Melbourne’s colossal growth will see it as the largest city in Australia in a few decades, with one of the greatest challenges facing it how to feed the many millions of additional mouths. The fertility and versatility of the farming land around the Kooweerup swamp will play a key role in answering that need, as ANDREW CANTWELL reports.
“A future inability to grow enough food has the potential to impact on Australia’s strong biosecurity regime. More food imports could mean greater risks of exotic plant diseases and pests being introduced.”
Melbourne’s population is set to swell from just over 4.5 million to more than seven million in the next 20 years, making it once again the biggest city in the nation – a status it once enjoyed in the afterglow of the colonial goldrush period.
As planners grapple with where to put the new residents, a State Government planning study has been underway since March this year looking at how to assist the city in feeding them.
Or more correctly, at how to protect the land that grows the food, and which provides incomes and employment for the agricultural and horticultural sectors and supporting industries.
There’s an obvious tension between the relentless growth and the ‘need to feed’ – with the outcomes so far favouring growth – and the result in the South East is that a large swath of valuable agricultural land has been gobbled up for new suburbs, such as Clyde.
The Urban Growth Boundary, intended to limit to the city’s expansion, has already been altered four times since its introduction in 2002.
A 2015 study on the foodbowl estimated that three-quarters of the farming land adjacent to the growth boundary could be lost by 2050, if current trends continued.
The government has decided that enough is enough, and intends to use the results of the current study to strengthen planning controls over high-value land.
The study is looking at identifying strategic agricultural land within 100 kilometres of the CBD, where some of the state’s most productive land sits; and on how best to protect it, in order to keep feeding the rapidly growing city.
Referred to as the Melbourne foodbowl, the land provides just 10 per cent of Victoria’s agricultural product – but a whopping 60-80 per cent of fresh vegetables – and overall providing more than 40 per cent of the city’s current food needs.
Population projections suggest this proportion could drop to about 18 per cent if food production is not ramped up to match the city’s growth – or if the land is built over.
As well as the city’s outer limits, the study will look into land capability, water availability, and the potential effects from climate change.
An issues paper was released earlier this year for the study, outlining the issues and identifying common factors of the foodbowl.
A few pockets of high-value agricultural land have been identified in ‘green wedge’ and peri-urban land to the west and north – around Ballarat, between Kyneton and Kilmore, around Bacchus Marsh, at Werribee, along the Mornington Peninsula, to the east in parts of the Dandenongs and Yarra Valley – but arguably no other single stretch of land offers the promise of the land between Pearcedale and Warragul, with land along the Great Swamp between Dalmore and Bunyip the most highly prized.
The growing season locally is one of the broadest in the country, running eight months from October through to May. Most other states have a four or five month season, with only South Australia matching Victoria, but with only a third of the produce.
Transport links, access to water – and potentially recycled water – highly productive and capable land and a solid track record all have the swamp primely placed to contribute to the city’s growing needs.
Cardinia already enjoys a prominence within the foodbowl, coming in second behind Baw Baw Shire in terms of the value of agricultural produce. The most recent ABS figures had Baw Baw supplying over $350 million worth of farm goods, with Cardinia supplying over $250 million, followed by the Mornington Peninsula at a squeak over $200 million.
Vegetables, poultry products, fruit and dairy make up the bulk of that produce.
Kooweerup is rightly known as the asparagus capital of Australia, providing 90 per cent of Melbourne’s supply, and 80 per cent across Australia.
Less well known is the extent of herb supply – 70 per cent – and green leafy vegetables that get shipped to Melbourne markets from local farms.
These more perishable goods need to be shipped quickly in order to retain their freshness and nutritional value.
Cardinia farming land’s proximity – serviced by the M1 and regular and reliable train services – makes it ideally placed to get produce in bulk delivered quickly, helping to retain freshness and nutrition.
The ability to do intensive agriculture on smaller plots also means the seasonal range of produce can be as varied as required to meet changing city tastes.
On water availability, the swamp has just under 400 bore water licences issued by Southern Rural Water, drawing fewer than 4000ML of a 13,000ML allocation.
This highlights the untapped potential of irrigable land locally.
On another front, the proximity to the south-eastern water treatment plant also opens options for the use of recycled water in the future. A trial is currently underway on the Mornington Peninsula, which could easily be extended to local areas once its value is demonstrated.
Stormwater is also being investigated as a potential source, in the event of increased temperatures and uncertain rainfall under climate change scenarios.
Such irrigation has the potential to ‘drought-proof’ land in the foodbowl – and again, Cardinia’s proximity to the source provides it an almost unfair advantage compared with all other areas but Werribee.
While rainfall and water availability are concerns, by far the biggest concern is the loss of farmland under shifting urban boundaries.
Developing ‘strategic land’ criteria and tying down the city’s limits are crucial to meeting the city’s ‘need for feed’.
The government has made assurances that even if land does not meet its ‘strategic land’ criteria, it could still be designated as locally significant, giving it some protection under existing planning laws.
There are significant risks to the food sector if foodbowl land continues to get bulldozed and built over.
Food prices are expected to increase as declining supply, relative scarcity and increased transport costs take their toll.
And, a future inability to grow enough food has the potential to impact on Australia’s strong biosecurity regime. More food imports could mean greater risks of exotic plant diseases and pests being introduced.
A parallel threat is the use of once viable farming land for mineral sands extraction and other quarrying activities – which are also feeding Melbourne’s growth through building and road construction projects.
During the its public consultation phase between March and May the study received more than 420 submissions and many farmers and interested community members participated in workshops and meetings, according to the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning, which is leading the study.
Cardinia Council, the Cardinia Food Movement, VFF and individual farmers and interested community members have all made submissions from this area.
While not stalled, the government has dragged its heels since the close of submissions in May. A response to the submissions was due in July.
A DELWP spokesperson said the government was committed to protecting and supporting important agricultural areas around Melbourne.
The public consultation period was an opportunity to help shape criteria to determine the land that should be identified as strategic agricultural land.
Once the approach has been finalised, the Victorian Government would work to establish stronger controls in the planning system to better support and protect Melbourne’s agricultural land.
“We have been busy working to better understand the soils, landscapes, climate and issues impacting on agriculture in these areas, including engaging with a range of people to share what we know and to learn more about these areas by tapping into local knowledge and expertise.
“The engagement process so far has attracted a high level of input with many people contributing their local knowledge, additional soil and water data, and ideas for managing these areas into the future. This feedback will be central to informing the approach to what land is identified and how it will be protected in the future.
“The immediate next step is to release our consultation findings report to the public, which summarises what we heard during the engagement process. This will be available on the web site in the coming weeks.
“We are currently refining our approach and developing planning options.
“We will come back to stakeholders and the community for a further round of engagement on this work. The next phase of consultation will include options for a planning response to better protect identified areas as well as options to strengthen green wedge controls more broadly.
“Implementation of our preferred approach will commence next year.”
