In 2016, Chinese investment in Australia’s agricultural sector skyrocketed from $300 million to $1 billion – an unprecedented investment boom. For Chinese companies, this was part of a drive to feed the world’s largest and fastest-growing consumer class.
“Chinese investors want a piece of that action,” said James Laurenceson, an economist at the University of Technology Sydney, “and at the same time, rural Australia has this chronic shortage of capital.”
China has replaced the United States as the second-largest foreign owner of agricultural land in Australia, behind the United Kingdom. Two years ago, Dakang, a private Chinese agricultural company, offered to buy the Kidman ranch, Australia’s largest cattle property. Kidman makes up two percent of Australia’s farmland.
The Australian government rejected the bid, citing it was against the national interest. But in the end, the Australian government approved the deal when Dakang knocked down its offer to purchase one-third of the ranch.
The Kidman deal didn’t deter or slow Chinese investment in Australia’s farmland. University of Sydney professor of Chinese business management, Hans Hendrischke, says it only changed the way Chinese investors do business down under.
“The Chinese investors will essentially have to bundle properties and assets to get the volume,” explained Hendrischke, who added that this trend will speed up the inevitable: the buying up of 135,000 family farms and their transformation into large-scale corporate farms.
What does this mean for Noosa?
So what does this mean for Noosa Shire’s farmland, and might Noosa Council unwittingly be funding the prospect of Chinese investors snapping up this land?
Country Noosa, a special interest group co-founded by former Mars Global chief financial
officer, vice-president and treasurer Dick Barnes, has introduced a grazing strategy of
combining various properties into one entity; essentially bundling properties under a group
farming operation.
Country Noosa also welcomed a delegation of Chinese investors in early March 2018 and plans to host a more comprehensive second meeting.
In the past two years, Noosa Council has given $19,000 in ratepayer grants to Country Noosa.
Dick Barnes is also the Noosa Biosphere Reserve Foundation (NBRF) chairman, and his NBRF profile boasts running a sustainable group farming operation producing beef on 1,200 acres in the Shire. Country Noosa also happens to have recently received a grant of $65,000 from the NBRF, which is entirely funded through Noosa Council by ratepayers.
Is there anything to see here? I reckon it’s a question of maintaining scrutiny. Meanwhile, should Noosa ratepayers have a beef with Noosa Council?
Source: https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2017/06/20/532915180/why-is-china-snatching-up-australian-farmland
Country Noosa was formed in September 2014 to educate primary producers about practical matters such as pasture management, livestock rearing, weed control and many other aspects relating to farming, grazing and horticulture in Noosa Shire. Along with co-founder with Dick Barnes, I was responsible for bringing together many interested people who brought fresh impetus to rural matters. All our activities were member funded back then, and we ran entirely on the good will of volunteers, like most community groups in the shire.
As a not-for-profit association, Country Noosa had, and has today, no business interests at all, including co-operative grazing enterprises. Individual members have gone down this path in an attempt to harness unused rural land for beef production. These properties are typically owned by city folk wanting to graze cattle on their farms, but don’t have the time and/or knowledge to set up and manage their land in this way.
Noosa Council received state drought relief funds for a research project two years ago, and passed this money to Country Noosa, the only rural enterprise group in the shire. The Council also provided a grant for a study of consumer reactions to purchasing local beef. These grants totalled $19,000. More recently, the NBRF granted Country Noosa $65,000 for a major rural enterprise program run with Sunshine Coast University which aims to “engage with the local community, businesses and landowners to uncover and discuss local food supply chains and enable the identification of rural ‘neighbourhood’ collaborative ventures, amongst other things.”
To put these figures in perspective, Council have been funding Tourism Noosa to the tune of $2.5 million annually for many years. Never before have rural producers in the shire had any financial support, and the funding is following Council’s policy of encouraging a diversification of the local economy. As I understand it, NBRF chairman, Dick Barnes, excluded himself from discussion, and hence a vote, on this latter grant.
Chinese investors were certainly not on the horizon in Noosa four years ago, although Americans and Europeans have been active buyers of rural properties in Australia for very many years, although not in our shire, because the cost of land relative to returns from any rural enterprise here on a large scale is too paltry. Not so, however, with small-scale, value-added production such as pasture-fed beef, small crops, fruit and nut plantations, and niche produce such as spices and free-range poultry, which can be lucratively marketed to Southeast Queensland consumers as local, fresh, clean produce, with low food miles. So, while Chinese investors may be active around the nation, they have shown only polite interest in Noosa’s rural enterprises, including farming and grazing land. I’d hazard a guess that they will never be large owners of rural property in the shire.
Reply form malfunctioning. Email sent to editor.
Hi Rod, thanks for your comment. Apologies for the delay in posting. I was off the ‘black mirror’. No digital. We’ve been to The Planting. Which was awesome. Co-incidentally two experiences during the festival reminded me of the beef yearling project:
1. The bamboo soil restoration economy talk was outstanding. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqF8FkiHLoQ Arief Rabiq is collaborating on Woodfordia bamboo pilots. He has put a call out for partners Australia for this carbon sequestering, soil restorative economic development. Have Country Noosa looked into that?
2. While camping in Woodfordia we could hear screaming diary cows for two days. I was told it was mother cows separation distress when the calves get taken away. One could not help but feel the distress and despair. No wonder people are reacting emotionally to routine cruelty in dairy and meat production. Some Country Noosa farmers probably are developing better and less cruel practices. Out of interest are you aware of any?
Kind regards
Bettina
Hi Rod,
Thanks for your insightful comment.
We have to be mindful that Council charges a number of special rates and charges for different zones and services within the Shire so as to burden ordinary general rates ratepayers. One of these special rates and charges is the Tourism and Economic Levy. At any rate, this is a not the subject matter of the story but more information can be found at:
https://www.noosa.qld.gov.au/documents/40217326/41324463/2017-18%20Revenue%20Statement.pdf
As you mentioned, Noosa Council have provided Country Noosa with a grant that not only includes a yearling beef project, but also, a proposal to re-open an old Eumundi slaughterhouse, outside of Noosa Shire.
With respect to co-operative grazing enterprises, Country Noosa assists in providing essential information at workshops for group farming operations to members and interested landholders.
And as you stated, many well-to-do city folk who are rural landholders are provided with the knowledge and given the possible opportunity to graze cattle. Significant land tax savings may be afforded to these city folk using their land for grazing through the primary production exemption.
In regards to Chinese investors buying in Noosa Shire, recently Chinese investors have expressed interest in a local Pomona farm looking to also use the guest accommodation for 457 visa workers. The property owners decided not to sell.
I refer you to the following links of valuable primary production farmland being purchased by Chinese investors in another iconic Australian region.
http://www.colliers.com.au/news/2017/offshore-buyers-continue-to-be-attracted-to-barossa-valley/
http://www.decanter.com/wine-news/chinese-owned-group-buys-yaldara-winery-in-barossa-8232/
https://www.barossaherald.com.au/story/4908595/barossa-brand-in-chinese-demand-gallery/
Yes, Chinese investors have only started to show interest in Noosa Shire, although Buderim Ginger has recently been partly sold to Chinese investors. One of the concerns is food security should home soil be sold to investors for a growing overseas consumer class.
Another concern is food miles and production since is being marketed as ‘sustainable’. Will Noosa grown food end up being exporting thousands of miles away? Should Country Noosa place more focus on making Noosa Shire and its Biosphere a diversified food bowl and less attention to intensifying beef production? An agricultural model too heavily reliant on beef production has proven unsustainable- for our environment and our health.
In the end, farmers are at liberty to sell to the highest bidder, but should ratepayers be happy funding this enterprise and possible unintended outcomes?
All the best,
John
Thanks Bettina.
There are no dairies in Noosa Shire, so the terrible plight (and din) of very young calves forcibly separated from their mothers will not be heard here. It is distressing and arguably quite cruel, but this is a worldwide practice since cows need to be in calf annually to keep up milk production. Once they calf, the calves must be removed so that natural lactation is turned into a twice-daily milking ritual. I guess all of those that consume dairy products are contributing to the perpetuation of this practice.
There is a weaning process that goes on in beef cattle production, but calves are approaching a year old before the cows are ready to have a new calf and the older calves must make way for the young calves so they can be the sole beneficiary of the cow’s milk. By this time the older calves are always on a diet of pasture, so the weaning is not so dramatic for them.
Good to know. Thanks. Have you heard of ‘Kind Cow Milk’? http://hownowdairy.com.au/customnews/what-is-kind-milk-meet-the-dairy-farm-starting-a-revolution/
No, I’d never heard of that operation. Very ethical and compassionate to the animals IMO.
The farmers do say:
“And while this isn’t the most financially viable option when it comes to earning a living through dairy, we’ve stuck to our guns [so] that kindness and compassion should triumph over economics every time.”
This makes me wonder how the system could be applied in the wider dairy industry where farmers are being screwed down in milk prices by the supermarket chains. But we should be asking “how is the milk we consume being produced” like we do with every other food product.
As an aside, an elderly women up the road from me has been rearing poddy calves sourced from diary farms for years. She hand feeds them bottle milk until they can thrive on her pasture and keeps them for a couple of years before sending them to market.
There was a recent article in SpinOff about a NZ farmer who had been struggling with this issue. https://thespinoff.co.nz/business/21-04-2018/i-founded-happy-cow-to-make-a-difference-in-dairying-i-failed/
John, Buderim Ginger has not been partly sold to the Chinese, rather they have a Cninese investor on board to help them market their product in China.
As to Country Noosa, their members are not interested in selling produce to the China market, rather they want to sell locally and value add as a premium product with low food miles.
And local beef producers don’t use intensive rearing practices, rather they graze their stock on pasture using methods described on the Cowspiracy doco as the most sustainable of all.
Hi Rod, thanks for your reply and feedback. With respect to Buderim Ginger, the news stories are a little confusing, but I refer you to:
https://www.sunshinecoastdaily.com.au/news/qiaqia-ginger-chinese-takeover-bid-for-buderim-gin/3118284/
https://www.bdo.com.au/en-au/insights/advisory/case-studies/buderim-ginger
In regards to Country Noosa, are you actively involved again with CN? From my understanding, you said you have stepped down from an active role but still an ordinary member? or active on its yearling beef/abattoir project?
It would be interesting to see modeling on how CN intends to mitigate GHG emissions among other environmental impacts with intensifying beef production in Noosa Shire.
It would be great if local food stays local considering food miles. But a Country Noosa post in February clearly states, “as the (supply) chain develops, to package export directly to China for premium prices.” So no guarantee there.
I have recently watched Cowspiracy, and the message I got was grazing was not the solution; only reducing our reliance on or consumption for meat will provide a realistic sustainable model. The changes to the land clearing laws were partly a result in our understanding that agriculture is the biggest culprit to land clearing- largely for grazing.
I refer you to:
https://www.ehp.qld.gov.au/wildlife/threatened-species/documents/land-clearing-impacts-threatened-species.pdf
The scientific review states, “In Queensland, 91% of the clearing of woody vegetation in 2014-15 was to increase pasture for livestock grazing, while forestry (5.4%), cropping (1.7%), mining (1.1%), infrastructure (0.3%) andsettlement (0.7%) accounted for a small proportion of the total 296,000 hectares
cleared in that year (Queensland DSITI, 2016).”
It is a concern that Country Noosa seems to focus heavily on placing cattle on cleared land for their yearling beef protect with little focus to diversifying agriculture. According to CN workshop events posted online, only one workshop was horticultural specific.
Again, with respect to grazing as a sustainable solution, A reliable 2017 independent intergovernmental Food Climate Research Network (FCRN) study, ‘Grazed and Confused’, states “switching to grass-fed beef and dairy does not solve the climate problem—only a reduction in consumption of livestock products will do that.” Even Noosa Council’s website mentions reducing meat consumption to reduce GHG emissions. The 127-page FCRN report also says there is no evidence that grass-grazing cattle will make a difference. Grass-fed cattle do contribute to CO2 sequestration but only under ideal conditions.
Lead FCRN author Tara Garnett and her colleagues calculated the flow of greenhouse gases into and out of pastures. She found that “in some circumstances, you can get carbon capture, but not always and the effect is small. You cannot extrapolate from a nicely run Dorset farm to a global food strategy.” At best, carbon capture only offsets 20 to 60 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions from grazing, mostly the methane from cattle. “And the carbon capture stops after a few decades,” says Garnett, when the carbon-enriched soils reach equilibrium with the air. “Meanwhile, the cattle continue to belch methane.” Tim Benton at the University of Leeds, UK says this analysis is more comprehensive than past studies. “It asks, if we are to eat meat, is there a better way to grow it? The answer is: not really.”
All the best.
Hi Rod, thanks for your reply and feedback. With respect to Buderim Ginger, the news stories are a little confusing, but I refer you to:
https://www.sunshinecoastdaily.com.au/news/qiaqia-ginger-chinese-takeover-bid-for-buderim-gin/3118284/
https://www.bdo.com.au/en-au/insights/advisory/case-studies/buderim-ginger
In regards to Country Noosa, are you actively involved again with CN? From my understanding, you said you have stepped down from an active role but still an ordinary member? or active on its yearling beef/abattoir project?
It would be interesting to see modeling on how CN intends to mitigate GHG emissions among other environmental impacts with intensifying beef production in Noosa Shire.
It would be great if local food stays local considering food miles. But a Country Noosa post in February clearly states, “as the (supply) chain develops, to package export directly to China for premium prices.” So no guarantee there.
I have recently watched Cowspiracy, and the message I got was grazing was not the solution; only reducing our reliance on or consumption for meat will provide a realistic sustainable model. The changes to the land clearing laws were partly a result in our understanding that agriculture is the biggest culprit to land clearing- largely for grazing.
I refer you to:
https://www.ehp.qld.gov.au/wildlife/threatened-species/documents/land-clearing-impacts-threatened-species.pdf
The scientific review states, “In Queensland, 91% of the clearing of woody vegetation in 2014-15 was to increase pasture for livestock grazing, while forestry (5.4%), cropping (1.7%), mining (1.1%), infrastructure (0.3%) andsettlement (0.7%) accounted for a small proportion of the total 296,000 hectares
cleared in that year (Queensland DSITI, 2016).”
It is a concern that Country Noosa seems to focus heavily on placing cattle on cleared land for their yearling beef protect with little focus to diversifying agriculture. According to CN workshop events posted online, only one workshop was horticultural specific.
Again, with respect to grazing as a sustainable solution, A reliable 2017 independent intergovernmental Food Climate Research Network (FCRN) study, ‘Grazed and Confused’, states “switching to grass-fed beef and dairy does not solve the climate problem—only a reduction in consumption of livestock products will do that.” Even Noosa Council’s website mentions reducing meat consumption to reduce GHG emissions. The 127-page FCRN report also says there is no evidence that grass-grazing cattle will make a difference. Grass-fed cattle do contribute to CO2 sequestration but only under ideal conditions.
Lead FCRN author Tara Garnett and her colleagues calculated the flow of greenhouse gases into and out of pastures. She found that “in some circumstances, you can get carbon capture, but not always and the effect is small. You cannot extrapolate from a nicely run Dorset farm to a global food strategy.” At best, carbon capture only offsets 20 to 60 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions from grazing, mostly the methane from cattle. “And the carbon capture stops after a few decades,” says Garnett, when the carbon-enriched soils reach equilibrium with the air. “Meanwhile, the cattle continue to belch methane.” Tim Benton at the University of Leeds, UK says this analysis is more comprehensive than past studies. “It asks, if we are to eat meat, is there a better way to grow it? The answer is: not really.”
All the best.
Just saw this John, will endeavour to reply asap.
Hi John, Yes, I found that Buderim Ginger info too. As they say:
“BDO and Buderim Ginger successfully negotiated about $20 million investment from one of the largest snack food companies in China. This allowed Buderim to achieve their financial objectives and the relationship opened up access to more than 450,000 retail outlets in China.”
So, this may well involve a diminution of the company’s stock, I can’t find this out, but it’s in no way a buyout of this $75 million Aussie company.
I stepped aside from the Country Noosa management committee a couple of years ago for health reasons. I don’t have any contact with the new committee and all I know I read in their newsletter or, with the NBRF grants, on the BBRF website. Nor am I on any subcommittees. My involvement with the cattle industry was as a primary producer from 1972 to 1984 in New South Wales. The motto then was get big or get out. I got out! It was only in recent times that I could see that get small and develop local markets might be the proverbial way forward.
I agree with you, I’d like to see figures of GHG emissions for Noosa. But, I don’t see a beef cattle explosion in numbers that people allude to. Rather, it will be a consolidation of a diminishing herd. Of course, if the plan gets off the ground, and proves successful, more people might get back into cattle. This would certainly need to be factored in to GHG equations.
As to: “as the (supply) chain develops, to package export directly to China for premium prices.” I haven’t seen this and don’t know who thinks it, but I really can’t see these younger cattle being suitable for the China market and be produced at a cost that would have to include high freight and storage charges.
Cowspiracy does maintain that beef cattle reared on pasture is the most sustainable way of rearing these stock. It’s another argument altogether to say we shouldn’t eat meat, and it’s fine to say we shouldn’t do it here, but I think low-scale beef production is the alternative to landholders slashing their properties four times a year. I’ve seen many properties where the riparian zones are fenced off, and stock excluded from sensitive vegetation, and I can see that the remaining pastured areas are a resource that could be utilised. These exemplary farms are models.
Large scale land clearing in Queensland is a real pity and, yes, most of it must be for grazing, but this isn’t the problem around here. Council jumps on you if you fell one tree and nearly all the shire is covered by vegetation protection orders.
Country Noosa is more diverse than you think and certainly is not all about beef cattle. I’ve written elsewhere about the diversity of its education program and membership includes people from all agricultural and horticultural pursuits, and many people just looking for the social aspects of a group of like-minded people. The new president is a foodie and is taking the group down new paths. This is excellent and I’m proud to have been a co-founder of the association.
Reduced meat consumption is an international trend and the move is towards quality over quantity. But with population increasing, the world will have to re-think all aspects of farming and grazing and I’d really like people complaining about farmers to say who is going to produce the food and where it might come from. Imagine if Noosa was self-sufficient for beef production, wouldn’t this be a good thing? I see all sorts of novel eco stuff happening in the shire and I think food production needs to be seen as a problem worth tackling. Only time will tell, but if half these new ways become normal ways, then we can say “great”. The obvious trouble is that we don’t know which half will succeed!
Finally, methane is the big issue, but there are so many big issues that I don’t think we need to single out beef production. Sheep produce methane as they grow wool, so should we stop buying wool? In the United States, the largest methane emissions come from the decomposition of wastes in landfills, ruminant digestion and manure management associated with domestic livestock, natural gas and oil systems, and coal mining. I’ve taken a trip to China and seen the effects of coal-fired power stations on air quality and I realise how lucky we are in our neck of the woods. And, like you, I want to be a part of the solution more than part of the problem.