Food Production in the Mary Valley From Conondale to Gilldora

A survey of food producers in the Upper-mid Mary Valley 



to determine what types of food are produced and how much (includes fresh produce and manufactured products)

to discuss issues that affect production and marketing of the produce, future plans and capacity, and views on the current trends associated with food production in this area.

A report for the Queensland Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation By Elaine Bradley October 2011

1

Contents Page 3

Executive Summary

4

Historical perspective—previous crops and trends

6

Profile of Middle Mary Economic Region—Current perspective of crops and trends

9

Project description

12

Profile of survey group

14

Principal findings

21

Identified Opportunities and Constraints, and Recommendations

25

References

26

Appendix 1

Questionnaire

28

Appendix 2

Promotional posters for produce of the Mary Valley

32

Appendix 3

Opportunities and Impediments: Excerpts from “Creating Local Food Connections” (Boardroom Business, July 2011)

34

Appendix 4

Opportunities for local food producers to supply the local food service sector: A list of foods and ingredients desired from local food producers on the Sunshine Coast and in Gympie (from “Creating Local Food Connections”)

35

Appendix 5

Detailed analysis of questionnaire

P. 9 Survey methods P. 11 Contractor‟s program

P. 14 P. 17 P. 19 P. 20

Current status of food production in the Mary Valley Distribution and marketing Capacity for expansion Production constraints

2

Executive Summary This study was conducted as part of the Sunshine Coast Food Futures Project, an initiative of the Sunshine Coast and Gympie offices of the Queensland Department of Employment, Economic Development and Innovation. The principal objective of the initiative of is to increase the value of the contribution from food producers, processors and retailers to the Sunshine Coast and Mary Valley economic region. The report is the result of an investigation to identify growers and food producers in the Upper-mid Mary Valley (Conondale to Gilldora) to:



Find out what types of food are produced and how much (includes fresh produce and manufactured products).



Discuss issues that affect production and marketing of the produce, future plans and capacity, and views on the current trends associated with food production in this area.

More than 100 businesses were contacted for the purposes of this project. 98 respondents agreed to provide information. The majority of respondents are full-time or part-time food producers, primarily in the 40-65 year age group. Time in operation on their current property ranged from newly settled to 65 years, with a significant proportion in residence from 5-10 years. The median size of operation was 210ha, with most vegetable production occurring on the smaller sized managed areas. Although there is a very diverse range of fruits and vegetables produced in the region, three major crops emerged—avocadoes, mangoes and macadamia nuts. The study has identified opportunities to fill gaps in food supply chains (which may assist food producers of the region looking to diversify or expand their operations) and to improve ways to link growers/ producers with potential customers. The study also identified overwhelming support for the development of a Mary Valley 'brand' to identify the range and quality of food produced in this area, and a keenness to participate in local food supply chains, with the precaution expressed that such a concept would need to be thoroughly researched and supported by an active commitment from both suppliers and consumers. A key section of the report is “Identified Opportunities and Recommendations”, which analyses the constraints and knowledge gaps pertaining to the businesses in the area surveyed, that could be used to inform future service delivery and development of industry in the Upper-mid Mary Valley area.

Acknowledgement Many thanks to the respondents to the survey for their valuable time and input, and to the support they expressed for the revitalization of food production in the Mary Valley.

Disclaimer The views represented herein are those of the author and not of the Queensland Government. The information contained in this report is intended as background information for policy development and general business support. Nothing contained in this report is to be considered as the rendering of financial, professional, legal or other advice for specific cases, and users are responsible for obtaining such advice from their own financial, legal or other counsel. The information contained in this report is intended for educational, background and informational purposes only. 3

Food Production in the Mary Valley Historical perspective—previous crops and trends Early horticultural activity in the Mary River Valley was characterised by a heavy dependence on two crops—maize and potatoes. Hay growing was also widespread. Maize was a particularly easily-grown and versatile crop (animal and human food, husks shredded for mattress stuffing or for toilet paper, cob centres used as small tool handles and for kindling in stoves and large boilers). From 1870s through to the turn of century, maize became the basis for future agricultural development. Experimental work began during this time. Mixed orchards and grape trellises were established. Tobacco and rice were trialled but did not perform well, whereas sugar cane, peas and pineapples were successful and all went on to play important roles in agriculture in the Mary Valley into the 1900s. Fodder crops also signalled the rise of dairying which, from the 1890s, had a significant role in the district‟s agricultural landscape. Piggeries were also commonplace, due to availability of maize and skim milk from cream and butter production. Dairying was the prime agricultural activity in the Mary Valley until the late 1960s, when a steep rise in production costs coupled with lower prices, followed by the introduction of margarine in the 1970s, saw a great downturn. Increasing numbers of dairy farmers changed to grazing beef cattle. By the early 1990s, most milk processing in the region had ceased. Maize Crop Imbil (Undated) Source: Queensland State Archives Neg No 392319

Food crops started to become more prevalent after 1905, coinciding with the end of the Federation Drought and the decline in the gold mining industry. An experimental farm was established between Amamoor and Dagun, with large plots of pineapples, bananas, avocadoes and smaller areas of other food crops (custard apples, citrus, grapes, pawpaw, coffee) being trialled. After World War I, banana crops proliferated in the Mary Valley. The government created small soldier settlements in the Tuchekoi to Lagoon Pocket area, all directed towards growing bananas. Subsidiary crops such as beans and tomatoes were grown on the flatter areas below the bananas, except during times of flood. Disease and pests saw the demise of the banana industry in the late 1920s, when pineapples started to emerge as the principal crop. At the same time, other fruit and vegetable crops were being grown profitably, particularly with the opening of, and easier access to, new markets in Sydney and Melbourne. Sugar cane was a popular crop in the mid-war years, with large plantings at Gilldora, Amamoor and Kandanga, however the closure of the Mt Bauple sugarmill in the mid 1940s put an end to this crop. Around this time, other commercial agricultural crops were proliferating. Pineapples were the most popular, along with beans, pawpaw, cucumbers, peas, cabbages, cauliflower, potatoes, beetroot and oranges. Egg production was also popular. Labour at that time was readily available, principally through the employment of Italian and German prisoners of war. It is thought that their general agricultural knowledge may have influenced the selection of a wider range of crop varieties. 4

The advent of electricity in the mid 1940s allowed the installation of efficient electric pumps for irrigation, allowing a huge increase in the amount of land under cropping. By the mid 1950s, an estimated 5700ha of land was under crops in the Mary Valley and immediately adjacent areas. Completion of Borumba Dam in the mid 1960s allowed more irrigation and production increased to 7300ha. The number of permissible water allocations rose to 70. Beans were the most prominent crop, but new marketable crops included eggplant, capsicums, passionfruit and rockmelons, with large plantings of avocadoes. By the 1990s, dairying was in severe decline, the pineapple industry was faltering (due to large plantings on flatter terrain to the north and south, and overseas) and fruit and vegetable production was also waning. Reasons for this included effects of land degradation, higher costs of production accompanied by lower prices received, and social factors. At this time there was a general trend in rural Australia of population shift to cities—family farms ceased production with retirement of the older generation and lack of interest in farming by the younger generations. The overall picture was of grazing replacing dairying, and part-time and hobby farms replacing larger fulltime commercial holdings. These trends are still evident today.

References:

Display of pineapples, bananas, pawpaws and avocadoes from the Mary Valley, with pioneer farmer Jim Long (1923)

Johnson, M and Saunders, K. (2007). Wild Heart Bountiful Land. Pedley, I. (1979) Winds of Change: 100 years in Widgee Shire.

Maroonda Experimental Farm in Amamoor was subdivided in 1918. Sales of its fruits and vegetables featured as strong selling points.

5

Profile of the Middle Mary Economic Region Current perspective on crops and trends Featuring a summary of information from Mary Economic Region: Agribusiness Resource Guide (2009). Figures refer to Middle Mary Economic Region (Gympie to Kenilworth), 2005-6. The Mary Economic Region covers the area from Hervey Bay in the North, south to Conondale, and to the western edge of the Gympie Council Region. It is an existing agribusiness zone with a diverse range of land-based primary production activities, and extensive business and infrastructure support networks, including a number of leading national and international agribusinesses. The area is close to markets in Brisbane, and key air and sea export port facilities. It is also within close proximity to the rapidlygrowing Sunshine Coast population centres. The region has substantial areas of good quality agricultural land that can support a range of agriculture as demonstrated by the diversity of production, and substantial additional supplies of irrigation water.

Climate The area also offers a climatic advantage with its subtropical climate (long summers, mild winters). Rainfall is summer-dominant, with about 70% falling between October-March. Frosts occur in low-lying areas, usually in June-August. Higher areas away from the valley floor, where cool air drains away on cold nights, have few frosts. These areas are capable of growing many frost-sensitive subtropical crops including avocadoes and macadamias. Mean annual rainfall for the study area (Conondale to Gilldora) is about 1200mm/annum. Mean maximum temperatures 30-32°C during the wet season (October-March), 20-28°C April-September. Mean minimum temperatures 15-20°C October-March, 7-15°C April-September. Rainfall in most of the region is relatively high and reliable (1200-1400mm). Additional water resources for irrigation are a key asset of this region, with a number of options including on-farm storage (dams, tanks), bores, and supplemented water or watercourses and irrigation schemes.

Soils Topography across the region varies substantially and greatly influences the distribution of soil types. The area of the survey is typically described as a complex mosaic of landforms and soil types. Key features are steep mountain ranges with peaks rising 400-800m above sea level, and wide alluvial floodplains along the Mary River herself. The climate and landforms of the Mary Valley allows agribusinesses (particularly those with seasonal crops) to generate their product at times when producers in other climatic regions are unable to do so, thus presenting a window of opportunity to supply the market at optimal price.

Coonoongibber 6

A major food-production area A total of 186 businesses were analysed for the “2008 Business Expansion and Retention Report for the Mary Valley”, a survey covering the area from Kenilworth to Dagun. Of these, 44 (24%) were in primary production, and a further 15 (8%) value-added (total 32% in food production). Specifically, 24% of Kandanga businesses were in food production, whilst in Amamoor this rose to 46%, mainly primary production of fruits and macadamia nuts. From ABS statistics (2005-6), the proportion of major agricultural activities within the Middle Mary Economic Region are generally:



Beef—64%



Fruit and nuts - 11%



Dairy—8%



Vegetables—7%



Other—10%.

Note that since this data was collected, dairy and pineapples have retracted further, and ginger and persimmons have become significant crops.

Fruit crops A number of tree crops are grown, including low-chill stonefruit, avocado, macadamia nuts, custard apples, Tahitian limes, persimmons, lychees, mango and citrus, and passionfruit vines are also popular. Stonefruit has been identified as having significant growth opportunities within the region.

Vegetables A range of seasonal vegetables is grown within the region. Production falls into 2 broad categories: 

Opportunistic production of crops grown only in response to short-term favourable market prices e.g., cucumbers, broccoli, potatoes, melons.



Typical annual crops—e.g., beans, snow peas, ginger.

Dairy The Mary Economic Region has been identified as one of the most significant dairying areas within Queensland, with good possibilities for expansion. Favourable features include ideal production seasons, good quality soils, high rainfall, secure water supplies. In addition to substantial farmgate production of milk, the Region supports a number of value-adding businesses producing a wide range of milk-related products under local brands (e.g., Gympie Farm Cheese and Butter, Mary Valley Cheeses).

7

High-value food sector These businesses are typically nichemarketed, value-added and are often incorporated within the value chain for tourism and/or the food service sector. Generally, these gourmet business market a premium-made product or service. In some instances, businesses have collaborated, utilising facilities and services such as commercial kitchens and qualified chefs, or collectively branding/marketing their products (e.g., Galeru, Cedar Creek Farm Bush Foods, Hinterland Feijoas, Dragon Delight).

Economic trends Significant trends in the economic value of various crops in the Middle Mary economic region between 2000-1 and 2005-6 (sorted in terms of value of production in 2005-6) were:

Increases Macadamias

$5.4M : $7.8M (up 45%)

Beans

$4.9M : $7M (up 45%)

Zucchini/squash

$1.08M : $4.58M (quadrupled, mainly through greenhouse production)

Hay

$2M : $3.5M (up 75%)

Lemons, limes

$42,000 : $465,000 (more than 10 times increase, primarily in Tahitian Limes)

Oranges

$325,000 : $435,000 (up 35%)

Strawberries

$213,000 : $325,000 (up 50%)

Pumpkins

$64,000 : $196,000 (tripled)

Nectarines

$89,000 : $159,000 (up 80%)

Capsicums

$64,000 : $150,000 (up 135%)

Decreases Milk

$28M : $25M (down 10%)

Pineapples

$3.7M : $3.2M (down 15%)

Mangoes

$1.8M : $386,000 (down 80%)

Grain production (wheat, barley, sorghum): $480,000 : $234,000 (reduced by 50%) Tomatoes

$268,000: $162,000 (down 50%)

Peas (shelling)

$228,000 : $84,000 (down 66%)

Bananas

$417,000 : $81,000 (down 80%)

Pawpaws

$1.7M : $66,000 (down 95%)

Little change Peas (snow)

$2.3M : $2.0M

Avocadoes

$1.3M : $1.15M

Cucumbers

$296,000 : $301,000

Peaches

$83,000 : $73,000 8

Project Description The survey was conducted as part of the Sunshine Coast Food Futures Project, the principal objective of which is to increase the value of the contribution from food producers, processors and retailers to the Sunshine Coast and Mary Valley economic region. Secondary objectives of the project are: 

To enhance coordination, connectivity and cooperation between enterprises along the food value chain of the Sunshine Coast.



To increase local distribution networks for Sunshine Coast Food particularly focussing on linkages between the Mary Valley and coastal catchments.



To increase food based tourism opportunities on the Sunshine Coast.

To contribute to the Principal and Secondary objectives of the Sunshine Coast Food Futures Project the Terms of Reference for the Contractor were: 

To facilitate the connection and involvement of Mary Valley producers and food companies to local events, workshops and business development support.



To coordinate micro and small businesses (producers and processors) involvement in the Gympie Flavour Fest and Sunshine Coast Real Food Festival



To collect and analyse data about existing and desired supply chain linkages and gaps, and perceptions regarding current demand and supply for local food.

Survey method The survey questionnaire was developed in consultation with Jonathon Smith (DEEDI) and with advice from other DEEDI personnel. A copy of the questionnaire is attached at Appendix 1. The main points of the survey process: 

Engaged with food producers operating between Conondale and Gilldora (April-August 2011).



More than 100 businesses were contacted for the purposes of this project. 98 respondents agreed to provide information.



Generally, did not interview graziers or milk producers, unless they were direct selling to customers or value-adding.



Most interviews were conducted in person at the property, others by phone following initial contact and sending out information pack (project info sheet, workshop/display/sales and marketing opportunities)



Notes were taken during interview of ad hoc comments of particular relevance to the project , and summarised as support for the analysis of the survey.

These food producers were located using a variety of means:  Direct contact with those already known to the contractor 

Referral by other producers



Visiting local markets and retail outlets



Information from membership lists held by relevant organisations (e.g., Gympie Cooloola Tourism, Chambers of Commerce, industry groups, pack-houses)



Invitation to engage following articles in local media, including newspapers, local area newsletters, school newsletters, and through regular electronic updates from community networking organisations.

Producers and processors were provided with a resources pack, which included (as a standard) information on local events and workshops and information on other local and state initiatives. Copies of 9

DEEDI publications were also offered at the interview, to those expressing an interest in accessing this information (“Your Future, Your Choices”, “Agribusiness Resource Guide”). Other materials were forwarded to the producers/processors following the visit (if requested), including:



Referral to specialist support organisations, etc)



Referral details for licencing or regulations (e.g., Safe Foods, SmartLicence)



Contact details for suppliers (from information gathered as part of this process).

(local and state government, industry and business support

Database of food producers of the Mary Valley created and analysed The information obtained by this process has been summarised and collated into a database (Excel Spreadsheet), that can be accessed for further study. For this project, the data was analysed to:



Examine existing and desired supply chain linkages and gaps.



Identify the gaps in the supply chain that present opportunities for existing and new growers (and other food producers) to fill.



Find out what is needed to help producers fill these gaps, such as further training or business support.



Look at specific issues raised, such as the co-ordination of transport, storage, processing and distribution.

The full question-by-question analysis is given at Appendix 5, and cross-referenced through this report, for ease of access.

Connecting with other studies in the project In the analysis, reference has been made to the Survey of Sunshine Coast and Gympie eateries completed at the same time this project was underway (“Creating Local Food Connections”, Boardroom Business, July 2011). That a complementary survey was conducted with potential outlets added significantly to the project, and generated a more positive response - there is a perceived 'purpose' to the activity that was considered beneficial by the respondents. The main points and conclusions of relevance to this study are presented in Appendix 3. Where possible, these findings have been cross-referenced in this report. “Creating Local Food Connections” also generated a listing of foods and ingredients that chefs would like to source locally. This is viewed as an opportunity for the producers of the Mary Valley, and has been included at Appendix 4 for reference.

10

Contractor’s program Survey of food producers in the Mary Valley (Conondale to Gilldora) 

As outlined in the survey method.



Face to face and telephone interviews with 98 food producers



Coding and collation of responses into a database (Excel Spreadsheet), that can be accessed for further analysis.



Statistical analysis of responses in the database.



Analysis and preparation of final report.

Public forums and presentations A variety of activities were engaged in, to promote the project and to engage with stakeholders:



Showcasing Your Product workshop, Nambour (May, June) - participant, and display preparation/ mentoring sessions.



Sunshine Coast Local Foods advocate group meeting, Montville (May) - participant



Gympie Show (May) - display, contact point for potential interviews



Flavour Fest, Gympie (July) - display



Gympie Regional Council FlavourFest workshops, Gympie (April, May, June) - participant



Mary Valley Renewal Forum, Imbil (July) - presentation



Mary Valley Chamber of Commerce, Imbil (August) —presentation



Real Foods Festival, Maleny (September) - display



Inaugural Agritourism Forum, Gympie (September) - participant, display



ABC radio (4 sessions—April, June, August, September)

Public display stall Creation of a set of public display stands featuring a series of 10 full-colour vinyl posters (each 1.2m x 0.8m) of foods produced in the Mary Valley, aligned with the Mary Valley Country branding (copy of images in Appendix 2). Storyboards (A3 size) developed to accompany display. This display was used in commercial stalls at the following events:



FlavourFest (Gympie, July) Featured and assisted by Mary Valley Prime Beef (Sue McMah, Imbil) and Cassie‟s Country Kitchen (Eddie and Anita Neeser, Dagun) Also featured Dagun Growers Market, Valley Bees project, Mary Valley Cheeses



Real Foods Festival (Maleny, September) Featured and assisted by Hinterland Feijoas (Sally Hookey) and Dagun Growers Market .



Good Food and Wine Festival (Brisbane, November) 11

Profile of Survey Group More than 100 businesses were contacted for the purposes of this project, of which 98 respondents agreed to provide information. The information has been collated into an Excel Spreadsheet and analysed. A full question-by-question statistical analysis is given in Appendix 5. The majority of respondents are full-time or part-time food producers, primarily in the 40-65 year age group. Time in operation on their current property ranged from newly settled to 65 years, with a significant proportion in residence from 5-10 years. The median size of operation was 2-10ha, with most vegetable production occurring on the smaller sized managed areas. Amongst the respondents is a significant emerging „new‟ demographic group of “lifestyle” farmers, who have been on their property for 5-10 years. These are generally people who have moved onto acreage after leaving a professional career, and who have a demonstrated interest in entrepreneurial agricultural pursuits. Occupational status 40

No. of respondants

35

Occupational status (82 responses)

Of the respondents, 35 worked at their business full-time, 31 were part-time, 16 were „hobby farmers‟ .

30 25 20 15 10

5 0 FT farm

PT farm

Hobby

Age of producers

Age of respondents

50

(98 responses)

45

The largest cohort of respondents was in the 50-65 year age group (46), with another 37 respondents aged 40-55 years. Only 9 respondents were in the 25-40 year group, and 6 were over 65 years.

No. of respondants

40 35 30 25

20 15

10 5

0 25 to 40

Size of property

40 to 55 yo

55 to 65 yo

over 65

Size (area) of operation

(98 responses) Analysed and discussed in Appendix 5, Q. 2 No. Of Respondants

25

The area farmed ranged from 0.2ha—50ha, with a median of 5ha. The respondents utilising less than 1ha were primarily food manufacturers who have a processing area only or who grow small amounts of produce to use in their products (herbs, etc - 5 respondents), and 7 respondents with either hobby farms or with small but intense market gardens.

20 15 10 5 0

Less than 1

1 to 2

2 to 5

5 to 10

10 to 20 20 to 50 more than 50

Hectares in production

12

Time in operation (98 responses) Respondents had been in operation on their current property from 1 year to 65 years (median 13 years).

 

37 respondents purchased their current property as an established business. 61 respondents purchased a „bare‟ property (either out of production or under a different use).

No. Of Respondants



Time in current operation 25 20 15 10 5 0

34 respondents had previous farming experience before moving onto their current property. All of these experienced farmers moved onto a bare property rather than taking over an existing business.

less than 5

5 to 10

10 to 15

15 to 20

20 to 25

25 to 30 more than 30

Years

The length of previous experience ranges from 5-35 years (median 15 years).

Production status (98 responses)

Production status 80



75 in production



5 not currently harvesting constraints or lack of interest)



2 for sale and not being managed



16 ceased production since Jan 2010 .

(time

No. of respondants

70

60 50 40

30 20 10 0

Not harvesting

For sale

In production

Ceased in past year

View overlooking a 10ha property with stonefruit and tamarillo orchards that have been in continuous production for about 20 years. Mostly bare when current owners moved in, with small productive orchard. Owners in 50-65 year age group. One had previous experience in broadacre hay and grazing. Also have off-farm income when not harvesting.

13

Principal findings A detailed question-by-question analysis of the results of the survey is attached in Appendix 5. What follows is a presentation of observations made during the survey and conclusions drawn from the statistical analysis of the survey responses.

Current status of food production in the Mary Valley Analysed and discussed in Appendix 5, Questions 3, 4, 5, 9 Respondents were asked to list their products from most significant to least significant. The responses varied from single product only (commonly macadamias, avocadoes, mangoes, ginger, beef, dairy), farms with one major crop and a number of smaller crops, and mixed farming operations. Most orchards in the Mary Valley contain only one or two types of fruit, although there may be a number of varieties of that type. The common orchards are avocado, macadamia, mango and Tahitian Limes.

Common 'principal' crops 0

Figure 1 illustrates the primary activity nominated by each respondent (only includes types with 3 or more responses).

No. of respondents 4 6

2

8

10

Avocado Macadamia Mango Limes Vegetable farm Mixed orchard Farm beef Pineapple Persimmon Vegetable garden Ginger

Most common crops 0

Figure 2 lists the most common crops grown by the survey group (5 or more responses). This does not indicate the size of the planting, but rather how many farms are growing that particular crop.

Mango Avocado Vegetable garden Mixed orchard Custard apple Other citrus Macadamia Limes Vegetable farm Ginger Pineapple

14

5

No. of respondents 10

15

20

Fruit crops

Major fruit crops production t/year

Respondents were also asked to estimate the quantity of saleable crops by weight that they produce. The most significant fruit crops in the Mary Valley (by weight) are illustrated.

0

200

400

600

800

1000

Pineapples Avocadoes

Mangoes Ginger

Pineapples are still the major crop, but only one or two producers still in operation.

Persimmons

(Note that this represents production from those who responded to the survey, and is not the total production from the district.)

Macadamias

Nectarines Limes

Peaches

“My advice to new/intending farmers - be very careful to grow only what is needed, with minimal exertion. Successful businesses in this area have been based on growing just a few lines very well, and with consistently high quality.” The Mary Valley does not have a distinctive seasonal advantage in fruit production, but there is a tendency towards late harvest of tropical fruits and early harvest of temperate varieties. The advantage it does have is in the diversity of produce that is available locally throughout the year (as opposed to the restricted seasonal cropping seen in the Granite Belt and in northern Queensland). With fruits, the season of some crops has been extended with selection of improved varieties, or in choosing appropriate microclimate that „holds‟ the crop longer. The following table illustrates the availability of major fruit crops grown by the respondents. (Note: the table below is based on information provided by the respondents, and relates to crops in the study area).

Availability of main fruit varieties in the Mary Valley Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Avocadoes Mangoes Tahitian Limes Oranges Mandarines Fingerlimes Custard Apples Pineapples Persimmons Stonefruit Feijoas Dragonfruit Lychees Tamarillos Passionfruit Pawpaw Banana 15

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

“Intending producers need to research opportunities thoroughly and only take up producing a small variety, and doing it well. And don't rely on any external funding.”

Vegetable production 

Vegetable production accounts for more than 500T of produce from the respondents.



Vegetable producers have seasonal crops year-round, and are able to service market stalls for most of the year.



Most of the vegetable growers sell their produce direct to consumers at farmers markets, locally and on the Sunshine Coast. Their emphasis is on having smaller amounts of diverse range of produce that is picked weekly.



These farms are generally mixed enterprises, usually also having a small to medium mixed orchard to complement market activity.

Growing conditions in the Mary Valley are ideal for mixed cropping (vegetables and orchards), to take advantage of areas of different soil types and microclimates typical of landholdings. Most of the market garden vegetable growers interviewed have trialed a wide range of crops with success, and agree that the potential for small-scale vegetable production is great. Notable, by omission, though is that there is little production of the „staples‟, primarily root crops such as potatoes, onions, carrots and sweet potatoes. This represents opportunities for niche market production of these lines.

Value-adding 

26 of the respondents currently valueadd on their crops or use raw materials produced in the Mary Valley in their products



There are at least another 6 new products under development.



Some food manufacturing businesses have recently ceased production, but there is opportunity for most of these to restart, under different management.

Meats, Poultry and Aquaculture 3 respondents produce direct packaged beef cuts, each specializing in a different breed—Droughtmaster, Lowline Angus, Hereford. Noticeable by omission, again, are other meat products (poultry, venison, lamb, pork), eggs, and aquaculture (fish, redclaw). All of these businesses operated in the Mary Valley until recently. Although many of the operations ceased due to land buy-up for the Traveston Dam proposal, others were affected by drought or by high cost of production and new regulations. This also presents opportunity for niche market production of these lines. 16

Distribution and Marketing Where the produce is sold Analysed and discussed in Appendix 5, Questions 6, 7, 8 Of those interviewed, 15 respondents stated that proportions of their crops are presold or on quota to a wholesaler/retailer, ranging from 25% (preserves) to all or most of the crop (dairy, avocadoes, macadamias, stonefruit, ginger, persimmons, pineapples). \

Other respondents were asked to quantify all avenues through which their produce reached the consumer, by percentage of all sales. The biggest proportion sell direct to the public via farmgate sales, markets or agritourism (56 respondents). These are primarily small operators handling a relatively small amount of product, and offers better profit. 28 respondents sell to retailers or wholesalers.

local

Marketing destination 0

10

no. of respondents 20 30 40

50

60

Direct to public Local retail/wholesale Central markets Food processing Restaurants/food service

National retailer

A significant proportion of sales to retailers/wholesalers is of lower grade stock to “onsellers”, who have regular stalls on the Sunshine Coast and in Brisbane. Interestingly, very little produce is sold in local stores in the Mary Valley, or to local eateries.

“Local farmers markets are good - they give access to good quality, fresh produce. We are able to offer people good healthy food and structure our crop management to pick little and often. Good for all of us.”

Pricing Appendix 5, Question 10



Growers who supply their products direct to a co-operative or through an agent at the wholesale markets have no control over the price they receive for their crop.



Those who sell direct to the consumer can determine their own pricing. Some growers calculate how much it costs to grow/process/transport/market each crop, others determine a price that is “fair” to ask for, usually based on averaging what that same crop is selling at currently in retail outlets, or what price is being paid at the wholesale markets for the same quality product and adding an appropriate margin for profit. Sometimes it may be a combination of inputs/fair price to get an average.

“If you produce good quality, then you get good money. It‟s important to keep the quality high, because this brings in good sales.” 17

Freighting Appendix 5, Questions 11, 12 Transport of goods off the farm appears to fall into 3 distinct categories:



Those in a business group generally happy with transport and sales.



Those responsible for transporting own produce, often by necessity rather than by choice, and frequently frustrated by poor communications and lack of control/lack of trust with regard to packhouse and transport arrangements.



Those who sell direct to the public through markets. Cost of transport to these venues is taken into account when setting price.

Marketing Appendix 5, Questions 13,17, 18, 19 30 respondents are involved in a business grouping external to the farm and share aspects of crop production and marketing, to maximise sales and profits . When asked about regional branding, the response was very encouraging. Regional branding is generally considered a positive step, with most respondents able to cite other areas where this has been successful. This supportive response was followed with the general advice to proceed with caution and to investigate the development of a local food supply chain in conjunction with potential customers, particularly those in the food services sector. Furthermore, many respondents are interested in connecting with a local food supply chain, for a variety of reasons including:



fairer prices



better transport options



better co-ordination of distribution



opportunity to diversify



better recognition of the value of locally produced food, and of the vital role food producers have in the local economy and in the area of future food security.

“It would be good to co-ordinate the marketing of our produce, as well as sharing transport, storage, packaging, labour. A number of smaller producers working together could make small-scale farming economically viable.”

“Pay attention to detail when growing - good quality means long shelf life. Encourage worms, constant cool, damp environment under heavy mulch. Build a regular, reliable customer base to ensure good sales at market.”

18

Capacity for expansion Appendix 5, Questions 22, 23 The desire to increase production is strong, with 27 respondents intending to expand output of their current lines. All were either in the process of expanding or anticipated expansion within the next year. Expansion is currently being considered in the following products:



Feijoas, dragonfruit, macadamias, avocadoes, pawpaws, persimmons, passionfruit, ginger, olives, pineapples (winter sweet varieties).



10 of the mixed vegetable growers have capacity to expand at any time, as do 2 of the value-added beef producers.



Cooloola Milk and its associated Mary Valley Cheeses are also looking to expand production.



One of the preserves manufacturers is trialling lines of sauces and mayonnaises.

One respondent also has a large production area under cover in an area closer to Gympie, and states that the potential for growing crops in the Mary Valley is tremendous, provided that there is good access to water. His present operation is constrained due to restrictions placed on water usage on the Pie Creek irrigation scheme, due to encroaching housing estates. Macadamia farmers are typically looking to expand to full capacity because the market prices are generally good. Most macadamia farmers confident that industry will expand, provided that the product is marketed properly and volume of production is increased to hold global share.

28 respondents indicated that they were already considering expanding production, but with different crops or other farming ventures. Most of these respondents were either in the process of commencing with the new lines or planned to do so within the next year. Some indicated that they still needed to research their proposals. Lines to be expanded on include: 

fruit tree crops.



vegetables



value-adding and new food product development



activities other than fruit and vegetable production including eggs, other meats (poultry, lamb, pork), liqueurs, herbs or spices, ginger, native flavourings, dukkah, teas, oils.

Finding opportunities The attraction of diversification to reduce economic risk was expressed by many respondents, as was the desire to move towards more sustainable practices. Copies of the publication “Your Future, Your Choices: Making farming decisions in times of change” were offered to respondents looking to make changes to their current practices. Respondents seeking to expand into different lines have already started to consider possible new ventures. However, many of their choices were based more on what they already knew about or „looked interesting‟ rather than based on any market research or consumer trends. Studies such as “Creating local food connections—a survey of chefs and restaurants on the Sunshine Coast and in Gympie”, done concurrently with this project, provide such valuable information and opportunity, and provide the basis for a greater chance of success. (See Appendices 3 and 4)

19

Production constraints Appendix 5, Question 24 Respondents were asked to describe constraints to expanding production on their farms, whether they had indicated that they wanted to expand production or not.



Half of all those interviewed responded that there were restrictions that could limit their capacity to expand.

The biggest single constraint was given as ‘lack of time’, with access to sufficient water being the next most important factor. Labour, land availability (size of plot, soil type, etc), transport/ infrastructure, funds and access to resources also featured. The major response when asked a bo ut limits to ex pa ndi ng production—lack of personal time—commonly came from those respondents running their farm as a single person or couple.

Constraints to expansion 0

10

no. of respondents 20

30

40

Owners time Water Labour Land Infrastructure Funds Inputs

A general observation made from comments made by the respondents was that management of 1000 orchard trees or a 2ha intensive vegetable production area appears to optimal size for 2 people to manage, with getting some casual help for picking, if needed.

“It‟s important to make the best of what you can do.”

"Growing food is generally not economically 'rational' under current economic conditions. It involves a large, inflexible, long- term time commitments of labour and capital at a great deal of risk from weather and markets. For this the small farmer is lucky to earn the equivalent of the most basic junior wage, and generally needs to include a buffer of past savings or outside income as part of their economic strategy to support this 'lifestyle' choice."

20

Identified Opportunities and Constraints, and Recommendations The responses to the survey questions generated considerable discussion on what are viewed as the major constraints to expansion (with regard to the respondents), highlighted opportunities available to the current and intending producers, and raised recommendations for addressing these identified issues. The major factors herein have been summarised from Appendix 5: A detailed analysis of the questionnaire, and are listed here in order of priority. The principal issue raised was one of the need to have a co-ordinated local food supply chain and a more effective marketing process, and this would appear to be pivotal to building the capacity of current and intending producers. A co-operative in the Mary Valley is not a new concept, as these were commonplace here until about 10 years ago. Dagun Co-operative began in the 1920s to assist local growers to market their produce, by opening a small sawmill (now the Mary Valley Timbers mill) to make crates for transporting pineapples and bananas and co-ordinating transport on the goods train. Imbil and Kandanga also had growers co-operatives for purchasing fertilisers and for co-ordinating freight. Paradise Fruit Barn at Kandanga was an initiative of local producers to grow, pack and market their produce. This co-operative ceased nearly 20 years ago, but the facility is still operational. Regional branding is responsible for the successful development and maintenance of sustainable communities worldwide. Australian examples include King Island, Margaret River, Barossa Valley and Byron Bay. Elsewhere, one of the most inspiring projects that this author has encountered is the Appalachian Sustainable Agriculture Project (see www.asapconnections.org). A recent study commissioned by Tourism Queensland (“Mary Valley Food Tourism Strategy”, Southern Cross University) outlined the process for the development of a Food Tourism Action Plan, the progress of which would appear to be locally supported, evidenced by the responses collected in the survey. This study identified a process that could address many of the issues raised below, particularly those relating to time constraints and to improving capacity for expansion. In summary, there is a business opportunity here for a social enterprise to develop a facility and to create an accredited local wholesale distribution network, as well as having capacity to address the training needs of existing and intending producers. This could then give rise to the development of a regional brand. The operation of the facility and its co-ordinated activities would likely address all the issues discussed below.

1. Development of a local food supply chain and regional branding Appendix 5, Questions 17, 18, 19 Nearly 50% of respondents indicated that they would participate in a local food supply chain, with the precaution expressed that such a concept would need to be thoroughly researched and supported by an active commitment from both suppliers and consumers. Furthermore, the concept of regional branding was overwhelmingly supported by nearly 80% of the respondents. The concurrent survey of food service providers also concluded that a coordinated marketing and distribution centre would remove a major impediment to the regular purchasing of local food items:

“A collective movement needs to engage with all restaurants to support our local farmers.” “A range of impediments and barriers to action were identified by participants in relation to the purchase of local foods. These include economic barriers (price competitiveness, competition barriers, poor economic conditions generally), knowledge barriers (insufficient knowledge of origin of produce and where to purchase local foods) and access barriers (inconsistent supplies, inconvenient, no central access point).”

Recommendation: That the establishment of a Mary Valley co-operative (or similar structure) be investigated, to develop a centralised marketing and distribution centre. A role of the co-operative could also be to research 21

consumer trends and to coordinate the growing of short-term crops to meet demand. The furtherance of this concept could take direction from the “Mary Valley Food Tourism Strategy”, which outlines a structure and strategies for the development of a Food Tourism Action Plan relating specifically to the Mary Valley.

2. Assistance with business expansion and capacity-building, and targeted rural extension programs for small ‘lifestyle’ farmers Appendix 5, Question 26 Respondents indicated that assistance was required to help with capacity-building: 

28 would like access to further support and information (technical and production advice, marketing advice, advice on food initiatives for the region, etc).



14 would like accredited training. Subjects mentioned included marketing, horticulture, sustainable agriculture, small business management.



4 would like assistance with sourcing inputs, particularly with regard to manufacturing.

Recommendations: The provision of technical support and training was noted as an important factor in Item 1, and could be co-ordinated as part of the development of that project. Main actions required would be to: 

Investigate the opportunities to arrange information sessions prepared specifically to meet the needs of producers and food manufacturers in the study district. There are examples of such programs conducted by U.S. Agricultural Extension Services that address this need, one of which is the Purdue University (Indiana) “Growing For Market” program, a series of 5 or 6 regular workshops held at least annually.



Investigate the opportunities to conduct accredited training to assist new and intending producers. An example of this is a similar program that was conducted in Gympie and Pomona in 2002, where participants undertook a year-long study course leading to a Certificate III Organic Agriculture. The author was a participant in this program, and is qualified to conduct a similar course.



Other short-course training ideas include crop production, pest and disease management, quality assurance, farm safety.



Investigate other training and business support opportunities that capitalise on programs already offered, such as the Federal Government “New Enterprise Initiative Scheme” and the Queensland Government “Skilling Queenslanders for Work” initiative.

3. Addressing constraints to expansion Appendix 5, Question 24 All respondents were asked to describe constraints to expanding production on their farms, whether they had indicated that they wanted to expand production or not. Half of the respondents indicated that there were restrictions that could limit their capacity to expand.

Lack of time The respondents who cited “lack of personal time” as their principal constraint are likely to be considering the question of expansion from the perspective of their current scale of operation. Not all scales of operation are profitable. To expand from one scale to the next profitable scale may involve a 22

quantum leap in inputs, such as hiring staff or changing management structures, or level of capital investment. Going from a single person/couple operation to employing a staff member involves significant change in scale of operation (payroll, insurances, superannuation, etc). Perhaps the constraint here is more likely a lack of commitment to the next stage—having to give over some control of their own business to staff members.

Recommendation: It may be of use to conduct a workshop series that looks at the economic implications of this greater step in expansion, to assist producers in making informed decisions.

Labour shortage Backpackers Hostels basically offer a working holiday for young people—work fits in with holiday, rather than vice versa. Gympie/Mary Valley can‟t offer the attractions that make other places popular (beaches, nightclubs, city activities). Respondents noted the difficulties in sourcing labour from backpacker hostels, and also the lack of experienced casual workers. It may thus be more beneficial to market seasonal farmwork to an older or more experienced casual workforce. It was also mentioned that there is currently no local casual employment network. In the past, there was a reliable group of ladies who would organise to share transport and work on various farms during school hours (principally macadamia harvesting and picking of beans, passionfruit, avocadoes and a range of other smallcrops).

Recommendations:



A local labour force is needed between May-November (this is not usually a good time for getting backpackers). It is possible to co-ordinate work between a number of farms in an area in this time. For instance, April-May is pruning of stonefruit and persimmons, then avocado picking MaySeptember, then stonefruit picking Oct-November, then avocado pruning.



There is capacity to have a casual work team established in the Mary Valley. Training could be offered in horticulture (tree maintenance, crop management, harvesting, post-harvest handling). Work schedules and transport could also be co-ordinated.



This region is not included in the map provided for itinerant pickers, nor on the circuit for "backpacker worker groups". This could be addressed by contacting the publishers and co-ordinators of this service. Perhaps the most suitable organizations to maintain this liaison would be Gympie Cooloola Tourism, Mary Valley Chamber of Commerce, or the Economic Development Office of Gympie Regional Council.

4. Addressing the identified shortage of ‘staple’ vegetable production locally, and encouraging production of under-represented items Appendix 5, Question 3, 4, 5 Notable, by omission, is that there is little production of the „staples‟, primarily root crops such as potatoes, onions, carrots and sweet potatoes, and only very small quantities being available locally. There are no large-scale producers of these crops in the Mary Valley. Because of land constraints (soil type, terrain) local producers are unable to compete with larger scale operations in the Lockyer Valley and Burnett areas. Establishment of large scale production of root crops in the Mary Valley is unlikely and possibly not economically viable. However, there is a worthwhile niche opportunity to grow these as a component of a small mixed operation on properties with suitable soil types for root crops. 23

Recommendation: That research is undertaken to determine the niche market opportunities for product lines which were under-represented in the survey. This principally comprises the following:



the „staple‟ vegetables (such as potatoes, carrots, onions, sweet potatoes)



„soft‟ fruits ( berries, brambles, shrub-fruits)



aquaculture (including freshwater fish and crustacea, eels)



meats other than beef (including lamb, poultry, venison)

For example, at one small outlet alone, weekly sales of „staple‟ vegetables at the Dagun Growers Market over a 2-hour period (based on consumer purchases, and of chemical-free produce) could predictably be:    

Potatoes—25-30kg Carrots—20-25 kg Onions—10-15kg (each, red and brown) Sweet potatoes—15-20kg

5. Assistance with Value-adding and product manufacture Appendix 5, Question 9, 22, 23 The survey identified capacity to expand, and desire from respondents to explore opportunities.

Recommendations: 

Assist potential value-adders to develop their products



Compile list of available approved kitchens for occasional use (e.g., Kandanga Bowls Club)



Refer to Economic Development Office, Gympie Regional Council, for information on product development.

6. Addressing transport constraints Appendix 5, Question 12 While most of the larger producers were satisfied with their transport arrangements, many smaller growers expressed frustration with their current freight situation.

Recommendation: There is opportunity for a carrier (preferably with refrigerated van) to pick up either from farms or from a central distribution point in the Mary Valley and deliver to these less mainstream places, on a routine basis. This would also be more satisfactory for the chefs , knowing that an order will be delivered at a regular time.

7. Addressing the lack of produce in local retail outlets and eateries Appendix 5, Question 8 Very little produce is sold in local stores in the valley, or to local eateries. A couple of growers were unhappy about the way their produce was marketed at local shops (no refrigeration, rough handling, damaged or perished stock left out for sale) and that this was damaging the reputation of local produce. Understandably, growers will market their prime product to wherever their return will be highest. It is 24

thus more likely that lower quality produce will be offered locally, unless growers are producing items solely for local supply by arrangement. This is more likely to occur with small vegetable gardens and mixed orchards.

Recommendation: To approach potential outlets to discuss these difficulties and to suggest and assist with ways by which the produce could be handled satisfactorily, and to encourage the utilization of local produce for local consumption.

8. Addressing barriers to egg production Appendix 5, Question 24 A few micro and small producers have noted the new restrictions on sales of eggs and the effect this will have on their overall profits. Poultry is often an important part of the food production chain, particularly for organic farmers. Many supplement stock feed costs by selling eggs at market or to local food manufacturers (for cakes, pies, etc) and this will impact on their operations. The expense of egg production registration and infrastructure required is generally considered unviable.

Recommendation: Investigate the opportunity to register a co-operative egg supply chain for small producers.

References Johnson, M and Saunders, K. (2007). Wild Heart Bountiful Land. Pedley, I. (1979) Winds of Change: 100 years in Widgee Shire. Mary Economic Region: Agribusiness Resource Guide (2009). Qld DPIF Creating Local Food Connections: A survey of chefs and restaurants to better understand the uptake of, and satisfaction in, local produce within the Sunshine Coast and Gympie regions” (Boardroom Business, July 2011) Business Expansion and Retention Report for the Mary Valley (2008). Mary Valley Inc Your Future, Your Choices: Making farming decisions in times of change (2009). Qld DPIF. Wright, Rose (2010). Mary Valley Food Tourism Strategy (Southern Cross University).

25

APPENDIX 1 Questionnaire Proforma for Survey

Sunshine Coast/Mary Valley Local Food Survey PRODUCERS Name:

Address:

Business Name:

Phone numbers:

Website: Question : 1. How long have you been in operation? 2. Area of farm/area under production? 3. Based on your property, please list your products from most significant to least.

4. What is the availability?

Fax:

Email: Response :

1. 2. 3. Others: Seasonal (if so, when? Year-round? Storage capacity?)

5. What quantities do you produce?

6. What percentage is presold or on quota to a wholesaler/retailer? 7. Please tell us how you sell your produce?

% Central wholesale markets % Direct to national retailer % To local retail or wholesalers % Direct to public via Farmgate, markets or agritourism % To restaurants or food service sector % To food processing company

8. What are your current local outlets? 9. Do you value-add or process crops or produce grown on your property? If so, describe.

10. How do you determine pricing of your products (e.g., market value, based on inputs, etc) 11. Please describe how your produce is transported off your farm to the point of sale? 12. Do you face any problems or challenges in transporting or distributing your goods? 13. Are you involved in any business grouping external to the farm which facilitate shared infrastructure, purchasing or marketing of your products? Eg. cooperatives, packing shed consortiums, marketing groups

If yes list:

15. Do you currently use any external inputs from the local area? (give examples) 16. Are there any materials or outputs you produce which could be reused? If so, give examples.

17. Do you see benefits in regional branding? 18. Are you interested in investigating opportunities to connect to local food supply chains? If yes, go to the next question…..

Yes No

26

19. Please indicate what level of influence the following factors would have on you if you were to consider supplying some or all of your produce to satisfy local demand?

A great influence

Somewhat of an influence

Of very little influence

If I knew more about the level of local demand If the price was more attractive If there was demand for my quality produce If local restaurants could be more reliable in ordering If there was an efficient local distribution system If there was more promotion of local food If there was demand for a variety of produce If other farmers were selling their goods locally If there was some support to learn how to be part of a local food supply chain

Comment or other :_____________ 20. Do you have any accreditations for your Farm Management System

21. Have your productions systems ever been audited/ benchmarked against accepted Best Management Practice, sustainability guidelines etc.

Food Safety Quality Assurance …................................................................ Industry FMS Accreditation …………………………………………… Environmental Management System (type and level) …………………... Organic or Biodynamic Accreditation (type and level ) ……………….. International Accreditation ( eg. for export to EU) …………………… Other: ….............................................................................................. If yes by whom ……………………………… & results available? If no, are you interested in someone visiting to do a farm walk and assessment against a BMP framework developed for SEQ?

22. Do you want to expand production? If yes, next question. 23. What is your capacity to expand, and when do you propose Current lines: to expand? Different lines: 23. What is your capacity to expand, and when do you propose Current lines: to expand? Different lines:

24. Are there restrictions to expansion? If so, describe.

Water/land availability Infrastructure (e.g., transport, communication) Resources (including ingredients) Labour Funding/access to capital

25. What is your perception of the current market relating to your own business (supply/demand) and opportunities?

26. What other assistance do you require to assist you with your business?

Training Information (technical, legal, production, etc) Sourcing inputs (particularly with regard to manufacturing)

27. Any other comments you would like to add?

27

No influence

APPENDIX 2 Promotional display posters Promotional display created for the purpose of featuring the produce of the Mary Valley. Each poster measures 1200mm high x 80mm wide, fully colour-printed on vinyl with fasteners at each corner. At Flavour Fest (Gympie) and Real Foods Festival (Maleny), the display was erected on a frame atop trestle tables, with samples of food products and of produce directly relating to each poster. A „storyboard‟ (A3 size) accompanied each poster, each with information about a business with connection to that poster (an example is at end of this Appendix). The header and footer of each poster is designed to complement the Mary Valley Country Tourism promotion. All images courtesy of Glenbo Craig. Graphics, layout and design by Elaine Bradley and Tavis Hawke. Printing by VistaPrint.

28

29

30

A Lifetime of Farming Eager customers at growers markets come as much to buy the fresh produce as to talk with the people who grow their food— people like Bruno and Trish Gabbana of Kandanga. Recently completing 25 years as stallholders at Eumundi markets, Bruno and Trish are on the organising committee of the newly relaunched Dagun Growers Market. Trish says it was a natural progression to back a Mary Valley market, after years of packing up their prime fruit and vegetables to sell down the coast. “Our market mantra has always been that buying produce at growers markets benefits our farmers first and foremost, that it provides jobs for Australians, and it also supports the use of environmentally sustainable farming practices,” says Trish. Farming is a way of life for Bruno. He grew up in the northern provinces of Italy and immigrated to Australia in the early 1970s. With Trish, a Queenslander, he purchased their property in the Mary Valley in 1978 and, a year later, they were already producing a wide variety of produce. That produce has been sold at Sunshine Coast and national markets, and is now available each week in the Mary Valley, and fortnightly at the Peregian Beach markets. “We have no trouble selling our produce,” says Trish, adding that their range is expanding all the time. And Trish is always keen to share her cooking tips for some of the less familiar varieties. Trish and Bruno are currently investigating options to value-add to their produce (such as a delicious lemoncello!), looking to secure a long-term future in agriculture for themselves, as well as for the Mary Valley. 31

APPENDIX 3 Opportunities and Impediments Excerpts from “Creating Local Food Connections” (Boardroom Business, July 2011) A survey of chefs and restaurants to better understand the uptake of, and satisfaction in, local produce within the Sunshine Coast and Gympie regions.

Conclusions 

Overall, the eateries surveyed are largely disappointed with the supply of local produce and are struggling to overcome a number of barriers preventing them from sourcing their food locally.



Given that a commitment was demonstrated towards local foods, an opportunity exists for the industry to collectively work together towards overcoming some of the barriers to supply.



Opportunities also exist for distributors to play a more active role in the sourcing of more local foods and better promoting themselves as supplying local foods to meet that demand. P. 4 A range of impediments and barriers to action were identified by participants in relation to the purchase of local foods. These include economic barriers (price competitiveness, competition barriers, poor economic conditions generally), knowledge barriers (insufficient knowledge of origin of produce and where to purchase local foods) and access barriers (inconsistent supplies, inconvenient, no central access point). P. 13 74% of respondents answered „yes‟ they do have a commitment to purchasing locally, however only 69.1% answered that they were satisfied with the supply of local produce.

P. 17 Respondents were asked to list any foods and ingredients they would like to source from local producers. This list contained 79 items, spread across all the major food categories except grains and dairy. The majority of responses detailed fruits, vegetables and herbs as well as a variety of seafood and meats (including organic, game and poultry). This list is reproduced in Appendix 4. Of note are the items identified as being in short supply locally during one-on-one interviews with local fruit and vegetable distributors, these include: Continental cucumbers, regular tomatoes, capsicums, eggplant, wild rocket, baby spinach, and asian vegetables. P. 18 In addition to listing food ingredients, a number of respondents chose to provide additional comments. A selection is as follows: “One of our biggest sellers is a mesculin mix however we struggle to get good quality supplies locally. Wild rocket is a huge opportunity for local growers” “Its not so much a specific ingredient that I get frustrated in getting, its more access to local pristine produce that does not seem to make it to our local markets as the big cities or export seems to take priority this is frustrating as it seems to break this cycle we need to pay more than anyone in many cases or tolerate lesser quality.” “Very well rounded range, however quality and irregular supply are issues as opposed to Sydney/ Brisbane/Perth. Quite poor really.” 32

P. 19 The majority of respondents chose quality as the most important purchasing decision factor. Other factors rating highly include sufficient quantities available reliably, convenient access to suppliers, timely deliveries and high quality customer service. In combination with this, sufficient, readily available quantities (rated „high‟ in importance in the previous question) is one of the categories ranked lowest in terms of satisfaction, alongside price competitiveness and organic produce certification. P. 21 “I would like to see a directory of local suppliers made available to industry wishing to utilise local produce. It was difficult as a new business to find local produce suppliers, other than the larger operators who did have an online presence. We even scrambled to write down numbers from delivery vans driving past! A centralised website or directory with all local producers is needed.” (Note that Seasons of the Sun , in collaboration with Real Harvest, has produced a website with many of these details. At the time of writing, it was out of date. It is understood that this is to be updated shortly.) P. 22 “We tried sourcing local fruit and veg but found that there was no consistency of supply or quality. We also found the service was not very good so I would have to go to Woolworths to get the rest of what we needed. Being very time poor I have found it is simply easier to go to Woolworths first and then chase up the local suppliers for the things that I can‟t get at the supermarket. We would like to support local businesses but until they have the consistency that we need we will have to continue sourcing most of our produce from Woolies.” P. 23 “A collective movement needs to engage with all restaurants to support our local farmers.”

33

APPENDIX 4 Opportunities for local food producers to supply the local food service sector: A list of foods and ingredients desired from local food producers From “Creating Local Food Connections (Boardroom Business, July 2011)” Excerpt from a full report on a survey of local chefs and restaurants to better understand the uptake of, and satisfaction in, local produce within the Sunshine Coast and Gympie regions. Responses to question: Please list any foods and ingredients that you would like to see available from local producers. (Listed alphabetically) Mesculin mix Mushrooms Mussels Nuts Oils Okra Onions Organic fruit Organic vegetables Organics Oysters Parsley Pineapples Potato Pumpkin Red Onions Rocket Rosemary Salad Seafood Seafood - Fish Seafood - Prawns Seeds Spinach Strawberries Sweet Potato Tea Thyme Tomatoes Vegetables White Turmeric Wild Rocket Wines Yellow Capsicum Zucchini

Almond paste Arugula (rocket) Asian vegetables and herbs Baby spinach Banana leaves Barramundi Basil Beans Berries Broccoli Capsicum Carrots Cheese Citrus fruit Coffee Cucumbers Dairy Deli goods Dill Dried herbs Dry goods Eggplant Eggs Eggs - free range organic English spinach Flour Fruit Garlic Green peppercorns Greens Guava Herbs Kang kong Karchai Lettuce Meat Meat - chicken Meat - organic chicken Meat - Pigs - Free range Meat - pork Meat - poultry Meat - venision Meats - Game meats Meats - Gourmet

34

APPENDIX 5 Survey results—question by question analysis 

98 food producers were interviewed for the survey, including some who have recently ceased production.



The profile of the age, time in production, size of property and current occupational status of the respondents is outlined in the main report.



Not all respondents answered every question. The number of valid responses is stated in the analysis of each question.

Q 1 How long have you been in operation? ( 98 responses) 

Respondents had been in operation on their current property from 1 year to 65 years (median 13 years).



37 respondents purchased their current property as an established business.



61 respondents purchased a „bare‟ property (either out of production or under a different use).



34 respondents had previous farming experience before moving onto their current property. All of these experienced farmers moved onto a bare property rather than taking over an existing business. The length of previous experience ranges from 5-35 years (median 15 years).

Time in current operation 25 ts 20 n a d n15 o p s e R10 f O . o N 5 0 less than 5

5 to 10

10 to 15

15 to 20 Years

35

20 to 25

25 to 30 more than 30

Q 2 What is the area of your farm, or area under production? (98 responses) 

Individual areas farmed ranged from 0.2ha—50ha, with a median of 5ha.

Many respondents noted that only part of the total farm area was arable or able to be farmed, primarily due to steepness, accessibility to water, and variable soil type. This was generally not viewed as restrictive, but rather that it allowed for a range of options when selecting crops. An observation made by a many respondents, when asked whether they intended to expand production, was that their time is a limiting factor rather than the physical attributes of their property (see Q.24), and that a couple could only realistically manage about 2ha of market gardens, or about 1000 trees in an orchard (without employing extra labour), irrespective of the total area of the property.

Size (area) of operation 25 st 20 n a d n15 o p s e R10 f O . o N 5 0 Less than 1

1 to 2

2 to 5

5 to 10

10 to 20

20 to 50 more than 50

Hectares in production

The respondents utilising less than 1ha were primarily food manufacturers who have a processing area only or who grow small amounts of produce to use in their products (herbs, chilis, etc) (5 respondents), and 7 respondents with either hobby farms or with small but intense market gardens.

36

Q 3 What crops do you produce? (81 responses) Respondents were asked to list their products from most significant to least significant. The responses varied from single product only (commonly macadamias, avocadoes, ginger, beef, dairy), farms with one major crop and a number of smaller crops, and mixed farming operations. Figure 1. Primary activity nominated by each respondent (only includes types with 3 or more responses).

Common 'principal' crops 0

No. of respondents 4 6

2

8

10

Avocado Macadamia Mango Limes Vegetable farm Mixed orchard Farm beef Pineapple Persimmon Vegetable garden Ginger

Figure 2. Most common crops grown by the survey group (5 or more responses). This does not indicate the size of the planting, but rather how many farms are growing that particular crop.

Most common crops 0

5

No. of respondents 10

15

20

Mango Avocado Vegetable garden Mixed orchard Custard apple Other citrus Macadamia Limes Vegetable farm Ginger Pineapple

Tree crops Most orchards in the Mary Valley contain only one or two types of fruit, although there may be a number of varieties of that type. The most common orchards are avocado, macadamia, mango and Tahitian Limes. Most avocado growers have a few different varieties to extend the harvest season which, in the Mary Valley, is from April-December (most harvesting May-October). Some have planted only one or two varieties which are strip-harvested over a 5-6 week period in June-August with the entire crop sold to Sunfresh (lesser quality fruit is used for oil). The macadamia nut industry is very strong in the region, with all growers having confidence in their 37

industry (see Q. 25). Most macadamia farms are planted to full capacity, or with the intention of doing so in the next couple of years. Many large mango orchards were planted in the Mary Valley in the mid 1990s in response to a recommendation at that time for production of large volume for export, and the release of improved varieties. Over the past 5 years, a sizeable proportion of these have been pulled out and the land returned to grazing, for a higher profit margin for the land use. There are many orchards on private and now governmentowned land in the district that are not harvested, because of recent poor returns. Some allow people to come in and pick their own for little no charge, for use in value-adding or for stockfeed. Tahitian Limes are seen as an easy-care crop with extended harvest period, and is favoured by part-time operators. Passionfruit has been a successful crop for many years in this district. It is generally not considered a longterm crop and is generally replaced after 3-4 years. However, passionfruit is a popular choice for growers seeking to extend their range, so there is no nett loss of production. Persimmons have gained favour over low-chill stonefruit over the past decade, with 3 stonefruit orchards changing to persimmons. All but one of the persimmon and stonefruit orchards are grown under netting, at great expense but necessary to avoid destruction by birds and fruitbats. Bananas and pineapples are now much less common in the Mary Valley than in the 1990s. Banana production has been affected by Panama Disease, as well as competition from huge plantations in northern Queensland. Lady Finger bananas are the preferred variety for this area, and now found mostly as part of mixed farming enterprises. The pineapple industry has all but ceased in the valley, with only 3 large plantations still in operation, due to major changes within the industry and competition from large plantings on flatter terrain to the north and south. There are old pecan trees remaining on 3 properties in Dagun, planted just after World War II as part of a returned servicemen‟s employment program. More plantings were done in Kandanga and Amamoor in the 1980s, and a grower in Imbil put in 200 trees about 6 years ago. This was also a popular tree for large home gardens, most of which were planted over 50 years ago. Ginger is seen as a major emerging new crop, as the ginger industry seeks to establish new growing areas to replace cropping lands infected with pythium fungus. Other emerging new orchards in the area include Dragonfruit, Fingerlimes and Feijoa, with recent plantings of blueberries.

Vegetables Most of the vegetable growers sell their produce direct to consumers at farmers markets, locally and on the Sunshine Coast. Their emphasis is on having smaller amounts of diverse range of produce that is picked weekly. These farms are generally mixed enterprises, usually also having a small to medium mixed orchard to complement market activity. Those who sell for the central markets generally select 3 or 4 lines suitable for the season. They usually plant the same crops each year, and stagger the plantings to have ongoing supply rather than a single pick. A couple of growers experiment with other varieties that are then sold at weekly or fortnightly stalls. All growers interviewed grow crops all year round. The biggest challenge noted by most is heavy rainfall and high humidity in summer. Loss due to winter frosts is negligible. Growing conditions in the Mary Valley are ideal for mixed cropping (vegetables and orchards), to take advantage of areas of different soil types and microclimates typical of landholdings. Most of the market garden vegetable growers interviewed have trialed a wide range of crops with success, and agree that the 38

potential for small-scale vegetable production is great. Notable, by omission, is that there is little production of the „staples‟, primarily root crops such as potatoes, onions, carrots and sweet potatoes. It can only be speculated that this is because Mary Valley vegetable producers are unable to compete with the large irrigated, mechanized bulk vegetable production areas to the north, south and west. This, however, presents a possible niche market. There is opportunity to supply these items locally. “The hardest things to get in regular supply at the Dagun Growers Market are the staples — potatoes, onions, carrots, sweet potatoes. These are on everyone‟s weekly shopping list, but don‟t seem to be popular with the growers.” As consumers are becoming more aware of „food miles‟ and seeking to buy only locally produced items — particularly those which use little or no chemical inputs—then small-scale production of the staples becomes a feasible proposition. The shortage of locally-grown crops, especially the staples, was evident early in 2011 when flooding prevented supplies being delivered to retail outlets. Local growers were contacted by retailers and consumers desperate to purchase fresh produce.

Comments: 

We grow a couple of main varieties each season for the central markets (like broccoli, cauliflower, leeks and spuds in winter, then tomatoes and melons in the spring), plus a wide range of assorted varieties in lesser quantity for the fortnightly markets. We usually plant a tray of each type each week..



I grow a large variety of mixed vegies, but small quantity. I pick for market each week, and have sufficient for a decent sized market stall.



We grow assorted vegies - small amounts, big variety. Sell about a ute-load every week.



We fenced off 1ha of our 60ha grazing land for cash crops (bananas, pumpkins). We then take advantage of the irrigation to plant out other lines such as lettuces, zucchinis, cucumbers and tomatoes for home use, and sell the excess at the local weekly market.



We grow mixed vegetables and have got a mixed fruit orchard of about 30 trees plus some grape vines. This grows enough for weekly market stalls. Realistically, we pick about 1/2 to 1 tonne per crop of standard lines per year (potatoes, onions, beetroot, snow peas, etc), lesser on speciality lines (okra, raddichio, etc).



Very little waste - all scraps go to poultry. Restricted from selling eggs alongside other produce at market due to regulations.

Recommendation: That research is undertaken to determine the niche market opportunities for, principally, the „staple‟ vegetables (such as potatoes, carrots, onions, sweet potatoes) and „soft‟ fruits ( berries, brambles, shrub fruits), both of which are under-represented in the survey. For example, figures for Dagun Growers Market indicate that the average weekly sales for these items (based on consumer purchases, and of chemical-free produce) at that outlet could be:

   

Potatoes—25-30kg Carrots—20-25 kg Onions—10-15kg (each, red and brown) Sweet potatoes—15-20kg 39

Q 4 What is the availability of your produce? (81 responses) Fruit production The table below was derived from information provided by the respondents for the main fruit crops. (Note: dark green represents the main harvest seasons, Light green represents times when the crop is available, but in diminished quantity)

Availability of main fruit varieties in the Mary Valley Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

Avocadoes Mangoes Tahitian Limes Oranges Mandarines Fingerlimes Custard Apples Pineapples Persimmons Stonefruit Feijoas Dragonfruit Lychees Tamarillos Passionfruit Pawpaw Banana

Very few respondents had storage facilities for their crops. Most picked and freighted on the same or the next day. Some of the macadamia growers have silos and can hold crops for a few months, to wait for better prices if needed (this has not been necessary for the past 2 years). The season of some crops can be extended with selection of improved varieties, or in choosing appropriate microclimate that „holds‟ the crop longer.



Pineapples are available year round with plantings of 3 varieties (Old „summer‟ variety, 2 winter sweet varieties). Mangoes—most are harvested Jan-Feb, but Keitt ripens in April.



Avocadoes—Sheppards are the first to ripen (April) then Fuerte and Sharwill usually harvested from May to August. Wurtz and Hass will hold until December.



Tahitian Limes can be harvested year-round in the region, although most growers pick from December through to September. There has been significant increase in the number of lime orchards over the past 10 years. “Because of microclimates on the property, we‟re able to produce limes all year round.”

Vegetable production All vegetable growers surveyed have year-round production, the varieties available according to season. There is generally no storage on-farm, so produce is sold soon after picking. Frosts do not generally cause problems, but all growers face major challenges in mid-summer due to high humidity and temperatures. Appropriate crop selection is vital. 40

Q 5 What quantities are produced? (81 responses) Respondents were asked to estimate the quantity of saleable crops by weight that they produce. (Note that this represents production from those who responded to the survey, and is not the total production from the district.)

Fruit crops The most significant fruit crops in the Mary Valley (by weight) are illustrated in the graph below.

Major fruit crops production t/year 0

200

400

600

800

1000

Pineapples Avocadoes

Mangoes Ginger Persimmons Nectarines Limes Macadamias Peaches

Although pineapple production was found to have the biggest volume of all crops grown in the district, there are only 3 producers, and one of these grows the bulk of the supply under contract to Heinz, on what remains one of the biggest intensive cropping areas in the Mary Valley. Avocadoes would be considered the major crop of the region at this time, being the most common principal crop and in having the second highest volume of production. There remains confidence in this industry, although recent big plantings in NSW and New Zealand have the potential to negatively impact in the future. Many large mango orchards were planted in the Mary Valley in the mid 1990s in response to a recommendation at that time for production of large volume for export, and the release of improved varieties. Over the past 5 years, a sizeable proportion of these have been pulled out and the land returned to grazing, for a higher profit margin for the land use. There are many orchards on private and now government-owned land in the district that are not harvested, because of recent poor returns. Some allow people to come in and pick their own for little no charge, for use in value-adding or for stockfeed. Ginger is a relatively new bulk crop in the Mary Valley, and it is anticipated that the yield will increase dramatically over the next few years with more land coming into production. With renewed confidence in the macadamia industry, the annual yield of this crop is also expected to increase significantly over the next decade. Young planting are due to come into production next year, and further plantings are already being planned. Other produce in lesser bulk quantities include (tonnage in brackets):



Custard apples (15), Pecans (15), Bananas (10), Tamarillos (10), Mandarines (7), Feijoas (7), Dragonfruit (6), Garlic (3), Fingerlimes (1), Other citrus (15)

There is a range of produce for which figures were not provided, but in marketable quantity:



Lychees, olives, pawpaws, jaboticabas, grapes, „rainberries‟ and „raincherries‟, bamboo shoots, melons, green tea and honey. 41

Vegetable Crops Vegetable production accounts for more than 500T of produce from the respondents. Varieties mentioned as being produced in bulk include:



Broccoli, cauliflower, button squash, zucchini, cucumbers, leeks, pumpkins, potatoes, snow peas and tomatoes.

Varieties produced in lesser quantity are too numerous to list. Respondents with mixed production generally grow a wide range of seasonal vegetables and fruit. A weekly list from the Dagun Growers Market typically has more than 35 varieties of vegetables and 10 types of fruit for consumers to choose from. All produce is grown in the Mary Valley. Dagun Growers Market Produce List—September 2011 

Vegetables—tomatoes (cherry and large), lettuce (ball, open and cos varieties), mesclun mix, raddicio, baby spinach, kale (3 varieties), silverbeet, asian greens (bok choy, pak choy, tatsoi, wombok, mizuna, elk), cabbages (3 green varieties, 1 red), pumpkins (2 varieties), carrots, spring onions, whole white and red onions, broccoli, broccolini, cauliflower, radishes (2 varieties), peas (shelling), snow peas, sugarsnap peas, beans (2 varieties), zucchini, cucumber (Lebanese), cocoyam, beetroot, fennel, turnips, celery, capsicums, potatoes, sweet potatoes, rocket, New Zealand spinach



Fruit—bananas, mulberries (black and shatoot), avocadoes, lemons, oranges, grapefruit, cumquats, pawpaw, strawberries, limes, pineapples, passionfruit



Other—ginger, turmeric root, galangal, lemongrass stalks, chilis, herb bunches, macadamia nuts.

Q 6 What percentage is presold or on quota to a wholesaler/retailer? (81 responses) Of those interviewed, 15 respondents stated that proportions of their crops are presold or on quota to a wholesaler/retailer. 100% presold (10 respondents) 90% presold (3 respondents) 80% presold (1 respondent) 25% presold (1 respondent)

Dairy (3), avocadoes (2), macadamias (2), stonefruit, persimmons, ginger. Macadamias (2), ginger Pineapples Manufactured items (preserves)

42

Q 7 How do you sell your produce? (81 responses) Respondents were asked to quantify the avenues through which their produce reached the consumer, by percentage of all sales.

Marketing destination 0

10

no. of respondents 20 30 40

50

60

Direct to public Local retail/wholesale Central markets Food processing Restaurants/food service

National retailer



56 respondents sell direct to the public via farmgate sales, markets or agritourism.

The amount sold via direct sales by individual respondents ranges from 5-100% (median 80%). Many growers ((particularly those producing vegetables and with small mixed orchards) attend regular farmers markets in the Sunshine Coast Hinterland (15 respondents) at Eumundi, Yandina and Witta. 11 respondents regularly have market stalls at coastal markets at Kawana, Fishermans Rd (Maroochydore), Noosa or Peregian Beach. 13 attend farmers markets in Brisbane (Newfarm, West End, Northey St) . One grower regularly travels interstate with a truckload of produce. These growers are generally handling relatively small amounts of produce, and direct selling is a more profitable method of disposal - the volume produced is too small to be handled by agents (production tends to diversity rather than volume of any particular crop), packaging can be re-used, and the grower builds a positive relationship with their customers over time. I sell pines at a 2-day market once a month in central NSW, 2T each time (at $3 each) - well worth the travel. I‟ve got regular customers there. 

28 respondents sell to local retailers or wholesalers.

Amount ranges from 5% to 100% (median 20%). A significant proportion of fruit growers sell lower grade stock to “onsellers”, who have regular stalls on the Sunshine Coast and in Brisbane. (14 growers) There are 3-4 onsellers who collect fruit and other produce direct from the farm to take to various weekend markets in Brisbane and on Sunshine Coast. They are significant in the marketing of local produce, and in the disposal of what would likely be losses otherwise. They usually take only lower grade produce. Grower is usually paid at pick-up and price is not necessarily good but, as one said, “at least it‟s not a total loss”. One grower no longer supplies, after having seen the price the onseller was getting when he dropped in at a market (“Better than I get at the farm gate for my good stock”). The general consensus is that the growers could get fairer prices for these lines, if a better food supply network was established. The current situation is seen as opportunistic and not in the best interests of the growers, but there is currently no other option available. The onseller takes none of the production risks, but does, in turn, bear transport and stall costs. One of the onsellers has registered a business called Mary Valley Produce, and is keen to work with a local marketing group if one is established. 43



18 respondents send produce to the central wholesale markets.

The amount sent ranges from 18-100% (median 90%). 

8 respondents sell direct to a national retailer.

The amount ranges from 10-100% (median 90%). 

Few sell directly to restaurants or food service sector—11 respondents

Amount ranges from 5-20%, median 10%). Most of the respondents to this question supply raw product to a processor to make into preserves, on contract. 

There is almost negligible sales direct to eateries.

Growers generally are apprehensive about contacting restaurants directly. Reasons given include difficulties in contacting the right person, inconsistency in ordering, negotiating price, lack of loyalty. I‟ve tried selling direct to eateries with poor results. Too fussy about appearance where it doesn't matter (e.g., sap discolouration on pine skins). I found that, if chefs really want it they will buy from markets or roadside stalls. Also, there are problems with inconsistency in ordering.

Q 8 What are your current local outlets? (28 responses) Apart from the Gympie and Imbil Sunday markets and Dagun Growers Market on Saturdays, few local outlets were listed by the respondents. Retail outlets include



Amamoor Store



Belli Park Store



Imbil ThriftyLink



Kenilworth Cheese Factory



Carters Ridge Shop



Wild Harvest (Gympie)



Pomona Fruit Shop



IGA (Gympie)

Very little produce is sold in local stores in the valley, or to local eateries. A couple of growers were unhappy about the way their produce was marketed at local shops (no refrigeration, rough handling, damaged or perished stock left out for sale) and that this was damaging the reputation of local produce. Understandably, growers will market their prime product to wherever their return will be highest. It is thus more likely that lower quality produce will be offered locally, unless growers are producing items solely for local supply by arrangement. This is more likely to occur with small vegetable gardens and mixed orchards.

Recommendation: A recommendation is to approach potential outlets to discuss these difficulties and to suggest and assist with ways by which the produce could be handled satisfactorily, and to encourage the utilization of local produce for local consumption. 44

Q 9 Do you value-add or process crops or produce grown on your property? (32 responses) .



26 of the respondents value-add on their crops or use raw materials produced in the Mary Valley in their products.

Enterprises include direct packaged beef cuts (3—each specializing in a different breed—droughtmaster, lowline angus, Hereford), frozen fruit crush, frozen mango juice and cheeks, cheeses and other dairy products (3), green teas (1), olive leaf teas (2), olive oil (2), avocado oil, mixed sweet and savory preserves (8), native plant condiments (2), frozen native berries and liqueurs, shelled macadamia nuts, ginger beer, breads, bamboo shoots. Product still under development include limoncello, lime teas and salts, other meats (lamb, poultry), dukkah and various preserves and sauces. One producer established an approved kitchen and now develops his own products and also those for other local businesses (e.g., Tomarata‟s lychee and nectarine preserves, Hinterland Feijoas‟ jams, Dragon Delight‟s jams and sauces). His own lines include a Kaffir lime marmalade and a Mountain Pepper Relish, as well as a range of preserves using bush foods and spices. He is also keen to source and experiment with local endemic spices. Access to an approved kitchen was cited as being a constraint for more producers to be value-adding on their crops, but this, realistically, only refers to those who are only likely to make an occasional batch of preserves or edible items to complement a market stall. The cost of developing a larger scale, marketable line requires considerable commitment of funds and access to a large, predictable quantity of raw materials.



Six food manufacturing businesses have closed down recently

Nature‟s Nibbles (toasted seed mixes), Mary Valley Dried Fruit, the two wineries in Kenilworth, Coolabine Farmstead Goat Cheese, whilst Borumba Deer Park no longer provides venison. Some of these closures were due to ill health, the wineries due to supply problems. Other reasons cited were: 

more stringent food handling requirements



poor returns for time/$ outlay



competition from larger commercial producers (especially those who make a product that looks 'home made' but is actually factory-produced)

All these businesses, apart from the wineries, were viable propositions that could well be re-established under new management.

Further ideas for value-added products In the survey of local restaurants done concurrently with this project, chefs were asked to list products and ingredients they would like to purchase from local suppliers. Chefs attending the Real Food Festival in Maleny were also approached for their requirements. Potential items include: macadamia paste and other macadamia products, pecan nut products, coffee, deli goods, dried and frozen herbs and spices, meats (poultry, pork, venison, crustacean, fish), dried and frozen native herbs and spices and other bushfoods (e.g., bunya nut paste and frozen cooked bunyas).

Recommendations: 

Assist potential value-adders to develop their products



Compile list of available approved kitchens for occasional use (e.g., Kandanga Bowls Club)



Refer to Economic Development Office, Gympie Regional Council, for information on product development. 45

Q 10 How do you determine pricing of your products? (82 responses) Whilst growers who supply their products direct to a co-operative or through an agent at the wholesale markets have no control over the price they receive for their crop, those who sell direct to the consumer can determine their own pricing. This can be a difficult exercise. Some growers calculate how much it costs to grow/process/transport/market each crop, others determine a price that is “fair” to ask for, usually based on averaging what that same crop is selling at currently in retail outlets, or what price is being paid at the wholesale markets for the same quality product and adding an appropriate margin for profit. Sometimes it may be a combination of inputs/fair price to get an average. I generally set a sale price based on fair price for me as a grower, but sometimes have to reduce if there is a glut at the market. Not worth growing the typical cash crops for sale at market, because there will always be too much competition - better to stick to less common varieties or exceptional, reliable quality of standard lines and gain respect of regular customers. Supermarket pricing has a big effect on prices - customers have an unrealistic expectation sometimes because the supermarket specials are lower than production costs.



For 39 respondents, the market determines the price they receive for their crop.



5 respondents base their prices solely on input costs.



42 respondents ask for a „fair price‟.

(Note: Some respondents have more than one pricing system—a major crop which is sold at wholesale markets or to the industry buying group, for which market price is received, and a secondary crop sold by themselves at markets or farmgate.)

46

Q 11 How is your produce transported off your farm to the point of sale? (81 responses)

Method of transport 0

10

No. of respondants 20 30 40

50

60

Own transport

Transport company

Other



51 transported their own produce (although 3 of these will arrange a carrier needed, and one has a major commercial crop that is picked up by the agent‟s carrier). This includes those who sell direct to the public at markets.



18 used a carrier.



For 11 farms the freight is arranged by the industry purchaser (e.g., Suncoast Gold, Sunfresh). With some of these, the agent arranges all steps from providing cartons or bulk bins, freighting, sales and distribution.

The most common carriers are Lindsay Bros and Turners Transport, or carriers contracted to the industry group. At the time of writing, one of the common carriers was in receivership. Most Macadamia growers transport their own stock on a regular basis throughout the harvest period to Suncoast Gold in Gympie. For others, nuts are stored in large silos and then picked up in bulk by the company‟s tipper truck at the end of harvest. Small to medium growers can transport their own stock into a local packhouse for packing and freighting, or to a transport depot in Gympie already packed into cartons. Both Lindsay Bros and Turners Transport will pick up from the farm if there is sufficient quantity. No packing is done on the farm - it‟s all loaded into crates on my ute and sent to a local packhouse, where it is packed and freighted out. Can be expensive, and not a good arrangement when there is an oversupply (sometimes doesn't cover costs).

Other alternatives 

Gowinta Farms will take stock for delivery to their own standard outlets. Has to be taken to their main farm at Beerwah. This probably works better with value-added items. Retail ordering has to be arranged by the grower.



Gympie vendor for Kenilworth and Mary Valley Cheeses has refrigerated trucks and able to make deliveries between Rainbow Beach and Eumundi.

47

Q 12 Do you face any problems or challenges in transporting or distributing your goods? (81 responses) While most of the larger producers were satisfied with their transport arrangements, many smaller growers expressed frustration with their current freight situation. There has previously been a transport depot in Gympie who charged on a per carton basis and did daily delivery runs to Brisbane. This closed down 5 years ago. The transport depot now in operation has a minimum charge. Transport is expensive - there is a minimum charge that, for a small grower, is always higher than the per carton rate. I can transport my own weekly market supply OK. If growing larger volume cash crop (e.g., pumpkins) then I‟ve got problems. Have to transport into Gympie depot, and freight costs for relative small amounts are high (there‟s a minimum charge). Most growers who have negotiated a sale in the district, down to Noosa, the Sunshine Coast or the hinterland have to make their own deliveries, because there is currently no carrier servicing these areas from Gympie or the Mary Valley, and little flexibility afforded by the larger carriers. I‟ve got lots of travel time. I have to deliver myself to Brisbane, Eumundi, Noosa. This takes time I could be spending on other aspects of my business. Because the crop is perishable, our aim is to pick, pack and freight on same day. This means there is no leeway for error or problems. Transport of orders to consumers is also an important aspect of the food supply chain. Nearly 80% of respondents to the concurrent chef‟s survey indicated that timeliness of deliveries was of moderate to high importance (Creating Local Food Connections, p.20).

Recommendation: There is opportunity for a carrier (preferably with refrigerated van) to pick up either from farms or from a central distribution point in the Mary Valley and deliver to these less mainstream places, on a routine basis. This would also be more satisfactory for the chefs , knowing that an order will be delivered at a regular time.

48

Q 13 Are you involved in any business grouping external to the farm? (81 responses) 30 respondents are involved in a business grouping external to the farm and share aspects of crop production (e..g., shared infrastructure, group sales, marketing, networking)

Membershipno.of business groups of respondents 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

None

Industry group

Marketing group

Co-operative



14 are members of an industry support group such as passionfruit growers associations, Suncoast Gold, beef liaison group.



11 are members of a marketing/networking group (e.g., Seasons of the Sun, Slow Foods, Sunfresh)



9 are members of a co-operative, such as Dagun Growers Market or other local foodgrowers cooperative.



5 respondents are involved in two or more groups.

Q 14 Deleted

49

Q 15 Do you currently use any external inputs from the local area? (81 responses) 29 respondents utilise external inputs from the local area.



16 growers source inputs from the local area to assist with crop production.

Items sourced include: Mulch hay— square and round bales Sawdust (Dagun Mill, Imbil Mill) Cow/horse manure Mushroom compost (Gympie) Seedlings (either from Nambour producer who comes to Gympie each Sunday, or another grower at Tiaro, who delivers to a service station at Kybong) Composted manure (Nolan‟s Meats) Crackerdust (Moy Pocket) Nutritech products from local distributor (Amamoor) Natramin (Gympie)



13 value-added product manufacturers utilise produce from the Mary Valley, and 6 of these also source inputs to assist with crop production.

Food items used include: Zucchinis, tomatoes, ginger, chilis, herbs, mushrooms, mangoes, pineapples, guavas, pawpaw, passionfruit, macadamia nuts. All three cheesemakers use local milk and cream for their products. I use 100 litres cows milk each week from local dairy (Conondale) to make brie, and cream from Dagun to make butter. I also use 200-300 litres goats milk each week for my signature cheeses, which used to come from dairies around Gympie but these have all closed down. Now have to get goats‟ milk from Nanango, which I pick up myself. Would like to buy this locally, if sufficient quantity, good quality, regular supply. A number of growers commented that there are items they would like to source locally. Where possible, contact details were given for other responders with these items.

Needed Respondents are seeking items to assist with their businesses: 

Zucchinis, tomatoes, pawpaws for making preserves.



Straw mulch for avocado orchards—best type to use to counteract phytophthera.



Boysenberries (or similar) for preserves.



Goats milk (large quantity, see above)



Macadamia oil (currently gets from a wholesaler)



Spices—traditional and indigenous

50

Q 16 Are there any materials or outputs you produce that could be re-used? (81 responses) 13 respondents have ‘re-usable outputs’. In most instances, this is reject crop that the grower is unable to utilise themselves. Items available include:  2nd grade and lower fruit available—mangoes, stonefruit, persimmons, feijoas, various excess fruits from a mixed orchard  Buttermilk, whey  Vinegar containers (20l)  Poor quality avocadoes (suitable for oil production)  Pecans—large quantity available for „tender‟ (2 growers, each with about 150 trees)  Mulch hay (2 growers)  Large limes that are suitable for juicing.  Macadamias - reject nuts are currently burnt. Suitable for oil, paste, etc. All vegetable producers interviewed stated that all reject produce is fed to their own stock (mainly pigs, poultry) or composted. All macadamia producers put husks back under the trees, for mulch and compost.

51

Q 17 Do you see benefits in regional branding? (98 responses) 

76 respondents see benefits in regional branding.

This is a very positive result, and indicates a good level of support for a proposal to introduce a regional branding. You can see how it helps to market products. Once you tie a product to an area or activity, the consumer will have a picture of where it‟s come from, and has an expectation of quality based on that view. Obviously, there‟s been a lot of publicity about the Mary Valley over the past few years, and we should leverage that to promote our products. The public now knows where we are, and has an image about its high agricultural value, its environmental credentials, and its friendly communities. That‟s what the Mary Valley is. They buy our stuff and they‟re part of that vision.

Q 18 Are you interested in investigating opportunities to connect to local food supply chains? (81 responses) 

48 respondents expressed interest in investigating opportunities to connect to local food supply chains.

This included the entire range of products grown or manufactured by the group of respondents. Again, a very positive result that could be capitalised on with the development of a regional branding and the creation of local food supply chains. I would like to see a 'prospectus' before committing to any involvement. It would be good to co-ordinate growers to ensure continuity of supply. Agreement with our current buyer is that they will take all crop and grower not allowed to sell outside, so can't connect with local food supply.

52

Q 19 Please indicate what level of influence the following factors would have on you if you were to consider supplying some or all of your produce to satisfy local demand (48 responses) The 48 respondents who replied that they would be interested in connecting with local food supply chains were further questioned on the influence of certain factors on their decision. The results were as follows (percent of responses):

Level of influence

Great

Somewhat

Very little

None

If I knew more about the level of local demand

55

30

15

0

If the price was more attractive

54

32

14

0

If there was demand for my quality of produce

53

34

13

0

If local restaurants were more reliable in ordering

56

27

17

0

If there was an efficient local distribution system

58

34

8

0

If there was more promotion of local food

52

38

10

0

If there was demand for a variety of produce

19

30

37

14

8

26

51

15

40

51

9

0

If other farmers were selling their goods locally If there was support to learn how to be part of a local food supply chain

The results indicate that any proposed local food supply chain will have to undertake research to investigate the potential demand and a get good understanding of the consumers‟ expectation with regard to pricing, quality, quantity and delivery, in order to secure the support and commitment of a group of growers. Commitment from consumers is also important. For the security of all parties, contractual supply arrangements would be recommended. It is a lot more complex to grow for demand than it is to sow a bulk amount of a crop destined solely for the central market. If a local food supply chain was established, there would need to be co-operation between growers for co-ordination of supply. This is particularly important with vegetable crops and other short term crops. It would be good to co-ordinate or share transport, storage, packaging, labour. A number of smaller producers working together could make it economically viable to grow crops. You need good co-operation between growers, and trust. Good communication and sharing of information rather than secrecy. Problems with restaurants - they should take what they order. Also, timing of delivery has to be considered—can you get it to them at a time that suits both you and the restaurant?

53

Q 20 Do you have any accreditations for your farm management system? (81 responses) 

34 respondents have accreditation for their farm management system and product handling.

  

20 are Freshcare accredited 2 have international accreditation (for persimmons, stonefruit and custard apples). Suncoast Gold has an accreditation system for its contracted suppliers, that requires suppliers to undertake a short course . Organic/biodynamic certification is held by 6 growers, with a further 2 growers considering conversion. Other growers had considered this certification, but declined.



Organic certification of our avocado orchard gives a definite edge in pricing, if you have a good agent. I use organic methods and no sprays, but not seeking certification - too expensive, and weeds too big a problem. Because most of the crop is exported, there is no advantage in getting certification, even though biodynamic farm practices used. I‟ve completed a Biological Farming Course, but organics is not viable on macadamia orchard, and probably not much price advantage anyway because deal with co-op is satisfactory. All co-op nuts are mixed in together, so there‟s no advantage of me going it alone. They‟d have to certify the processing area, anyway. What I would like, though, is to be able to get my own crop processed and get it back to sell it as „clean‟. Dagun Growers Market has its own quality assurance program that growers can ascribe to, called “CareFarmed”. This encourages growers to use organic principles, and assures consumers concerned about the use of artificial fertilisers and use of chemicals.

Q 21 Have your production systems ever been audit/benchmarked against accepted Best Management Practice, sustainability guidelines, etc? (81 responses) 

24 respondents have had their production systems audited or benchmarked against accepted Best Management Practise.



Those with Organic/Biodynamic certification undergo an automatic annual assessment to maintain currency, as do those with international accreditation.



Suncoast Gold suppliers are usually audited annually.

54

Q 22 Do you want to expand production? (81 responses) 

35 respondents indicated that they were looking to expand production. Only this group was asked to complete the next question.

Many of the remaining respondents nominated „lack of time‟ or „heading into retirement shortly‟ as the reason for not considering expansion. Another small cohort said that they were doing as much as they could comfortably manage by themselves. Any expansion would mean having to hire labour or put more time into their business, which changes the economic perspective of the business considerably. Older and longer-term producers are generally reducing their scale of food production, due to a variety of factors including 

age



no family interest being shown in continuing with the farm



more variable and harsher growing conditions over past decade



better money to be earned working off-farm

A number of product manufacturers have ceased operation in the past year. Reasons cited include: 

more stringent food handling requirements



poor returns for time/$ outlay



competition from larger commercial producers (especially those who make a product that looks 'home made' but is actually factory-produced)

55

Q 23 What is your capacity to expand, and when do you propose to expand? (35 responses) Current Lines 27 respondents intend to expand production of their current lines. All were either in the process of expanding or anticipated expansion within the next year. 

Feijoas, dragonfruit, macadamias (3 growers), avocadoes (2 growers), pawpaws, persimmons, passionfruit, ginger, olives, pineapples (winter sweet varieties).



10 of the mixed vegetable growers have capacity to expand at any time, as do 2 of the value-added beef producers.



Cooloola Milk and its associated Mary Valley Cheeses are also looking to expand production.



One of the preserves manufacturers is already trialling lines of sauces and mayonnaises.

Diversifying The attraction of diversification to reduce economic risk was expressed by many respondents, as was the desire to move towards more sustainable practices. Copies of the publication “Your Future, Your Choices: Making farming decisions in times of change” were offered to respondents looking to make changes to their current practices.



28 respondents indicated that they were already considering expanding production, but with different crops or other farming ventures. Most of these respondents were either in the process of commencing with the new lines or planned to do so within the next year. Some indicated that they still needed to research their proposals. Of the 28 respondents:



4 were looking at other fruit tree crops.



2 were looking at fruit trees and vegetables



4 were looking at fruits, vegetables and value-adding



1 was about to trial different fruits and value-adding



3 were looking to include vegetables as part of their crops.



2 more were looking at growing vegetables and value-adding



12 were considering activities other than fruit and vegetable production including eggs (3), other meats (poultry, lamb—3), liqueurs, herbs or spices (2) , ginger, native flavourings, dukkah, teas, oils, and 3 growers were looking to value-add.

A few respondents noted the new restrictions on sales of eggs and the effect this will have on their overall profits. Poultry is often an important part of the food production chain, particularly for organic farmers. Many supplement stock feed costs by selling eggs at market or to local food manufacturers (for cakes, pies, etc) and this will impact on their operations. The expense of egg production registration and infrastructure required is generally considered unviable. I can grow cash crops in orchards while new trees are still young, to take advantage of irrigation. I‟m looking to find ways of value-adding on produce that is distinct from other products fairly new to market (limes). We‟re investigating suitable sheep breeds to run under citrus trees, for meat production (possibly Dorper).

56

Q 24 Are there constraints to expansion? (81 responses) All respondents were asked to describe constraints to expanding production on their farms, whether they had indicated that they wanted to expand production or not.



49 responded that there were restrictions that could limit their capacity to expand.

Constraints to expansion 0

10

no. of respondents 20

30

40

Owners time Water Labour Land Infrastructure Funds Inputs



The biggest single constraint was given as „lack of time‟ (31 responses),



Access to sufficient water was the next most important factor (21).



Labour (14 responses)



Land availability (size of plot, soil type, etc—11 responses),



Transport/infrastructure (6),



Funds (4)



Access to resources (3)

26 of the respondents nominated multiple constraints. The most prominent are „lack of time‟ coupled with „access to labour‟ (9 responses), „lack of time‟ and „access to water‟ (7), „lack of time‟ and „suitable land‟ (5), and „access to water‟ and „access to labour‟ (5).

Some specific responses are as follows:

Water “Our water allocation is insufficient for our proposed expansion of orchard if irregular rainfall patterns continue.” “We‟d have to rely on bore water, if we expanded. Bore water presents a problem in orchards, because of high mineral content.”

Land “The terrain on our remaining land is only suitable for some tree crops.” “Has pockets of good land on the property, but most of it too steep to farm. However, works well as a very intensive organic production system, though probably not a full-time equivalent.”

57

Infrastructure “We‟re leasing back land sold for Traveston Dam project. Because we‟re unsure of tenure, we don't want to put our own money in for necessary farm improvements. We‟ll likely move in 2012.” “I‟d like to double our market gardens but we‟ve got no storage capacity. To set up a large cool store with some refrigeration is going to cost more than I can justify paying unless I know that the extra crops are going to sell. I don‟t grow enough to send away—and don‟t want to anyway, because I want to sell local only—but it‟s all about economies of scale. If I ramp up production, it will have to be 4 times as much to turn over the same profit rate, not just double the amount, which is what I think we are capable of doing.”

Resources Goats milk - “Seasonal production and variable supply impacts on quantity of cheese produced.” Bottles - “There are only a couple of bottle suppliers, who are in Brisbane. Extra cost for transport makes our product more expensive.”

Labour “Backpackers are hard to get. Maroochydore hostel is the best place, but not during strawberry season.” “I employ 3 or 4 family members or locals when crops ready to harvest. We‟ll have problems when the young people move away to the city.” “I employ some local people but need more because we pick entire crop over a 5-6 week period. Backpacker hostels/employment services in Sunshine Coast and Bundaberg not interested in helping because their clients would have to stay in Gympie or local accommodation, so they would lose out. I‟ve tried going to caravan parks with no success - they don't want to work.” “It‟s hard to get seasonal labour. Good if there was a local pool of reliable, casual workers.” “I need hand-pickers for macadamias, because we‟re too steep and the lower tree braches are too close to the ground to take any machinery underneath.” “The backpackers guide and seasonal harvest guides don't include the Gympie region.” “A local labour force is needed between May-Nov (this is not usually a good time for getting backpackers). Could co-ordinate work between a number of farms in an area in this time. For instance, April-May is pruning of stonefruit and persimmons, then avocado picking May-September, then stonefruit picking October-November, then avocado pruning.”

Funds “There‟s a high cost in expansion. To set up orchard of 1000 netted persimmon trees cost $250,000.”

Recommendations: Lack of time “Personal time” is generally not given the same high value as other resources and inputs required for production. This is particularly evident when observing that a high proportion of respondents sell direct to the public at markets in order to maximise profits, but this in turn restricts the amount of time available to put into increasing production. Participation in a group-marketing plan (where one stall carries the produce of a number of growers) may alleviate this problem. 58

Additionally, the respondents who cited “lack of personal time” as their principal constraint are likely to be considering the question of expansion from the perspective of their current scale of operation. Not all scales of operation are profitable. To expand from one scale to the next profitable scale may involve a quantum leap in inputs, such as hiring staff or changing management structures, or level of capital investment. Going from a single person/couple operation to employing a staff member involves significant change in scale of operation (payroll, insurances, superannuation, etc). Perhaps the constraint here is more likely a lack of commitment to the next stage—having to give over some control of their own business to staff members. It may be of use to conduct a workshop series that looks at the economic implications of this greater step in expansion, to assist producers in making informed decisions.

Labour Backpackers hostels basically offer a working holiday for young people—work fits in with holiday, rather than vice versa. Gympie/Mary Valley can‟t offer the attractions that make other places popular (beaches, nightclubs, city activities). Respondents noted the difficulties in sourcing labour from backpacker hostels, and also the lack of experienced casual workers. It may thus be more beneficial to market seasonal farmwork to an older or more experienced casual workforce. It was also mentioned that there is currently no local casual employment network. In the past, there was a reliable group of ladies who would organise to share transport and work on various farms during school hours (principally macadamia harvesting and picking of beans, passionfruit, avocadoes and a range of other smallcrops). There is capacity to have a casual work team established in the Mary Valley. Training could be offered in horticulture (tree maintenance, crop management, harvesting, post-harvest handling). Work schedules and transport could also be co-ordinated. This region is not included in the map provided for itinerant pickers, nor on the circuit for "backpacker worker groups". This could be addressed by contacting the publishers and co-ordinators of this service. Perhaps the most suitable organizations to maintain this liaison would be Gympie Cooloola Tourism, Mary Valley Chamber of Commerce, or the Economic Development Office of Gympie Regional Council.

59

Q 25 Perception of current market relating to industry (78 responses) Respondents were asked their perception of the current market relating to their own business (supply/ demand), and opportunities. 78 responses were received.

4 respondents stated that the future for agriculture generally is bleak.  

  

“There is little public respect for agriculture production or for primary producers.” “Farming dying out - no respect from consumers, hard work for low return, no incentive. Likely that most of our future food supply will come from small 'lifestyle' farms, at likely a higher cost to the consumer.” “We removed all our orchards early 2011 (5000 citrus trees). No confidence in industry. Costs raised, returns dropped dramatically. Can't compete with larger farms around Bundaberg and out west.” “Agriculture dying - maybe 20 years left? Lack of support from government in ensuring that Australian farmers are considered worthy and in recognising the value of food production. Pricing is killing farmers, and big retailer price-cutting is feeding down to the farmer (the supermarkets are not taking the cut, but passing it back).”

18 respondents felt that their industry had poor prospects.      



“Market fairly stable, but $/kg unchanged though retail price has increased greatly.” “Price received hasn't changed for many years, but costs have all risen a lot.” “Poor prospects for the avocado industry - New Zealand is becoming a big competitor.” “Avocadoes - competition from New Zealand, NSW and upper areas of Victoria.” “Consumers don't value food producers.” “Very negative. Profits were OK until about 10 years ago (stonefruit, custard apples) but dropping a lot, while costs are increasing greatly. Margins are too tight to do anything other than just maintain current stock.” “Markets are not as flexible - there is less acceptance of anything less than perfect, but unwillingness to pay more for higher quality.”

36 felt that their industry was ‘doing OK’.  

 

“Value-adding becoming very competitive and hard for a small producer. Need to have a distinctive 'edge'.” “New crops only hold their value for a short time as a niche crop until bigger growers take over the market. Dragonfruit, for instance, has been lucrative for the past few years but there are huge plantations now up in Bundaberg and on the Atherton Tablelands that will take over soon.” “Challenging - need to better market to consumers the value of low food miles and sustainability of boutique beef farming practices. The prospects for this industry are good.” “Some diet fads can have negative impacts on produce. For instance, the Atkins Diet affected the macadamia industry.”

20 responded that their industry was buoyant.    

“Persimmons are becoming better known in Australia. Brisbane still not as accepting as Melbourne and Sydney (greater number of asian communities). Poor reputation from older, unselected varieties.” “Large retailers are selling persimmons as an exotic fruit, doing a disservice to the industry (higher retail prices and lesser stock, rather than commonplace like stonefruit).” “Macadamia industry buoyant at present. Australia needs to lift production to retain its market share.” “After an initial oversupply of macadamia nuts a couple of years ago due to overseas crops this has settled down (weather, pests impacted on overseas crops, generally of poorer quality). Marketing needs to be much better. The potential for this industry is huge.”

60

Q 26 What other assistance is required to assist you with your business? (33 responses) 33 respondents require assistance to help with expanding their business. 

28 would like further information (technical and production advice, marketing advice, advice on food initiatives for the region, etc).



14 would like accredited training. Subjects mentioned included marketing, horticulture, sustainable agriculture, small business management.



4 would like assistance with sourcing inputs, particularly with regard to manufacturing.

The 2008 Business Expansion and Retention Project for the Mary Valley highlighted difficulties faced by businesses within the Mary Valley. The main problems cited included increasing transport costs and shortage of skilled labour. That project also identified training needs in primary industry businesses. These included product knowledge, customer service, Public Relations, finance management.

Recommendations:  Investigate the opportunities to arrange information sessions prepared specifically to meet the needs of producers and food manufacturers in the study district. There are examples of such programs conducted by U.S. Agricultural Extension Services that address this need, one of which is the Purdue University (Indiana) “Growing For Market” program, a series of 5 or 6 regular workshops. 

Investigate the opportunities to conduct accredited training to assist new and intending producers. An example of this is a similar program that was conducted in Gympie and Pomona in 2002, where participants undertook a year-long study course leading to a Certificate III Organic Agriculture. The author was a participant in this program, and is qualified to conduct a similar course.



Investigate other training and business support opportunities that capitalise on programs already offered, such as the Federal Government “New Enterprise Initiative Scheme” and the Queensland Government “Skilling Queenslanders for Work” initiative.

61

Q 27 Any other comments? The group surveyed were generally well-experienced food producers who have found proven ways to keep their businesses relevant and successful. Some offered valuable advice to new and intending growers. “Local farmers markets are good - they give access to good quality, fresh produce. We are able to offer people good healthy food and structure our crop management to pick little and often. Good for all of us.” “It‟s important to make the best of what you can do.” “If you produce good quality, then you get good money. It‟s important to keep the quality high, because this brings in good sales.” “My advice to new/intending farmers - be very careful to grow only what is needed, with minimal exertion. Successful businesses in this area have been based on growing just a few lines very well, and with consistently high quality.” “Intending producers need to research opportunities well and only take up producing a small variety, and doing it well. And don't rely on any external funding.” “Pay attention to detail when growing - good quality, long shelf life. Encourage worms, constant cool, damp environment under heavy mulch. Build a regular, reliable customer base to ensure good sales at market.”

62