However, in common with all new schemes, differing opinions are being raised over the proposed route south once the rail link leaves the hub at Parkes.

At present, it appears the preferred route south connects through Stockinbingal to Illabo before reaching Wagga Wagga and then to Albury, and ultimately into Melbourne.

On a map, it appears the most straightforward approach; but a few landholders west of Cootamundra question the validity of the proposed route which will involve building a new pathway across flood-prone country adjacent to the Bland Creek south of Stockinbingal before traversing undulating country which would mean deep cuts through hills to facilitate passage.  

“There is an existing corridor running through West Wyalong to Narrandera which crosses the Murray River at Tocumwal, and we think if it was upgraded it is the most logical direction for the new rail link,” Tony Hill said.

“We are thinking for the long-term … you have to imagine the potential of the country during the next 50 or 100 years … and not base your assumptions of what is happening now.”

Mr Hill, the fourth generation of his family based at “Springvale”, Cootamundra, is concerned about the proposed route along with Eric McKenzie, “Grasmere”, Bethungra and Tim Berryman, “Wyuna”, Stockinbingal.

The group support the infrastructure upgrade but have serious reservations over the   long-term effectiveness of the route through Wagga Wagga to Albury.

“Our production capacity has already peaked,” Mr Hill said.

“But the area west of us along the Murrumbidgee River and around Griffith and Hillston is growing and production will only increase given the availability of water.”

Mr Hill pointed out all of the statistics upon which the rail link was proposed are based on work done up until 2010, and the growth of the cotton industry along the Murrumbidgee valley since that time has been exponential.

“The first cotton opened in 2011 and the industry has changed in a very short time,” Mr Hill said.

Mr Hill argued that taking the line through Narrandera will open opportunities for small towns like Tullibigeal and Rankin Springs along with making the freight of nuts, wine and vegetables produced in the MIA cheaper to carry to the port.

It will be tremendous for those towns: Wagga Wagga doesn’t need a lifeline, it is already big enough but the inland rail through Narrandera will immeasurably assist that town and others along the western route.

“Imagine the employment opportunities it could bring to those towns,” Mr Hill said.

“Routing the rail link through the western corridor would be a tremendous boost for the whole area.”

Mr McKenzie made the point that building the rail link through the western Riverina would be, in the long term, so much more productive, joining the the western irrigation areas directly to the southern ports.

“We can’t imagine producers trucking their crops into Wagga to put on the train,” he said.

“And if it is already on a truck, it is unlikely to be unloaded at Shepparton … it will go straight through to the Melbourne ports … further adding to the traffic along our highways.”

Mr Berryman said they can’t see any long term benefits to be gained by routing the line through Stockinbingal to Wagga Wagga, but all are in favour of a sensible plan to raise the standard of the rail infrastructure and improve the effectiveness of product transport..

“We all think it is a tremendous idea, but we feel it would work much better if it went west following the existing corridor,” he said.

In 2015, the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development engaged an independent consultant, Deloitte, to further investigate the merits of the Shepparton – Narrandera and Albury routes (further to the 2010 Inland Rail alignment study).

The findings of the independent assessment were contained in the Inland Rail Implementation Group report released in late 2015.

The report notes the Shepparton route would cost between $1 and $2 billion more than the Albury route and the Albury option provides a better economic outcome.

These reports confirm that the study area provides the best balance between economic, community and environmental considerations as well as best meeting the requirements of the Inland Rail Service Offering, which is to provide a road competitive freight transport link between Melbourne and Brisbane in under 24 hours.

ARTC continues to work closely with landowners and communities as part of our commitment to building the best possible rail line for the nation.

The Australian Rail Track Corporation (ARTC) 2010 alignment study did consider whether the route from Melbourne to Parkes should run via Albury or Shepparton. The report stated the route via Albury as preferred and that although the Shepparton route offered a 30 minute quicker transit time, it attracted a significant extra capital cost – adding $900 million to the project relative to the Albury route.

·         During 2014 and 2015, supporters of the Shepparton route in the food bowl region (the Food Bowl Inland Rail Alliance) claimed a number of benefits for Inland Rail to go via Shepparton.

·         In response to this, and the need to capture further regional freight data, the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development engaged an independent consultant, Deloitte, to further investigate the merits of the Shepparton and Albury routes.

·         An assessment was undertaken of how much rail freight would need to be generated or consumed in the Riverina and Goulburn Valley food bowls to economically (rather than financially) justify the cost of constructing a new line through Shepparton and Narrandera. The findings of the independent assessment were contained in the Inland Rail Implementation Group Report released in 2015

·         Based on work undertaken in 2014-15, the Inland Rail Implementation Group estimated that this extra cost would now be between $1 and $2 billion.

·         The conclusion of the Group, on this matter, was that on the basis of all the available information including the independent cost-benefit analysis, the Albury option provides a better economic outcome for Inland Rail.

·         The report reflects ARTCs 2010 feasibility study and the independent analysis undertaken in 2010 – suggesting that the volume of additional freight and the reduction in operating costs generated by the Shepparton option does not justify the extra capital cost involved.

·         The Implementation Group also found that the adoption of the Albury route for the north-south alignment does not preclude future development of an additional track linking Shepparton with Narrandera through to Parkes which addresses the concerns of the Food Bowl Inland Rail Alliance

·         It is worth noting the NSW Government has recently committed a $60m investment in upgrading the Griffith to Junee rail line to 25 tonne axle loads. This will provide a highly efficient rail connection from the Griffith region into the inland rail line which will provide the major trunk line (see: https://www.artc.com.au/2018/05/31/cuts-to-farmers-costs-boosted-by-inland-rail/ )

·         ARTC continues to work closely with industry members right across the supply chain to secure new freight to rail, this includes products such as cotton now being transported by rail in volume for the first time via its national interstate rail network.