and water consumed

per standard unit o product are becoming

important issues.

Lie cycle assessment (LCA) also has the

potential to accurately inorm Triple Bottom

Line reporting. In 200708 SRDC collaborated

with other rural R&D Corporations in an

RIRDC-led project to develop common

approaches to conducting LCAs or primary

industries. This research also helped to build a

shared understanding within the RDCs, their

producer stakeholders, customers and the

regulatory authorities with respect to lie-cycleanalysis, including a shared learning rom

previous lie-cycle assessment projects. (SRDC

Project Code: RIR001)

Improved value-chain operations andutilisation o capital

SRDCs investments in the Regional Futures Arena

have helped the industry to take advantage o

opportunities to increase the protability and

sustainability o the entire value chain. A number

o projects are ocussed on the acilitation o

change across regions and mill areas.

In the Herbert, industry and researchers knew

that there were potential rewards along

the value chain by optimising the length o

the harvesting season and capitalising on

geographical variation o the sugar content

o cane. A BSES Limited-led project supports

industry investigating options to achieve this.

Millers in particular stand to gain rom longer

crushing seasons through increased utilisationand return on their capital; however one o the

main challenges in starting the crush earlier in

the season is the relatively low juice purity and

low CCS levels.

The project showed that when season

lengthening is required, extension o the season

orward, as opposed to lengthening the season

at the end o the harvest window should be

considered. The advantages o an earlier start

ar outweigh the advantages o a late harvestnish, because o the loss in sugar yield, loss o

yield in subsequent ratoons, and the possibility

o premature ploughing out o a crop due

to ratoon ailure. Varieties were identied or

optimum productivity at dierent times in

the harvesting season and this should assist in

improving the management o varieties.

The results indicated that the industry has the

potential to increase the monetary returns

through the management o varieties, avoidingharvesting o ratooning cane ater early

November in the Herbert, harvesting plough-

out cane last i the harvesting season is going

to continue ater early to mid November and

to avoid losses associated with late-harvested

cane. The project also highlighted the potential

or a crop ripener such as MODDUS to

improve early CCS. Crop ripeners should be

considered as a management tool or early

harvested cane.

In considering the possible impacts across

industry o extending the harvest season, the

project provided stakeholders an opportunity

to better understand supply-chain issues and

to investigate urther opportunities to increase

monetary returns. There is an increasing

willingness and ability o people in the Herbert

to evaluate and implement some o the

practices towards increasing season length and

sugar yields. (SRDC Project Code: BSS264)



25/63


26/63

The Mackay region has recognised the potential

o NIR to be used as a measuring techniqueor cane nutrients, to assist growers in making

management decisions, to improve arm

protability and reduce environmental impact.

A Mackay Sugar-led project will work on the

integration o the GIS and NIR technologies

including the development o an interace

with Mackay sugar, development o

unctionality within the AgDat application,

and the development o the grower web

mapping component.

The advantages o electronic consignment

include providing in-eld mapping o cane

constituents at the cane bin level rather than the

paddock level. This is done through interacing

the NIR system and accurate determination

o harvest location o bins rom the GPS

monitoring system. There is the potential or

this to give valuable inormation to growers on

the actual yields rom individual bins within a

paddock, which may be used to change on-arm practices to improve productivity, such

as variable rate application o chemicals and

ertilisers. (SRDC Project Code: CSR038)

Improving harvesting-transport-millinglogistics

Current manual methods o scheduling road

transport and allocating harvesters to loading

pads lead to increased costs. This is due to

poor utilisation o vehicles and turn around rate

o trailers, highly variable day-to-day average

distances o travel, variable mill crush rates,

and diculties in providing a reliable service to

harvesters on some days.

A transport scheduling and siding (or loadingpad) rostering tool was developed by CSIRO

to overcome these diculties through existing

value chain projects. The Maryborough mill

region needed the integration o these tools

under a user-riendly interace/ramework so

that schedules are produced and adopted on

a daily basis.

Programming to supply transport schedules

in a user riendly ormat or cane haulage was

successul. The user interace is complete andworks with the daily planner and rescheduling

versions o the transport optimisation model.

The project team conducted scenario planning

which showed that the number o vehicles

scheduled and average queue time at the mill

could be reduced by more than 50 per cent

just by optimising a transport schedule that

allowed the pooling o hauliers. (SRDC Project

Code: MSF002)

A project to improve the overall eciency

o the harvest and transport sector o the

Mossman sugar industry concluded in 2007.

Eciency improvements were developed

through an industry consultation group which

looked at a range o payment and harvest

management issues. The project assessed three

payment options, with a number o growers

and harvest contractors changing to a fat rate

plus uel system in 2008.

The Mackay region has recognised

the potential o NIR to be used as

a measuring technique or cane

nutrients, to assist growers in

making management decisions, to

improve arm proftability and reduce

environmental impact.



27/63

A group o six cane harvesters had data-

loggers tted to monitor in-eld progress andperormance. Analysis o this data showed

that most in the group were operating within

harvest best practice guidelines or a number

o perormance indicators. (SRDC Project

Code: MAS002)

Implementing methods or industryadoption

Identication and implementation o appropriate

adoption strategies or emerging technologies isa key requirement o research outcomes.

In 200708 researchers rom CSIRO Sustainable

Ecosystems completed a project which

resulted in the development o a ramework

that connected theories rom science and

technology studies with the participatory

development o decision support systems.

This ramework provides a mechanism or

researchers to understand how their technology

is more likely to be adopted and appliedin practice, and the condence to engage

with a case study group. This creates a more

ecient and eective process which in turn can

enhance industry activities by better identiying

and overcoming delaying obstacles and

identiying improved processes or technology

development and adoption.

Another important area o outputs and

outcomes or the Wet Tropics is the active

participation o sugar industry members in the

development o technologies and management

recommendations or improved application o

seasonal climate orecasting, improved irrigation

scheduling and reduced environmental impacts

o nitrogen ertiliser management. Outputs

to better manage limited water supplies

(WaterSense) and increase industry preparedness

or climate variability (RainForecaster) were

developed as part o this project.

The project methodology combined awareness

training, action learning and extension activitiesand was tailored to suit local context. The

action learning approach combined acting,

observing, refecting and uture planning. This

guided the development o the operational

plan which consisted o three main stages:

understanding (understanding the tool and the

processes to achieve adoption), implementation

(implementing technology and adoption

processes) and renement (redening the tool).

Many o the challenges that the sugarcaneindustry ace are complex systems issues and

R&D addressing these issues requires the

active participation o industry stakeholders.

A deeper understanding o processes that

contribute to eective engagement between

researchers and end-users is thereore essential

to deal with the ongoing and evolving

complexities o sugarcane systems. Building

capacity within the industry to implement

lessons rom this research could help maximise

the impact o complex technologies in theAustralian sugarcane industry. This will assist

the industry to prot rather than suer rom

the complex challenges that it aces. (SRDC

Project Code: CSE009)

This research developed a ramework

that provides a mechanism or

researchers to understand how

their technology is more likely to be

adopted and applied in practice.



28/63

A CANEGROWERS-led TLOP has raisedawareness o cane industry WH&S issues.Ergon Energy reported a signicant dropin the number o electrical saety incidentsduring the 2007 crushing season (rom 54to 27), a sure sign that this project andothers like it oer tangible rewards and

benets. (Photo courtesy o Ergon Energy)

Improving health and saety

Under Work Place Health & Saety (WH&S)

legislation employers are obliged to provide

sae premises, sae machinery and substances,

sae systems o work, inormation, instruction,

training and supervision, and a suitable working

environment and acilities. Failure to comply

can result in prosecution and nes.

Understanding and interpreting this legislation

is oten daunting or business owners.

CANEGROWERS took the lead and developed aSaety Management Handbook or the sugarcane

growing industry and used an SRDC unded-

Travel and Learning Opportunity Project to

conduct training and education in the regions.

Project activities included a Saety in Cane

seminar at Mackay, a WH&S orum in the

Burdekin and a eld day at Bundaberg.

Each event had a unique ocus, but all had

the objective o increasing sugarcane grower

knowledge and awareness o WH&S legislation

and provided a orum or growers to discussissues with industry experts. The project

was supported by FarmSae Queensland,

Queensland Transport, Ergon Energy, the

Queensland Police Service and Workplace

Health and Saety Queensland.

The 120 people who attended were provided

with a practical demonstration on hazard

identication and risk assessment and acquired

inormation and training on saety procedures

at delivery points, operating high-litmachinery near exposed power lines, and the

consequences o driver atigue.

The project team got their message through

- Ergon Energy reported a signicant drop in

the number o electrical saety incidents during

the 2007 crushing season (rom 54 to 27), a

sure sign that this project and others like it oer

tangible rewards and benets.

(SRDC Project Code: CMY001)



29/63

Case study A regional approach or Mossman

A project that concluded in 2007 helped industry in the Mossman Central Mill area take

a regional approach to change. The project had our broad areas o ocus:

Best management practice. Grower sel-assessment surveys showed that an extension

program developed with growers is paying o. More than hal o growers surveyed have

changed their row spacing to 1.65m or greater, are allowing at least some blocks o cane

with legumes planted zero-till and are taking soil samples at least once per cane cycle.

Business Planning. Data collected through this project suggest that approximately 70 per

cent o Mossman growers have undertaken some orm o business planning.

Community Engagement. Community and environmental groups were invited to Sugar

Awareness Days (held in 2003, 2004 and 2007) to meet arming and mill representatives.

The ormat or these days was inormal with presentations o cane arming practices and

open discussions. This allowed or concerns o the environmental and community groups

with cane arming practices to be directly addressed and allowed the cane industry to

present their land management practices in a positive manner.

Harvest and Transport Optimisation. An industry representative group was ormed in

2003 to consider measures to improve eciency in the harvest and transport sector o

the Mossman sugar industry. The role o the group was expanded in 2005 to develop

an optimum model or the sector in 2010. Activities o this group included trips to

Northern Rivers and Mackay areas to discuss reorm o the transport sector with industry

representatives in those areas. In 2006, ollowing the Northern Rivers trip, the group was

instrumental in overseeing the successul introduction o direct road transport o cane to

Mossman Central Mill.

(SRDC Project Code: MAS001)

A new phase o the Farm Health and Saety

Joint Venture started in March 2008 toimprove the health and saety o workers and

their amilies in the arming industries across

Australia. During the year, a toolkit Managing

Sugarcane Farm Saety was produced to assist

producers in agricultural industries to reduce

the risk o injury and illness associated with

work on arms. More than 350 toolkits have

been distributed across the NSW and QLD

sugarcane industries. CANEGROWERS used the

kit as a tool at their Workplace Health & Saety

Workshops or sugarcane growers. (SRDCProject Code: OHS003)



30/63

Investment Arena: Regional Futures

Indicator Enhanced resource utilisation in the arming and harvesting sectorsMeasure Implementation o improved arming and harvesting systems that increase revenue and

reduce input costs, and concurrently are environmentally and socially sustainable

NRPs Saeguarding Australia; An environmentally sustainable Australia

RRPs Biosecurity; Natural resource management; Productivity and adding value

As industry continues to rise to meet the

challenges o fuctuating sugar prices, climate

variability, disease and demand or alternative

land uses the need to enhance the cane

supply while maximising returns per unito costs is essential to achieving protability

and sustainability.

Many elements, including varieties, water and

nutrient inputs, pest management and timely

operations must be integrated into a workable

and robust system which ts industrys needs.

A ocus on implementation o improved

practice is thereore critical to success. This

thinking underpins SRDC investments in this

Arena Outcome area.

Supporting biosecurity planning

SRDC is supporting a BSES-led project

which aims to enhance Australias sugarcane

biosecurity measures by updating the industrysBiosecurity Plan to account or recent changes

in legislation and in PLANTPLAN (national

guidelines covering management and response

procedures or emergency plant pest incursions

aecting the Australian plant industries),

and in light o lessons rom the recent smut

response. Incursion Management Plans are

being developed or downy mildew, Ramu

stunt, sugarcane longhorn borer, Eumetopina

planthopper, sugarcane thrips and moth borers.

This project will ensure there is an enhanced

emergency response capacity towards existing

and emerging exotic threats. (SRDC Project

Code: BSS303)SRDC is supporting a BSESLimited-led project to developIncursion Management Plans.This image shows the damagecaused by the moth borerEldana saccharina to sugarcanein South Arica.



31/63

Helping industry understand and managethe spread o smut

200708 marked the second year since the

discovery o sugarcane smut on Australias

east coast. Over the last decade, SRDC has

supported R&D activities which have increased

industrys understanding and preparedness or

such a potential disease incursion.

SRDC supports the eorts o the BSES-CSIRO

Plant Industry Joint Venture in Sugarcane

Improvement (BSES-CSIRO plant breedingjoint venture) to increase the level o smut

resistance in cane cultivars across all stages

o the program.

This is most evident in the crosses made in 2007

smut-resistant crosses increased to more than

hal o the total crosses made. The BSES-CSIRO

plant breeding program released two new

smut-resistant and one intermediate variety in

2008. Seven existing smut resistant varieties

will be distributed in regions where they havepreviously not been grown. Major propagation

programs are in place to rapidly multiply the

new smut resistant varieties in all areas.

The industrys ability to successully manage

smut relies not only on resistant varieties but alsoon growers awareness and understanding o the

diseases impacts. A survey o grower awareness

o smut in the Herbert and Tully regions ound

that almost all growers have good knowledge o

smut and smut resistant varieties and are actively

planting smut resistant varieties.

The nal Indonesian smut resistance trial in

this project was planted in November 2007

and will be completed in November 2008. The

outstanding contribution o the IndonesianSugar Research Institute (ISRI) to the Australian

sugar industry by its proessional conduct o

smut trials over 10 years was recognised through

the presentation o the SRDC Service Award to

Irawan, the ISRI Senior Plant Pathologist, during

the ASSCT Conerence in Townsville in May

2008. (SRDC Project Code: BSS265)

Another BSES-led project, which commenced

in 200708, is ocussed on the epidemiology

o sugarcane smut. Researchers are gatheringinormation on smut escalation and spread in

each district where smut has been identied.

Healthy and diseased crops will be monitored



32/63

to quantiy disease spread and escalation in each

district. Spread o smut within the three targetareas has been comprehensively documented. It

is already clear that all arms in a region are likely

to be signicantly aected within three years

o the disease rst being detected in the region

aster in the northern parts o the Australian

sugar industry. This inormation will be used to

optimise industry transition rom susceptible to

resistant commercial varieties. (SRDC Project

Code: BSS302)

SRDC has invested in a BSES-led projectwhich aims to develop a decision-support

tool or growers and advisory sta to assist

them to select a balanced mix o varieties that

maximises productivity while managing risks

rom pest and disease outbreaks. The web-

based program QCANESelect was drated in

200708. A key group o growers is testing the

components that are already operational. The

system will be ne tuned using their eedback.


Managing the impacts osmut - the BSES-CSIRO plantbreeding joint venture releasedtwo new smut-resistant and oneintermediate variety in 2008.

SRDC has invested in a BSES-led

project which aims to develop a

decision-support tool or growersand advisory sta to assist them to

select a balanced mix o varieties

that maximises productivity while

managing risks rom pest and

disease outbreaks.

Giving canegrubs their marching orders

Outbreaks o greyback canegrubs are costly and

hard to predict. In 200001 an outbreak o this

devastating pest cost about $30 million in lost

production.

The inability to predict outbreaks means that

huge cane losses are suered during outbreak

years, while control measures (which can cost

up to $400/ha) are used ineciently during

years when the risk o grub attack is low. These

actors make it important that growers and

their advisors have access to the tools and

skills to predict the potential risk o greyback

canegrub damage.

GrubPlan - a whole-o-industry initiative driven

by BSES, unded by SRDC and supported by

CANEGROWERS, ACFA and productivity service

organisations - is aimed at helping growers

and their advisors understand the biology and

behaviour o the pest.

The GrubPlan2 project, which concluded

in 200708, provided industry with rened

greyback canegrub management systems

complete with risk assessment and decision-

support models that will allow growers and

their advisors to proactively manage the pest.

Better prediction and management o outbreaks

should reduce the severity o canegrub damage

and reduce the quantity o insecticides usedduring periods when control is not needed.



33/63

This project also provided a ramework or

collecting inormation required to objectively

assess the risk o canegrub attack in individual

elds and make rational management

decisions. This ramework is being put to the

test by the Mulgrave CaneGrub Management

Group (Cairns) and Mount Kinchant Growers

Group (Mackay) as part o two Grower Group

Innovation Projects.

These grower-led projects will see the

expansion o integrated pest management

concepts among cane growers as well as the

on-arm assessment o the prediction system

and the validation o the regional GrubPlan

approach. (SRDC Project Codes: BSS257,GGP029, GGP030)

The New South Wales NewFarming System Group is workingon a project which will provide astructured, strategic approach orimproved nutgrass control.

Availability o annual monitoringdata means growers can makewell inormed managementdecisions which will minimise theirlosses and result in more ecientregional canegrub control.

young cane plant and ratoon crops. The eects

are exacerbated by dry soil conditions. The

New South Wales New Farming System Group

is working on a project which will provide a

structured, strategic approach or improved

nutgrass control. Trial sites, established using anumber o control options, are producing good

inormation. This project should also achieve

signicant productivity and economic gains or

the industry. (SRDC Project Code: NFS002)

Keeping weeds in check

200708 marked the start o a project which is

targeting nutgrass - a signicant weed problem

in many cane growing areas and a particular

problem or the NSW industry.

Nutgrass seriously competes with newly

planted cane. The weed can cause poor

germination and reduce subsequent growth o



34/63

This project reports that adoption rates o

improved arming system principles areincreasing steadily about 10 percent o

Central and Southern Queensland cane land

is now at least partly armed with the new

arming principles. Twenty percent o the cane

planted in 2007 in the Mackay area was on

1.8 to 2m row spacing with projections that

twenty percent oallcane in the Mackay area

will be under the improved arming system by

2012. (SRDC Project Code: BSS286)

One nding rom this project is that varietiesmore suited to the new arming system are

required. There are anecdotal accounts that

some varieties have perormed poorly (excessive

lodging and subsequent harvester damage)

when the new arming system has been used.

Another BSES-led project is investigating this

issue. While this project is only in the second

year o the ve-year project it is expected that

cultivars with the necessary traits or wider row,

minimum tillage arming will be identied.


Helping growers to embrace improvedarming systems

An increasing number o cane growers

are embracing reduced tillage, controlled

trac and crop rotation as methods or

improving protability and sustainability.

While recognising the economic benets o

implementing new arming systems, industry

is also realising the potential or these systems

to positively impact on environmental

sustainability. SRDC investment in projects

specically aimed at improving understandingo the advantages o the new arming systems

is leading to increased adoption rates.

A BSES Limited and Queensland Department

o Primary Industries and Fisheries project is

coordinating the activities o various arming

system projects and providing the technical

support to a range o other projects which are

also aimed at improving arming systems.

Researchers have ound thatvarieties achieve their nalyield via a number o dierentpathways (eg ew thick stalks,many small stalks, rapid growthearly in development ollowed bylimited growth in the nal monthso the crop) and are workingon matching those pathways tocertain environments.

32 SRDC Annual Report 200708


35/63

Case study- Making mill mud application easier

The Maryborough Advanced Grower Group has spent the last two years working on a Grower

Group Innovation Project to develop a precision mill mud spreader.

The group is nearing the end o their project and project member Je Atkinson said everything

has been going smoothly. The ocus o their recent work has been to undertake an economic

analysis o the trial.

Mud is such a scarce yet valuable product the main idea behind this project was to make it

go urther by getting application rates down, Je said.

The analysis we did shows that our banded spreader saved over $6 or each tonne o mill

mud when compared to a conventional spreader. We also estimated that over 10.5 hectares

there would be savings o $2600 on ertiliser by applying mill mud, he said.

Costs included in the conventional system were the transport o mud rom the mill, levelling

the dumped mud on the paddock and ripping and discing the ground to incorporate the

mud. The costs o the system using the mill mud spreader included transport o the mud rom

the mill, dumping in a stockpile, loading into the spreader and spreading. The mud need not

be spread any urther once on the ground.

Now we just have to wait to harvest the trial in September to see how the gures all stack up,but on paper it is all looking really good.

Down the track it would be great to see the unit tted to the trucks that bring the mud rom

the mill. With the unit in place it would be really hard to top this system. And because you

wouldnt have to unload and reload the mud you would be able to save so much time.

Weve had a lot o interest in the project, and weve met with growers who have given us

eedback that they were impressed with the spreader and the cost savings it could provide.

(SRDC Project Code: GGP015)

Growers joined orces through Grower Group

Innovation Projects to test elements o the new

arming systems under their local conditions.

The North Coast Grower Group members

combined their resources and eorts to

develop and implement a new arming

system that utilised the bulk o their existing

equipment, improved the management o

their natural resources and reduced their cost

o production.

The group combined the results o their trials

to identiy a arming system that is suciently

robust to handle the variations experienced

in the North Coast environment (seasonal

conditions, soil types, arm layouts and

variable equipment) and improve the nancial

sustainability o the group members.

The group ound that dierent planting

techniques (dual row and wide shute) in a

controlled trac situation produced the same



36/63

Controlled trafcThe New South Wales Sugar Milling Co-

operatives (NSWSMC) move to whole cane

harvesting or cogeneration will increase

in-eld haulout trac by 30 per cent with the

potential or yield decline due to increased

soil compaction. As part o a project which

concluded in 200708 trials were established

in all three milling areas o NSW comparing

various controlled trac (1.8 m) row spacing

with the conventional 1.5 m conguration.

The results, which indicated the potentialor small yield increases, have given growers

condence that they can adopt a controlled

trac arming system without productivity losses.

An economic analysis indicated that by

adopting a controlled trac, reduced tillage,

legume allow system, on a 72ha arm, a

grower will improve gross margins by $12,857

when compared to a conventional system.

Variable costs such as ertiliser and uel are

greatly reduced in such a system. GPS guidancesystems were evaluated in these trials and as

a result the NSW industry has established a

GPS base station network, with coverage o all

three mill areas. The entire harvesting feet in

Broadwater and Condong have been set up

with GPS guidance, with a number o units

also set up on growers tractors. (SRDC Project

Code: NSC005)

The development o a bed renovator

is helping growers save time, money

and the environment by reducing the

amount o cultivation required beore

a crop is planted.

yield. They reported that when moving to a

controlled trac situation it appears that theplanting method does not impact on yield. The

grower should use the technique which best

suits his arm, machinery and arming style.

The group also reported that they saw no

yield loss in moving to controlled trac and

that there were similar yield results rom

conventional and controlled trac systems with

three dierent varieties. Plant and rst ratoon

trials produced very similar yield and tonnes o

sugar per hectare or both conventional andcontrolled trac systems. However, costs were

lower under the wider row spacing o controlled

trac. (SRDC Project Code: GGP007)

BSES is working alongside Mackay growers to

help them take the second step o establishing

the next crop cycle into permanent beds using

limited or no cultivation. This is good news or

the environment and growers back pockets.

The project is ocused on reducing cultivation,

resulting in reduced soil erosion and improvedenvironmental perormance using a bed

renovator. When using the current arming

system o ull cultivation prior to planting cane,

up to $450/ha is spent on land preparation.

This money could be saved i zero till planting

can be successully used; even limited

cultivation will provide considerable savings.

A system change-over kit has been produced

to help cane growers and extension sta with

the adoption o new arming systems. The kit

has been designed as a how to kit to give

growers the inormation they need to make the

transition. Grower surveys conducted as part

o this project show that growers believe they

have optimised most areas o their arming

system, but still have the ability to improve on

controlled-trac systems, as only 20 percent

o growers have optimised controlled-trac

systems. More than 70 percent o growers eel

that they have the potential to improve on their

arming system. (SRDC Project Code: BSS269)



37/63

An economic analysis indicatedthat by adopting a controlled

trafc, reduced tillage, legume

allow system, on a 72ha arm, a

grower will improve gross margins

by $12,857 when compared to a

conventional system.

The Calen and St Helen Young Farmers

Association are investigating the appropriateplanting bed shape to match local conditions.

As part o their research they hope to improve

eld eciencies, reduce cultivation and

reduce the wear on machinery by adopting a

controlled trac arming system. (SRDC Project

Code: GGP021)

Another grower group this time in North

Eton worked with a local engineering rm

to develop an active steering system that

would allow a haul-out trailer to be steeredindependently o the tractor. This allows the

trailer wheels to ollow the wheel tracks o the

tractor as it re-enters the eld ater turning The

Deguara Harvesting Group has ound that the

unit is eective in reducing compaction (rom

20 percent to zero) within the dual row grow

zone area. (SRDC Project Code: GGP022)

Case study Harvesting in the controlled trafc arming system (CTFS)

The Singh Harvesting Group, led by Rajinder Singh, believes harvesters should be built to suit

the ideal arming system rather than compromising the arming system to suit the harvester.

This ve-member group in the Tableland mill area produce 110,000 tonnes annually and is

experimenting with various width planting options including 2 metre dual rows to make the

transition to the CTFS. Knowing that harvesting is the single largest cost or growers, the group

are designing a low-cost integrated modication system or harvester manuacturers.

A 2005 Cameco 3510 harvester was transported rom Mareeba to Mackay and EHS

Manuacturing built a wider basecutter box; widened the main rame orward o the

basecutters; and modied the steering components, crop divider mounts, rollers andhydraulic components.

The transormed machine harvested 106,000 tonnes in 1.5 1.8 metre single rows in 2006

with excellent results. In the last year o the project, the group has tweaked the harvester to

increase the back wheel spacers, incorporate the Plane Creek elevator extension, modiy the

topper gatherer discs and change the haul-out wheel spacings to two metres.

Despite initial reservations, there are a number o growers who see the gains o the CTFS

two-metre system are greater than the initial harvester costs. This groups results will

encourage other growers to change and create a demand that will justiy changes by

harvester manuacturers at the actorythe most cost eective and preerred outcome.

(SRDC Project Code: GGP026)



38/63

Also investigating the suitability o peanuts as

a break crop, the Blackburn Harvesting Grouphas ound that they were able to increase

their gross margin by over $1500 per hectare

compared with traditional bare allow. (SRDC

Project Code: GGP023)

The Mackay Fibre Producers are working

on a GGIP to investigate the easibility o

improving the protability, sustainability, and

robustness o the sugar industry in the Central

region through the incorporation o bre

rotation crops. The group is investigating theproduction and processing systems o kena

and other bre crops in the central region.

In 200708 the group were successul in

attracting a Regional and Community Project

that enabled the grower group to enter into

the rst commercial arrangement rom its

bre production in rotation with sugar cane.

This project will supply unding or equipment

required to produce a garden mulch product as

well as equipment to produce and store seed.(SRDC Project Code: GGP024)

Break cropping as an alternative incomeAs well as delivering signicant soil health and

environmental benets, growing other crops

in rotation with sugarcane also provides an

alternative source o income or growers.

A group o Bundaberg growers is undertaking

trials in two Grower Group Innovation Projects

using peanuts as a rotation crop or cane.

The Sustainable Sugar and Peanut Agriculture

(SSPag) group are growing peanuts in an

uncultivated cane trash blanket and discovered

early on that the level o trash thickness hadan impact on germination. I the trash blanket

is too thick, the planter pushes the trash into

the soil insulating the seed rom the soil.

The group is nding that the advantages o

growing peanuts in the cane o-season include

lower land preparation costs, less irrigation and

erosion and improvements to soil health. The

group also report getting up to150 tonnes/

hectare rom the cane without ertiliser,

because o the nitrogen introduced into the soil

rom the peanut crop. (SRDC Project Codes:GGP028 and GGP040)

The Sustainable Sugar andPeanut Agriculture Group isinvestigating how to best growpeanuts in an uncultivated canetrash blanket.



39/63

In the Childers area, an Isis Target 100-led

project generated inormation about possiblebreak crops suitable or the specic seasonal

climatic conditions at Isis and the market access

and opportunities to sell these crops, including

grains and legumes. Since the discovery o

sugarcane smut in the district in June 2006 the

value o this study has become even greater.

The expected requirement that smut inected

cane blocks with signicant smut inection are

to be allowed with a bare allow or non-host

crop creates a need or sound inormation

on alternative crops that can be grown in theregion. Early eedback indicates that more

growers will be growing allow crops than in

previous years. Whilst soybeans are an obvious

crop or many growers, the study provided

individual growers, and the district as a whole,

with a user-riendly resource to identiy other

allow crops that may be suitable.

The majority o growers now see themselves as

serious soybean/grain growers who intend toharvest their crop or grain rather than being

a cane armer who throws in a ew beans.

(SRDC Project Code: CG009)

In late 2007 the CSIRO announced the release

o another new soybean variety, Fraser, suited

to the Fraser coast region o Queensland.

Fraser was developed with support rom SRDC.

Fraser matures about the same time as existing

varieties, but has higher grain yields and higher

biomass production, making it ideal as a rotationcrop or sugarcane. It has excellent grain quality

with high protein content, a clear hilum and

is suitable or the eed and oilseed crushing

markets. With diversication oten being the key

to increased prot, this type o research, which

has given many sugarcane growers another

income option, is paramount or industry

development. (SRDC Project Code: CPI009)

The Mackay Fibre Producersharvested and hauled almost

30 hectares o kena using threedierent optionstraditional

cane harvesting, round balingand orage harvestingwithoutany major issues. As this picture

shows - harvesting bre crops withconventional sugarcane harvestingequipment is denitely achievable.


annual report sugarcane

Documents