Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION AND AIMS
1 . 1 THE CONTEXT
There is a nostalgic view still evident that the countryside has a quality of changelessness(Armidale Express 16/2/2002:3). In many ways this was expressed in the landscape paintings of the English countryside by John Constable during the early nineteenth century (Gadney 1976). His Salisbury Cathedral from the Meadows (1829), The Hay Wain (1821) and Wivenhoe Park (1817), as shown in Plate 1, depict landscapes that are are synonymous with this bucolic view of rural society.
PLATE 1. Constable's Wivenhoe Park', Essex,1817, now the site of the University of Essex (Source:Gadney 1976:50).
However, like all facets of life, the countryside has never been static but in a constant state of evolutionary change brought about by the human need to create a productivist landscape(Walmsley 2002). The only constant is change itself. 'Wave front' analysis looks at history as a succession of rolling waves of change focussing attention not on continuation but on discontinui ties innovation and breakouts(Toffler 1980:29). 1 Quite significant changes occurred in the rural landscape during the Agricultural Revolution in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. Until this time farming practices in the English countryside had changed little from the Middle Ages with plowshares made of wood and fields laying fallow every three years. Scientific advances with the introduction of machinery, such as the iron seed planting drill, the threshing machine and the 'enclosure' of land formerly subject to communal use, accelerated the rate of change in the countryside(Kerridge 1967). Another example can be seen in the clearance of the Highlands of Scotland during the early nineteenth century whereby the land was forcibly depopulated in favour of sheep(Prebble 1969).
The twentieth century saw this process of evolutionary change continue at an exponential rate, particularly in Britain since the 1970s. Here the rural transformation can be clearly identified with the construction of motorways, the grubbing out of hedgrows , the harvesting of water and the expansion of urban areas (Blunden & Curry 1985). Indeed, Freeman(1967:2) noted that in some parts of England, particularly in the Southeast and Midlands, people were wondering just how much of the rural landscape would be left by the end of the 20th century.
In the United States too, it has been estimated that 1 million acres(400,000 hectares) of farmland have been lost each year to urban sprawl. On the Great Plains this has resulted in many remote rural areas haemorrhaging population at rates of 10 to 20 percent over recent decades with the median age of the remaining residents in the 60s«Mitchell 2004:8). In Washington there has now been a call for the establishment of a rural heritage program to help 'save' the American countryside(National Trust for Historic Preservation 2004b). This concern for the future of rural heritage has also been expressed in China as the nation's cities encroach on the countryside(People's Daily 2003). In Canada too, the change to the rural countryside due to restructuring since
2 the 1950s has seen a 70 percent loss of all farms. There has been the elimination of virtually all farm input manufacturing. The grain elevator system at prairie delivery points, for example, has been reduced by 80 percent(Troughton 2003:28). The once extensive rural landscape has now been partially emptied with flow-on effects to village schools, churches and traditional rural social life.
In Australia the impact of changing social, political and economic conditions on farming has resulted in the average age of farmers rising to 57 and the children of farmers often showing a disinterest in continuing with the family farm. Thus, in 2003 farming in NSW was described as a "sunset industry" (Peters 2003) while the Australian Bush Heritage Fund was established by interested parties in order to 'buy back the farm' - the purchasing of farm properties in order to maintain biodiversity and the rural genre(Landline 2003).
Clearly, what we have come to think of as the traditional agricultural landscape and the family-owned enterprises that have moulded it, is under great pressure in many parts of the globe.
The Clarence Valley of northern New South Wales, the geographical focus of this thesis, has witnessed some of these dramatic changes to the rural landscape since the 1970s, changes initiated mainly by the restructuring of the once ubiquitous dairy industry. Yet this densely settled, diverse agricultural area is regarded by residents and visitors alike as authentic Australiana (Derrett & Welch 2001:3). This scene is epitomised in Plate 2.
The evolution of the dairy industry in this valley from the late nineteenth century has been marked by many changes brought about by exogenous and endogenous forces. This includes technological developments and domestic and international political decision making including the formation of the European Economic Community (EEC) and recent
3 PLNT§ 2 Rural Landscape on the Dorcigo Plateau, Clarence VallQy, 200).
deregulation policies. This has resulted in difficult f i nanci al decisions being made at the farm level which have also been sUbject to the twin environmental problems of flood and drought. During the 19305 over two thousand commercial dairy farms operated in the valley - this has now declined to just ten(Daily Examiner 6 / 1/2001:1).
Because the dairy industry was such a dominant activity in the region for over 70 years it has l eft its mark on the landscape and the community. The relics of this productivist landscape can still be found in the a rea and as such, forms part o f the assets of the 'cultural heritage' for the community. These assets, in turn may provide the basis of a post-productive landscape, whereby some farmers may be enticed fram their perceived traditional role as producers of an agricultural commodity - milk - towards supplying an agritourism service to an i ncreasingly mobile consumer market (Walford,2003a:51).
In Europe, for example, the Common Agricultural Policy(CAP) of the European Union(EU) pays farmers not to produce agricultural output. Tourism rather than farming has become a 4 major rural activity in some areas(Walmsley 2002:433;Ilbery et al.1996:306). By 1989 over 1,800 farmers in the UK had opted to take land out of production during the previous two years under a'set-aside' scheme with the land beiny earmarked for woodland, non-agricultural use and fallow (Robinson 1990: 161). In south-east England (sussex, Surrey and Kent), however, this move to a post-productivist landscape has not occurred as farmers have continued to intensify and specialise their agricultural operations (Walford 2003b:501).
In many parts of the globe since the 1970s industrial heritage tourism has revived abandoned factories and mines such as in the USA(Rudd & Davis 1998}, Canada(Summerby-Murray 2002) and Australia(Cegielski et al.2001; Department of Mines and Energy 1996). Similarly, diversification and pluriactivity may be options for a flagging dairy industry in the Clarence valley in what might be called rural heritage tourism. Agritourism is a relatively recent innovation within the tourist industry and has become widespread in the USA(Adam 2002 i Nickerson et al. 2001) and Europe(Tagliabue 1998). Rural tourism in Australia is a concept that has been established for several decades(Dept.of Industry, Science and
Plgte ). The 'Big Banana' at Coffs Harbouc, opened in 1964 (20031.
5 Tourism 1996) with attractions such as the 'Big Banana' at Coffs Harbour NSW(see Plate 3), which opened in 1964 and the -Big Pineapple' on the Sunshine Coast of Queensland which opened in 1971. These are two examples of working enterprises associated with 'highway tourism'. However, it has been suggested that care must be taken with tourist attractions similar to these that they are not based on 'transported' cultural objects to attain a highway location(Walker 1991).
1.2 RESBARCH AIII & OBJBC'ZIVBS
··tJ.jti·iJt~·····" .·.~A.·.·.;c;;,ifll~:~~•• t.~•• t:... ·.;,·· ·.• ·:·.t~,,.;.·.~·i::r .•• ·.•. ··c .. <:Q.• ldc.c.c .•...•.•.•· •• _ .•• ;; ••.•••• t1.~••. ~.~R ••• · ~~:,~i~ta.;""~t:'$'()f'·l:~..,)c ·"ll..c.ilii~~;'X~~~~
.. ::: ..... :<-:-:.:: ...... ::-: ..... ;...... :...... ::.,. ... \ .i,.t:ij··~<> ... '. .. .'.
In order to achieve this aim, five key research questions have been identified:
1. What is the 'cultural heritage' of the Clarence Valley dairy industry?
2. How has the agritourism industry been developed for economic development in areas outside the Clarence Valley both in Australia and overseas?
3. To what extent does agritourism already exist in the Clarence Valley and what potential is there for the cultural heritage assets of the dairy industry to be successfully developed along similar lines to those in other areas for agritourism ?
4. If this is a potentially viable undertaking for the Clarence Valley, what strategies would need to be adopted in order to bring this to fruition?
5. will the development of a dairy heritage agritourism industry in the Clarence Valley help to preserve dairying as an active industry in the Region? 6 Figure 1 Local Government Areas of the Clarence Valley (Prior to ATJaJgamation :in February, 2004)
G!'_!;!.fiQ[1 _MacJ~an eristine$_ Area (square km) 83 1049 6800 3166 Population 16,666 17,360 10,636 4,111 (ABS, 20(1) Richmond River T cntcrficld Coprnanhunt Shire Maclean Shire r.nfta ity Pristine Waters Shire Guyra Q' ,' :=>OI£:=.. I£ =,,,.m Dumaresq 7 1.3 SIGNIFICANCE The Lower Clarence Valley encompasses Grafton City and the four shires of Maclean, Copmanhurst and Pristine Waters(see Figure 1). In the year 2000 Ulmarra and Nymboida councils were amalgamated to form the Pristine Waters Council. This was followed by the amalgamation of the four councils in the Valley during February 2004 to form the lClarence River Council'(Coastal Views 26/2/2004:1). Smith(1971:20) indicated that the drainage basin has a long tradition as a suitable framework for geographic study from the time of Buache in 1756. Shaw(1959:18) also noted that the catchment area of coastal rivers, such as the Clarence, should be the basis for the promotion of tourism and development in regional New South Wales. It seems that future planning in this area will now be carried out on a valley-wide context. The largest urban centre in the Clarence Valley is the City of Grafton with a population of 17,432 at the 2001 census but it had a population decline of 0.2 percent between 1997 and 2002. (Australian Bureau of Statistics(ABS) 2003:49). Nymboida Shire also recorded a population decline of 0.1 percent over the same intercensal period. The other local government areas in the Clarence Valley - Maclean, Ulmarra and Copmanhurst - recorded slight increases of 1-2 percent with predictions for a larger increase in the Maclean Shire based on large scale urban development at Yarnba. While 'sunbelt migration' associated with counterurbanisation (Walmsley et.al. 1998) may be a feature of the north coast of NSW, the distribution effect appears to be quite uneven with Coffs Harbour(Duncan & Epps 1992a) , Hastings, Byron and Tweed attracting most of the in-migration. The Clarence Valley , on the other hand , has received little benefit from this movement in population, although this may alter in the future with in-migration to Yamba. 8 At the same time unemployment rates in the Clarence Valley are extremely high, averaging 17 percent in the 1996 Census with the Ulmarra Shire ranked highest in the State at 20.7 percent unemployed. Maclean was ranked 7th., Nymboida 8th., Copmanhurst 10th., and Grafton 27th., out of a State ranking of 188 Local Government Areas (ABS 1998:61). Figures for the 2001 Census show little change from 1996 with the Clarence SSD ranked highest in the State for unemployment at 15 per cent compared to Sydney 6.1 percent, Hunter 9.9 percent, Central West 7.5 percent and Murrumbidgee 6.3 per cent(ABS 2001a:6). Small Area unemployment data in the Valley is indicated in Table 1: Table 1 Rate of Unemployment for 15 Year Oids and Over(%)2001 (Source : ABS 2001 b:34 ) Brooms Head 29.6 Copmanhurst 34.8 Grafton 11.8 Iluka 19.4 Maclean 13.7 Ulmarra 23.9 Yamba 13.2 Clearly unemployment is a major problem which needs to be addressed in the Clarence Valley. At the same time employment in tourism in the Valley is quite low compared to the rest of the Mid North Coast with numbers of tourist establishments the lowest in that statistical division (see Table 2): Table 2 Numbers of Tourist Establishments on Mid North Coast (Source: ABS 1997 :14) Coffs Harbour S3 Grafton ...li Hastings 45 Kempsey 17 Maclean 11. Nambucca IS Taree 26 9 wi th a declining population, high unemployment and the limited development of a tourist industry it seems that there may be scope for the establishment of an agritourism industry associated with the cultural heritage of a declining dairy industry. The Clarence Valley is still an agricultural area, with 10 percent of the workforce employed in rural activity (ABS 2001a:38).This is well above the national figure, with only the retail sector having a higher proportion of the population employed (17 percent). 1.4 THESIS STRUCTURE This thesis is comprised of seven chapters with the following structure: Chapter 1. Introduction and Aims. This chapter sets out the context of the research, the aims and objectives as well as its significance in terms of the profile of the study area. Chapter 2. The Contextual Framework in Literature.In this chapter the previous research that has been undertaken in the areas of tourism, cultural tourism, heritage tourism and rural tourism as well as the role of government in cultural heritage tourism will be reviewed. Chapter 3. Research Design and Methodology. This chapter describes the data collection procedures used for the thesis and the methodological issues that arose during the study. Chapter 4. A Review of the Cultural Heritage Assets of the dairy industry in the Clarence Valley. Through a historical approach this chapter will provide an inventory of the heritage assets associated with the dairy industry that can still be found in the Valley. 10 Chapter 5. Comparative Case Studies in Agritourism from Overseas and Australia. Case studies from various parts of the globe will be described in this chapter in order to indicate the ways in which agritourism has developed in the farming sectors. It will look at the issues associated with its relative success to affect tourism, create local employment and underpin the financial viability of farming families. Chapter 6. Agritourism and Heritage Trails in the Clarence Valley: Research Findings. This chapter will indicate the extent to which agritourism and heritage tourist trails have already been developed in the Valley. The results of the research involving all the stakeholders will then be presented including an analysis of tourist questionnaires and interviews with farmers. Chapter 7. Conclusions, Options and Projections. A discussion of the research findings and their limitations will be indicated in this chapter. Suggestions for future planning associated with agritourism and cultural heritage tourism involving the dairy industry of the Clarence Valley will also be made. 1.5 CONCLUSION The Clarence Valley of Northern NSW is the focus of a unique set of issues associated with a decline in the dairying landscape which was so widespread during the mid Twentieth Century. Slowly, the vestiges of the once flourishing industry are disappearing from the landscape while at the same time the area is beset with problems associated with a declining population, high rates of unemployment and limited development of tourist facilities. It is within this context that the research for this thesis was undertaken. ------~~--~------~-~--~---- oOo-----~----~-~-~-~---~~----~--- 11 Chapter 2. THE CONTEXTUAL FRAMEWORK IN LITERATURE 2.1 INTRODUCTION Tourism has a long history, from ancient Egypt and Rome through the Grand Touring of the 17th and 18th centuries to the growth of the seaside resorts of the 20th century(Towner 1994, Holden 1994). Thomas Cook, for example, offered the first 'package tours' to European destinations in the 1860s (Richards 1996a:7). On the other hand mass tourism has corne about only with increased leisure time, higher disposable income and improved technologies basically since the end of World War 2(Holden 1994:849). Worldwide there has been an explosion in tourism since the 1950s(Holecek 1993:20) with many types of tourist activity now available - resort, cultural, ecotourism and very recently 'reproductive' tourism (Farouque 2003). 2.2 CULTURAL TOURISJI The World Tourism Organisation (WTO) was formed only in 1975 (Edgell 1993b:230) at the same time as concerns were being expressed in Australia about tha loss of places of 'heritage' value and the 'national estate'(Yencken 2002). The UNESCO World Decade for CuI tural Development 1988-1997 emphasised the importance of conserving , cultural heritage' and recently the WTO asserted that cultural tourism accounts for 37 percent of all global tourism(Richards 2001:8). Others suggest that up to 70 percent of international travellers are considered 'cultural tourists'. Thus 'cultural tourism' has become recognised as a distinct product since the late 19708 and now supersedes 'ecotourism' as a trendy tourist buzzword(McKercher & du Cros 2002:1). 'Cultural tourism' has been defined as "all aspects of travel whereby travellers learn about the history and heritage of others or about their contemporary ways of life or thought"(Richards 1996b:22). 12 Culture has, of course, always been a major object of travel as shown by the Grand Tours of the 16th century with visits to historic sites, cultural landmarks, special events and museums. Today such places as the Parthenon in Athens, the Louvre in Paris, the Pyramids in Egypt and the Edinburgh Tattoo are typical examples. Waitt(1996) indicated that for Korean students visiting Australia as tourists 'cultural' sites were as important as beach resorts in their preference ranking, with only 'scenery' ranking ahead in preference intensity. McKerchner and du Cros(2002:144) have suggested five types of cuI tural tourists, ranging from the ' purposeful' to the 'serendipitous' and 'incidental'. What these consumers all have in common, however, is the end result of learning from their travel experience(Walker 1991:3) rather than just 'sun worshipping' at a resort. That is, there is an increasing demand for informed experiences particularly among the affluent and educated middle-classes(Prentice 1997:215). The ATLAS (European Association for Leisure and Tourism Education) cultural tourism research project in Europe found that the respondents to the project had a high level of educational attainment with over 20 percent having postgraduate education(Richards 1996b:33). Nowhere is this more evident than in the case of 'heritage site' tourism, whether it be natural heritage, cultural heritage or built heritage (Masberg & Silverman 1996:20). 2.3 HBRITAGB TOURISM While tourism may be one of the world's largest industries with over 613 million international tourist alone in 1997, heritage tourism, although difficult to measure, appears to be one of the fastest growing segments in the tourist market. One reason for this is perhaps the 'greying' of the tourist consumer as increasing numbers of retirees on superannuation seek out such sites(Richter 1999:110). 13 The Australian Heritage Commission Act came into being in 1975 but the importance of 'cultural heritage' tourism in Australia has only recently been acknowledged. The release of the Commonweal th Government's document Draft Heri tage Guidelines occurred only in 1999. Many of the cultural heritage sites are located outside the metropolitan areas in regional Australia and their potential contribution to the economic growth of these areas is considered significant (Cegielski et al.2001:1).· What is included in a definition of 'heritage tourism' ranges from natural landscapes to old buildings and to traditions and experiences of the past(Blacker 2002:235). 'Cultural heritage', however, is often considered to be much narrower than this. It may simply include the restoration of old buildings to maintain the historic preservation of an area and to draw visitors to the area(Edgell 1993a:217). Cultural heritage tourism, then, has long been associated with buildings and sites located in urban areas(Waitt & McGuirk 1996). Urban destinations account for 17 percent of all holidays of Europeans within Europe and tourist agencies are looking to this to revitalise inner urban centres by placing heritage buildings into the mental maps of the tourists (Jansen-Verbeke & Lievois 1999:93). Outside the main urban centres cultural heritage can also be a source of sustainable tourism and thus provide economic benefit to rural and regional communities(Cegielski et ale 2001:2). Heritage mining towns, for example, provide visitors with a glimpse into the past through their diggings, streetscapes, spoil heaps etc. as indicated by the study of the three mining towns of Maldon(Victoria), Burra( South Australia) and Charters Towers (Queensland) (Cegielski et ale 2001) . The making of 'silk purses out of sows ears 'is exemplified by the Line of Load Project at Broken Hill(Landorf 2001) which 14 had its origins in 1983 and opened in 2001. Relatedly, the Blinman Mine site in the Flinders Ranges of South Australia has a tourist self-guided walking trail to 18 sites (Dept. of Mines and Energy 1996). Some of the most successful industrial cultural sites have been based on a 'cluster principle' whereby a number of visitor sites are provided in a small area. Broken Hill and Blinman have developed a range of industrial/cultural heritage assets for diversified tourist experiences. At the Bingham Canyon Copper Mine heritage site in Utah, USA, which has 160,000 visitors a year, it is not just the site that is important. Here ski tourists in the winter and self-drive 'windshield tourists' to the Great Salt Lake and Mormon sites in the summer contribute to the popularity of the industrial heritage site(Rud & Davis 1998). That is, it forms a part of a 'cluster' of sites that can be visited. The remaking of an industrial past fit for contemporary consumption in the post-industrial era can, however, result in a 'bogus history I (Summerby-Murray 2002: 49), where the sanitised recovering of the past gives a misleading or false impression of what the environment was really like(Walker 1991). Apart from industrial and mining cultural heritage sites there appears to be a preference now in some countries for heritage tourism to include an even earlier rural and pastoral era(Summerby-Murray 2002:49). 2.4 RURAL rOURI SJI Rural tourism is not new: examples from the past include providing rest and recreation for short periods, helping with the grape harvest, perhaps visiting during the hunting season (Cavaco 1995:128) particularly during the inter-war years (Richards 1996a:7). It grew rapidly in the 1950s and 1960s with planning for rural tourism by authorities in France, for example, dating from the 1970s(Tarlet 1993:51). 15 During the 1980s, however, little research interest was paid to rural tourism globally(Owens 1984iPigram 1993iOppermann 1995). Many researchers have focussed much of their writing on trying to define what is indeed meant by the term 'rural' (Robinson 1990;Shucksmith 1994;Hall & Page 1999;van der Ploeg 1997). For example do 'second home owners' who are not living in the rural area full time, form part of the rural space? However, 'Seasonal suburbanisation', counterurbanisation resulting in part-time farming, second homes ownership and retirement migration are all now impacting on the traditional nature of rural areas(Robinson 1990:113). Even in the once depopulated Highlands and Islands of Scotland return migration is occurring but many have outside sources of income and are not therefore dependent upon farm income(Robinson 1990: 109). In France this process of 'in migration' to rural areas began in the 1970s in the form of 'neorurals'. Initially, these were well educated young urbanites in search of a simpler, more natural lifestyle, and willing to live on a shoestring. This has been followed by a trend towards middle aged dropouts and 'downshifters' from successful careers(Rogers 2002:481) creating what Holmes (2003:9) refers to as the "Type 2: Amenity Social Landscape", where consumption values dominate. In some parts of Europe - such as in Sweden, Switzerland and the Austrian Tyrol- there has been a long-standing tradition of rural tourism. In contrast to resort tourism, which concentrates tourists at a particular site, rural tourism supplements the local economy without disrupting the local lifestyle and offers tourists the opportunity to experience 'authentic' countryside and country people (Rogers 2002:477). About one fifth of Austrian, Swiss and Swedish farmers take in summer holiday makers, letting rooms as a means of securing the survival of the farm(Cavaco 1995:130). In The Netherlands, however, it was not until the 1970s that awareness of rural areas as much more than places of agricultural production arose. Here it was the Land Develop- 16 ment Act of 1985 that explicitly sanctioned the multiple use of rural areas. In Britain the Countryside Act 1968 had pioneered this concept(Dietvorst 1993:77). During the 1980s, the EU undertook a survey of tourist behaviour in member States and found that in countries where rural tourism was important, such as Denmark, The Netherlands and Germany, over one third of the population chose rural destinations for their holidays. In Sweden, the LRF(National Farmers Union) only started actively to promote farm tourism in June 1989(Peterson 1990:93). Surveys by the Countryside Commission in Britain(1987) showed that 84 percent of the population of England and Wales visited rural areas as tourists at some time during the year(Pigram 1993:158). Rural areas are also being increasingly seen as sites of cultural consumption(Richards 2001:12) which includes items produced by past human activity (Lipe 1984:1). The cultural assets range from classic heritage attractions to themed trails and traditional crafts, food and drink. Part of this 'built heritage' comprises fabricated items which have historical value and meaning derived from a particular time and setting. French rural tourism is generally understood to be about 'rural heritage' comprising both landscapes and lifestyles(Rogers 2002). In Brittany, for example, the regional park(Parc Naturel Regional d'Armorique) was designed to give urban dwellers a hinterland of green space, clean air, rural roots and a cultural heritage of renovated rural buildings depicting by-gone days of rural life in the area(Kneafsey 2003b:158). Rural tourism in its purest form then, has to be located in rural areas, be 'functionally' rural (that is, built upon the special features of a rural community, the natural world, her i tage, etc; ) , be rural in scale (small scale buildings ,settlement) and traditional in character being connected with local families(Hall and Page 1999:187). 17 Globalisation has also resulted in rural areas undergoing dramatic change in recent years. Restructuring and the deregulation of many rural industries together with high unemployment in some rural areas(Duncan & Epps 1992b; Beeton 1998) are causing major social issues(Jenkins 1997:188). In Australia, deregulation (the progressive removal by the Federal Government of protection screens for many areas of private enterprise) began in the mid 1980s(Lawrence 1990:101) and came into effect for the dairy industry in 2000 (Cocklin & Dibden 2002). Some see tourism as the panacea to the difficulties facing rural communities(Beeton 1998) although others have warned that tourism may not be the answer to the problems of some rural areas(Walmsley 2003). Certainly in response to these exogenous influences farm households are having to adjust their farm businesses by adopting a number of strategies or 'pathways' in their farm development. Some have suggested that diversification of the rural industry is in fact the key to survival(Beeton 1998:ix) and that tourism would work well as a companion industry for rural businesses in providing such things as 'farm stays'. In 1988, for example, the UK Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food(MAFF) introduced the Farm Diversification Grant Scheme to assist farmers to diversify into non-agricultural profit- making activities on their farms. This included grants for farm-based accommodation such as bed and breakfast, farm based educational facilities and the processing of farm products. The up-take of these grants, however, was very limited with only 1 percent of all significant holdings being attracted( Ilbery & Stiell 1991:262). Despite this seemingly lack of interest, later surveys indicated quite a different picture. During 1994 in a study of 1256 farm businesses in three different areas of England (Ilbery et ale 1996:305), 28 percent of the farm households had adopted some form of business diversification with 70 per cent being 'on-farm' activity. In a survey of farms in Less Favoured Areas of Wales covering 80 percent of that 18 country, 93 percent of the households were involved in pluriactivity. Most of the initiatives were, however, 'off farm'(Bateman & Ray 1994:3). Non-agricultural work on-farm, such as tourism, had been a feature for 80 percent of the farmers for at least 5 years while off-farm employment, such as teaching, was a more recent activity. In a further study in south east England(Kent,Surrey ,East and West Sussex) in 1999 while some interest was shown in diversification by the farmers, only 11 percent commented that they were 'saved' by diversifying(Walford 2003a:60). An EU project called 'LEADER 1 ' was instituted to assist with the development of alternative forms of activity to replace declining forms of agricultural income. In Ireland these programs covered 61 percent of the country, with nearly half associated with rural tourism(Hall & Page 1999:210).The project covered similar proportions of Belgium, Germany and Portugal(Cavaco 1995:146). Unlike Europe, in Australia it has been suggested that opportunities for farm tourism are limited. The distances involved and often poor roads make it quite a challenge. The better opportunities would appear to be located near major transport arteries(EppS 1994:39). Nevertheless, rural tourism, whether it be for recreation (eg hiking), environmental (national park visits) or heritage visits(Pigram 1993:161), can provide both the individual farm and the surrounding local community with a supplementary income and, via multiplier effects, create employment(Dept. Industry,Science & Tourism 1996:6). It has been suggested that the tourism multiplier in Australia and New Zealand would be around 2.1 to 3(Beeton 1998:9). On the Atherton Tablelands the tourism multiplier is thought to be 3 (McNamara 2003). There are several ways in which tourist activities could be organised in a rural community. The French derivation of the word 'tour', meaning a circular movement, and 'tourner' to go around, suggests that rural tourism may involve a safari, journeying from place to place in sequential fashion, as 19 opposed to a 'site' location such as a cathedral, which is typical of urban areas. A safari might involve the movement along corridors leading to a number of nodes or sites(Pigram 1993:161), some of which may be associated with heritage rural activity. This concept has sometimes been described as a 'linear' touring route or heritage network which could be undertaken as a 'self drive' process(McKercher & du Cros 2002:111). The route provides a spine from which travellers can momentarily deviate to visit other places(Graham & Murray 2003:168). It is similar to the 'cluster' concept developed in the municipalities of Ede, Harskamp and Enkhuizen in The Netherlands (Dietvorst 1993) and found to be very effective in the more local confines of urban areas(Jansen-Verbeke & Lievois 1999:96). On the other hand, many tourists visit rural areas as an escape from modern urban life(Holden 1994:849) attracted by the relative peace and quiet of the countryside, to establish contact with nature and a return to 'tradition' (Cavaco 1995:130). These tourists are generally 'site' orientated, being attracted to bed & breakfast stays (Warnick & Klar 1991),rural gites (rooms to let in farm houses in France) (Tarlet 1993:52iCavaco 1995:135), farm stays(Malibu Water Resources 2003iAustralia/New Zealand Down Under Travel 2002), bed and barn accommodation(Tagliabue 1998), petting farms (Pieces of Vermont 2003), sleeping in the hay(Go Nomad 2000), agritourism(Adam 2002iNickerson et al.2001; Dolciano Country Holidays 2003; Agriculture Innovation Centre 2003) or agrotourism(Tourism Authority of Thailand 2000). Most of these investments come from the farmers themselves. However, in Thailand, until recently, the attractions, such as the Royal Project Inthanon Research Station in Chaing Mai, were undertaken by the government. The following tables indicate the growing importance of farms for holidays in NSW, the UK, and Portugal: 20 The tables indicate that while farm tourism in NSW 1.5 relatively important(Table 3) in the UK it is very important(Table 4) and in Portugal there has been a threefold increase in agrotourism between 1989-1994(Table 5). While there are significant differences from country to country in Europe, for Europe as a whole a Eurobarometer survey of holiday destinations of Europeans by the European Commission in 1998 indicated rural areas were at least as important as urban and mountain areas as tourist destinations(see Table 6) • 21 'lable mba ~1~¥ Tne(Se. ~ba;.KQutitaln.$ mhe C()'II.Jd:'~~i~$ 15.8 The UK, Sweden, Finland and the Netherlands scored very highly for rural tourism with Greece and Italy scoring below 10 percent. The difference between 'rural tourism' and 'agritourism' lies in the degree to which tourist activity plays a part in farming activity and income. That is, in rural tourism the income from tourism and the amount of labour dedicated to it is less than for more traditional farming activity. Agritourism is a by-product of farming as it is complementary to and dependent upon farming(Cavaco 1995:137). In Australia both of these forms of tourism are encouraged by Australian Farm & Country Tourism Inc. (AFACT) established in 1987 as a national industry association(Australian Farm & Country Tourism Inc. 2003). 2.5 GOVBRlfJIEB'.t , 7!O URI 511 AJID BERI7!AGE There is no doubt that the impact of globalisation on rural Australia in recent years has been enormous. For example, deregulation of the sugar, tobacco and dairy industries have contributed to the closure of 35 small family businesses at Tolga on the Atherton Tablelands in Queensland, with the number of dairy farms falling from 186 to 130 following deregulation in 2000(McNamara 2003). However, rural areas are continuing to adjust and evolve with perhaps only the 'fittest to survive' the Darwinian concept(Sorensen 1990:58). Government programs have tried to address some of the problems by contributing to developing tourist infrastructure and financing tourist research(Jenkins 1997). The three levels of government recognise that tourism creates jobs, stimulates regional development and diversifies the economic base of the area involved. This was verified by a SWOT (strength, weakness, opportunity, threats, analysis) 22 study of the Southern Highlands of NSW in the Wingecarribee Shire (Baric et.al. 1997). The Australian Commonwealth Department of Housing and Regional Development issued a Working White Paper in 1994 setting out procedures for applying for grants to promote regional development(Commonwealth Government 1994). The former Department of Tourism* allocated funds for programs such as walking track projects, tourism guides, tourist information bays and regional tourism strategies. In terms of heritage conservation, the Commonwealth Government has played a major role in the past. The Australian Heritage Commission was established in 1975 under the Australian Heritage Commission Act with responsibility for the identification and maintenance of the National Estate. Items identified by the Commission are placed on a register of the National Estate(State Government of Victoria 1991:8). The basis of heritage conservation in Australia is the Australia ICOMOS Charter (International Council of Monuments and Sites affiliated with UNESCO) which adopted the Burra Charter in 1979 as a set of best practice principles for the planning and care of heritage items(Kerr 1985:25). The Burra Charter was established at a meeting in the South Australian historic mining town of Burra in 1979. In NSW heritage legislation is based on the Heritage Act 1977 while the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 enabled responsibility for heritage to be shared by State and Local government agencies(NSW Heritage Office 2002:6). Amendments to the 1977 Act were made in 1999 to provide for more control to be delegated to local councils to manage their heritage. Local Government Heritage Committees have been established as formal committees of council under the Local Government Act 1993 to assist with heritage management * In March 1996 the Department of Tourism was abolished and merged with the Department of Industry and Science and in November 2003 all Federal tourism agencies were merged into Tourism Australia). 23 in the local government area(NSW Heritage Office 2002:12). The NSW Heritage Off ice also provides funds under the Heritage Incentive Scheme to encourage local heritage projects(NSW Dept. of Urban Affairs and Planning 1996:2). Thus, while there may be a I trickle down I effect from Commonwealth and State involvement in heritage and tourism, the devolution of power and finance to local and regional authorities, which are closer to the issues, appears to be a more appropriate approach to the problems(Jenkins 1997:186). But even at this level, it can be argued that Local Government should not be the sole initiator and controller of tourist development(Hunter Valley Research Foundation 1995:7) although they must ensure community values are incorporated into tourist and heritage developments. In Rotorua, New Zealand for example, local government plays a facilitative or catalytic role and employs a variety of strategies to raise awareness of tourism locally. Radio talk-back, newspaper columns and open days are some of the strategies adopted, resulting in 95 percent of local residents believing that tourism would benefit the local community(Ateljevic & Doorne 2000). Normally because of the scale involved, the Public Sector will take on the provision of tourist infrastructure, such as roads and parking, as accessibility is a vital consideration for tourist development(Boniface & Cooper 1987:28). This was considered a major factor in the development of tourism in Central Western Queensland (Sorensen & Epps 2003:86) where local self-help is suggested for the future development of tourism in that area. In promoting rural tourism a number of principles should be adhered to (Phillips 1988 in Jenkins et ale 1997:139): • It should be aimed at activities which draw on the character of the countryside - its beauty, culture, history and wildlife. • It should assist conservation and recreation by bringing new uses to historic buildings (heritage), supplementing the income of farmers. 24 Investment in tourism should support the rural economy while encouraging a wider geographical spread of tourism so as to avoid problems of congestion and damage through over-use. Clearly it is a set of guidelines like these that must be considered in any analysis of the potential for agritourism associated with the cultural heritage of the remnant dairy industry in the Clarence Valley of northern NSW. 2.6 CONCLUSION The literature indicates that while mass tourism exploded during the latter half of the twentieth century associated with increased leisure time and disposable income, rural areas are now being sought after by growing numbers of tourists as sites of cultural heritage and relaxation. This increased awareness of rural heritage comes at a time when farmers throughout the world are being subjected to the effects of globalisation and are often looking to diversify their activities in order to survive. At the same time, governments are becoming more involved in heritage preservation and establishing guidelines for the identification and maintenance of appropriate sites. The coming together of these two forces - the financial pressures being faced at the farm level and the desire of governments to register and protect heritage- may open up an opportunity for the creation of a heritage tourism venture in the Clarence Valley of NSW. Perhaps some of the si tes associated with the old dairy industry in the Valley could become part of this global trend into rural tourism. ------000------ 25 Chapter 3. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY 3.1 INTRODUCTION Chapters 1 and 2 established that the countryside has always been in a state of evolutionary change and the cultural heritage assets of a previously productivist landscape have formed the basis of a rural tourism industry in some areas of the globe. The growing importance of farms for holidays is evident from the literature. It is now necessary to find out the extent to which this may be possible in the Clarence Valley of NSW. One of the objectives of this thesis is to find out the extent to which agritourism has already been developed in the Clarence Valley of northern NSW and the potential for its future expansion as an income supplement for the dairy farmers in the area. Associated with this is an examination of the viability of developing a tourist industry focussed around the cultural heritage assets of the old dairy industry. This chapter describes the data collection procedures used in order to attain these objectives. 3 • 2 THE STUDY AREA Delimiting the Area for Data Collection. The Clarence River Valley is the largest river catchment on coastal NSW, covering an area of 22,600 sq.km.; larger than the Hawkesbury and Hunter valleys. The surface water resources of the Clarence are more than twice that of any other coastal river and on the basis of depth of run-off it is 20 per cent greater than the average for coastal NSW (Water Conservation and Irrigation Commission 1968:24). From its early discovery in 1831(McFarlane 1924:6; The Colonist 1835:2), it has therefore been known as the 'Big River', a tag still evident in the naming of present day enterprises in 26 the City of Grafton such as Big River Auto Spares and Big River Appliances. The Clarence Rivor itself rises on the Queensland border between Acacia Creek and Stanthorpe along the MacPherson Range. To the west, tributaries- such as the Mann River- have their source on the Northern Tablelands while the southern boundary of the Clarence catchmen t is formed by the eastward spur of the Great Dividing Range from Ben LOmond ( l,SOO metres) t hrough Oorrigo(see Figure 2 and Plate 4). FIGURE 2. Topography and drainaqe of t he Clarence Valley indicating the alluvial lOlodands of the LOI Harbour 27 The eastern boundary of the catchment area follows the Coast Range from Coffs Harbour to Yamba at 200 metres above sea level, joining the Richmond Range in the north. Typically, t he western and southern sections of the valley are quite rugged until Copmanhurst, below the Clarence River Gorge(see Plate 5). PLATe 4. Sign near t he Clarence he~dwate c at &oonoo Boonoo,Tenter f~e ld. From this point the river is subject to tidal influences and the valley opens out into large areas of alluvial flats with meander loops, ox - bows, terraces and natural levee banks. Most of the intensive agriculture of the Clarence Valley is concentrated in this area(see Plate 6). The data collection area for this thesis has been concentrated in this Lower Valley. Upstream from The Gorge, dairyi ng in the past was always a precarious activity and further north from Baryulgil functiona l links for dairy farmers were mace towards Lismore in the Richmond valley. To 28 PLAT~ 5 . The Cla rence Rive r Gorge Upstre am from C op ~nnurst. PLATE~ . floodplain c f ~he Lower Clarence ng&r Yamba. 29 the south, dairy farmers from the Dorrigo Plateau have never had direct marketing links to Grafton preferring to send their milk to Bellingen and Raleigh in the Bellinger Valley. In the past, dairy farmers in the Upper Orara river near Glenreigh marketed their milk via Grafton but with the opening of the Coramba Butter Factory in 1902 this link was abandoned. Thus, in terms of both historic and functional links the area of the Clarence Valley covered for this study includes only that area downstream from The Gorge. This Lower Clarence Valley has had a continuous association with dairying via Copmanhurst, Grafton, Ulmarra and Maclean. It is in this area where the greatest concentration of dairying occurred in the past and where the majority of dairy farmers are currently located. 3.3 DATA COLLECTION (1) - Previous Fieldwork The research methodology followed for this study followed an inductive approach involving the collection of many observations for analysis before conclusions were adopted - what is known as a 'bottom up' approach(Argent & Rolley 2003:9). During 2001 and 2002 a detailed survey was undertaken of all existing dairies in the Clarence Valley and the location of dairy bails from past dairying eras that were still standing were mapped(Fisher 2003b). Following detailed historical research from secondary sources as well as interviews with present and past farmers and others involved in the dairy industry, a report was completed for the Clarence River Historical Society(Fisher 2003a). This 100 page report looked at the growth of the dairy industry in the Clarence Valley from 1840. The current thesis builds upon this historical perspective by looking at the future of dairying in terms of diversification 30 via agritourism and the development of tourist trails associated with the heritage assets of this old dairy industry. 3 • 4 _D__ A.-.~_A __ C__ O __L __ L __ B __ C....;!.'_I_O_N __ .... (_2",,-) - Sampling & Interviewing The collection of data for this thesis began in September 2003 and was completed by March, 2004. All social or behavioural research conducted at UNE is governed by the National Guidlines on Ethical Conduct in Research Involving Humans (Argent & Rolley 2003:28). The Human Research Ethics Committee of the University granted approval for this research on 24/9/2003(approval No.HE03:176) and a reconnaissance survey was conducted as a pilot study in order to help devise the actual wording of questions for a suitable questionnaire(Oppenheim 1966:26). A four pronged approach was undertaken: (1) A questionnaire was delivered personally to all existing dairy farmers to be completed in situ (see Appendix 1a). This would give a 100 per cent response rate from dairy farmers who are currently still in the industry. (2) A semi-structured interview was conducted with the four tourism/heritage representatives of the local government authorities comprising the study area at that time(see Appendix 1b) (3) During the pilot survey, an approach was made to the Tourist Information Centres in the Clarence Valley (at Grafton and Maclean) to gain approval for questionnaires to be placed at the Centres over a five month period, including the summer tourist season, in order to gain responses from tourists regarding agritourism. The layout of the questionnaire, which was to be self administered, was very concise - one page(Toyne and Newby 1971:23)- in order to achieve a high response rate. One 'ranking question' was used with a limit of 9 responses(Oppenheim 1966:93) with most 31 responses being the Yes/No, tick a box format (see Appendix lc). The completed questionnaires were then placed in a 'post box' for collection(see Plate 7). (4) Informal interviews were conducted with a number of farmers who have now ceased dairying with regard to their views on the future for dairy heritage assets. The farmers were purposively sampled, recommended by residents as farmers who had been involved in the industry for many years. In all cases a 'Letter of Introduction' was used as required by the Ethics Committee of the university (see Appendix ld). ?LA~E2 Receptacle Boxes used to collect tourist questionnaires. 3.5 DATA COLLECTION (3) Inventory of Heritage Assets Using an original report as a starting point(Fisher 2003a), a list of the dairy industry historical assets was compiled with some indication noted as to their significance (see Appendix 2). The measure of significance as 'low', 'medium' 32 and 'high' was based on the historical background and uniqueness; the degree of deterioration and, hence, the amount of restoration needed; and the geographical location in relation to other features of the dairy industry. From this list more detailed Heritage Inventory Sheets were developed for selected items in each Local Government Area (see Appendix 3 for samples). These sheets provided detailed information on the location of the sites, a description of the site, their significance as a cultural heritage asset and a suggested management plan as well as a photograph of the site. The sheets were developed after visiting and photographing each site, interviewing current owners, studying secondary sources through library research on the history of the sites and speaking with heritage officers from each of the Local Government Areas. In this way the first objective of this research was established with the sites located on a map in terms of · cl~s ters · (see Appendix 4). 3 • 6 JlErBODOLOGICAL ISSUBS - Proble.s and Li.itations In order to undertake accurate analysis and draw satisfactory conclusions from questionnaires a high response from all stakeholders is necessary. with only 10 dairy farms now in production in the Valley a 100 per cent response rate was achieved from them. They gave freely of their time and showed genuine interest in the project . . Until February, 2004, the Valley was administered by four Local Government authorities(see Figure 1) and while this could have resulted in difficulties for a valley - wide approach to problem solving, the Councils involved were beginning to co-operate and formulate policy on a catchment basis. At the time of the interviews the possibility of amalgamation occurring in the near future, however, resulted in some representatives being hesitant in making 33 observations regarding the future. Once again a 100 per cent response rate was achieved for interviews wi th the representatives of the four administrations and all indicated a keen interest in the project. The greatest difficulty with regard to responses came from the tourist questionnaires. with co-operation from the CEO for the Clarence River Tourist Association self administered questionnaires were displayed in a very visible way at the Grafton Tourist Information Office over a five month period - October 2003 through to and including February 2004. The response rate was extremely low even though this was the busy summer vacation time period. Only 50 returns were recorded for this period: a response rate of less than 1 per cent based on people counter numbers as regis ted by door openings*. The response rate rose to 16 per cent if visitor numbers were based on information provided by signatures in the 'Visitors Remark Book' provided at the entrance to the Centre. In a more detailed visi tor survey conducted by the Tourist Association for September/October 2003 at the Lower Clarence Visitor Centre, Ferry Park Maclean, there were 88 responses giving this survey a response rate again of just over 1 per cent. In order to achieve greater feedback for this project I decided to undertake a more hands-on approach and over a two day period administer the questionnaire to visitors personally at the Ferry Park Visitor Centre, Maclean. This location has a higher visitor rate than Grafton(see Plate 8). Over this two-day period, the response rate was 70 per cent as visitors were approached to complete the questionnaire. Clearly, tourists were quite willing to complete * Due to the fact that 'people counters' register employees, volunteers, tredesmen, children playing back and forth, customers for other purposes as well as tourists seeking information, this method gives an exaggerated result but does provide a rough measure. 34 ~~ Lower Clarence Visitor Centr e, Ferry Pa r k, Maclean. questionnaires when asked. The question causing the greatest difficulty for the tourist survey was No.9, the ranking question(see Appendix Ie). This question required more time and respondents often ticked rather than ranked. Some failed to complete the questionnaire after this question suggesting it may have been too time consuming and/or confusing. This also raised the question as to how to include incomplete questionnaires for analysis. As response statistics for each question were to be indi~ated as 'percentages' the problem of incomplete questionnaires was overcome. Some difficulty arose in questions 4-8 as many tourists did not know they were in the Clarence Valley or what the area covered. With a self-administered questionnaire this could cause difficulties without an explanation or location map provided. While the major stakeholders were included in the study, same form of 'community survey' would have been useful in order to indicate both interest in and acceptance of both agritourism 35 and the preservation of dairy heritage assets. Kneafsey(2003b) indicated a general apathy on the part of the local community to rural tourism in Brittany_ However, Ateljevic and Doorne(2000:28) found that 95 percent of the residents of the Rotorua District in New Zealand supported tourism ventures as they recognised the flow of economic benefit to the total community. 3.7 CONCLUSION with the high response rates from dairy farmers currently in production and the public administrators in the Local Government Areas it would appear that the methodology chosen was suitable in order to obtain data to help satisfy the aims and objectives of the thesis as outlined in Chapter 1 (Section 1.2) page 6. While the response rates from tourists was initially quite low in the final count the rates rose substantially to provide a satisfactory outcome. If there is to be a demand for agritourism and tourist safaris associated with cultural heritage assets of the dairy industry then these responses from the tourist questionnaires would be invaluable. ------000------ 36 Chapter 4. A REVIEW OF THE CULTURAL HERITAGE ASSETS OF THE DAIRY INDUSTRY IN THE CLARENCE VALLEY 4.1 INTRODUCTION In accordance with the first objective of this research, as outlined in Section 1.2 (page 6) of the thesis, this chapter will indicate what cultural heritage assets of the dairy industry can still be found in the Clarence Valley. In order to do this the historical growth of the industry, both at the farm and processing levels, will be analysed to suggest just where heritage assets are most likely to be found and the background as to why they might be regarded as potential heritage assets. The chapter will then conclude with an inventory of these assets located in each of the four local government areas of the Valley prior to their amalgamation in February 2004. 4.2 PIONBER DAIRYING ON THE ' BIG RIVBR' Dairying has been a rural activity in the Clarence Valley since the 1830s. John Small had a depot on the South Arm of the river downstream from Cowper in 1837 and census returns by Commissioner Oaks in 1841 indicate a dairy on Smalls Island owned by James Devlin(Mackey 2001: 73). In 1842 the Deputy Surveyor General, S.A.Perry, while navigating the 'King William' up to First Falls (now called Eatonsville) noted this dairy on Woodford Island near present day Brushgrove (see Figure 3). Butter was consigned to the Sydney market from the Clarence River district aboard the 'S.S.Tamar' in 1842, being heavily salted and shipped in 25.4kg casks or firkins(Bawden Lectures 1888:149). In 1848 37 Figu re 3.Location of Settl e me n ts in the Claren ce Vall ey •••••••• •• • ••• e · • • • Woodenbong •• • • ' .. - . •. .• .... ~ O~L=_"II:::J_~30 km •• • Stanlhorpe & •• CA • •• <>'''-09 : • "c. • . Usmore •• • • • •• • • • • . Tabulum• • • •• • • •• Tenterflelde ! • • • • '. • •• • • ' Whiporie •••• • c ••• • • •• • • Baryulg~ •• • •• • Coaldale ••••••••• • ••• •• o •• • Gordon Brook J-,.--l~ lIuka • • lawrence o y",""" •• °T_ • ru!('lQroVA • , • _Callippe •• e T ' ia • • Eatonsv ~le _ ~ . Ulmarra •••• ~1If;, Glen e: .-~-"'7 Cootts \. ~~ Innes • Newlon Dalmorton Crossing . : Boyd - o • •• • . Nymboida •• •• ' .. Glenre agn . • •• Coramba - • • • • • . •0 Coffs Harbour ••••• • •••••• • ••••••••• • • •• • •••••••• •• •••• • •• 38 and 1851 other dairies were also noted in the Grafton area (Fi sher , 2003a: 7 ) . Cheese f actories were opened i n the Valley in 1884 (at Matildadale) and 1896 (at Stockyard creek) while t he f irst butt er factory opened a t Ulmarra i n 1892(Fish er, 2003a,48) . From these humble beginnings the dairy industry grew to be the most important agricultural a ctivity in the Valley (Grafton Municipal Council 1909:107) and the mainstay of the farming community during the first half of the 20th century(MOorhead 1984:19). The oldest milking bails still standing in the Valley are those owned by the Bailey family at Ulmarra. This farm has been owned by the family since the 1870s and the original bails were built in 1895, although they were modified on several occasions since that time. They we r e l ast used i n 1950(see Plate 9). Pl..A'l'!$ 9 . Bailey's Bails at Ulmarra.01de et bails s t ill standing in the va lley. 39 4.3 THE GROWTH AND DECLINE OF DAIRYING Obtaining accurate data on the number of dairies in the Clarence Valley through time is a difficult task. Dairies have had to be registered since 1897 but that registration was in the hands of local authorities until 1970. However, Clarence Valley local government boundaries have altered on many occasions during that time interval, meaning that the official records contain gaps or are archived in geographically separate locations. A variety of sources including Norco(North Coast Co-operative Dairy Company) and anecdotal accounts from local producers, past and present, have provided the following statistics on the number of dairies that existed in the Valley over time (see Table 7): During 2002 a survey of dairy bails still standing in the Valley was conducted(Fisher 2003a:78) with the location of the bails recorded as well as the dates they were built and last used. The numerical data is indicated in Table 8: 40 Table 8 Dairy; ··>B.1 1s···81:.... 4i.9>····2003 SbQwi.g...... ·.. Perio4.··.· ••.• Btlil~ .•.•.•• 1<1 <:108.4 (SourQetFisner2003a;27) period NU1liberBuilt Nul!lber·Closed 1890 1899 5 1900 - 1909 5 1910 - 1919 9 192.0 - 1929 41 1930 - 1939 24 1940 - 1949 42 1950 - 1959 4 1960 - 1969 10 1970 - 1979 1 1980 - 1989 o 1990 - 1999 o 2000 - 2003 o From these tables there are clearly some prominent phases in the growth and decline of the industry: The 1920s to the 1940s were the years of greatest expansion in the dairying industry. By 1931 dairying had challenged sugar as the main agricultural activity in the Clarence Valley with a peak in the industry reached in 1933- 38. At this time the Northern Rivers districts produced 60 percent of all butter in NSW(Kass 1989:28). The other growth period of significance was the Second World War and immediate post-war period. Government policy indicated that dairying should play a key role in the war effort and it encouraged stability in the industry. Under the Dairy Industry Assistance Act 1942 the Commonwealth Government introduced measures to 'protect' the industry (Drane & Edwards 1961:201). The export market for butter and cheese to the UK in particular, expanded in the mid 1950s with butter exports alone increasing 59 percent in 1954-5 over the previous year(Phillips 1955:175). The greatest decline in dairying numbers occurred in 41 the 1960s and early 1970s. Not only did overseas markets shrink but the price of exported products fell as margarine started to make inroads into the domestic market. In 1960 there were 14,800 dairy farms in NSW but by 1969 this number had fallen to 9,800, a decline of 1,139 alone during 1968 (Punch 1969:9). This State wide pattern was also evident in the Clarence Valley. Here the local industry unsuccessfully attempted to force entry into the lucrative Sydney liquid milk zone in order to increase their market share and in so doing reduce the decline in dairy farm numbers (Daily Examiner 16/8/1963:8; Holmes 1962:217). The implementation of the NSW Dairy Industry Act 1970 was one of the most important factors causing the decline in dairying numbers in the Clarence Valley over recent decades. The Dairy Industry Authority took control of the dairy industry in the Clarence Valley in September 1971 and strict new" guidelines for dairying were introduced. Under the Pure Food Act refrigeration vats had to be installed on each dairy farm(DailyExaminer 5/6/1972:2) at great expense to the farmer(Jeans 1971:28). All milk supplied to the factory was to be collected by bulk tanker(Daily Examiner 9/12/1972:2). The sale of raw milk from the farm direct to the consumer was prohibited with milk vendors having to obtain their supplies from Dairy Industry Authority agents - in the case of the Clarence Valley it was the Grafton-Ulmarra Co operative Dairy Company. The vendors now had zoned delivery areas and one vendor- the Longs from Carrs Creek- were fined in the Grafton Court of Petty Sessions for breaches of this law(Daily Examiner 2/9/1972:5; 16111/71:2). From 1971 onwards there was a steady decline in the 42 number of registered dairy farms in the Valley. For the Australian dairy industry as a whole there was a 25 percent decline in the number of dairy farms over the five year period ending 1982-3(Bureau of Agricultural Economics 1983:271). The last dairy farm operating within the Grafton City boundary ceased operation in 1996(Daily Examiner 9/11/1996:1). On the 1st July, 2000, the dairy industry was deregulated by the Commonwealth Government, removing the guaranteed farm-gate price support to farmers. Under the new 'free market' system the average farm gate milk price fell by 29 percent for some farmers (Daily Examiner 2/2/2001:11) with the result that many of the existing dairy farmers left the industry(Daily Examiner 6/1/2001:1;9/2/2001:5; 23/3/2001:13). Currently there are 10 functioning dairy farms in the main section of the valley concentrated around Grafton and Maclean, with four more at Coramba although their functional links are more to Coffs Harbour and the Norco factory at Raleigh. 4: • 4: rBE SPArIAL PArrBlUI OF DAIRr FARHS The location of the largest concentration of dairy farms has always been in the less elevated country of the Lower Valley although dairying was carried out during the early 1900s in the dry upland areas well away from water(Fisher 2003b:8). Upriver from The Gorge(see Fig.2), dairying had always been a precarious activity. Dairying in the Baryulgil/Tabulum area began when selectors took up land around Yulgilbar Station in the early 1900s following the Robertson Crown Lands Acts of 1861(Commonwealth of Australia 2000). Under these two Acts of Parliament Crown land settled by squatter-pastoralists was opened up for free selection. At 43 the time Yulgilbar Station was the largest occupier of crown lands in the Clarence district covering 80,000 hectares (Farwell 1973:159). The Robertson Free Selection Act enabled the closer settlement of pastoral lands as selections could be up to 128 hectares. Cream from the closer settled dairy farms was transported to the butter factory at Copmanhurst and later to Grafton. The Keybarbin cheese factory, near Baryulgil, was built in 1927 because of the difficulties in transporting the milk and cream lOOkm to Grafton(see Plate J 0) • PLATlL.!.9..... 'fhe Cheese factory at Keybarbin built bV j',eo 'ryrrell in 1927 • -.. Dairying gradually disappeared from these marginal areas with a spatial contraction(Powell 1988:308) to the more fertile •• and better watered Lower Valley. The last dairy in this upland area closed in 1954 and the property was converted to beef grazing. Near The Gorge, five dairies operated by sharefarmers, had existed on Heifer Station, owned by the Page family since 1922. However, this area had a limited range of production possibilities for dairying with remoteness and difficulties of maintaining nutritional pasture resulting in beef grazing replacing dairying in the 1940s(In Our Town 2002:5 ; Page,J. pers.comrn.12/9/2002). By far the largest concentration of dairying lay along the floodplain between the Coldstream and Clarence rivers, centering on Ulmarra, Cowper, Tucabia and Calliope(see Figure 3). This area was also the location of many creameries and the establishment of the oldest and longest serving butter factory at Ulmarra. Other major concentrations also occurred at Woodford Island, Southgate/Lawrence, Coutts Crossing/ Braunstone and Seelands/Copmanhurst (see Figure 3). The oldest bails still standing in the Valley are located in this area. Three institutional dairies operated in this part of the Valley. The Agricultural Research Station began operations at Trenayr, 11 km north of Grafton in 1902. Initially it had a mixed herd of 130 head converting to Ayrshire cattle in 1914, Australian Illawarra Shorthorn in the 1940s and to the Jersey breed in 1958. Dairying closed at the Station in 1972. The Rathgar UPA Children's Home at South Grafton also operated a dairy in 1952 while the Sisters of Mercy orphanage operated a dairy at Cowper for 60 years, closing it down in 1971(Daily Examiner 12/8/1971:3). A feature of many of the bails in the Lower Valley is their construction from Sheehy Bros. bricks from Tyndale. Beginning in 1940 this family company constructed water troughs 45 throughout t he Valley and during the 19500 and 60s movAd into the building of hails from distinctive sand and cement bricks. The last bails of this type were constructed in 1965. Of the 318 bails still standing in the valley, 24 are constructed from Sheehy bricks(see plate II). PLATE 11. Norley Bails at Tyndale ..ade f r Oll Sheehy Bros. br leks in 1950. 4.5 THE PROCESSING OF DAIRY PRODUCTS a. The Creameri es . At the turn of the last century, before pasteurisation, refrigeration and fast tanker transport, dairy farmers separated cream from milk using a centrifugal force separator. The centrifuge, invented in Sweden in 1883, 46 separated the cream from skim milk, the latter often being fed to pigs and calves. Separators were not available to individual farmers for many years and creameries were often established at strategic locations in order that surrounding farmers could bring their milk in for separation. These small establishments were scattered throughout the Valley as transport at the time was very slow. The first creamery in the Valley was built in 1896 by the Fresh Food and Ice Company at Maclean. Table 9 lists the location and dates of opening of the creameries in the Valley. :'" .:: .. .::.: ..... :..... ::. < .: •• ':.:.; ...... :(i.\.i} ::.:' .::::":':.:.:'. ::.: i \. .:...... ::.:.: '.'::'. : ...:.'.:. \i ... :::.... : .....•.. :...... /...... '.:". :.: I .. :. ... :.. ::::...... • :.::' r' )1" ~/i•...... ~m~i:J~ :i ii .·.~)·'~I iii, .. :: .... :: ... :., I"'~:,. .:..... : .. . :} .. ii····::·: 2)·;·1 : ::/ ..... :...... ·i.>. '.. I ••.••.•'" :.•..•• .::. :.... : • toti t>·:·::;:'·:i· , ...'" /<://>ii •••h ::':::::: .... :... ::: .. }. :. The majority of the creameries were owned and operated by the NSW Fresh Food and Ice Company although there were some private establishments. Palmers Island was the first co operative creamery (later converted to a butter factory) on the Lower Clarence (Coastal Views 25/7/2002:9) and others like Southgate and Lower Southgate were also co-operatives. 47 Most of them were built to t he s ame patt ern, as is evidenced i n the foundations still v isible at Coutts Crossing and Kenny 's Creek(see Plate 12). PInE 12 Fo unda.tions of Cou tts Ccoss i (lq Creame ry opened 14/3/1896. b. The Fact.ories 'rhe factories were generally larger establishments than creameries and were the receivi ng depots for cream in order to make butter and cheese. In later years othor products such ae whole milk and manufactured milk (powdered milk, ice cream etc.) became the main products. Whi le the Matildadale cheese factory wa s the first factory established in the Valley (in 1884) it waH the Clarence River Co-operative Pioneer Dairy Company' s butter factory a t 48 Ulmarra that really deserves the titl e of 'pioneer ' (Graf ton Municipal Council 1909:107). This fac~ory was opened on 19th March, 1892 (Clarence and Richmond Examiner 19/ 3/1892;4) and whil e the factory was rebuil t i :1 1923, amal gamated with Grafton in 1970 and sold to Norco in 1990, it did not close until 1999(5ee Plate 13). PLA:I''E'l.1 The Pior.eer Dairy ('.a.factory at lJ l ma~ ra open~d 21 / 4/1913 Other factories soon followed the ear l y success of the Ulmarra butter factory. The Southampton factory at South Grafton opened in 1892 (Clarence and Richmond Examiner 30/7/1892:3) and Brushgrove opened in 1893(Clarence and Richmond Examiner 21/3/1893a:8). Action was also taken in 1892 to establish a factory for Grafton and the site chosen was along what is now known as 'Butter Factory Lane' at North Grafton fo1lowlng the construction of a bridge over Alumny Creek ( Cl arence and Richmond Examiner 17/9 / 1892: 4). The Grafton Dairy Company factory opened on 18.3.1893(Clarence 49 and Richmond Examiner 21/3/1893b:8) continuing at this site until 1896 when it was moved to the banks of the Clarence in Grafton. A creamery had been opened at Whiteman Creek by the NSW Fresh Food & Ice Company in January 1896. This creamery would not accept cream from the neighbouring Stockyard Creek area resul ting in the first dairy factory in the Parish of Copmanhurst being opened at Stockyard Creek one month later (Clarence and Richmond Examiner 3/3/1896:5). The factory was owned and operated by George Chevalley whose family had migrated from Switzerland. The NSW Fresh Food and Ice Company opened a number of creameries in the Valley during 1896, including Maclean, but decided to take the milk manufacturing process a stage further by building a butter factory. This Company had been incorporated in Sydney by T.S.Mort and boasted the largest refrigeration plant in Australia. It had rail and truck access for the delivery of milk, butter, beef and mutton ( Clarence and Richmond Examiner 14/3/1896:8). The Company opened the Grafton Butter and Bacon Factory and Ice Works on 30.4.1896, although the enormous structure had been planned well before this date(Clarence and Richmond Examiner 2/5/1896:6). The factory was located in what is now called Blackwood Close, off Victoria Street in Grafton, on the banks of the Clarence for access to water transport. The factory remained in the hands of the Fresh Food and Ice Company until 1909 when it was purchased by the Grafton Dairy Co operative(Clarence and Richmond Examiner 4/9/1909:2). In November 1909 the NSW Fresh Food & Ice Company advertised for tenders to erect a creamery at Lower Copmanhurst but the Copmanhurst Dairy Company had already opened a butter factory in 1906(see plate 14) to serve the areas north of Copmanhurst 50 such as Gordon Brook and Coaldale. This rendered the 1909 initiative redundant and it did not eventuate. As separators became established on individual farms the creameries began to close. Following the success of the Pioneer Butter Factory at Ulmarra and the Fresh Food and Ice factory at Grafton, farmers in the Lower Clarence proposed a central co-operative for that area. J.G. Kempnich built a refrigeration works and butter factory in Maclean(MCSwan 1992:345) but a co-operative was considered a better way for the farmers to market their cream. The Maclean Dairy Company opened their factory on 18.12.1907 (Clarence and Richmond Examiner 2111211907:2), operating until 1929 when local farmers transferred their supplies to the Pioneer factory at Ulmarra. The building is currently owned by the Clarence Valley Fisherman's Co-operative. Small cheese factories also operated in remote sections of the Valley such as at Keybarbin, near Baryulgil(see Plate 10) and Newton Boyd. Difficulties in transporting cream from remote areas under slow transport conditions was clearly a factor in their establishment. In 1937, Foley Brothers built their butter factory at Lower Southgate where it continued to operate until 1948 when it was bought out by Consolidated Milk Industries Ltd. (CMI) (Daily Examiner 4/2/2003:9).Initially the only product made was butter but from 1951 the factory, now called Peters Creameries Grafton pty .Ltd., accepted whole milk (Daily Examiner 16/10/1951:2) which was pasteurised and sent by tanker and rail to Taree. It was the need for the factory to be serviced by a rail site that led to the closure of the Southgate factory in 1953 and the construction of the large four storey building in Westlawn(Grafton) which was opened in September 1954(see Plate 15). With diminishing cream supplies the production of butter ceased in 1962 and the Niro Spray Dryer for powdered milk was altered to an instant powderd milk converter, the first in Australia. However, the number of suppliers to the factory was further reduced after 1968. This was due to the establishment of a 640 hectares poplar plantation for a match factory, part owned by the Federal Match Company, at Great Marlow, as well as farm amalgamations. The takeover of CMI by Petersville Australia Ltd., together with the Dairy Industry Authority appointing the Grafton / Ulmarra factories as its agents to receive milk for the whole milk market, added further to a decline in suppliers. The instant powdered milk section was then relocated to Victoria. 52 !';LA'l'E 15. P(>ters CrealDE!.ry Factory at w('sUawn. Opened 19S4. --- The factory con tinued t o produce ma n u f ac tu~ed milk for which suppliers received only ha l f the pl'ice of whole milk(Daily £'Xilwiner 251111972:2; 17/ 2 /1 972:2) . The Graflon factory became a key centre for the production of Poters and penguin ice cream in NSW but the factory was closed in 1983(Daily Examiner 20/5/1983:2) with the merger of Petersville and Pauls Ice Cream under the new company, Australian United Foods. 'rhe factory remains a landmark as the largest building in Grafton and was sold to Melacare Industries of Australia Pty.Ltd. for tea-tree oil procesaing(Daily Examiner 5/8/1989:1) but has since passed ownership to the Blanchard Brick Co. as a transport depot. 53 The two 'stayers' in dairy processing in the Clarence Valley, at Grafton and Ulmarra, continued to operate separately until 1970. As there was a dec I ine in the number of farmers supplying the factories, associated with widespread flooding in the Valley as well as the implementation of new regulations associated with the NSW Dairy Industry Authority Act , the two processors decided to amalgamate. The Grafton site was sold and all operations moved to Ulmarra. Butter was phased out, particularly after Britain joined the Common Market in 1974. The Company merged with Norco in 1990 but with the proposed deregulation of the industry the Ulmarra site was closed in 1999. 4 • 6 TRANSPORT FRON FARM TO FACTORY TO MARKET Manufacturing refers to the assembling of raw materials and the up-grading of their usefulness into another product which is then made ready for transport to the market. In the dairy industry transport has involved the transfer of milk or cream from the individual farm to the creamery or factory where it is converted to butter, cheese, whole milk or manufactured milk, such as powder and ice cream. From here the products are sent to local, regional, national or international markets. Clearly in the early days when the dairy industry was being established, methods of transport were quite basic - horse, horse and slide, horse and dray, spring cart etc. The Winter family, dairying at The Gorge between 1938 and 1946, for example, used a pack horse to take their cream to Fineflower. Here it was picked up three times a week during summer by Jack Hamilton in his 1925 model T Ford to be taken on a further four hour trip to Grafton(Wilkinson 1983:216). Most of the butter factories were located at riverside sites 54 in order to take advantage of water transport. River transport became the main means of transporting the cream from the creameries to the butter factories. Later, when cream was separated on the farm, the farmer delivered the cream to the wharf directly. As dairying flourished along the river flats, droghers(slow,shallow bottom stern paddle-wheel barges) and river boats stopped to pick up the cream at hundreds of small jetties(Grafton Municipal Council 1909:109). The river boats ran regularly between Grafton and Copmanhurst, a distance of 50km, carrying passengers and produce while the large paddle wheeled droghers carried timber, ore and farm produce from Cangai and other areas further up-river(Starlight 1963:2). The drogher 'Perseverence' , chartered from the North Coast Steam Navigation Co., ran a bi-weekly service between Grafton and Copmanhurst(Clarence and Richmond Examiner 30/10/1920:2) .. Downstream from Grafton riverboats were also part of the dairy industry. The 'Coldstream' collected cans of cream from farms along the Coldstream River, as far as Tucabia and Collet t s Cove, as well as along the South Arm of the Clarence, delivering to the Pioneer Dairy factory at Ulmarra (Tucabia Public School 1991:37). Other river boats included the 'Favourite' , the 'Mulgai' and the 'Elwee' (Lee 2003:247). Butter, bacon and cheese were transported to the city markets by the North Coast Steam Navigation Company from their wharf at South Grafton until they ceased operation in 1925. The State owned railways, which had reached Grafton from the south in 1922, offered competitive concessional rates and this led to the demise of the shipping transport to Sydney (Daily Examiner 20/2/1954:2) 55 The decline of the river boats came in the post World War 1 period when roads became easier to traverse and the advent of the motor lorry improved the carrying time for cream. With delivery door-to-door and reduced overall transport times during the 1920s and 1930s road transport became the favoured means of transport. This trend has continued to the present day. Today, bulk milk is picked up every second day by tankers with a capacity of 28,000 litres from on-farm refrigeration vats. The milk is then transported to the Norco factories at Lismore and Raleigh or to the Dairy Farmers factory 400km away at Toowoomba and Labrador in Queensland. 4. 7 THE DAIRY HERITAGE AS A RESOURCE a. Meaning of Heritage The recognition that Australia has any heritage worth protecting is a fairly recent concept. Certainly, the development ethos that followed World War II left little regard for the conservation of the environment, natural or built. Gradually, the climate of opinion has changed as the belief that Australia does have a heritage that is worth looking after for future generations has matured. The first stage in this process was the formation of the National Trust, incorporated in NSW in 1950 and established by the National Trust of Australia(NSW) Act in 1960(Statutes of NSW 1960:73). This was based on the National Trust in Britain and was followed by the establishment of branches in all States, with an Australian Council of National Trusts formed in 1965 (Lloyd 1977:14). During the 1960s and 1970s the 'green bans' imposed by the trade union movement on the demolition of historic buildings and the rise of the 'green movement' associated with the Tasmanian Government's proposal to flood Lake Pedder, were 56 significant new developments in the conservation and preservation of the National Estate. In April 1973 a Committee of Enquiry into the National Estate, chaired by Mr. Justice Hope of the NSW Supreme Court, was established by the Whitlam Labor government. In defining the National Estate the committee expressed three components (Hope Committee 1974:35) : Those features of outstanding world significance that need to be conserved, managed and presented as part of the heritage of the nation as a whole; Those features of outstanding national value that need to be conserved, managed and presented as part of the heritage of the nation, as a whole and; Those features of such aesthetic, historical, scientific, cultural, ecological or other special value to the nation or any part of it, including a region or locality, that should be conserved, managed and presented for the benefit of the community as a whole. The National Heritage Bill was introduced into Parliament in May 1975 and the Australian Heritage Commission Act (No.57) was passed later in the year. Following this, the Australian Heritage Commission completed its work on the preliminary listings for a National Estate Register in March 1977. The database for this register now contains over 12,000 listed places of natural, historic and indigenous significance. For most Australians the term 'heritage' suggests places such as Uluru, Sydney Harbour Bridge, the Opera House and the Great Barrier Reef. While these are very important features 57 of our natural and built heritage, our national estate includes much more. The National Estate Register in NSW lists a great variety of items in the Sydney Metropolitan area, the cradle of colonial settlement on the continent(Lloyd 1977). Beyond Sydney, places like Lake Mungo, buildings such as the Shire Hall at Merriwa and villages like Carcoar and Hartley have all been added to the Register. The National Estate, then, includes those parts of Australia's natural, historic and indigenous environments that have special value to present and future generations. It includes all those items that help tell the story of who we are, how the landscape, both natural and cultural, has taken shape and helped give Australia its identity. In the Clarence Valley of NSW many items have been listed as par,t of the Environmental Heritage, including the Post Office, Cathedral and Jail in Grafton as well as several residences such as Schaeffer House in Fitzroy Street (Graf ton City Council 2002:30). Thus far, however, very little attention has been given to identifying features associated with pioneer economic activities such as the dairy industry. b. Criteria For Use in Assessment of Heritage Significance. Heritage items can be identified and protected in a number of ways. The main statutory legislation within NSW relating to heritage sites is the Heritage Act 1977, the Act to conserve the environmental heritage of the State. Under this Act a heritage 'relic' is defined as: 58 "any deposit , object or material evidence which relates to the settlement of the area...... not being aboriginal " (Statutes of NSW 1977:7), and 'environmental heritage' refers to "those buildings, works, relics or places of historic, scientific, cultural, social , archaeological, architectural, natural or aesthetic significance to the State" (Statutes of NSW 197 7 : 6 ) . The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 controls most of the planning regulations in the NSW. The key planning instruments are the Local Environmental Plan (LEP) , administered by local councils, and the Regional Environmental Plan (REP) , administered by the Department of Planning. Both have provisions to protect heritage items. The value of potential heritage items is assessed according to three criteria established by the Heritage Branch of the Department of Planning(Kass 1989:31). The criteria are: the significance of the item; the contextual value of the item i and the value of the item in'terms of its regional or local importance. In the first case the item is associated with the life or activities of a person, group, organisation or institution that has made a significant contribution to the region. In the second case the question is asked, "Is the item rare or does it have representative value?". Thirdly, items of regional or local significance are items that are excellent examples of significant aspects of community life and have contributed to the landscape of the area. 59 c. Heritage Assets of the Dairy Industry in the Clarence Valley of NSW. An inventory of heritage assets of the dairy industry in the Clarence Valley was made through fieldwork observation during 2003-2004 using the three critera from the Department of Planning listed above. In total, 291 sites were examined, categorised and listed as potential heritage sites (see Appendix 2). Of the sites listed, 47 were considered 'highly' significant, 161 of 'moderate' significance and 83 of 'low' significance. The measure of significance was based on a number of criteria including: . a site's historical background and uniqueness; . the degree of deterioration and, therefore, the amount and cost of any restoration that may be needed; and . the geographical location in relation to other features of the dairy industry and its accessibility. While this study found 110 dairy sites in the Copmanhurst Shire alone, the Copmanhurst Shire Council Community Based Heritage Study, which was completed in December 2003 identified 170 items, 50 of which were considered significant enough to warrant some form of heritage listing. However, only two of these were associated with the dairy industry - Foley's Butter Factory at Westlawn and McKee's Dairy Bails at Stockyard Creek. The Heritage Advisor for Copmanhurst Shire has indicated this deficiency (Gardiner ,J .pers .comm. 5/12/2003) • On the completion of the list of potential heritage sites, 60 detailed Inventory Sheets were completed for the sites, indicating their location, why they are significant and suggesting possible management strategies (see samples in Appendix 3). For this thesis, the heritage asset sites were grouped into clusters at Copmanhurst, Grafton, Ulmarra and Lawrence/Maclean (see Appendix 4). Each cluster indicated the various dairy heritage assets such as bails, creameries and factory sites which could form a focus for heritage safari tours in that geographical area. d. Local Government Cultural Planning Guidelines The NSW Department of Local Government issued draft Cultural Planning Guidelines to Councils in July 2002(Department of Local Government 2002). In this document, 'culture' was a term broadened to embrace cuI tural products produced by artists as well as the diverse creative products of local communities. Thus, culture could include heritage, architecture and design as well as tourism(Department of Local Government 2002:7). Cultural assets could include places, buildings and facilities as well as infrastructure such as heritage places, and buildings and tourist attractions(Department of Local Government 2002:8). Under the Guidelines Councils are to develop a Cultural Plan every 5 years, with the first being due on 30 November, 2004 (Department of Local Government 2002:15).This is to include a strategy to collaborate with local tour operators promoting local places and her i tage sites, encourag ing cultural experiences and fostering local distinctiveness. In September 2003, the Clarence Valley councils recommended 61 the adoption of the draft Guidelines as well as endorsing the development of a Valley Wide Cultural Plan to include the four Local Government areas in the Valley. In this way it was hoped that there would be an improvement in access to state/federal grants and a stimulus for business development based on the cultural pursuits. The heritage dairy assets which have been identified in this thesis could be incorporated into the framework of any Clarence Valley Cultural Plan developed in the future. 4.8 CONCLUSION The dairy industry was the dominant economic activity in the Clarence Valley for nearly seventy years, leaving its mark on the landscape and in the community. Over 300 dairy bails still stand in the Valley; three milk processing factories still stand but are no longer operational and 15 dairy farms stiil operate with only 10 in the Valley between Seelands and Cowper(see Figure 3). No creameries now exist, although the concrete foundations of some of the old buildings are evident in some areas. These relics are widespread in the Valley and form part of the cultural heritage of the people. Not only should some consideration be given to the preservation of some of these assets as part of the Clarence Valley Cultural Plan, but they could also form a strong core around which a viable cultural heritage tourist trail might be developed in the future. ------000------ 62