Land Resources of the Einasleigh - Atherton Dry Tropics
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
QUEENSLAND DEPARTMENT OF PRIMARY INDUSTRIES 0089004 D LAND RESOURCES OF THE EINASLEIGH - ATHERTON DRY TROPICS M. J. Grundy and N. J. Bryde Land Resources Branch Q Department of PrimaryIndustries Queensland Government, Queensland Government Technical Report This report is a scanned copy and some detail may be illegible or lost. Before acting on any information, readers are strongly advised to ensure that numerals, percentages and details are correct. This report is intended to provide information only on the subject under review. There are limitations inherent in land resource studies, such as accuracy in relation to map scale and assumptions regarding socio-economic factors for land evaluation. Before acting on the information conveyed in this report, readers should ensure that they have received adequate professional information and advice specific to their enquiry. While all care has been taken in the preparation of this report neither the Queensland Government nor its officers or staff accepts any responsibility for any loss or damage that may result from any inaccuracy or omission in the information contained herein. © State of Queensland 1989 For information about this report contact [email protected] Queensland Department of Primary Industries Project Report QO89004 LAND RESOURCES OF THE EINASLEIGH- ATHERTON DRY TROPICS M. J. Grundy and N. J. Bryde Land Resources Branch Department of Primary Industries, Queensland Government Brisbane 1989 ISSN 0727-6281 AGDEX 524 This publication was prepared for Queensland Department of Primary Industries officers. It may be distributed to other interested individuals and organisations. Funds provided under the National Soil Conservation Program to partly fund this project are gratefully acknowledged. © Queensland Government Queensland Department of Primary Industries GPO Box 46 Brisbane 4001 iii ~NTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES iv LIST OF FIGURES iv ABSTRACT V I. INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background to the study 1.2 The study area 1.3 Previous resource studies . PHYSICAL RESOURCES 6 2.1 Climate 6 2.2 Geology and landform 17 2.3 Vegetation 19 2.4 Water resources 21 . LAND RESOURCE SURVEY METHOD 24 3.1 Terminology 25 . SOIL LANDSCAPE UNITS AND SOIL ASSOCIATIONS 27 . LAND USE 35 5.1 Present land use 35 5.2 Limitations on agriculture 37 . PRIORITY ORDER OF MAP SHEET AREAS 45 . CONCLUSIONS 47 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 49 REFERENCES 49 APPENDIX I Symbols used to derive soil association 52 mapping codes. APPENDIX II Attributes of Great Soil Groups (in 54 alphabetical order). APPENDIX III Collated soil chemical data from 6O commercial enquiries in drier areas of the Einasleigh-Atherton dry tropics. iv LIST OF TABLES Page Table 2.1 Annual rainfall variability index 11 (Vl) for a number of centres. Table 2.2 Mean rainfall per rain day (mm) for 16 a number of centres. Table 2.3 Streamflow attributes for major 22 watercourses. Table 4.1 Soil landscape units and soil 28 associations with major limitations. Table 4.2 Land limitation factors used to assign 33 land suitability classes. Table 5.1 Agricultural management units 38 - their limitations and potential. Table 6.1 Areas of soils in each of the five 46 Land Suitability Classes within I: I00 000 map sheet areas. LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1.1 Dominant land suitability in Queensland 2 and location of the study area (box). Figure 1.2 Major geographical features. Figure 2.1 Average annual rainfall. Figure 2.2 The monthly median rainfall of six centres. Figure 2.3 The Waite Index -~-(r/e 0'') for five 10 centres. Figure 2.4 The probability of receiving varying 12 amounts of rain over a four month period commencing on (a) November I, (b) December I and (c) January I for eleven centres. Figure 2.5 Average monthly maximum and minimum 17 temperatures for Herberton and Mt Surprise. Figure 5.1 Cropped land (1985) in the Einasleigh- 36 Atherton study area. ABSTRACT An exploratory study was undertaken of the land resources of the Atherton and Einasleigh 1:250 000 map sheet areas west of Cairns. The result, an overview of 3.5m ha of the dry tropics, is an aid to the setting of priorities for more intensive resource assessment. The work was funded by the National Soil Conservation Program. Twenty-two soil landscape units consisting of 87 soil associations were identified. Of these, 33 soil associations were considered suitable for rainfed summer grain production with few, slight or moderate limitations. They covered an area of 533 000 ha with 2 981 000 ha unsuitable. Of the suitable soils, soil associations dominated by red earths occupied 166 000 ha, non-calcic brown soils and red podzolic soils 70 500 ha, black earths and grey and brown clays 72 000 ha and various suitable soils on alluvium 46 000 ha. The climate including rainfall which is of moderate reliability is discussed. Research and development needs and degradation hazards are identified. Priorities for further resource survey are assigned based on the twelve 1:100 000 map sheet areas found within the Einasleigh - Atherton dry tropics. 1 • IFfRODUCTION 1.1 Baek~ound to the study Intensive agricultural development in the northern half of Queensland is presently confined to the coastal fringe and adjacent tableland areas• Yet there exists a large area of land in the far north with a significant annual rainfall (greater than 700 ram) which produces store cattle from unimproved pastures• There has long been a perception that appreciable areas of this land have the potential for more intensive use and this was formally recognised in the 'Assessment of the Agricultural and Pastoral Potential of Queensland' (Weston et al. 1981). Sorghum, maize, and, by inference, similar crops were assessed as well adapted to some 1.3m hectares of the far north with soil type, climate and landform as the assessment criteria• This assessment was based on small scale soils mapping (Isbell et al. 1968) with input from local officers of the Queensland Department of Primary Industries (QDPI). This data base was insufficient for providing advice on cropping reliability or assessing the potential for degradation• If more detailed resource information could be obtained prior to extensive development then the adoption of sustainable cropping systems could be encouraged on suitable soil types. Consequently the QDPI sought and received Federal funding through the National Soil Conservation Program (NSCP) for a study into the land resources of the dry tropics• Dry tropics in this study were taken to be tropical areas with a pronounced dry season and consequently a limited growing season• Much of this land has impediments to more intensive use other than those addressed in the Weston et al. (1981) study• These include: • access to existing agricultural infrastructure; • type of land tenure; • source of experienced farmers; and • current economics of site. These are essentially ephemeral criteria but are factors that determine which of the potential cropping areas first comes under development pressure. The study area chosen was the Einasleigh and Atherton I: 250 000 map sheets which adjoin the established agricultural areas around Mareeba and Atherton and which include a large portion of the potentially arable land (Figure I• I)• These sheets cover some 3.5m ha including wet tropical areas outside the scope of the study• These wetter areas, however, were included in the mapping as detailed studies of the agricultural areas were available and could be incorporated without further work. The mapping of complete map sheet areas also has practical advantages• The first stage of the project reported here was an overview of the area to identify the major land resources and enable an assessment of priorities for further more intensive work. The results of earlier QUEENSLAND DEPARTMENT OF PRIMARY INDUSTRIES AGRICULTURE BRANCH Adapted from DOMINANT LAND SUITABILITY By J. Harbison and E.J. Weston (1980) F~-~~ ~:: ~,~-,--~_---~-~ Drawn by M.B. Carroll REFERENCE LAND SUITABILITY GROUPS i :i .i!:i : :ii ~ A. P ....... t arable (crop). ,~'.~.~• B. Arable with stabihzing pasture Cairns rotation~ (crop ..... pasture). ~ C. Non-arable except for sown pasture ._ ::~ eslablishment (sown pasture). ~:::i" D. Native past ..... d .... agricultural land. ~z ::~: --_~~~:i % ~.7 ~.~,--~-~:~ ~ ~ _~-~_= ....... -- ~ --~, ~-_- -~-~ ~ ~ ~ ~-~- --~ -<.__,~ - ~ ~ ockhampton ..... ~__. -- ~- ~-~---. __ ~ ~, ....,~-,~--~,..~_:~_~, ~.--- __ ........ ~- ~ ~ \~.'..\ __~ ~.-- ~ ~-'~ -- ~ ~ -= ..........._- _ ___ _:_ ~,~ ;::.:.:~. ..,~ ....: :.: :~,~,~, __,~ ,~ .~ %:~~.-~ ............ ~ .... ~--~ ~_. • ~ .....~. .'.~... "~-.~._'~_~:"~'...~;,2~ ~~-- ~---- -- i-i~~-:~-~::~: .~-- ~L~_ • ~'-~i.i ~ ii i !~ __ .......... .- ~ ............ ,-~ i.. -- --, .-~5 .... ;.~ -- -~ !- -- -- ~-:C/." ." .......... ~ ~__ --~ ~f.., __ --~ --~.~. ~ -- ___~, _ - ........... ~ ~::~ ~y PREPARED BY THE DIVISION OF LAND UTILISATION, D.P.I,, BRISBANE 1981. Figure 1.1 Dominant land suitability in Queensland and location of the study area (box) 3 studies were reviewed and new field work commenced, the intensity of work being dependent on potential agricultural suitability. 1.2 The study area The major population centres, Mareeba, Atherton, Herberton and Ravenshoe (Figure 1.2) are concentrated in the intensive agricultural areas in the north-east of the study area. The more remote centres generally owe their existence to mining with important industries still centred around Greenvale (nickel), Kidston (gold), Mt Garnet (tin) and Chillagoe (formerly copper, now marble, limestone and tourism)• Mt Surprise and Einasleigh