The empty paddock

Bill, Tom and Dog and the Paddock That Was Doing Nothing

Bill had a paddock beside the road that was doing nothing.

At least, that was how Tom described it.

It grew grass, held a few cattle when the other paddocks were short, carried water downhill after rain and had three decent ironbarks along the back fence. It also contained several million grass seeds, a family of hares and one old stump Dog had been investigating for six years without producing a final report.

But there were no buildings in it, no machinery and no signs saying anything important was happening.

So, in Tom’s view, it was doing nothing.

“A bloke in town wants to put a little depot there,” Tom said one morning.

Bill looked over the top of his tea.

“What sort of depot?”

“Nothing much. One shed, a gravel pad and somewhere to park a truck. Just to see if the business works.”

“What business?”

“He hasn’t quite settled that part.”

Bill went back to his tea.

Tom had prepared for this.

“It could be useful,” he said. “The corner is close to the road. The truck wouldn’t need to come through the farm. It might employ someone. And if it doesn’t work, we can pull it all out.”

Dog emerged from under the table with an old fencing glove and the expression of someone who had successfully completed a tender process.

Bill took the glove from him.

“Show me your numbers,” he said.

Tom produced three sheets of paper.

He had drawn up a proper feasibility study.

The first option was called Do Nothing.

It had a value of zero.

The second option was Small Depot.

It had a positive value.

The third was Expanded Depot, which had an even larger positive value, although Tom had written subject to demandunderneath in smaller letters.

Bill studied the pages.

“You’ve made the depot win,” he said.

“No,” said Tom. “The numbers made it win.”

“You wrote the numbers.”

“Yes, but objectively.”

Bill pointed at the first option.

“Why is this worth nothing?”

“Because nothing happens.”

Bill looked out across the paddock.

A cow was eating grass. Water from the previous night’s rain was soaking into the ground. The ironbarks were standing where they had stood before either Bill or Tom had been born.

Dog had returned to the stump.

“Looks busy enough to me,” Bill said.

“You know what I mean. There’s no development.”

“That isn’t the same as no value.”

Tom folded his arms.

“All right. What value would you give it?”

“I don’t know.”

“Well, there you are.”

“No,” Bill said. “There you are.”

Tom frowned.

Bill tapped the paper.

“You’ve given the depot all the benefits you can imagine. Income. Jobs. Road access. Future expansion.”

“That’s what a feasibility study does.”

“And you’ve given the paddock nothing because you can’t predict what else we might want it for.”

“What else would we want it for?”

“I don’t know yet.”

“That’s not very helpful.”

“It’s the whole point.”

Bill took a pencil and wrote beside Do Nothing:

Keeps every other option open.

Tom read it twice.

“That’s not a benefit. That’s just not deciding.”

“Sometimes not deciding is the benefit.”

Dog had discovered that the stump contained an ant and was now reviewing his earlier assumptions.

Bill continued.

“We could graze it. Plant trees. Put in cattle yards. Sell it with the rest of the farm. Leave it alone. Build something else there in ten years that neither of us has thought of.”

“We could still do those things later.”

“Could we?”

“Of course.”

“After we’ve put in a gate, a gravel road, a shed, power and a truck pad?”

“We could pull them out.”

Bill nodded.

“And if the depot succeeds?”

Tom paused.

“Well, then we wouldn’t want to.”

“Why not?”

“Because it would be succeeding.”

“It might employ someone?”

“Yes.”

“Someone might have borrowed money to buy the truck?”

“Possibly.”

“There might be contracts?”

“Probably.”

“And when they want a second shed?”

Tom looked down at the feasibility study.

“We’d assess it.”

“Against what?”

“The existing operation.”

“Not against the paddock?”

“The paddock would already have the depot.”

“Exactly.”

Tom opened his mouth, then closed it again.

Bill put his tea down.

“Right now, the question is whether we turn a paddock into a depot. Once the depot is there, the question becomes whether we let an existing business add another shed.”

“That doesn’t mean we have to approve it.”

“No. But it changes how the decision feels.”

Bill pointed towards the road.

“Right now, the truck is new traffic. Later, it’s a truck that already comes here.”

He pointed towards the empty corner.

“Right now, the shed changes the character of the paddock. Later, another shed is only being added beside the first one.”

He pointed at Tom’s paper.

“Right now, the jobs are possible benefits. Later, they’re existing jobs someone says might be lost.”

Tom considered this.

“But those would be real facts.”

“Yes.”

“So we should consider them.”

“Yes.”

“Then what’s the problem?”

“The first decision created them.”

Tom stared at him.

Bill picked up the pencil again.

“The project gets approved because it looks small. Then the project creates investment, jobs and customers. Later, those things become reasons to let it grow. The growth creates more investment and more jobs, which become reasons for the next change.”

He drew a small circle on the paper.

“It starts feeding its own argument.”

Dog came over and sat on the page.

Bill moved him.

Dog sat on it again.

“He agrees,” said Tom.

“He likes the pencil.”

Dog took the pencil.

Bill retrieved it.

“What if the depot fails?” Tom asked. “Then we pull it down and we’re back where we started.”

Bill looked at the paddock again.

“No, we’re not.”

“Why not?”

“Because it won’t be the paddock anymore. It’ll be the old depot.”

“That’s just a name.”

“Names change how people think.”

Bill pointed to the corner nearest the road.

“The next bloke looking for somewhere to put a workshop will say the gate is already there. The road base is already there. The power is already there. The land has already been disturbed.”

Tom nodded slowly.

“And someone will say it makes more sense than disturbing another paddock.”

“Exactly.”

“That sounds reasonable.”

“It will.”

Tom waited.

“That’s the danger,” Bill said.

They sat quietly for a while.

Dog wandered towards the dam.

There were several ways he could get there. He could go through the trees, under the bottom wire, around the cattle trough or across the open grass.

Last month, Tom had opened a gap in the fence and driven the ute through it twice.

Dog now used that gap every day.

It was not the shortest route to the dam. It had simply become the route.

Bill watched him go.

“Dog understands path dependence,” he said.

“Dog understands there might be something dead near the gate.”

“Same principle.”

Tom picked up his feasibility study.

“So what should I put in the do-nothing case?”

“First, stop calling it do nothing.”

“What should I call it?”

Bill thought for a moment.

“Retain the paddock.”

“That sounds biased.”

“So does ‘do nothing’.”

Tom crossed out the heading.

Under Retain the Paddock, he began adding things:

• continued rural use;

• no capital committed;

• no rehabilitation liability;

• future site choices preserved;

• alternative developments remain possible;

• no industrial precedent established.

He stopped writing.

“We can’t put a dollar value on all of these.”

“No.”

“Then the depot might still win.”

“It might.”

“So you’re not against the depot?”

“I’m against pretending the decision is smaller than it is.”

Tom looked back across the paddock.

Until that morning, he had seen an empty corner beside a convenient road.

Now he could see several possible futures sitting on top of one another.

Most of them had no drawings, no cash flows and no one offering to build them.

But they were there.

The depot was only one of them.

Approving it would not simply select a use. It would make the other possibilities harder, and perhaps impossible, to recover.

Dog returned from the dam through the same gap in the fence.

“Still not the shortest route,” Tom said.

“No.”

“Should we close it?”

Bill shrugged.

“We can.”

“Will he stop using it?”

“Eventually.”

Dog turned around and went back through the gap for no clear reason.

Bill watched him disappear.

“A decision doesn’t just choose a road,” he said. “Sometimes it bulldozes the turn-offs.”

What Bill Learned

The “do nothing” option is rarely nothing.

It may preserve choices that cannot yet be valued because their future use is unknown. Once land, money and attention have been committed to one path, other options become harder to recover.

The first decision also changes the way later decisions are judged.

A proposed industry is initially compared with the land as it exists. Once built, later changes are compared with the existing operation. Jobs, investment and infrastructure created by the first approval become reasons to support the next one.

Even if the original business fails, the site may not return to its former identity. It becomes the old industrial site—the obvious place to put the next industrial use.

None of this means the first proposal must be rejected.

It means the real decision must be recognised.

At Glan Devon, the question is not merely whether one early-stage biosolids facility can operate within acceptable limits.

It is whether rural land should cross the threshold into high-impact industrial use, knowing that the decision may change how the site is perceived, reduce the alternatives available and shape every decision that follows.

© 2026. All rights reserved.