BPS AGM 26/8/2014 Chairmans Report This is my first address as the - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

BPS AGM

26/8/2014

Chairman’s Report

 This is my first address as the chairman of BPS following

six years on the board.

 Resulting from the election at last year’s AGM, we have 2

new directors in Peter McDonnell & Bryce Davies.

• Peter brings years of experience in precision agriculture and has

worked at BPS previously and therefore has great insight into the

• peration of the company.
• Bryce has worked as an agronomist with BSES and private enterprise

and has also worked abroad in New Guinea. He brings a wealth of knowledge to the boardroom.

Chairman’s Re Report

• rt



Our new management team of Rob Milla & Mark Rickards have taken the reins from John Deambrosis and Lance Wassmuth. Both John and Lance provided excellent service to the company and we would like to thank them for their respective contributions. Rob was elevated to the Manager’s position following a trial period as acting manager. Mark came to us from private enterprise with years of experience in financial management and employment management skills.



Thanks go to the field staff who have continued to address grower issues and are always willing to help and advise members whenever required to do so.

St Strategic ategic Pl Plan an

Our ur missio sion

• 1. To facilitate an increase in productivity, profitability & sustainability within the

Burdekin sugar industry by providing highly skilled agronomic services & support to growers.

• 2. To propagate new varieties & control distribution of approved seed sugar cane

plants throughout the district.

• 3. To employ, train & up-skill a professional workforce to deliver positive outcomes for

the sugar industry. Our

ur vi vision ion

To be recognised throughout the Burdekin district as the primary independent resource for agronomic advice and support in regards to sugar cane production.

ENABLING STRATEGIES (ES) Our essential business strategies

BPS Strategy Summary 2015 - 2017

STRATEGIC GOALS – (SG) Our desired achievements

SG 4

Administrative practices based on sound corporate governance & secure fiscal planning

SG 5

Develop IT systems & formulate practices to communicate with growers & enhance the collection & storage of data

Our mission

1. To facilitate an increase in productivity, profitability & sustainability within the Burdekin sugar industry by providing highly skilled agronomic services & support to growers. 2. To propagate new varieties & control distribution of approved seed sugar cane plants throughout the district. 3. To employ, train & up-skill a professional workforce to deliver positive outcomes for the sugar industry.

Our vision

To be recognised throughout the Burdekin district as the primary independent resource for agronomic advice and support in regards to sugar cane production.

Our Goal (STRIVE)

1. Delivery of Service 2. Embrace Technology 3. Accurate Records 4. Correlate Information 5. Create Value 6. Committed Employees Why we exist What’s important to us

Who we are

SG 3

Participate in industry & government funded projects aimed at delivering value to growers & millers

SG 1

Minimise pest and disease pressure through supply of approved seed cane and crop monitoring

SG 2

Deliver a wide ranging extension service to growers utilising agronomists & field

• fficers

Where we want to be in the future

St Strategic ategic Go Goal l 1

 Minimise pest & disease pressures through supply of

approved seed cane and crop monitoring

St Strategic ategic Go Goal l 2

 2.

Deliver a wide ranging extension service to growers utilising agronomists & field officers.

St Strategic ategic Go Goal l 3

 3. Participate in industry & government funded

projects aimed at delivering value to growers & millers.

St Strategic ategic Go Goal l 4

 4.

Administrative practices based on sound corporate governance and secure fiscal planning

 5.

Develop IT systems & formulate practices to communicate with growers & enhance the collection and storage of data.

St Strategic ategic Go Goal l 5

Value lue for

• r Mon
• ney

 Levy – 7c/tonne Grower

• 7c/tonne Miller

 Unchanged since 2011  Industry expectation of increased

extension activities

 Funding adequate at this point in time  Additional funds being sourced

 Seed distribution  Pest and disease  District Performance  Extension  Projects

Manager’s Report

Se Seed d Dist stribu ribution tion

• Increase from 2012 of almost 20% in growers purchasing approved

seed cane, although tonnes sold did not increase significantly

• BPS has recognised the growing need for increasing availability for

growers

• Shane McNee has offered to manage another distribution plot

in Invicta

• Establishment of mother plot at Wilmar
• Use of some of SRA land to propagate varieties for potential

release Mill Area Number ber of g growe wers rs Tonne nes sold Inkerman 145 1585 P & K 151 1682 Invicta 94 1375 Total 390 390 4642 42

Plan anted ted Cane ne

• Amount of Q183

planted last year is of some concern

• Consider variety mix in

terms of overall farm risk management strategy

• With introduction of

Q240, Q252 and Q253 there are some more

• ptions for growers

than in previous years

Varie riety ty Perfor rformance mance

5 10 15 20 25 Plant All Ratoons Plant All Ratoons Plant All Ratoons Plant All Ratoons Plant All Ratoons KQ228 KQ228 Q183 Q183 Q208 Q208 Q232 Q232 Q247 Q247

Yield Sugar/Ha 2013

Pest st and nd Disease sease

Approximately 36.5% of the area was affected by one or more

• pests. Of this area, the graph shows the distribution of that

damage – based on crop survey data provided by growers.

Gr Grub ubs

 Seeing some signs of increase  Ensure growers treat in high pressure areas  Apply within label directions

• Particularly width (500mm)

 Be aware of environmental pressure

 Around 1700 RSD samples taken by

field staff

 This included intensive sampling of

mother and distribution plots

 All returned negative  A great result but this does not mean

the risk of RSD has gone

 Sterilise equipment between farms

Ra Ratoon

• on St

Stun unting ing Di Dise seas ase

 BPS is committed to supporting Burdekin

growers through extension activities

 This includes

 Nutrient recommendations  Irrigation support  Farming systems advice  Pest and disease advice  Shed meetings  Targeted extension activities through projects or trials

Ex Extension ension

 36 grower shed meetings delivered in

partnership with Farmacist

Ex Extension ension

• Early 2014 round had

43% attendance

• Strive to continue to

deliver relevant productivity information for growers

 Field Walks looking at planting systems,

legume fallow management, soil pits, dual sprayer

Ex Extension ension

 Nitrogen rate demonstrations with Q253

• Results to date from harvested trials have limited

applicability due to moddus and mill mud applications

• Growing traits of this variety, suggest that nitrogen

management will be important in managing CCS

• Further trials after a bare fallow will be conducted

this year

Ex Extension ension

 Successful receiving funding from SRA

• Quantify harvester losses at a range of speeds

 Measurement of gaps and stool loss  Measurement of yield/CCS of subsequent ratoons  Repeated for 3 seasons  4 sites

Ha Harvesting rvesting Sp Speed d Tr Trials ials

 Funded through QDNRM and delivered through

CANEGROWERS to BPS.

 Builds on previous work from CANEGROWERS and BRIA

Irrigators

 Marian Davis key contact for irrigation system evaluations or

incentives

 Dewatering component for high risk areas

Ru Rural al Water ter Us Use e Ef Efficiency iciency

 Smartcane BMP

• Technical support role
• Need for all industry to be involved

 Barratta Creek Project through Wetland Care

Australia

• Extra pig and pest control activities for BPS to provide

for growers

 NQ Dry Tropics

• Supporting BPS through extension activities and on farm

demonstrations

• Technical support for incentives programs

Project ject Activi tivity ty

Varie riety ty Trials als – TC/Ha /Ha

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Q183 Q240 Q253 Q252

Selkirk Yield - t/ha

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Q208 Q240 Q253 Q252 Q247

Jardine - Yield t/ha Planted 28/3/13 Harvested 28/7/14 Mill Mud applied in fallow Planted 2/5/13 Harvested 9/8/14

Varie riety ty Trials als – TS/ S/Ha Ha

5 10 15 20 25 30 Q183 Q240 Q253 Q252

Selkirk - TS/Ha

5 10 15 20 25 30 Q208 Q240 Q253 Q252 Q247

Jardine - TS/Ha

 Further trial to be harvested in September 2014  3 more trials planted in 2014 comparing clones

that will be potentially released

Varie riety ty Trials als

 Committed board leading direction  Enthusiastic and hard working staff  Assistance of plot managers is greatly

appreciated

 Trial and demonstration co-operators  BPS are here to service our levy payers, please

contact our field or extension staff for on farm advice and support

Fi Final nal Comments mments

• Mark Ric

ickards

• Company

any Se Secretar ary/ y/Co Comm mmer ercia cial l Manag ager er

BPS Limited

Financial Statements

For the year ended 31 March 2014

(000’s)

Year 2014 2013 Revenue 1,666 1,555 Expense 1,534 1,398 132 157

BPS Profit & Loss

For the year ended 31 March 2014

The following is a summary of the Financial report contained in the Annual Report.

BPS S Fina nancial ncial Sum ummary mary

 The final result for this F/YR compares favourably with the previous

12 months. Net operating profit down overall by $25K 5K.

 INCOME increased by $111K

11K & EXPENSES increased by $136K 36K represented by:

• Seed Cane Sales - $22K extra
• Income stream from Project & Extension activities - $114K extra

ra

• Off set by a reduction in membership fees - $22K less
• Expenditure on Project & Extension activities - $131K more
• Seed Cane Expenses - $21K more

(000’s)

Yea ear 2014 2014 2013 2013 Growers 501 510 Wilmar Sugar 510 523 Seed cane Sales 429 407 Project Income 141 27 Interest 37 44 Other 48 44 TOTAL L 1,666 1,555

BPS Income

For the year ended 31 March 2014

(000’s)

Year 2014 2014 2013 2013 Employment Exp. 638 636 Seed cane Expense 411 390 Projects Expense 152 21 Admin & General 91 78 Depreciation 78 75 Vehicles 44 43 Other 120 155 TO TOTA TAL L 1, 1,53 534 1, 1,39 398

BPS Expenses

For the year ended 31 March 2014

2014 14 2013 13 As Asse sets ts 1,85 ,854 4 1,7 ,719 19 Li Liab abilities ilities 120 120 117 117

NE NET T AS ASSETS SETS

1,73 ,734 4 1,6 ,602 02

(Profit $132K)

BPS Balance Sheet

For the year ended 31 March 2014 (000’s)

2014 2014 2013 2013 Cash at Bank 1169 1046 Debtors - owed to BPS 12 4 Prepayments (Insurance) 19 19 Shares - STL 5 5 Property & Equipment 649 645 TOTAL L ASSET ETS 1,854 1,719

BPS Asset Breakdown

For the year ended 31 March 2014 (000’s)

BPS Liabilities Breakdown

For the year ended 31 March 2014

2014 2014 2013 2013 Accrued Wages 13 Creditors 23 26 Provisions

• (A/L & LSL) 84

73 Other 18 TOTAL L LIABIL BILITIES ITIES 120 117 117

(000’s)

BPS PS Balanc lance e She heet et Sum ummary mary For the

e year ended ded 31 1 March rch, , 2014 014.

 Cash

h increa reased by $ $123K 23K

• Maintaining a cash reserve to cushion the effect of any

catastrophic event that might devastate the district’s ability to produce a crop.

• Ease the burden of capital outlay & eliminate borrowings.
• Assist in funding the expansion of extension services to growers.

 Capital

l expend penditur ture program m

• Refurbishment of site office at P & K Plot
• Awning over patio at Inkerman site office
• New set of portable scales
• New trial bench for experimental work
• 2 replacement vehicles for field officers

Con

• ncluding

cluding Sta tateme tement nt

 BPS remains committed to being a leader in the

productivity services industry. The board and management have identified the requirement for, and appreciate there is increasing demand from growers for the delivery of, expanded extension

• activity. The sound financial position that the

company enjoys will aid in the delivery of this benefit to growers.

Su Suga gar r Pr Produ

• ducer

cer of

• f the

he year ar

 Sponsored by Incitec Pivot  Highest farm average TS/Ha for farm over

25Ha and less than 28% plant cane

Frank nk Gras asso so 22.5 .5 TS/Ha /Ha

 Sponsored by Wilmar BioEthanol,

AgServices

 Highest tonnes per Ha – plant crop over 4

Ha

Hi High ghest est To Tonn nnes s Cane ne

Ia Ian Young – 237 7 T/Ha Ha

 Sponsored by Impact Fertilisers  Highest CCS Average - Farm over 25Ha

Hi High ghest est CCS CCS

Ricky cky Mi Mio

• 16.65

.65

GUES EST SP SPEA EAKE KER

 Davey

ey Ols lsen: n: ‘Yell llow w Canopy py Sy Syndrome

• me – Project

ct fin inding dings s & Ex & Experim imenta ental l pla lan’.

Yellow Canopy Syndrome – Update 26 August 2013

YCS Research – An Integrated Approach

Three complementary projects

• (Davey Olsen, SRA Burdekin)
• Is YCS a plant-induced response to stress – environmental, biochemical or

structural?

• Determine whether YCS is a plant physiological response to stress
• Investigate the physiological mechanism which causes YCS expression
• Determine the impact of YCS on cane and sugar yield over the crop cycle
• Confirm distribution of YCS
• Investigate how YCS effects may be mitigated

1. ‘Solving Yellow Canopy Syndrome’

YCS Research – An Integrated Approach

• 2. ‘YCS: a microbiome approach’
• 3. ‘What biological factors cause or drive the development of YCS?’
• Dr Frikkie Botha, SRA Indooroopilly
• An ‘inside-out’ approach, responses to an external biotic stress
• Are cellular metabolism and gene expression altered in YCS-affected cane?
• Is crop productivity affected by YCS and can affected plants compensate over a crop

cycle?

• Dr Pankaj Trivedi, University of Western Sydney
• An ‘outside-in’ approach, assuming an external biotic stress
• Are microbes (including bacteria, viruses, fungi) associated with YCS?

YCS Project Team

• Davey Olsen (agronomy/soil)
• Dr. Rob Magarey (pathology)
• Dr. Kathy Braithwaite (molecular pathology)
• Dr. Jaya Basnayake (crop physiology)
• Dr. Barry Salter (agronomy/physiology)
• Dr. Priya Joyce (molecular physiology)
• Zofia Ostatek Boczynski (plant/soil chemistry)
• Prof. Bernard Schroeder (soil, cropping systems)

Research conducted in the Burdekin, Herbert, Mackay, Tully and at SRA laboratories Indooroopilly

Phase 1– Findings

• YCS more prevalent from January onwards
• Symptoms appear in ‘waves’
• ‘Triggers’ may arise from an interaction between weather and

crop background stress

• Symptoms occur across soil types, varieties and crop classes
• Symptoms may appear even when soil nutrient status is

adequate

• No evidence of insect involvement, including linear bugs
• Symptoms appear low in the canopy except in severe cases
• Even badly affected crops may recover
• Root systems may show lack of vigor in some cases
• Trials inconclusive re YCS transmissibility

Phase 1 – Key Results

Symptoms have been triggered under controlled conditions by imposing a shock water stress YCS affected plants show physiological impairment including reduced photosynthetic function and increased levels of stress YCS-affected leaves show starch accumulation in cells Unidentified isometric viroid particles present in some YCS-affected cane YCS is unrelated to any known sugarcane diseases in Australia (viral, bacterial or fungal)

Varietal Effects

Some varieties show more severe YCS yellowing than

• thers

To date, YCS has been seen in 35 varieties and in all

• ld varieties

No variety appears resistant

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 KQ228 MQ239 Q183 Q200 Q208 Q232 Percentage % No YCS Slight Moderate Advanced

(n=109) (n=364) (n=209) (n=464) (n=54) (n=377)

Starch Accumulation - Bundle Sheath Cells

Bundle sheath cells, together with Mesophyll cells, are sites of photosynthesis in C4 plants Starch accumulates throughout the day in these cells and is exported overnight

Starch Hyper-Accumulation in YCS plants

• YCS affected plants show starch hyper-accumulation in bundle sheath cells
• This indicates a potential problem with carbon (sugar) exporting processes
• A. Healthy leaf
• B. YCS leaf

Cold Soak Hot Water Treatment

• 1386 observations per treatment over 33 weeks
• CS HWT treated cane showed significantly less YCS yellowing then untreated cane

(p=0.0320)

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 13/12/2013 20/12/2013 27/12/2013 3/01/2014 10/01/2014 17/01/2014 24/01/2014 4/02/2014 14/02/2014 21/02/2014 28/02/2014 1/03/2014 7/03/2014 14/03/2014 21/03/2014 31/03/2014 4/04/2014 11/04/2014 17/04/2014 24/04/2014 4/05/2014 9/05/2014 16/05/2014 23/05/2014 12/06/2014 19/06/2014 27/06/2014 4/07/2014 10/07/2014 28/07/2014 1/08/2014 4/08/2014 6/08/2014 8/08/2014

% YCS affected leaves per stalk

• CS HWT

+ CS HWT

Molecular Pathology

O-G staining of YCS samples. Green inclusion bodies observed in stalk vascular tissue in Q183 (A) and in a phloem cell of a B72-177 leaf (B)

Isometric viral particles have been seen in some YCS-affected stalk tissue Work is underway to verify if they are related to YCS or whether they are naturally

• ccurring

Yield Impacts

• Strong negative correlation between YCS and biomass
• YCS was moderate to high at this site
• 82 observations over 10 months

Herbert Intensive 1

Stalk ID

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Biomass (fresh wt kg)

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0

Average YCS%

5 10 15 20 25 30 Biomass Stalk vs YCS

High YCS (25% affected leaves) Low stalk biomass Low YCS High stalk biomass

Herbert Intensive 2

Stalk ID

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Biomass (fresh wt kg)

0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8

Average YCS%

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Biomass Stalk vs YCS

Yield Impacts

Degree of yield impact depends on the severity of YCS?

• No correlation between YCS and biomass at this site
• YCS was slight to moderate
• 79 observations over 9 months

2014/15 Experimental Program

Research Focus Develop a diagnostic test Isolate the trigger mechanism Causal agent -biotic

• r abiotic?

Experimental Program (2014-2015)

Burdekin 5 pot trials

• Stress physiology
• Crop age
• Varieties
• Transmission

2 field trials

• Crop age
• Water stress/Confidor

Herbert 3 field trials

• Confidor
• Soil Biology
• Environmental stress

Tully 2 pot trials

• Pathology
• transmission

Mackay 1 pot trial

• Environment

1 field trial

• Crop age/physiology

Thank you.