�
�
�
�
Over 80 per cent of farmers indicated that their level of interest in water quality improvement had changed ‘ moderately ’ to ‘ very much ’ as a result of the project . Environmental and economic reasons dominated responses .
Over two-thirds ( N = 19 ) of farmers indicated that they had implemented other practice change since receiving the grant , including irrigation system improvements , adjusted fallow / rotations and involvement in other projects including the RP20 N reduction project and Reverse Tender .
When farmers were asked what they would like to improve on their farm , especially if money was not a limitation , the most common improvements were in areas related to irrigation ( e . g . new recycle pits , trickle tape , automation , laser levelling ), technology and soil health .
Three-quarters of farmers indicated they were ‘ very likely ’ and ‘ moderately ’ sure that they would adopt additional land management practices as a result of the project .
� The top three topics of interest identified by farmers was “ irrigation efficiency ”, “ rotational crops ”, “ whole of farming systems ” and “ nitrogen rates ”. The majority of growers ( 47 per cent ) preferred this in a “ workshop ” format , followed by “ field day ” ( 30 per cent ), and “ one-on-one ” ( 23 per cent ). In relation to irrigation , growers identified the following :
�
- Implementing a greater number of irrigation practices since receiving their grant ;
- Identifying irrigation technology and adoption of irrigation practices as an improvement they would like to make on their farm in the future ; and
- Identifying ‘ irrigation efficiency ’ as a topic for further learning . In almost all cases , growers had no access to water monitoring equipment to be able to substantiate whether technology and farming practice change was having an effect on water quality .
Some concerns related to the design of the grants included the high investment required for smaller growers , and that training especially in Global Positioning System ( GPS ) auto steer and Variable Rate Controller ( VRC ) would have been beneficial to equip growers with the knowledge and skill to ultilise the technology to its full potential .
Recommendations most relevant to this report
� Develop incentive schemes for small growers to apply new technology and practices for future funding rounds . One approach to consider could be to provide a percentage rebate per hectare when a recognised “ Water Quality Improvement ” technology and practice is employed when leased / contracted by a small grower .
�
�
�
�
�
�
Deliver supported training especially for grantees that received precision technology such as GPS autosteer and VRC to enable full utilisation and maximise benefit .
A Farming Systems approach rather than a singular technology adoption model is required to identify and support applied learning and solutions ( problem-solving ) for unintended consequences of technology .
Accessible and simple on-farm water-quality monitoring tools and associated training are required for growers to measure and substantiate applied technology and implemented land management practice change with effects on water quality . It is said that “ seeing is believing ”, so growers direct involvement in measuring their water quality outcomes is likely to increase understanding and ownership , and thereby be a motivator for positive practice change .
Focus greater resources and efforts ( investment ) on irrigation technology and practices that can deliver improved irrigation efficiency , and therefore achieve improved water quality outcomes . A concerted capacity building / extension effort is needed in this area .
Support and allow for more workshops and field days as a medium for grower learning rather than a focus solely on one-one-one as it has been identified that farmers have a preference for other modes of extension that offer the benefits of social interaction and learning .
Conduct bus / field tours involving all grant recipients to enable the exposure , exchange and learnings from all the various types of technology and practices adopted . Growers would be placed centre stage to
92