Smith v Chief Executive, Department of Natural Resources and Mines

[2001] QLC 107

LAND COURT

BRISBANE

28 SEPTEMBER 2001

Re:     AV00-587 and AV00-588
Appeals against unimproved valuations
Valuation of Land Act 1944
Local Government: Dalrymple
Property ID:   5168302         (AV00-587)
5168319         (AV00-588)

Raymond J and Rhonda M Smith

v.
Chief Executive, Department of Natural Resources and Mines

J U D G M E N T

By consent of the parties, both of these appeals were heard together. Appeal AV00-588 relates to a property called "Bluff Downs" which was valued by the Chief Executive pursuant to the provisions of the Valuation of Land Act1944 at $940,000 as at a relevant date of 1 October 1999. The appellants contend for a valuation of $800,000. The other appeal is concerned with a property called "Talavera" which was valued by the Chief Executive at $415,000 and in respect of which the appellants say the value ought to be $305,000. Both valuations are as at a relevant date of 1 October 1999. Both properties are used for the breeding and fattening of beef cattle.
Rhonda May Smith appeared on behalf of the appellants and gave evidence. She also called Raymond Jack Smith, her husband. Stephen Brooks Gilbert, a registered valuer, provided written valuations in support of the Chief Executive's valuations. In his valuations Mr Gilbert relied on three sales to which I will come in detail shortly: "Amelia Downs", "Junction Creek" and "Lava Plains". Before I come to the substantive matters in these appeals I will deal with some matters of a general nature.
Mrs Smith said that it was unfair that appellants generally had to rely on their own resources in presenting their case against a valuation, whereas the Chief Executive had access to substantial resources. She thought that some form of legal aid ought to be made available. I record this here only for completeness. This is not a matter that has any effect on my consideration of the substantive issues in these appeals. Mrs Smith also said that rural people have to be very self-reliant with respect to services and safety/health issues and should be compensated in some way. That may well be the case, however, there is nothing in the provisions of the Valuation of Land Act which provides for any form of compensation of the type proposed.
In a statement tendered by Mrs Smith she explained how the owners of grazing properties are subjected to large variations in seasonal influences and market conditions and how such factors impact greatly on the difficulties in property management. Fire can also cause hardship to stock and can damage land, particularly in the basalt areas of Dalrymple Shire in which both of the subject properties in these appeals are found. The result of these various influences is that properties are sometimes overgrazed. Supplementary feeding and licks become necessary and often stock need to be agisted. Roads are often impassable in the wet and it is often the landholder who must repair road surfaces. Whilst this evidence was not challenged and indeed, I accept it, it cannot be said that the value of the subject properties must be reduced accordingly. Such aspects are taken into account in that they also influence the environment in which the sales referred to by Mr Gilbert took place.
Mrs Smith said that rent levels have increased at a rate that cannot be accommodated by property budgets. The rate of increase in rent charges, local authority rates and, indeed, general prices in the marketplace are matters of concern for all graziers. They are not, however, matters that can properly be taken into account in cases such as those presently under consideration. This was made quite clear by the Land Appeal Court in Tow v. Valuer-General (1978) 5 QLCR 378 at 381:
"The Valuer-General and the Court are concerned with finding unimproved value and not with the amount of rates that may be levied as a result. Rates are fixed by Local Authorities and may be varied annually according to the fiscal requirements of the Local Authority concerned. Any such variation may be made at any time during a valuation period and may be entirely independent of a new and increased valuation."
Mrs Smith also raised a question as to whether the three sales relied upon by Mr Gilbert in his valuations were properly applied. She was concerned that the sales took into account improvements and potential. I have studied Mr Gilbert's valuations and observe that he has analysed each sale to deduct from the sale price the value of all improvements on each sale property at the time of sale. His approach accords with accepted practice. He has also taken into account the potential of the sale properties and the subject properties with regard to their use as grazing properties. Such potential is, of course, part of the unimproved value of the land and must be taken into account. A grazing property in its unimproved state will have the potential to carry a certain herd with the addition of fencing, yards, water and possibly clearing of timber. Were it the case that such potential could not be taken into account, the properties would not be settled and utilised for their grazing value. What has to be assessed is the potentialities of the land, not the realised potentialities with all of its improvements in place. It must, however, be considered in the improved environment in which it exists; that is; with all roads, towns and so on.
I will now turn to a description of the subject lands dealing first of all with "Bluff Downs".
This property is situated about 106 km north-west of Charters Towers and is accessed by 77 km of bitumen strip Lynd Highway, then 29 km of formed earth and gravel road. The unsealed access road is impassable during most wet seasons.
Mr Gilbert described the nature of the land on "Bluff Downs" as:
"About 16,500 hectares (42%) open black basalt plain lightly timbered with bloodwood and ghost gum.
About 17,100 hectares (43%) level to slightly undulating red basalt country, timbered predominantly with narrow leafed ironbark.
About 5,800 hectares (15%) in the northern corner comprises sandy and gravely ironbark, interspersed with areas of box country running into hard yellowjack tableland."
Mrs Smith did not dispute this description of the property but said that the problems associated with such a large proportion of black soil country need to be taken into account. She said that this sort of country becomes very boggy in the wet, erodes easily, yet dries out and cracks during the dry. Pasture on this country does not quickly respond to rain, particularly when it falls late in the season. She said also that ticks can harbour in the cracks in the soil. Mr Gilbert said that his analysis of a large number of sales transactions, including those set out in his valuations, reveals that the marketplace highly regards black soil and will pay more for it than other country because of its carrying qualities. I acknowledge the concerns raised by Mr and Mrs Smith concerning black soil country, however, in the context of a valuation it is not simply the negative features that should be taken into account, but the balance of features as perceived by the marketplace. Accordingly, I accept Mr Gilbert's evidence in this regard.
Mr Gilbert said that "Bluff Downs" has only very light stone north of the Basalt River, whilst the southern section contains medium to heavy surface stone, low basalt ridges and walls. Mrs Smith offered a slightly different description, saying that there was 20% heavy stone, 30% medium stone and 50% light stone, though it is not a description that I see to be at odds with that contained in Mr Gilbert's valuation. I also note Mr Gilbert's evidence that "Amelia Downs", one of his sales, suffers heavy stone pockets, particularly to the south of the river.
Mr Gilbert assessed the carrying capacity of "Bluff Downs" at one beast to 10 ha. Mrs Smith did not proffer a carrying capacity which was less than this, though she did say that the carrying capacity on "Bluff Downs" was inferior to the sales included in Mr Gilbert's valuation. I will come to the comparisons shortly. In his estimation of carrying capacities on both "Bluff Downs" and "Talavera" as well as the sales he relied on, Mr Gilbert paid regard to the scientific work done by the CSIRO at "Hillgrove", a property in the basalt area. Mrs Smith was critical of that work suggesting it was experimental only and that it was carried out on a small scale, therefore was not directly relevant to a broad-acre situation. In the matter of Adam J Allingham(AV00-478) and Adam J, Robert J & Sarah B Allingham (AV00-579) v. Chief Executive, Department of Natural Resources and Mines I consider this matter in some detail and was assisted in that regard by the studious and practical evidence provided by Mr Allingham which I accepted. In my reasons in that matter handed down today I said:
" Evidence as to the sustainable productive capacities of the red basalt country was provided by Mr Allingham and supported by three published scientific papers he tendered in evidence. The CSIRO Cunningham Laboratory has undertaken grazing trials at a property known as 'Hillgrove' between 1984 to 1992 under a project or site called 'ECOSSAT'. 'Hillgrove' adjoins "Emu Valley" to the east. The result of that work is that the researchers were able to calculate average annual pasture production in the red basalt country west of Charters Towers as being 2,400 kilograms per ha in an average benchmark season. Of that pasture volume 25% or 500 kilograms is available for grazing on a continuous basis. Allowing for the fact that 50% of seasons will not produce the average season volume of pasture, the utilisation of 600 kilograms per annum ought to leave a reasonable buffer of 500 to 600 kilograms per ha, a volume considered to be the minimum amount required to prevent long-term land degradation. Such long-term degradation occurs where there is greater than 70% to 80% usage of volume of pasture available in any one year, though even a usage of 50% would lead to long-term changes in pasture composition.
The degradation, which results from overgrazing, will lead to a change in biodiversity, infestation by weeds, soil erosion leading to soil loss and nutrient runoff which has the potential to cause downstream problems and offshore biological crises. Apart from that, individual animal production can taper off by as much as 20% to 30% where pasture utilisation exceeds 50% of the average 2,400 kilograms available on an annual basis.
The work at 'Hillgrove' showed that based on a 25% of annual pasture growth consumption, red basalt country could carry 7.786245 beasts per ha on an ongoing basis. The grazing trials which led to that fine numerical conclusion were carried out using small numbers in small experimental paddocks. The result is that animals are forced to graze a pasture evenly and to therefore fully utilise the available feed. Where paddock sizes are larger as in the case of a grazing property, grazing patterns will depend on soil and pasture types as well as topography, with the result that some areas will be grazed more intensively than others. Depending on the number and placement of water points, an allowance of 25% may be necessary when estimating maximum average sustainable carrying capacities on larger properties when the 'Hillgrove' results are used as the basis. Thus the carrying capacity of one beast to 7.786245 ha would be adjusted to 9.732806 ha, which is a figure consistent with the one beast to 10 ha which Mr Allingham said historically would apply to the red basalt country. He acknowledged that some graziers in the basalt area would graze perhaps one beast to 5 ha on an ongoing basis, but such graziers, according to him, were those more likely to have to agist cattle off the property on a frequent basis. Mr Allingham tendered photographs which clearly showed the effect of over-grazing."
In his written valuation Mr Gilbert described the natural water on the property in this way:
"Permanent waterholes in the Basalt River near the Homestead with numerous other holes dependant on season. Permanent spring in Three Mile Creek and semi permanent hole in Allingham Creek. Several other springs/soaks/holes dependant on season. All springs/soaks can become boggy and claim weak cattle."
Mrs Smith said that there were two permanent waterholes only in the Basalt River and that, given that these were both near the homestead, the bulk of stock on the property could not utilise that water. She disagreed with the water in Three Mile Creek being described as permanent, however, gave no basis for that view. During her evidence-in-chief she indicated that she would call her husband to address that issue, however, when he gave evidence he was not asked about that matter. Mrs Smith confirmed the bogging nature of springs/soaks on "Bluff Downs".
Mr Gilbert said that there was grader grass along all public road frontages and in isolated patches along internal property tracks; parthenium and rubbervine infestations along the Basalt River and other waterways. There have been heavy rubbervine infestations near the homestead paddocks which have been poisoned by the owner. Small areas of poison peach are found on the harder country, whilst scattered mimosa bush is found generally confined to black soil country. There was also chinee apple on the property. Mrs Smith said that deer were prevalent on the property and that they aided in the distribution of weeds, particularly chinee apple, which she called "chonkee apple". She said that she and her husband had undertaken a deer control program. Whilst Mrs Smith suggested that only "Bluff Downs" had a deer population, Mr Gilbert said there were deer on "Junction Creek", "Wandovale", "Fletcher Vale" and "Southwick West". He suspected there would be some on "Amelia Downs". Mr Gilbert said that the attitude of property owners to deer was a mixed one, some seeing their presence as a positive feature, whilst others were intent on controlling them.
Mr Gilbert said that the Basalt River west of the Two Mile Bore generally lies at the bottom of a steep gorge, thus the attraction of seasonal water there is offset by the potential for the loss of weak cattle. He said that Sandy Creek also presents access difficulties, though access to the northern sandy forest has in the past been obtained via the adjoining property "Allensleigh". Mrs Smith said that access via this property was withdrawn about four years ago. Mr Gilbert referred to the southern section of the property below the Basalt River as presenting obvious internal access difficulties - a point also noted by Mrs Smith. He said that "Amelia Downs" suffers internal access difficulties to a greater extent.
"Bluff Downs" is generally between 380 metres and 480 metres above sea level and is commonly subjected to frost during winter. The result is that supplementary feeding is common as standing pastures will be damaged by frosts. The appellants accept this evidence, however, consider "Bluff Downs" to be particularly badly affected by frost.
Rural power and telephone are available to the property, however, it appears that the telephone service to "Bluff Downs" is via satellite and will fail when power is interrupted, as frequently occurs. Mrs Smith was unable to explain why the appellants' property had satellite telephone, whilst other properties, including Mr Gilbert's sales, were served by more conventional telephonic systems. I now come to substantive valuation matters.
Whilst Mr Gilbert included three sales transactions in his valuations and compared each of the subject properties to these sales, the appellants did not provide similar sales evidence but preferred to rely on the sales included in Mr Gilbert's valuation. Notwithstanding this, the appellants made a general criticism of the Chief Executive's valuation method saying that too high a price was paid by the purchasers for the sale properties. That proposition was not supported by reference to other market transactions, but was based on Mrs Smith's appreciation that in order for the purchasers to receive a suitable return on their investment they would need to overstock the properties, thus leading to degradation of the land. A similar concern was raised in some other appeals heard by me at the same sittings in Charters Towers and in the case of Allingham v. Chief Executive, Department of Natural Resources and Mines, I said this:
" In addition to the broad submission which I have already discussed, Mr Allingham submitted that the sales employed by Mr Gilbert ought not be relied on. He said in evidence-in-chief that properties in the Charters Towers basalt area which change hands are, with the exception of a property named 'Wandovale', not being purchased by experienced landholders in the area. Under cross-examination, however, he said that he was aware that in the case of the 'Junction Creek' sale the purchasers previously had property in the area and had family there. He agreed that there would be other sales to locals but said that some properties tend to continually change hands following short periods of ownership by outsiders. This indicates in his view, both that experienced landholders in the locality consider the prices of these properties to be unrealistic, and that those 'outsiders' who purchase these properties soon find that the production possible does not live up to their expectations, so they move on. Mr Allingham did not submit that the sales relied upon by Mr Gilbert are not proper market transactions. Indeed he agreed that if he were selling one of his own properties he would seek to achieve the best price that he could, notwithstanding the prospect that such a price may in due course lead to overstocking and degradation of that property.
It may be that by the provision of detailed and comprehensive evidence a case can be made out that a number of purchases do not meet the Spencer test, however, in the absence of such cogent evidence, I must accept the prima facie evidence that a sale is a market transaction. Commonly, a consistency in the level of price paid will show that sales are 'at market'. A sale will either be a 'high' or 'low' sale if its price is not consistent with the market. There is no evidence that the sales relied upon by Mr Gilbert are other than consistent in price and therefore are 'at market'. The unpreparedness of many people in the basalt area to pay asking prices for properties is not evidence of value or lack of value, for that matter, for it is not the case that there is a reverse test of the Spencer test provided by Griffith CJ to that effect."
Mr Gilbert's Sale 1, "Amelia Downs", sold for an analysed unimproved price of $667,184 ($32.40 per ha) on 14 January 1998. The Chief Executive applied an unimproved value to that property as at 1 October 1999 of $650,000 or $31.56 per ha.
This sale property has an area of 20,595 ha and is located 120 km north-west of Charters Towers via 77 km of bitumen road with the balance formed earth and gravel. It adjoins "Bluff Downs" to the west and is to the north of "Talavera", being separated from that property by "Grenfell Downs".
"Amelia Downs" comprises approximately 2,500 ha (12%) open black soil plain with the balance 18,095 ha (88%) good red basalt forest country intersected by areas of gorge along the Basalt River and W Creek. Mr Gilbert estimated the carrying capacity of the sale property at one beast to 10 ha. The property is used for the breeding and fattening of beef cattle.
Sale 2, "Junction Creek", sold for an analysed unimproved price of $753,681 ($31.40 per ha) on 1 July 1996. The applied unimproved value is $640,000 or $26.67 per ha. "Junction Creek" is located approximately 203 km north-west of Charters Towers via a 57 km bitumen road with the balance of the road access being formed earth and gravel which is impassable during most wet seasons.

The Sale 2 property comprises approximately 1,547 ha (6.5%) open to lightly timbered black soil; 17,862 ha (74%) good open red basalt forest; 2,296 ha (9%) good to fair ironbark and box forest; with the balance 2,295 ha (9.5%) generally fair to poor forest ridges of box and ironbark on gravelly forest soils. Mr Gilbert estimated the carrying capacity of "Junction Creek" at one beast to 10.5 ha.
Sale 3, "Lava Plains", sold for an analysed unimproved price of $587,278 ($14.32 per ha) on 19 September 1996. The Chief Executive applied an unimproved value of $570,000 to this property, that is $13.90 per ha. The Sale 3 property has an area of 41,000 ha and is located 260 km north of Charters Towers and approximately 90 km south of Mt Garnet.
The sale property comprises approximately 34,300 ha (84%) of open red basalt and red sandy forest country, according to Mr Gilbert, and approximately 6,700 ha (16%) unavailable lava flow or areas inaccessible due to lava flow. Mrs Smith said that her husband had been on "Lava Plains" and could not recall any sandy country there. Mr Smith was not, however, asked about this when he gave evidence. Mrs Smith said also that the area of "Lava Plains" referred to by Mr Gilbert as being unavailable or inaccessible is in fact grazed by cattle though, as I understand it, not intensively. I think that perhaps the greatest criticism that can be made of the "Lava Plains" sale is its distance from the locality of both "Bluff Downs" and "Talavera", however, I accept that the description of the "Lava Plains" country in Mr Gilbert's valuation should not be rejected, based on the imprecise criticism levelled by Mrs Smith. In drawing that conclusion I take judicial notice of the generally consistent evidence in matters heard at these hearings concerning the nature of the "Lava Plains" property.
Mr Gilbert assessed the carrying capacity of the sale property at one beast to 14 ha or one beast to 11.7 ha on the available country. "Lava Plains" is used for the breeding and fattening of beef cattle.
In his comparison of the sale properties with "Bluff Downs" Mr Gilbert noted that each property is affected by frosts. Frosts will blacken off many of the introduced pasture species and will reduce the protein level of pastures substantially. The result is that fewer stock can be carried and those who are tend to do poorly and become weak. Supplementary feeding and the provision of salt licks is generally required. Weak cattle become susceptible to being stuck in soaks or falling down the steep slopes that are found in the Basalt River and Sandy Creek.
Mr and Mrs Smith said that frosts are more likely to occur on open country than in timbered country and particularly where that open country has undulations presenting lower areas where the cold air tends to congregate. Mr Gilbert agreed with this. The evidence of the appellants is that "Bluff Downs" is more greatly affected by frosts than any of the three sales referred to by Mr Gilbert. Mr Gilbert, on the other hand, did not agree with the suggestion that "Bluff Downs" was more frost affected than the "Junction Creek" sale in particular. He said that he had regard to evidence of temperature ranges on "Ellenvale" which indicated to him that temperatures at "Junction Creek", which is of a higher elevation than "Bluff Downs", would be lower than "Bluff Downs" and that the sale property would experience greater frosts. He also disputed , in comparison with Sales 1 and 3, that "Bluff Downs" would have greater frosts and referred to the elevation at "Lava Plains", which he said was substantially higher than "Bluff Downs". He also said that "Amelia Downs" which adjoins "Bluff Downs" to the west has similar open country, though a lesser area. He conceded in cross-examination, however, that "Bluff Downs" would be more frost affected than "Amelia Downs".
Mrs Smith said that "Lava Plains" was 80% unaffected by frost and, therefore, is superior in this regard to "Bluff Downs". She was not cross-examined on this point. She said that "Lava Plains" had retained much of its natural grasses, whereas "Bluff Downs" was populated with Flinders grass, Indian couch and buffel - species more greatly affected by frost than native grasses. The failure of Counsel for the Crown to cross-examine either Mr or Mrs Smith on the frost susceptibility of "Bluff Downs" is a matter of concern to me. When I take this into account, together with Mr Gilbert's admission that "Bluff Downs" would be inferior to "Amelia Downs" in this regard (a matter not adverted to in his valuation); together with the clear evidence that frost susceptibility is a matter of concern in the basalt country - it is clear that some adjustment must be made to this valuation. That adjustment must be minimal given that Mr Gilbert's evidence concerning the comparison with "Junction Creek" was not challenged. Nevertheless I consider "Amelia Downs" to be the better basic property given its adjacency to the subject.
Mr Gilbert in his valuation concluded that "Bluff Downs" was more greatly affected by a weed problem than any of the sales properties. The appellants agree with that. They also appear to agree that in comparison with "Amelia Downs" and "Junction Creek" the distribution of natural water is similar, whilst in the case of "Lava Plains" the availability of natural water is inferior to the subject property.
Since "Amelia Downs" adjoins "Bluff Downs" to the west, it is clear that it is marginally further from Charters Towers, whilst "Junction Creek" is considerably further away from Charters Towers and therefore has inferior access and situation. Access onto the subject property is sometimes affected by flooding in the river which will inundate the bridge there. Such flooding will affect the Sale 1 and subject properties similarly except that in the case of "Amelia Downs" alternative access is available. Mrs Smith said that the "Lava Plains" property is superior to the subject lands in that it is closer to alternative markets at Innisfail, Mareeba and Karumba in addition to Townsville. Mr Gilbert accepts this.
"Amelia Downs" is about half the size of "Bluff Downs" and although it has a lower percentage of black soil country, the poor quality sandy gravelly forest at the northern end of "Bluff Downs" offsets its advantage in that regard in Mr Gilbert's view. He said that the carrying capacity of the "Amelia Downs" property is similar to "Bluff Downs". For their part the appellants did not provide a detailed consideration of the country in "Amelia Downs" compared with "Bluff Downs".
There is an unfenced public road which travels through "Bluff Downs", passing over nine grids and grid bridges. Whilst access from this road may be an advantage to the property, the negative consequences manifest themselves in the form of higher insurance costs and in hunters and poachers gaining easy access to the property. Weeds are easily spread along such an access route. In addition, the owners are precluded from running horses near the road because of the nature of the animal. In Mrs Smith's view Sales 1, 2 and 3 in Mr Gilbert's valuations are superior to "Bluff Downs" in this regard. Mr Gilbert said that he had taken the presence of this road into account in his valuation. He said also that "Junction Creek" was also severed by a main road, though he acknowledged it may experience somewhat less usage than the road through "Bluff Downs". The same road travels through "Ellenvale", a property which was the subject of appeal at the same sittings in Chargers Towers.
In his comparison between his Sale 2 and "Bluff Downs" Mr Gilbert said that the sale property is about half the area of the subject and has a slightly lighter carrying capacity because of its smaller percentage of black soil and a component of poorer forest along the western boundary. Mrs Smith expressed the view that the smaller area of black soil was an advantage on the "Junction Creek" property, however, I have already accepted Mr Gilbert's evidence concerning the value of black soil country as perceived by the marketplace. Mrs Smith said that the four classes of soil on the "Junction Creek" property provided it with a mix of country which gave it a better prospect of responding to a range of different seasons. In this regard the subject property is less well balanced having a large proportion (42%) of black soil. Mr Gilbert acknowledged the matter of balance but adhered to his evidence that the market paid a premium for black soil country.
Mrs Smith's comments on "Lava Plains" were confined to observing that its 84% of red basalt provided the advantage of it having country which responded quickly after rain. She seemed to be less concerned with balance of country in regard to this sale property, though it is clearly less well balanced than "Junction Creek" or "Bluff Downs".
Mr Gilbert said that the "Lava Plains" property is similar in size to "Bluff Downs" and the country overall is lighter carrying and is overall considered inferior to the subject property. I accept this comparison. I will now consider "Talavera", the second property under appeal.
"Talavera" is situated about 119 km north-west of Charters Towers and is accessed by 57 km of bitumen strip Lynd Highway, then 62 km formed earth and gravel road which is often impassable during most wet seasons.
Mr Gilbert described the nature of the land on "Talavera" as:
"About 1,330 hectares (10%) open black basalt plain lightly timbered with bloodwood and ghost gum, interspersed with areas of ti-tree, some areas of considerable stone in the south eastern section.
About 11,717 hectares (90%) gently undulating red basalt country, timbered predominantly with narrow leafed ironbark and bloodwood."
Mrs Smith said that 90% of "Talavera" has medium to heavy rock, a proposition not disagreed with by Mr Gilbert. She also noted its limited balance of country compared with Sales 1 and 2. Mr Gilbert acknowledged that such an issue featured in his valuation. He estimated the carrying capacity of "Talavera" at one beast to 10 ha. Mrs Smith said it was lower than that, however, offered no detail.
Mr Gilbert said that there was permanent running water in Talavera Creek and a permanent waterhole in Allingham Creek, with numerous other holes dependent on the season. He said that there are several other springs/soaks, however, they can become boggy and are a hazard to weak cattle. Mrs Smith said that Talavera Creek went dry during the 1950's therefore could not be classified as permanent. I accept her evidence in this regard, however, would think that the description of a natural water point as "permanent" does admit the prospect that in unusual seasons the supply may fail. Mrs Smith said that the waterhole in Allingham Creek is not permanent, though did not elaborate.
Mr Gilbert said that grader grass is to be found along all public road frontages and in scattered patches through paddocks. He said that parthenium and rubbervine are found along all waterways and there is scattered mimosa, prickly acacia and chinee apple and some isolated thorn apple. There are thick black ti-tree patches on some of the black soil which presents obvious problems when mustering cattle.
Mr Gilbert observed that "Talavera" is effectively severed by three creeks that are steep and boggy and present obvious internal access difficulties.
"Talavera" is generally 400 to 460 metres above sea level and frosts commonly occur there during winter. Again Mrs Smith said that frosts on "Talavera" were worse than those on each of the three sales, "Amelia Downs", "Junction Creek" and "Lava Plains", referred to by Mr Gilbert but did not lead similar evidence to that led with respect to "Bluff Downs", nor did she cross-examine Mr Gilbert on this matter.
In his comparison with "Amelia Downs" Mr Gilbert said that in terms of situation and access both properties are similar. Mrs Smith agreed with this. She did not, however, agree with Mr Gilbert's view that the "Junction Creek" property has inferior access and location. I accept Mr Gilbert's evidence in this regard. It is self evident, in my view. Both parties agree that "Lava Plains" has superior access to that of the "Talavera" property.
Mr Gilbert expressed the view that with respect to natural water "Talavera" was superior to "Amelia Downs", but that "Junction Creek" was inferior to the subject property. Mrs Smith said that each of these properties is similar with regard to natural water distribution, however, the descriptions of natural water contained in Mr Gilbert's valuation support his opinion on this matter. Both parties agree that the natural water available on "Lava Plains" is inferior to that on "Talavera". They also agree that the weed/pest problem is greater on "Talavera" than on each of the sales properties.
"Amelia Downs" is appreciably larger in area than "Talavera", however, has a similar percentage of fragmented black soil and red basalt country. It follows, according to Mr Gilbert, that each property would have a similar carrying capacity and, given the other points of comparison, that the "Talavera" property would be considered slightly superior to "Amelia Downs" on a per ha basis.
"Junction Creek" is larger in area than "Talavera" but has a slightly lower pro-rata carrying capacity, given its class of country. On the basis of this and the other points of comparison contained in Mr Gilbert's valuation, he sees the subject land as being superior to "Junction Creek" on a per ha basis.
"Lava Plains" is considerably larger than "Talavera", being over twice the area. Both "Lava Plains" and "Talavera" have less red basalt country, however, the "Lava Plains" property has a lighter carrying capacity, according to Mr Gilbert, and has a significant area of unavailable country. Whilst Mrs Smith disputes the extent of unavailable country and suggests that "Talavera" has more rock, I accept Mr Gilbert's evidence that "Talavera" is markedly superior to Sale 3 on a per ha basis.
I have attempted to set out reasonably fully many of the matters raised by the appellants. Other matters were included in their evidence, but like some items that I have mentioned above, could be classified as part of the many vicissitudes that those in our farming and grazing community endure in their daily lives. Such matters impact generally on the value of grazing properties including the sales relied upon by Mr Gilbert. Indeed, whilst the appellants have put forward a comprehensive list of complaints about their properties, they have not demonstrated to me that, apart from the need for me to make an adjustment to the value of "Bluff Downs" with respect to its frost susceptibility, Mr Gilbert has proceeded in ignorance of such matters or that he has made any serious error of fact or any error of principle in his valuation.
With respect to Appeal AV00-588, "Bluff Downs", the appeal is allowed, the valuation of the Chief Executive is set aside and the value is determined in the amount of Nine Hundred and Thirty Thousand Dollars ($930,000).
Appeal AV00-587 is dismissed and the valuation of the Chief Executive is affirmed.

RP SCOTT
MEMBER OR THE LAND COURT

[2001] QLC 107

28 September 2001