The Feuerherdts’ concerns over discussions between their neighbour and Neoen about a solar development on up to 1100 hectares of crop land prompted a meeting with the NSW Farmers Association on Tuesday night.

About 150 people filled the Culcairn Bowling Club, including Steve Campbell, who also lives near the land Neoen is considering.

“I take exception to the use of ‘solar farm’; they’re nothing more than industrial developments, they’re not farms,” he told the forum.

“We’re talking 30 years (for the lease), with an option for another 30 – that’s 60 years – who in this room will be alive then?

“It’s been 73 years since the end of  World War II and you think about the technological advancements since then.

“There’s going to be massive changes to technology, but one thing that won’t change is our need to grow and eat food.

“These panels need to be put on land where farmers are struggling, where they’re not alongside houses, not going to affect land values, and people’s health and livelihood.”

Daniel Moll, whose property adjoins land that’s in the sights of one of two solar developers considering projects in Jindera, also spoke.

“Our main concerns are the unknowns,” he said.

“We lease a block at Table Top, it has the freeway running alongside it, and when you get a thunderstorm there’s a huge watershed rate.

“Are we going to see huge amounts of water running through our property (coming off the panels)?

“The government has a clean energy target they want to meet, I think they’re going too hard, too fast, and we just want to know more about it; there needs to be more research.”

There was one speaker in support of the Culcairn development – which Neoen says is still at the feasibility stage – who disputed comments that it would have a large noise impact.

“It won’t be very great and it is a non-polluting form of power we’re all going to need,” he said.

“It’s okay to put solar farms in the outback, (but) you then need high-tension lines that are prone to storm damage.

“There probably isn’t anything more valuable that land could produce, than what those solar panels will.

“One thing it will do is preserve agriculture, which coal mines don’t.”

Gerard O’Brien said the extra infrastructure needed to develop solar away from transmission lines “was just the cost of doing business”.

“If we take this land out of production … we have to substitute its capacity somewhere else,” he said.

“I was interested to hear the comment that NSW Farmers don’t have a position on solar power.

“At risk of being a smart alec, I think we need to put the batteries on you blokes and fire you up because we desperately need a position.

“My recommendation is we put a motion forward to NSW Farmers that we strongly support agricultural land use for agricultural purposes.”

A motion put forward in that vein was passed by NSW Farmers members, as was a motion to seek from government clearer classification of agricultural land.

Under draft NSW guidelines important agricultural land would be an area of constraint for developers, but the meeting heard there was no land in the Greater Hume area that fell into this category, despite the obvious cultivation capability.

A speaker also said the Department of Primary Industries was currently conducting mapping for prime agricultural land, with a draft to be put out for comment soon.

Sharon Feuerherdt said it was important any agricultural land that had the ability to cultivate crops be protected for that use.

“The land we leased (that is being considered for the solar development) produced 10 tonne of hay per hectare in 2015 …we know the agricultural potential of this land.

“We have concerns about assertions by the solar company that grazing sheep under panels is a retention of agriculture.

“There is research that acknowledges changes to the soil structure under the panels and we suggest the capacity of the land to graze sheep will be minimal and could not be considered as a retention of productive agriculture.”

Mrs Feuerherdt successfully passed a motion that “NSW Farmers lobby all levels of government for large-scale solar infrastructure development to be placed on only land with limited agricultural potential”.

“We understand some farmers may wish to diversify into smaller energy ventures to assist their agricultural pursuits,” she said.

“We do not wish there to be confusion; our concern is about large-scale developments.

“We’ve dealt with fire, flood and frost … we find this issue to be more difficult, as it is man-made idiocy that could be controlled with sensible policy.”

The NSW Farmers will hold further forums in the near future on the issue.

A development application for the Culcairn project, if or when it is lodged, would go to the NSW government for approval as it would most likely involve a capital investment of more than $30 million, which is considered state-significant development.

Greater Hume general manager Steven Pinnuck sat in on the meeting with the mayor and a number of councillors, and explained that council’s role in the approval process would be to enter a submission for or against the development.

“We’re a little bit similar to the NSW Farmers at this point in that council hasn’t formally developed a position on solar farms – and tonight is about getting some feedback from the community,” he said.

“We would probably want to see a development application first, before we made that determination.

“To be fair to everybody … not prejudging something is the first thing you should do in considering it (a project) on its merits.”