Carbon farming in the Wheatbelt — can it be done?

Carbon farming has been a hot topic in agricultural circles in recent years, with the practice gaining more and more traction as it takes the pastoral estate by storm. It has been dubbed a “game changer” for WA’s rangelands, but has drawn varying opinions as to its’ potential in the Wheatbelt, where the State Government has set its sights on a further $15 million investment. It could see pockets of previously unproductive land in the State’s grain growing regions used to generate an alternative income stream, based on carbon as a commodity. The practice involves making land management changes including revegetation and reducing grazing pressure to regenerate land and increase the amount of carbon stored in the soil and vegetation, for which farmers earn Australian Carbon Credit Units (ACCUs) which can be sold as an alternative income stream. The landmark decision to approve the practice by State Government in 2019 made way for pastoralists to adopt Human Induced Regeneration projects, of which there are now almost 70 across the southern rangelands, spanning more than 12 million hectares. It is anticipated to generate millions of dollars for embattled pastoralists — who have been dealing with ongoing drought and wild dogs — over the next 25 years. Earlier this year, Goldfields pastoralists David and Vicki McQuie, of Bulga Downs, received their first carbon credit payment through the Commonwealth Emission Reduction Fund, after generating more than $2m worth of credits by reducing grazing pressure on their properties. Off the back of the rangelands’ success, WA Agriculture Minister Alannah MacTiernan has now set her sights on “unlocking the potential” of the Wheatbelt and South West Agricultural Zone. Through a new $15m Carbon Farming and Land Restoration Fund — which is set to open in the next couple of months — people will be able to apply for funding to embark on a carbon farming project. Projects will be assessed on cost, likelihood of success, strategic merit and priority co-benefits, which include agricultural productivity, biodiversity and conservation, salinity mitigation, soil health and Aboriginal economic and cultural co-benefits. And to speed up how quickly growers are paid for their credits, the State Government will act as the middle man, pre-puchasing an “agreed portion” of ACCUs from successful applicants with projects registered with the ERF after December 2020. The $15m boon is considered a “key element” of Labor’s WA climate policy released in November, which set an ambitious net zero emissions by 2050 target. Ms MacTiernan said the CF-LRP was “pivotal” in increasing the uptake of carbon farming in WA and would help farmers overcome financial barriers in entering the market. “If we get this right, we can also make our farms more productive in the process.” Researchers, farmers, government, carbon farming companies and other interested parties came together last month for a carbon farming forum to ask questions and raise concerns over the CF-LRP. Ms MacTiernan said “a number of important issues” were raised — including how to “de-risk” soil carbon projects for farmers — and would be considered in finalising the structure of the fund. Co-benefits A number of co-benefits are anticipated to arise from carbon farming projects, including increased agricultural productivity on previously unproductive land, soil health, mitigating salinity and protecting native species by planting wildlife corridors. The projects are also anticipated to provide opportunities for Aboriginal employment. Soil and Land Conservation commissioner Cec McConnell said carbon farming provided farmers with the opportunity to improve soil health and address broader landscape issues such as wind and water erosion, salinity, and biodiversity. “Within the rangelands, through the HIR projects, there is an ability to improve vegetation coverage and quality,” she said. “Lack of cover is a significant contributor to water erosion in the rangelands, and, in turn, the increasing dryness of that landscape. Improving vegetation cover and quality will slow down water movement, improve infiltration and reduce erosion.” “In agricultural areas, soil health underpins production,” she said. “Any increase in organic matter will contribute to improve soil structure, nutrient availability, moisture holding capacity — these support production. “Improved plant and crop growth, better cover — including perennials — will contribute to reduce wind erosion, improved soil micro climates and increasing water use. “So the potential in carbon farming is to not only support soil health but also to provide the potential for additional revenue streams for primary producers.” She said over time, soil acidity and salinity had increased across the State, which posed challenges for farmers. Improving land use through activities like planting mixed grazing shrubs that improve water use, reduce wind erosion, improve soil cover and provide an additional fodder source on low productivity or at-risk land could improve agricultural productivity. Mrs McConnell believed improving the soil health of agricultural systems would foster long-term sustainability and support the industry’s ability to adapt to the effects of climate change. “Having a well structured, healthy protected soil, will be critical to giving our agricultural and rangelands systems the best opportunity to be resilient to a changing environment,” Mrs McConnell said. “The climate change modelling suggests both a reduction in rainfall for most of the southern agricultural areas and an increase in the intensity of summer rainfalls. “So agriculture will need to adapt to less growing season rainfall and look at how it protects the soil over summer.” Potential in the Wheatbelt WAFarmers chief executive Trevor Whittington said while there was interest from the State’s grain growing areas, it was not a cost-effective use of high-value cropping land. “At $18.50 it works beautifully for pastoral land worth about $10 an acre, it certainly does not work with farmland worth $1000 an acre,” he said. He said it “absolutely” had potential in the Wheatbelt, given the right price for ACCUs generated. Murdoch University Professor Richard Harper — who has undertaken several carbon farming trials on WA farmland in the past 20 years — said the opportunity to earn credits came from the change in carbon storage, not what was there to begin with. By turning unproductive land around, he said there was plenty of potential for Wheatbelt farmers. “If you put a productive plant on crappy soil you’re more likely to increase carbon storage,” he said. “In WA there’s a lot of sandy soils — that’s where the opportunity lies.” He said it was not about swapping crops for carbon, but changing practices on land they were unable to turn much of a profit on through agriculture. “These parts of farms that don’t produce very much, land affected by salinity, make that the first port of call rather than competing with agriculture and converting them to carbon which would impact food production.” Over the past 20 years, Professor Harper said they had seen mixed results in trials on Wickepin, Dryandra and Popyaninning farms, with saltbush, trees and Tagasaste all generating increases in biomass carbon. He called the results of the Tagasaste trial “spectacular,” generating 3 tonnes/ha on previously unproductive land, which equated to a change of 9.2 tonnes of carbon per hectare per year, as well as adding grazing value to the land. To encourage more farmers to explore the practice, he said the CF-LRP needed to provide farmers with more data if carbon was going to be a financial product. “If you change land use you can generate co-benefits, we need to be quantifying the amount of co-benefits and how many tonnes of carbon will be produced, the price and overall economic proposition,” he said.