Rob Eccles Agronomy & Agribusiness Services

31/10/2026

Sharing the latest US industrial h**p statistics. Industrial h**p is still an infant industry in both our nations.

Like cotton in the 1970s, and canola and poppies in the 1990s, it will take time to establish, scale and mature. I believe it will keep growing. Its biggest handicap remains its name, and four generations of social conditioning around the word h**p


Perhaps one of h**p's greatest strengths is the extraordinary diversity of things we can do with it. We can wear it, live in it, eat it and cook with it. We can turn it into food, building materials, engineered and craft wood products, biofuels, biochar, vehicle panels and composites, and specialised fibres. It also has applications in livestock feeding and bioremediation. Few agricultural crops can realistically claim such a diverse range of potential end uses and markets.

It is an excellent soil repairing rotation crop so it threatens none of existing crop options. It will just make us all more income in a very water efficient way.

https://www.facebook.com/share/1KLPsAiFSu/

Thinks

28/10/2026

Biologicals: What Does an Agronomist Actually Need to See?

There is plenty of discussion at the moment about why agronomists and growers may be slow to adopt biologicals and biostimulants.

From my perspective, we need to be careful not to confuse healthy professional scepticism with resistance to change.

I’m not anti-biological and I’m certainly not wedded to conventional chemistry. I’m pro-results.

I advise across conventional agriculture, including synthetic fertilisers and pesticides, biologicals, biostimulants and recycled organic inputs such as poultry litter, manure and compost. I’m not particularly interested in being tribal about any one production system. They are all tools in the toolbox.

I have plenty of clients who follow my recommendations on products and approaches from Metagen, Bayer’s Prime Extra, Biocoat VAM and Azospirillum products, natural zeolite, manures, poultry litter and composts. When I know I can get a better result for a client from one of these approaches, I push it. When I can’t demonstrate that advantage, I’m quite comfortable staying with proven, cost-effective conventional inputs.

The question I keep coming back to is simple:

What is limiting this crop, and what is the best tool or combination of tools to improve the outcome?

When I tell a supplier,“I need more data,” I actually mean it.

What does the product do? Why should it work? Under what conditions does it work? Where might it not work? How consistent is the response? And, importantly, is the improvement sufficient to justify the grower’s investment and change from what they are already getting good results from?

For me, the standard should be the same whether we are talking about a pesticide, fertiliser, seed, animal health product, biological, biostimulant or recycled organic input:

Where is the evidence? Is the response repeatable? And does it produce a predictable improvement in profitability, productivity, crop health, soil health, animal health or resilience?

Ideally, we want several of those outcomes together.

Agronomists also carry some of the risk. It isn’t our paddock or crop, but we have put our professional judgement and reputation behind the recommendation. We aren’t treating a plant in isolation. We’re advising the person whose livelihood depends on that crop. If we get the judgement wrong, it can cost our client real money.

And farming margins can be much tighter than many people outside agriculture appreciate. Saving $50,000 by removing a proven input isn't an achievement if the result is $100,000 less margin because harvestable or packable yield has fallen. Equally, if a biological costs money but reliably produces an improvement worth substantially more than its cost, it deserves serious consideration.

That is why I am not prepared to risk the financial wellbeing of my clients, and ultimately my own, without multiple datasets showing that something works under Australian conditions. I also want some of that evidence to be as local and relevant to the farming system as reasonably possible.

We expect evidence, consistency and accountability from seed, fertiliser, animal health and pesticide companies.

Why should we lower the bar for biologicals and biostimulants?

I also don't subscribe to the idea that farmers and agronomists have suddenly discovered soil health, or that conventional agriculture has somehow ignored it. Farmers and advisers have been questioning, adapting and looking after their land for generations. Being sceptical of a conventional input is part of good agronomy. So is being sceptical of a biological one.

As the pig farmer next door to my parents’ farm used to say:

“You can’t smell the pig on the cheque!”

A fairly blunt bit of old-fashioned farming wisdom, but there is an important point behind it. We all need a sustainable income first. (Pigs, by the way, can be a bit too smelly for the average person, farmer or not)

Profitability and sustainability shouldn't be treated as opposing objectives. A farming business needs to remain financially viable if it is going to keep investing in its crops, livestock, soils, people and future.

06/10/2026

The amazing world of mycorrhizal fungi 🍄🌱

Whatever these fungi are, they certainly seem to be turbocharging this kikuyu soccer pitch in early October!

I didn’t have time to check the species, but judging by the fruiting bodies, they appear closely related to the familiar mushrooms we see above ground. You can really see why these patterns are often called “fairy rings.”

Mycorrhizal fungi form fascinating symbiotic relationships with plants. Ectomycorrhizae and endomycorrhizae (including VAM) can effectively extend the plant’s root system through their fungal networks, helping with access to nutrients and water, while receiving carbohydrates from the plant in return.

The darker, much more vigorous kikuyu growth following the ring is a great visual example of how dramatically these below-ground relationships can influence plant growth.

This is probably the best example of a fairy ring and associated plant response I’ve seen for quite a while. 🌱🍄

19/04/2026

Here’s the link again to the Short‑Term High‑Performance Pasture Podcast 🎧
With conditions still dry across our temperate, high‑rainfall zone in eastern Australia, this approach is well worth considering when the next meaningful rainfall event arrives.
These pastures are more winter‑active, deliver greater liveweight gain per hectare per 100 mm of rainfall, and support faster daily weight gains—helping move livestock off farm sooner and closer to market specifications. Added benefits include improved soil carbon accumulation and lower methane emissions.
The sowing window runs from April to September, and I can tailor a mix to suit your system—whether you’re looking at an annual, biannual, or 3–5‑year option.

Podcast Episode · In The Paddock · 17 February 2023 · 1hr 6min

12/04/2026

Why Isn’t H**p Widely Grown in Australia?

Many people are surprised to learn that industrial h**p—one of the most versatile crops on the planet—is still barely grown in Australia. H**p can be used as a sustainable food source, building material, textile, biofuel, and even as a soil remediator. So why isn’t it grown everywhere?

The short answer is regulatory baggage.
For much of the 20th century, h**p was lumped in with ma*****na. Although all Australian states legalised industrial h**p roughly a decade ago, the stigma and bureaucratic hurdles never fully disappeared. Regulations remain a state‑by‑state patchwork. Some states make h**p relatively easy to grow; others still treat it like a controlled substance, with excessive licensing, testing requirements, and strict crop destruction rules if THC thresholds are exceeded. In many jurisdictions, h**p cannot be used for grazing or as a green manure crop.

In practice, “legal” and “viable” are very different things.
Investor confidence remains weak, and contrary to social media narratives, h**p is not an easy crop to grow well. Achieving optimal yield and quality is agronomically demanding, and processing adds further complexity. Australia also faces a major infrastructure gap. We dismantled most of our h**p supply chain more than a century ago—processing facilities, decorticators, and established markets disappeared. Today, many farmers simply have nowhere nearby to process the crop, making the economics difficult.

This is despite the fact that one of the First Fleet’s original missions was to establish h**p production for rope and sailcloth to support the British naval empire.

The potential uses remain compelling. H**pcrete is lightweight, carbon‑negative, mould‑resistant, and an excellent insulator. H**p seed is a complete plant protein containing essential fatty acids, including Omega‑3, 6, and 9, in ratios well suited to human nutrition. Few domesticated crops match h**p’s diversity of applications.

Yet major agricultural, timber, and petrochemical interests have limited incentives to support h**p’s expansion. Meanwhile, countries investing now—such as Canada, China, and parts of Europe—are building infrastructure and expertise that will give them a lasting advantage.

Australia has a unique opportunity. Unlike the Northern Hemisphere’s single annual harvest, we can grow and harvest h**p year‑round, enabling a continuous supply chain that supports cash flow and downstream processing. Transitioning now is not just good agricultural policy—it is sound economics.

Industrial h**p isn’t failing in Australia because it doesn’t work — it’s failing because we’ve made it too hard to let it work. While other countries build infrastructure and capture markets, we’re still trapped in outdated regulations and misplaced fears. The opportunity is here, the agronomy is proven, and the economics make sense. The only question left is whether Australia is willing to move past the baggage and lead — or keep watching others do it first.