A West Australian farmer has temporarily padlocked his farm gates in a bid to get Japanese energy giant to negotiate its ongoing access to his property.

Keith Tunney has shared his farmland near Dongara with oil and gas companies for 28 years.

But in a move he conceded made him “very nervous”, Mr Tunney padlocked his front gate, locking out oil and gas workers from Mitsui and Co for 24 hours in a bid make the company speak with him. 

“They have had 30-odd vehicles, trucks, light vehicles driving straight past my sheds for the past 40-odd days,” he said. 

As the world scrambles for energy, many farmers across Western Australia are negotiating to share their land with companies looking to produce traditional and renewable power. 

Under WA legislation, farmers cannot stop mining and gas companies from working on their land, but companies must negotiate land-access agreements which dictate compensation and the obligations of both parties sharing space. 

Mr Tunney said some of the land-use agreements for oil and gas wells on his properties were negotiated up to 60 years ago, and most of the 14 wells on his land were sunk on blocks before he purchased them.

But he said he had enjoyed good working relationships with previous energy companies which owned the wells.

Mitsui E&P Australia (MEPAU), an Australian subsidiary of Mitsui and Co, bought into the Irwin gas region in 2018, and Mr Tunney’s frustration with the global giant has since grown.

He said roads and weeds on well sites were not being controlled, communication was poor, and his requests to renegotiate dated land-access agreements were denied. 

The tipping point came this month after weeks of having Mitsui-contracted vehicles driving past his house and sheds to access and work on wells, some of which were not on his property. 

“My house is just over there — you could see the lights from the verandah and you could hear them all night.” 

He said dust was blowing over his house and through his hay stores, and that the road, which is his driveway, was deteriorating. 

Despite raising his concerns, Mr Tunney said he felt dismissed and ignored by the company.

Mr Tunney said he was paid between $800 and $5,000 per year per well under the land-access agreements.

He said land values had increased significantly over the past few decades, and while the footprint of the spent gas and oil wells remained the same, the value of the agreements did not change. 

In a statement, MEPAU said it had land-use agreements with all landowners where its assets were located and worked collaboratively with them. 

“MEPAU ensures decommissioned assets are rehabilitated in accordance with agreements with landowners and government approvals, and that mitigation and management measures are in place to minimise the impact of the decommissioning activities on landowners,” the statement said. 

The company said it was aware of “a partner landowner” raising concerns associated with decommissioning work and had met with them. 

It said it had traffic and dust management plans in place and was “aiming to complete the decommissioning work in a safe and timely manner”. 

The right to restrict access

Tim Hayter from Mid West Lawyers said he had seen a “proliferation” of landowners and large companies negotiating land-access agreements for a variety of projects in WA, such as wind farms, carbon projects, solar energy, hydrogen or mining operations. 

Under state legislation, farmers must negotiate with mining companies but can reject renewable energy projects, such as wind farms, from being built on their land. 

“I would think that could change into the future, because the government can see commercial interests in allowing access to land subject to compensation being paid,” Mr Hayter said. 

Always get advice 

Mr Hayter said landholders should always seek independent legal advice when negotiating land-access arrangements due to the complex issues involved.

“The agreements presented to the farmer initially are almost always prepared by lawyers acting for the mining company or wind farm operator, which means they’re heavily in their favour,” he said. 

“Essentially it’s a long-term commitment of 20 to 60 years, which is longer than most marriages — they need to think carefully before they jump into bed with a mining company.” 

Mr Hayter said having not seen the land-use agreements Mr Tunney was subject to, mining companies were only required to renegotiate agreements if it was listed in the terms, and restricting a company’s access to a property could be a breach of an agreement.