Sthn Range Past Memo (Dec 2009) - FutureBeef · Action: Submission to be prepared for the state NRM...

Pastoral Pastoral Pastoral Pastoral Pastoral MEMOMEMOMEMOMEMOMEMOCopyright © Western Australian Agriculture Authority, 2009

Southern RangelandsPO Box 110, Geraldton WA 6530 Phone (08) 9956 8555 Facsimile (08) 9921 8016 Website www.agric.wa.gov.au

December 2009 ISSN 0726-9382 Vol. 15, No. 2

EDITOR: Greg Brennan

ContentsPastoralists ‘taking control of their industry…’ ........................................................................................ 2AGM of the Meekatharra Rangelands Biosecurity Association ............................................................... 3Birds of our rangelands – how healthy is your property? ......................................................................... 7The monitoring method for pastoral self assessment and reporting ....................................................... 10WARMS monitoring and self-assessment monitoring methods ............................................................ 12WARMS site results in the Southern Rangelands and what they suggest about stocking levels ........... 13Satellite position and tracking system .................................................................................................. 16Radio telemetry systems – are you on channel? .................................................................................. 17New rangeland survey Technical Bulletin for the lower Murchison River area in Western Australia ........ 19ESRM to begin work in the Fortescue River catchment ........................................................................ 21Breeding EDGE opportunity in the Kimberley and Pilbara .................................................................... 22Depots – the missing link in the WA goat supply chain? ...................................................................... 23Getting into further study ...................................................................................................................... 26Life after stations .................................................................................................................................. 27Future land use roles for trees .............................................................................................................. 28Destocking captures more carbon, but does it pay? ............................................................................. 29Climate change in Western Australia: positioning your industry to capitalise ona ‘carbon-based economy’ ................................................................................................................... 32Claim the date! ‘Rain on the Rangelands’ Conference – Bourke, NSW, September 2010 ...................... 33Minimising evaporative losses from pastoral stock-water dams ............................................................ 34National Wild Dog Management Advisory Group ................................................................................... 36Position statements on national wild dog management issues ............................................................. 37

2

PASTORAL MEMO – SOUTHERN RANGELANDS DECEMBER 2009

PPPPPastorastorastorastorastoralists ‘takalists ‘takalists ‘takalists ‘takalists ‘taking contring contring contring contring control ofol ofol ofol ofol of their industry…’ their industry…’ their industry…’ their industry…’ their industry…’Editorial—Greg Brennan, DAFWA Geraldton, (08) 9956 8554, [email protected]

Seasons in the region have been at best patchy during 2009 and for this summer, the Bureau ofMeteorology says there is ‘equal chance of above or below average summer rainfall in WesternAustralia. The outlook for summer (December–February) rainfall shows no significant tendencytowards either a drier or wetter summer season across Western Australia.’ Not what we’d like Santa tobe delivering to our rooftops. There is more information at:http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/ahead/rain.wa.shtml

This leads to the discussions about climate change which most people would probably rather not knowabout as it seems to be only more bad news. On the Internet there are mountains of information onclimate change, some of doubtful reliability. Meat producers pay Meat and Livestock Australia to keepthem ‘up to speed’ with information and its ‘Climate Change Resource Centre’ has a wealth of reliableinformation.

Go to www.mla.com.au and in the top right-hand corner there is a search option. Search for ‘climatechange’ and you will go to the Climate Change Resource Centre.

With the decades of declining productivity together with climate change predictions of highertemperatures, less rain generally, and summer rain being more intense, producers in the Murchisonand Goldfields Nullarbor are mustering their forces to make better use of what rain does fall. There iswidespread appreciation that too many raindrops land on bare ground, splash and head for the saltlakes and the seaside, taking loads of topsoil for the ride.

Producers covered by the Gascoyne Catchments Project have had a head-start with generousfunding from NHT and are making great headway ‘taking control of their destiny’ (a specific request byMinister Redman at the Carnarvon Cattle Forum). Their work on the monitoring tool is just oneexample of pastoralists taking control of their industry and the management of their land resource.Members of the Meekatharra ZCA recently met to form their Recognised Biosecurity Group where theydecided to take on pastoral productivity projects as well as dog control projects. The summary of theirmeeting and plans in this edition clearly shows how they have taken the Minister at his word. Managingtotal grazing pressure, the raindrop and the water as it flows across the drainage system features intheir project plans, as well as the all-important wild dog control projects.

Industry leaders in the Goldfields–Nullarbor are also on the front foot discussing strategies to workwith land managers in the region to gain a better understanding of the current land resource base.People are becoming more and more interested in understanding how principles of controlled grazingpressure and landscape ecology can be used to rebuild the foundations of the productive capacity oftheir land. Any talk of economic development they say is futile until rainfall can be held in thelandscape and perennial groundcover plant species are regenerated. They believe that ‘business asusual’ will take them to desert status and they are determined to get off that trajectory

This line of thinking has also been fuelled by the announcement of future compulsory self-assessments of pastoral leases for the Pastoral Board and also interactions with the Department ofAgriculture and Food rangeland survey team currently conducting rangeland assessments in theGoldfields.

There is ample evidence to show that department resources for industry development achieve highreturns for government investment when activities happen in a tight partnership with producer groups.The recent consolidation of the leadership from Landcare and Biosecurity groups into well-supportedRBGs suggests that the Southern Rangelands may be entering a new era of producer-drivendevelopment. All my department colleagues welcome this ongoing development as it makes our workhighly rewarding.

Any feedback on the quality of this Pastoral Memo is always welcome.

From the highly committed team of DAFWA staff in the Southern Rangelands, please accept ourwishes for a Merry Christmas and a soaking new year.

3


AAAAAGM ofGM ofGM ofGM ofGM of the Meek the Meek the Meek the Meek the Meekaaaaatharthartharthartharrrrrra Ra Ra Ra Ra RangangangangangelandselandselandselandselandsBiosecurity AssociaBiosecurity AssociaBiosecurity AssociaBiosecurity AssociaBiosecurity Associationtiontiontiontion

David Galloway, Ferart Design, Geraldton(Abridged report) written for and on behalf of Ashley Dowden, Chairman of the MRBA

The Meekatharra Zone Control Authority (ZCA) has been working with the Department of Agricultureand Food and the Agriculture Protection Board to reconstitute itself under the state’s newBiosecurity Legislation, into a Recognised Biosecurity Group (RBG). A wider group of interestedpastoralists and associated stakeholders previously incorporated in September 2008, under thebanner of the Meekatharra Rangelands Biosecurity Association (MRBA). Now that the managementcommittee has been elected at the AGM on 1 December, this group intends to apply to the HonMinister for Agriculture and Food for recognition as a Biosecurity Group, as soon as the necessarylegislative powers become available for the Minister’s use.

The MRBA held its inaugural Annual General Meeting at Cue on 1 December 2009. At this meeting,members were asked to elect a Management Committee to take the business of the MRBAforward. A Committee comprising nine pastoral members and two government associates waselected, from which three statutory office-bearers were also selected.

Those who were elected onto the Committee are:

Management Committee TermAshley Dowden (Chairperson) Challa 3 yearsGreg Watters (Vice Chairperson) Mt Clere 3 yearsNeil Grinham (Secretary/Treasurer) Melangata 3 yearsLiam Johns Killara 3 yearsGreg Scott Wondinong 2 yearsWill Scott Wynyangoo 2 yearsJohn Mahony Moorarie 2 yearsDAFWA 2 yearsMichael Clinch Nallan 1 yearDavid Jones Boogardie 1 yearDEC 1 year

Following the election of committee members and office bearers, the members held a workshop toplan the future activities of the MBA.

One of the major issues that the MRBA will have to come to terms with is how to integrate thedifferent approaches to managing the landscape that are now seen in the rangelands. None ofthese management styles are currently delivering well on all the criteria. It is accepted that theMRBA is the best organisation in the region to organise the managers of the different land usergroups to improve their performance and to be able to deliver on all the required criteria.

There was considerable discussion about the merits or value of some of these criteria or whetherpastoralists should worry about management for multiple objectives. These discussions wereparticularly true in the consideration of:• whether climate change was real and if carbon should (or could, due to legislation) be

considered, and• how to balance the work of the MRBA between dog control and improving productivity (managing

the water in the landscape).

4


With regards to balancing the work of the MRBA across dog control and productivity andsustainability issues, there are enough people, resources and commitment for the MRBA toeffectively progress both activities. Improving performance in both these areas will bring benefits toall members. The main issue is for the MRBA to give freedom, permission and support to thedifferent interest to proceed with their chosen direction. It will be important to avoid creating thenegativity associated with criticising different ideas just because they don’t align with individualopinions.

Five projects

Following on from the work begun at the September 2009 meeting at Cue, the meeting broke intoworking parties to firm up project proposals to be implemented by the MRBA. These projects arelisted below.

Projects targeting wild dog control

Project 1 Dogs—Political Lobbying for more funds to pay for doggers

Action—A proposal will be prepared for a Committee member to take to the Minister viathe PGA for five years of funding to pay for more doggers. The funding schedule will be:Year 1 $1 000 000Year 2 $1 000 000Year 3 $250 000Year 4 $250 000Year 5 $250 000

Responsible person—Will Scott

Project 2 Dogs—Bounty on dogs

Action—A proposal will be prepared for a Committee member to take to the Minister viathe PGA for a bounty to be placed on dogsResponsible person —Will Scott

Project 3 Dogs—Use the Oakagee Port and Rail (OPR) corridor construction as the basisfor a dog-proof ‘cell’.

Action—OPR is building a rail corridor between the Jack Hill mine and Geraldton. Thisproject will request that OPR build a fence to dog-proof standard on one side of thetrack. Funding will also be sought to build a 100 km link fence across to the existing dogfence to create a dog-proof cell around grazing land in the Cue, Yalgoo, Mt Magnet andMullewa shires and part of the Meekatharra and Murchison shires.Responsible person —Ashley Dowden will prepare a costed project proposal, identifythe appropriate liaison person in OPR and initiate the meeting.

Projects targeting productivity improvement

Improving groundcover

The overarching objective was to improve groundcover which in turn will improve fodder production,livestock productivity and profits while reducing soil erosion.

The group agreed that improved groundcover could be achieved by a parallel process of first,controlling total grazing pressure to starve the ‘gullies’ and second, to slow the water down as it

5


travels across the drainage system. The project activities to address this parallel process wereidentified as:

Controlling total grazing pressure (including domestic stock, rangeland goats, kangaroos andrabbits).

Controlling the grazing pressure of domestic stock and rangeland goats was achievable withcurrent technology and commitment by the land manager. Control of kangaroo grazingpressure has not been achieved on most pastoral stations and this is an issue on a nationalscale.Project 4.1 Developing effective control of kangaroo grazing pressure.

Action: Submission to be prepared for the state NRM which is due by 29 January 2010.Greg Brennan to identify officers to assist writing the submission with the MRBA.

4.1 Funding for station infrastructure to control total grazing pressureThe group identified targeted stewardship payments as one possibility to fund the costof materials for self-mustering yards on waters. They would need to be located onspecific high value land units or where species can be shown to be vulnerable in theabsence of effective control of total grazing pressure.Action: Greg Brennan to investigate whether there was an opportunity for this throughthe NRM state funding round due 29 January or other options.

4.2 Fixing the leaky landscapeApproximately 60% of pastoralists had participated in stage one of the EcosystemManagement Understanding (EMU) process of understanding how the landscapeecology works. This created a lot of energy five years ago which could be re-invigoratedby finding funds for Stage 2 in the process.Action: Greg Brennan to discuss the development of a landscape ecology trainingmodule with Ken Tinley, Hugh Pringle and ESRM management. This module would bepractically based and accredited through FarmReady so that the $2000 per year trainingsubsidy for pastoralists could be used to fund the service.

Accessing the deep and shallow groundwater for fodder production

There are substantial areas of good quality (low supply) groundwater within 2 metres of thesurface. If deep rooted fodder plants or shrubs can be grown to penetrate to the groundwater,substantial fodder production could result. There may also be sources of high quality, highvolume artesian water that could be accessed at much deeper levels for irrigation ofpastures.Action: Greg Brennan to discuss both these options with DAFWA specialists and report backto the group.

Projects targeting the administration of the MRBA

Effective administration of the group was seen as essential but this administration service needs tobe well funded. Funding of this initially part-time position could be obtained by all the shirescontributing Royalties for Regions money, mining companies as a community service or throughthe state NRM funds where the Recognised Biosecurity Groups were seen as a priority for funding.

Action: Ashley Dowden to progress the initiative of funding through Royalties for Regions and GregBrennan in a proposal to the WA NRM funding round due 29 January 2010.

6


Project 4 Productivity and managing the ‘raindrop’ – Farm Ready Grant

A project has already been submitted to the Commonwealth’s FarmReady program asan outcome of the September meeting. This project aims to progress the work alreadydone in the region through the EMU/ESRM project and take it to Stage 2. This entails agroup process based on the proven ‘Continuous Improvement’ process employed inBestprac groups to do the detailed station planning to improve ‘management of theraindrop’ and total grazing pressure to lift the productive capacity and sustainableprofits.

Project 5 MRBA operational details

Throughout the course of the MRBA meeting, several areas within the Association’sadopted Constitution were ‘flagged’ as potentially in need of further consideration andpossible amendment. These included issues of reshaping the boundaries of the MRBA,introducing rules to ensure adequate representation from across the whole region andchanging the name from the MRBA to better represent the activities of the group.These would entail changing the constitution and Tony Richman explained theprocesses required in order to change the MRBA’s now registered Constitution.

The next meeting of the MRBA is to be aligned with the meeting of the ZCA on 17 March 2010.

A more detailed report of this meeting will be distributed shortly to all members of the MRBA bypost.

7


BirBirBirBirBirds ofds ofds ofds ofds of our r our r our r our r our rangangangangangelands – howelands – howelands – howelands – howelands – how

healthy is yhealthy is yhealthy is yhealthy is yhealthy is your prour prour prour prour properoperoperoperoperty?ty?ty?ty?ty?Andrew Huggett and Kevin Marshall

Why we need birds

For more than 5000 years birds have been used to supply us with food, clothing, medicine, sport, andquiet enjoyment. The ancient Egyptians used birds to help indicate the time to sow and harvest crops,the quality of water supplies, and the health of soil and vegetation. Another highly advancedcivilisation—the Inca of the South American Andes—understood how the farming cycle was connectedto nature and could ‘read’ the health of their land from signs provided by birds and other animals.

Today, we depend on birds for many services, from canaries detecting poisonous gases inunderground mines to the control of pests and diseases in crops and the pollination of manyeconomically valuable plants. Many people, including farmers, attach high value to individual birdspecies such as Malleefowl and Bush Stone-curlew in Western Australia and Seriema (or RoadRunner—known as the farmer’s friend because of its control of damaging crop insects and taste forrodents and snakes) in Brazil, Bolivia and Argentina.

Birds as indicators and planning tools

Recent work in the northern WA wheatbelt has shown just how important some birds can be asindicators for the health of our farming landscapes and as tools for their restoration. In the Buntine–Marchagee Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment—a 180 000 ha area threatened by secondarysalinity between Coorow, Wubin and Dalwallinu—six species of declining small woodland andshrubland birds have been used to design and implement a strategic, long-term revegetation andhabitat restoration program. These are birds that are unable to cross gaps between remnants of morethan about 400–1000 metres and depend on large enough (i.e. 40 ha or more) high quality habitatfenced off from stock for their survival and reproduction. Over 522 000 trees and shrubs have beenplanted at key sites on farms in the catchment since 2004 while more than 150 ha of priority remnantshave been fenced (Plate 1). The project was recently highly commended by the Society for EcologicalRestoration International.

Many of you reading this article will have observed birds on your ‘patch’ and how they use differentresources. For example, you may have noticed how many different bird species use your cattletroughs as watering points in increasingly dry times (Plate 2). Their very presence on your propertycan indicate just how well your land is faring in providing food, water, shelter and breeding sites forbird species that may be in decline or threatened elsewhere (such as in the wheatbelt). This can alsobe an indirect measure of how you are performing as a manager of natural resources.

In the southern rangelands, several bird species can be used to indicate both the quality of habitat onyour property and the overall health and performance of your farming operation. These include anumber of threatened and near-threatened birds (e.g. Malleefowl, Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo, MajorMitchell’s Cockatoo, Bush Stone-curlew, Australian Bustard, Peregrine Falcon—Plates 3–4) anddeclining woodland and shrubland birds (e.g. Gilbert’s Whistler, Southern Scrub-robin, Varied Sittella,Regent Parrot—Plates 5–6). These species require either hollow tree branches or sufficient shrub ormallee cover for nesting and protection from predators. Some forage for insects on the ground oralong bark-covered branches.

8


Plate 4—Bush Stone-curlew – avulnerable species in WA, extinct in

much of the wheatbelt through habitatloss and fox predation.

(Photo: Wikipedia)

Plate 5—Southern Scrub-robin – adeclining shrubland bird that

requires at least 29 ha of heath/shrub/mallee with gaps betweenthese patches of no more than1 km in Buntine–Marchagee

Recovery Catchment.(Photo: B&B Wells/DEC)

Plate 2—Flocks of Zebra Finch at a trough in theGascoyne. (Photo: Kevin Marshall)

Plate 7—Large numbers ofBudgerigar irrupt in the

rangelands after good rains.(Photo: Kevin Marshall)

Plate 10—The Scarlet-chestedParrot is a nomad of malleeand other eucalypt woodlandin the southern rangelands.

(Photo: Stan Sindel)

Plate 8—Spiny-cheekedHoneyeaters forage in flowering

Grevillea, Banksia and other nectar-producing plants across parts of the

wheatbelt and rangelands.(Photo: Arthur Grosset)Plate 9—A bird found across many

inland and coastal habitats is theCommon Bronzewing.(Photo: Kevin Marshall)

Plate 6—Regent Parrot (Smoker) –wheatbelt parrot requiring hollow tree

branches for nesting, moves northand inland after good rains.(Photo: Graeme Chapman)

Plate 3—Malleefowl – a nationallythreatened ground-dwelling bird of

mallee in the southern rangelands andwheatbelt. (Photo: B&B Wells/DEC)

Plate 1—An 80 metre-wide by 1.2 km-long wildlife linkageplanted in 2004 on a farm at Wubin in the northern wheatbelt

to connect two key remnants for threatened and decliningbush birds. (Photo: Andrew Huggett)

9


In the northern rangelands, some bird species are direct indicators of exceptional seasonalconditions. For example, wet seasons that only occur once in several years, numbers of the commonCrimson Chat, Zebra Finch, Cockatiel and Budgerigar (Plate 7) can explode as multiple nestingsoccur in response to the favourable conditions.

Across the northern and southern rangelands, the presence of small insect-eating, ground-dwellingpasserines can indicate healthy native vegetation and pasture condition. Stable numbers of speciessuch as Crimson Chat, Orange Chat, Variegated, Splendid, and White-winged Fairy-wrens, Thick-billed Grasswren, Brown Songlark, Red-capped Robin, and Australasian Pipit indicate adequatesupply of insects and shrubs and groundcover for breeding and shelter. The protection of thesehabitats from livestock trampling (through fencing), wildfire, feral animals and clearing activities iscentral to sustainable natural resource management (NRM).

Birds that feed on nectar and insects play a vital role in helping to pollinate our unique, endemic plantspecies, as well as regulating insect numbers. Some honeyeaters such as the White-fronted, Black,and Pied and the Red Wattlebird are blossom-nomads or seasonal migrants, travelling hundreds ofkilometres or more through parts of the rangelands, wheatbelt and coastal zone to feed on nectarfrom eucalypts, banksias and flowering shrubs in spring and/or autumn. Others in the rangelandssuch as Grey-fronted, Brown-headed, Spiny-cheeked (Plate 8), and White-eared Honeyeaters arelocally nomadic or part nomadic-part sedentary while still others (e.g. Singing, White-plumed, someBrown Honeyeaters, and Yellow-throated Miner) are true locals inhabiting woodland and malleepatches and street/garden vegetation in towns.

Seed-eating birds are also important indicators of the health of our semi-arid rangelands. Theseinclude some well-known non-passerines such as Common Bronzewing (Plate 9), Crested Pigeon,Spinifex Pigeon, Diamond Dove, Budgerigar, Bourke’s Parrot and Scarlet-chested Parrot (Plate 10).These birds require abundant supplies of seeding grasses to survive and breed. This is oftenindicative of well managed productive land.

Working with birds and climate changeUsing birds as indicators of farm health and vegetation condition and monitors of NRM performancerequires the collection of quality biological and ecological data through a systematic scientificapproach. This draws on local farmer and volunteer bird observer knowledge, historical records andprofessional baseline field surveys of bird communities present on farms. Aerial photographs and GISdata are used to map the distribution of native and planted vegetation. The location, abundance,diversity, and habitat use of birds surveyed at different sites over time are then related to thisinformation.

For many of our dryland bird species, the rangelands may well be their last stronghold. As our climategets hotter and drier in the south and probably wetter and warmer in the north, significant changes tobird distribution and abundance are expected. Some species that are already imperilled will go extinctwhile others that are likely to be more resilient and adaptable may actually increase. This highlightsthe importance of improving our knowledge of how birds live in their altered landscapes, how wecurrently manage our natural resources to affect these landscapes, and especially how we may beable to adapt to the impacts of climate change.

Hopefully this article has helped stimulate you to consider birds a little closer when thinking about howhealthy your property might be for wildlife or to help plan a new restoration or monitoring project. Feelfree to contact the authors should you have any queries or require more information.

Andrew Huggett is a consultant ornithologist and NRM-focused ecologist from Coffs Harbour NSW who hasbeen working in Australian farming landscapes for the past 21 years. He can be contacted [email protected] or (02) 6653 7973.

Kevin Marshall is a Regional Wildlife Officer (Nature Protection) with Department of Environment &Conservation at Geraldton. He has over 30 years of experience working in the northern and southern WArangelands. He can be contacted at [email protected] or (08) 9964 0904, 9921 5955.

10


TTTTThe monitoring method fhe monitoring method fhe monitoring method fhe monitoring method fhe monitoring method for pastoror pastoror pastoror pastoror pastoralalalalal

selfselfselfselfself assessment and r assessment and r assessment and r assessment and r assessment and reeeeeporporporporportingtingtingtingtingDavid Warburton, Department of Agriculture and Food WA

Tel: 9690 2235, Mobile: 0408 905 344, Email: [email protected]

The Pastoral Lands Board (PLB) has adopted a system of Pastoral Lessee Self-Assessment andReporting (PSR) based upon permanent photographic monitoring sites. PSR will replace thecurrent system of periodic Range Condition Assessments conducted by the Department ofAgriculture and Food WA (DAFWA).

This article explains the monitoring process that will be required for PSR.

All pastoral lessees will be invited to attend regional training workshops in PSR, conducted byDAFWA, prior to the implementation of the system.

Rangeland type

Across the majority of the southern rangelands pasture health is indicated by the shrubcomponent while livestock productivity is driven primarily by seasonal ephemerals. This requiresthat PSR in the southern rangelands will employ the ‘shrubland’ monitoring method. (Thenorthern rangelands will employ a ‘grassland’ monitoring method.)

A number of pastoral leases are situated in the transition between shrub-based and grass-basedrangeland. On these leases the composition of the rangeland at each site will determine whatmethod of monitoring will be required. It is likely some leases in this transition zone will require bothshrub and grass monitoring sites.

Frequency and timing of assessment

Following initial installation, assessment of monitoring sites will take place over a rolling three-year interval. This means that every year a lessee must assess one-third of their sites. Sites duefor assessment will be highlighted on the PSR web page.

Assessment of monitoring sites must take place at the end of the normal growing season.Therefore, in the majority of the southern rangelands sites will need to be assessed inapproximately spring (August to October).

Numbers of monitoring sites per lease

The number of monitoring sites on each lease will be calculated according to a formula that willcompensate for:

• lease area, and

• rangeland productivity.

Therefore larger pastoral leases and/or those comprised of higher productivity rangeland willemploy more monitoring sites up to a maximum of 45. The minimum number for a lease will be six.

The final number of sites per lease must be a multiple of 3 (i.e. 15, 24, 30, etc.) so that the samenumber of sites will be re-assessed every year.

The majority of pastoral leases will require between 15–30 monitoring sites.

11


The shrubland monitoring method

Monitoring shrub-based rangeland for PSR requires that pastoral lessees install permanentmonitoring sites according to the layout in Figure 1.

Figure 1 Shrubland monitoring site layout

Not to scale

As illustrated in Figure 1 the shrubland monitoring site layout is based upon the existingPhotographic Monitoring Sites (PMS) already installed on many leases.

At installation of a shrubland monitoring site, the lessee identifies a location which:

• is within the grazing radius from water (1.5–3.5 km)• is preferred by livestock, and• is in ‘fair’ condition (has the capacity to improve or decline).Ideally the site will contain four perennial shrub species important to the pasture type of which twowould be desirable and two undesirable. However, it is recognised that four species may not alwaysbe present.

To assess the monitoring site a lessee must place a measuring tape (supplied) around theperimeter of the site. The tape should also be run up the centre of the site to aid plant counting. Theoccurrence of the four species of shrubs within the monitoring site is measured by counting theshrubs. This shrub count data is submitted to the PLB together with a photograph of the site, and abroad assessment of soil stability and the occurrence of perennial grass.

At every re-assessment the lessee must re-count and report the occurrence of these same fouridentified species using the same method. The occurrence of perennial grass and soil stability isreported, and a photograph of the site is submitted. Based on this data the lessee must assess andreport range condition trend (i.e. has the site improved, remained stable, or declined sincelast assessment?).

12


WARMS monitoring and self-WARMS monitoring and self-WARMS monitoring and self-WARMS monitoring and self-WARMS monitoring and self-assessment monitoring methodsassessment monitoring methodsassessment monitoring methodsassessment monitoring methodsassessment monitoring methods

Kath Ryan, Carnarvon

Several questions and some misconceptions about Western Australian Rangeland MonitoringSystem (WARMS) sites on pastoral leases were discussed at the Halls Creek PGA meeting lastmonth, prompting the following comparison between WARMS and self-assessment monitoring.

Differences & Similarities WARMS monitoring Self-assessment monitoring

Responsibility On-going WARMS monitoring conducted by DAFWA is continuing for the foreseeable future.

A self-assessment monitoring system to be utilised by the lessee has been sought and approved by the Pastoral Lands Board.

Assessment and reporting capability Regional monitoring provides ‘trend-over-time’ reports on a large spatial scale.

Lease monitoring will provide ‘trend-over-time’ reports at the local scale.

Method complexity The method includes assessment of range condition, perennial pasture composition (100 repetitions), landscape function, shrub/tree canopy cover and a photographic record.

The method will include assessment of range condition, perennial pasture composition (~25 repetitions) and a photographic record.

Site size Site size is 2500 sq m Site size will be 121.5 sq m Sites per lease There are 1600 sites spread across the rangelands of WA (between nil and 12 sites per lease).

There will probably be less than 30 sites per lease.

Site location protocols Strict protocols on site location and selection have been developed specifically for WARMS.

Guidelines on site location, selection and installation specifically designed for the self-assessment monitoring system will be provided by DAFWA.

Re-assessments Sites in the Kimberley are assessed every 3 years and sites in the Pilbara and southern shrublands are assessed every 5 years.

Sites will all be assessed at installation, and every 3 years after that (one-third of all sites assessed each year after initial set-up).

Reporting Copies of site information and photographs obtained on a lease are provided to the lessee for their records on request.

Copies of site information and photographic records obtained by the lessee will have to be provided to the PLB.

Uses of assessed information Information from WARMS monitoring is used to answer the question, ‘are WA’s rangelands changing, and if so, are they improving or declining?’.

Information from the monitoring sites provides evidence (objective data) to support the lessees’ assessment of change in range condition on the lease.

Comparison of information Information from WARMS monitoring gives the regional context for changes in range condition observed at lease scale, e.g. is the regional trend positive, negative or stable?

Information from self-assessment monitoring may be compared with regional information (from WARMS) to see if regional changes are reflected locally.

Lastly… Audits of self-reported information may be required by the

PLB. In summary:

WARMS monitoring vs. Coverage: all of WA rangelands vs.

More detailed, slow and complex assessment vs. Bigger sites, less sites per lease vs.

Self-assessment monitoring coverage: one pastoral lease. less detailed, quick and simple assessment. smaller sites, more sites per lease.

13


WARMS site rWARMS site rWARMS site rWARMS site rWARMS site results in the Southernesults in the Southernesults in the Southernesults in the Southernesults in the Southern

RRRRRangangangangangelands and whaelands and whaelands and whaelands and whaelands and what thet thet thet thet they sugy sugy sugy sugy suggggggestestestestest

aaaaabout stocbout stocbout stocbout stocbout stockkkkking leing leing leing leing levvvvvelselselselselsPaul Novelly and Phil Thomas, DAFWA, South Perth

The shrubland sites of the Western Australian Rangeland Monitoring System (WARMS) have beenmonitored three times over the past 15 years. Between the first monitoring assessment whichbegan around 1994 and the second in 2000–2002 (Cycle 1), there was a widespread increase inplant numbers. Although there were exceptions, this increase was generally associated with aboveaverage seasonal conditions. The third assessment measured the changes between 2000–2002and 2007–2009 (Cycle 2) when there were below average seasonal conditions at many WARMSsites. The preliminary analysis of Cycle 2 is presented in below in Table 1.

Table 1 Seasonal quality (in terms of amount and timing of rain) of WARMS sites (% in each seasonal qualityclass) and percentage change in shrub numbers in Southern Rangelands Land Conservation Districts, Cycle 2. (*indicates a small number of sites* and ^ indicates a small number of plants in that group).

Seasonal quality (was it above, average, or below average) Above average

season Average season

Below average season LCD

% of sites

% Shrub change % of sites % Shrub

change % of sites

% Shrub change

Cue 50% 0% 44% 7% 6%* 23%^ Gascoyne Ashburton Headwaters 32% -12% 40% -34% 28% -39% Gascoyne–Wooramel 6% 3% 31% -22% 63% -13% Kalgoorlie 12% -3% 46% -5% 42% -4% Lyndon 0% - 40% -30% 60% -17% Meekatharra 11%* -20% 81% -9% 8% 16% Mt Magnet 3% * -4%^ 71% 11% 26% 8% Murchison 30% -1% 33% -12% 37% -11% North Eastern Goldfields 22% 3% 74% 6% 4% 43% Nullarbor–Eyre Highway 13% -5% 31% -5% 56% -9% Sandstone 2% * 16%^ 87% 6% 11% 16% Shark Bay 0% - 12% -37% 88% -23% Upper Gascoyne 0% - 38% -11% 62% -25% Wiluna 73% 5% 27% 3% 0% - Yalgoo 8% * 19%^ 65% -2% 27% -3%

The above, preliminary analysis of the shrub data from the second cycle for the shrublandssuggests there has been an 8% average fall in shrub numbers in Cycle 2.

• Sites that experienced below average seasonal conditions in Cycle 2 have the largest averagefall of 15% in shrub numbers.

• Sites experiencing average conditions had an average fall of 6% in shrub numbers.• There was a 3% average fall in plant numbers recorded on sites that had above average

seasons.

14


This suggests that falls in shrub numbers were not only the effect of seasonal quality, but thatexcessive grazing pressure also contributed to the decline.

In particular, there has been a large decline in shrub populations in the Gascoyne –AshburtonHeadwaters, Gascoyne–Wooramel, Lyndon, Shark Bay and Upper Gascoyne LCDs. Smallerdeclines were recorded in the Murchison LCD. In some cases below average seasonal conditionswere not reflected in reduced stock numbers and declines in desirable shrub numbers have beenthe result.

The percentage changes in shrub numbers within each LCD and the relative stocking levels overthe assessment period of Cycle 2 are illustrated in Figure 1. Changes in recorded shrub numbersfrom WARMS sites are represented horizontally, either increasing (to the right) or decreasing (tothe left) compared with Cycle 1. Reported animal numbers relative to the assessed presentcarrying capacity of leases within each LCD are represented vertically. LCDs with average stocknumbers above the average present carrying capacity are in the top half, and those with averagestock numbers below the average present carrying capacity are in the bottom half. Ideally, theplace to be is on the right hand side (Wiluna, NE Goldfields, Mt Magnet, Sandstone, Cue andYalgoo). The results indicate that for some LCDs, the grazing pressure in times of below averageseasons and in some cases average seasons is not sustainable for maintenance of desirableperennial shrubs, with average declines in shrub numbers of 39% being recorded in some areas(Table 1). Any sites affected by flood and fire were removed from the analysis to assess this impacton average figures. Removal of these sites from the analysis had little effect on average shrubpopulation change.

Figure 1 Changes in shrub populations in relation to grazing pressure, Southern Rangelands LCDs

Cue

Gascoyne Ashburton Headwaters

Kalg oorlie

Lyndon

Meekatharra

Mt Magnet

Murchison

Nor th Eastern Goldf ields

Shark Bay

Sandstone

Up per Gascoyne Wiluna

Yalgoo

Gascoyne Wo oramel

Nullarbor

-5

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

-35% -30% -25% -20% -15% -10% -5% 0% 5% 10% 15%

% change in plant num bers

Sum

med

sto

ckin

g ra

te (a

ctua

l/pre

sent

) ove

r ass

essm

ent p

erio

d

15


Matching stocking rate to seasonal feed supply is the key factor influencing changes to plantpopulations (excluding natural events like floods or fire). LCDs such as Mt Magnet and NorthEastern Goldfields have increased shrub numbers, even under average and below averageseasonal conditions because of their seasonally appropriate stocking rates. However, resultsindicate that for some LCDs the current grazing pressure in times of below average seasons, andin some cases average seasons, is too high.

Given the importance of season in setting stocking rates, how is 2009 shaping up? Whilst year todate NOAA–NDVI imagery (October 2009) indicates that some areas in the shrublands may havehad a ‘reasonable season’ this year, there are still some areas which have not had a ‘reasonableseason’ for a number of years. However, some areas which may have had a ‘reasonable season’in 2009 may still have had only a few reasonable seasons in the last 6 years. This is important, asthere are cumulative effects from successive below average seasons, and these need to beaccounted for. Therefore, these areas are of particular concern and management should beendeavouring to reduce the grazing pressure so as to maintain the current plant resource.

Due to the high degree of variability in rainfall, the quantity and composition of pastures varies fromplace to place and from year to year. Managing grazing animals in an environment characterised bysuch variability is difficult, but adjusting stocking rates in response to varying seasonal conditions isthe main management option available to producers in the Southern Rangelands.

Determining the appropriate stocking rate for each season is the most important of all grazingmanagement decisions from the standpoint of vegetation, livestock and economic return. Grazingpressure is the principal force controlling species composition and forage production which themanager can adjust. The choice of stocking rate and the resulting grazing pressure also have aprofound effect on both immediate and long-term animal productivity and station profits. Theimmediate effect arises from changes in the quality and quantity of available forage at differentlevels of utilisation. The long-term effect on productivity arises from changes in the rangeland’splant density and composition. Additionally both the vegetation and the livestock (and hence thebusiness) are more vulnerable to drought if the resilience of the pastures is lowered by prolongedheavy stocking. Moreover, the grazing capacity issue is not confined to sheep and cattle. Native andferal animals (kangaroos, feral goats, rabbits) graze the same pastures as sheep and cattle andcontribute to ‘total grazing pressure’. These consumers and their intake must be considered whensetting stocking rates.

Therefore, when setting your stocking rates for the season to come, consider the current season,the recent seasons (have they given you a buffer or are they a cause for caution), and ensure thatall grazers are accounted for.

16


SaSaSaSaSatellite position and trtellite position and trtellite position and trtellite position and trtellite position and tracacacacackkkkking sying sying sying sying systemstemstemstemstemTom Jackson, Austin Downs station, Cue

Like most pastoral properties there are areas on Austin Downs where neither UHF radio norTelstra’s Next G reach. And one or other member of the family often travels long distances onroads which are likewise incommunicado. Some of our neighbours have satellite phones—expensive and not always reliable.

So when I saw SPOTS (Satellite Position and Tracking System) advertised in a flying magazine Imade some enquiries and decided to give it a try.

The unit cost just under $300 with an annual fee for the service of $140. To have the trackingfunction was another $70 which I didn’t get.

The unit measures 105 mm by 70 mm by 35 mm.

It is powered by a long-life, non rechargeable Lithium ion battery.

It has just four buttons, each with their own light: On/OffOKHelp911

The second two are smaller and slightly recessed so as not to be pressed by accident.

wWhen the unit is turned on it locates satellites. Pressing the OK button then sends a message viasatellite to the USA , from where a message which you have pre-set via internet when registeringthe unit is sent to up to 10 email or mobile phone (by SMS) addresses of your choice. In my case itsays ‘everything OK’ and is accompanied by the coordinates of the unit (hopefully my position too).

So when I arrive at my destination, and perhaps again before Ileave it, the family is told that all is OK.

Earlier in the year I took two of my grandsons across to the‘critter camp’ at Muggon. I was able to regularly set theirmother’s mind at rest as to their wellbeing by sending OKmessages.

If I press the HELP button the family receives a message saying,‘I need to be picked up’, again with a GPS location. I haven’t hadto use it yet, but it’s there in case of breakdown.

Finally, the 911 button. This message goes to the nationalemergency centre, as an EPIRB type alert. I guess if you need it,you hope you are able to locate the unit and press the button. And don’t press it by accident! It willcost you heaps! You can cancel the signal if you realise (or see the light flashing).

For the price, and the peace of mind it gives, I think it’s a great little unit. If you wanted to send morecomplex messages with it you could work out a code with sequence and repeats of the OK andHelp buttons.

If you go on a way outback trek, or a single-handed sea voyage, the tracking function will allow yourfamily to follow your movements on Google Earth.

Further details and suppliers can be obtained from the website http://www.tracertrak.com.au/

Little boy not lost (with SPOT)

17


RRRRRadio telemetry syadio telemetry syadio telemetry syadio telemetry syadio telemetry systems – arstems – arstems – arstems – arstems – are ye ye ye ye yououououou

on con con con con channel?hannel?hannel?hannel?hannel?Kaz Johnson, ESRM and Rebecca Dray, DAFWA

Radio signal telemetry systems have been used by pastoral managers in Australia for 15 years orso now. Since those first radio set-ups were established many new technologies have come andgone to assist with the transmission and storage of information that the systems can provide, butthe base set-up and principles have remained relatively unchanged.

A recent field day held at Bullara Station near Exmouth sponsored by Observant Telemetryhighlighted some of the advances in technology and options available with the most recenttelemetry computer software packages. Bullara Station owner, Tim Shallcross has been using thewater telemetry system for 12 years.

From the humble beginnings of the products being able to report the level of water in tanks, thecurrent day technology has advanced to be able to conduct various aspects of monitoring andmakes remote management easier. Bullara uses the telemetry system to remotely start dieselpumps and to measure the flow rate of water in and out of the tank (useful to determine the stockintake of water or potential leakages). The information is fed back to the homestead via UHFtransmitters and can be received on demand, even when accessing the program remotely via theinternet. Mr Shallcross stated that ‘this has saved the station a lot of time and money, being able todo mill runs twice a week instead of every day to start pumps and check troughs’.

The choices

• Remote reading of instruments describing waterflow rates

• Monitoring dam or tank levels• Switching solar or diesel pumps ON and OFF• Starting generators and monitoring pressure,

temperature, voltage• Monitoring and controlling operation of electric

fences• Water medication• GPS vehicle tracking• Digital camera or CCTV camera footage• Walk-over weighing systems with EID tag readers• Automatic drafting of saleable animals.

The costs

• Costs vary depending on what type of system ismost appropriate to your business

• Base set-ups range from $1200 to $3000(depending on technology required)

• Computer software network supporting equipment from $3000• Associated costs such as support diesel pump (± $5000), solar pump control (± $700).

Tim Shallcross of Bullara Station describing howthe telemetry system works at the recent

Bullara Field Day.

18


The benefits

• Cost savings (reduction in labour and running costs and wear and tear on vehicles)• Animal welfare (better alerting system to tanks/troughs not performing)• Monitoring and controlling of stock and infrastructure• Reduced carbon footprint.So if it’s all so good, why doesn’t everyone use this technology?

The barriers

• High initial set-up costs (can be costly to establish depending on choice of product)• Fear of the technical/computer side of things• Lack of technical support available locally• Not enough local examples to learn from.

If you have any questions about telemetry systems, Manus Stockdale is full bottle on it all.So contact him in the Karratha DAFWA office:

Tel: (08) 9143 7005Email: [email protected]

This article is not intended to promote any one product or supplier over another so thefollowing websites will be handy to visit if you are interested in learning more about theoptions out there.www.desertknowledgecrc.com.au/watersmart/equipment/telemetry.html

www.observant.com.au

www.stockmantelemetrysystems.com.au

www.blackmorespw.com.au

www.usee.com.au/usee-remote-monitoring

19


NeNeNeNeNew rw rw rw rw rangangangangangeland sureland sureland sureland sureland survvvvveeeeey Ty Ty Ty Ty Tececececechnicalhnicalhnicalhnicalhnical

Bulletin fBulletin fBulletin fBulletin fBulletin for the lowor the lowor the lowor the lowor the lower Murer Murer Murer Murer Murccccchisonhisonhisonhisonhison

RivRivRivRivRiver arer arer arer arer area in Wea in Wea in Wea in Wea in Western Austrestern Austrestern Austrestern Austrestern AustraliaaliaaliaaliaaliaPeter-Jon Waddell, Rangeland Survey Project,

Department of Agriculture and Food WA, South Perth

The Department of Agriculture and Food (DAFWA) rangeland survey team conduct regionalsurveys and condition assessments throughout Western Australian pastoral leases providinginventory and descriptive references of rangeland landscapes and developing land system maps. Anew report and land system map has been published that presents findings from a survey of about13 000 sq km of rangeland country around the lower reaches of the Murchison River andsurrounds. Designated the lower Murchison River area, this survey edge matches with thesouthern edge of the Carnarvon Basin survey (entitled An inventory and condition survey ofrangelands in the Carnarvon Basin, Western Australia, DAFWA Technical Bulletin No. 73) and thewestern edge of the Murchison survey (entitled An inventory and condition survey of the MurchisonRiver catchment and surrounds, Western Australia, DAFWA Technical Bulletin No. 84).

The findings from this survey have been published under the title ‘Technical Bulletin No. 96: Aninventory and condition survey of the lower Murchison River area, Western Australia’ and form adetailed technical report that focuses on the natural resources of the region. A coloured landsystem map accompanies the report displaying the distribution of natural resources within thelower Murchison River area at a scale of 1:600 000. This Technical Bulletin represents the 12th

rangeland survey in the history of the Western Australian rangeland survey program.

Rangeland survey reports provide detailed accounts of survey methodology, geomorphology, soils,vegetation, habitat ecology, land systems and the resource condition of survey areas, as well asreviewing background information such as land use history, climate, geology and declared flora andfauna. These reports provide an invaluable tool for rangeland stakeholders including pastoral,mining, conservation, research and government organisations to better understand rangelandlandscapes and assist in its management and administration.

Also included within the report is a section aimed more specifically at the pastoral industry,specifically in how grazing systems relate to the different components of land systems, as well as atwo-page summary statement of the nature and status of the rangeland resources on each lease.

With a new publication, reports are provided to all leases within that survey area. However, withchanges in station management occurring across the rangelands, there may be other stationswhere the report from earlier surveys has disappeared. If you are interested in a free technicalbulletin covering your lease in one of the below mentioned regions then please contact therangeland survey team. Available reports include:

• The Murchison survey was published in 1994 and covers the area of Curbur to part ofYarlarweelor in the north and Bullardoo across to Wondinong in the south. The complete title is:An inventory and condition survey of the Murchison River catchment and surrounds, WesternAustralia, (WA Department of Agriculture Technical Bulletin No. 84).

20


• The Sandstone–Yalgoo–Payne’s Find survey was published in 1998 and covers the stationsfrom Wandina in the west to parts of Yeelirrie in the north-east and Wanarra in the south-west,to Diemals in the east. This report also has a separate pastoral management publication forpastoralists and land managers. The two publications are entitled: An inventory and conditionsurvey of the Sandstone-Yalgoo-Payne’s Find area, Western Australia, (WA Department ofAgriculture Technical Bulletin No. 90) and Pastoral Resources and their management in theSandstone–Yalgoo–Payne’s Find area, Western Australia, (WA Department of AgricultureMiscellaneous Publication 1/98).

• The North-Eastern Goldfields survey was published in 1994 and covers the stations fromPerrinvale in the west to White Cliffs in the east and parts of Yeelirrie in the north-west toEdjudina in the south-east. This report also has a separate pastoral management publication forpastoralists and land managers. The two publications are entitled: An inventory and conditionsurvey of the North-Eastern Goldfields, Western Australia, (WA Department of AgricultureTechnical Bulletin No. 87) and Pastoral Resources and their management in the North-EasternGoldfields, Western Australia, (WA Department of Agriculture Miscellaneous Publication 22/94).

• The Carnarvon Basin survey covers stations from Ningaloo to Towera in the north to Tamalaand Coburn in the south and was published in 1987. The complete title is: An inventory andcondition survey of rangelands in the Carnarvon Basin, Western Australia, (WA Department ofAgriculture Technical Bulletin No. 73).

For further information please contact survey team members:

Santino VitaleTel: (08) 9368 3346

Peter-Jon WaddellTel: (08) 9368 3421

21


ESRM to beESRM to beESRM to beESRM to beESRM to begin wgin wgin wgin wgin wororororork in thek in thek in thek in thek in the

FFFFFororororortescue Rivtescue Rivtescue Rivtescue Rivtescue River caer caer caer caer catctctctctchmenthmenthmenthmenthmentRichard Glover, Development Officer, Carnarvon

ESRM has been funded via Rangelands NRM WA to work in the Fortescue catchment over the nexttwo years. Following on from their successful property planning and on-ground work exercises inthe Lower Gascoyne catchment and in working with the Gascoyne catchment Group, ESRM will beoffering their planning and rangeland support services to land managers within the Fortescuecatchment.

The ESRM property plans will include a detailed landscape ecology mapping component utilisingthe land managers’ local knowledge of their country as well as up-to-date infrastructure,topographic, satellite and land system maps. Property action plans will be developed for eachparticipating station—these action plans will be costed and have relevant time lines ascribed tothem. Infrastructure plans will be designed using the latest knowledge of sustainable systems aswell as the land managers’ own ideas.

Linda Anderson from the Pilbara Mesquite Management Committee will help design a weedmanagement plan for all properties managing Weeds of National Significance and herd models willbe included as required using the Breedcow software package. Rainfall and climate data will alsobe included in the plan.

At the end of the planning period ESRM will fund on-ground projects that are of value to theFortescue catchment in terms of soil and biodiversity conservation, as well as assisting landmanagers in their pastoral operations. These projects may include fencing to manage valuable landsystems, relocating waters away from sensitive areas, mechanical regeneration where appropriateand trap yards and fencing to allow for easy management of stock in sensitive riparian and wetlandareas. ESRM is also hoping to run several workshops in the area dealing with issues relevant to theindustry. This project offers a starting point for ESRM and the Department of Agriculture and Foodto work on landscape ecology andintegrated business planning inthe Pilbara.

If you are a land manager in theFortescue catchment and wouldlike to work with ESRM, pleasecontact Richard Glover [email protected] on (08) 9956 3313 to expressyour interest. Planning visits willbegin early next year after the(hopefully) wet.

Stay tuned!

Kaz Johnson from ESRM chats to the Koordarie Station managerRory De Pledge

22


BrBrBrBrBreeding EDGE opporeeding EDGE opporeeding EDGE opporeeding EDGE opporeeding EDGE opportunity in thetunity in thetunity in thetunity in thetunity in the

KimberKimberKimberKimberKimberleleleleley and Pilbary and Pilbary and Pilbary and Pilbary and PilbaraaaaaMichael Jeffery, DAFWA, Derby and Peter Smith, DAFWA, Karratha

Arrangements are in place for John Bertram, cattle breeding authority with Queensland PrimaryIndustries & Fisheries, to visit the northern rangelands in April 2010. We are developing workshopopportunities with John for pastoralists and others involved in the northern cattle industry.

John presented breeding information at the Dampier and Derby Beefup Forums in April 2009. Hispresentation at the forums was rated highly by pastoralists attending the forums. John alsoconducted a well-attended morning session on breeding and bull selection at Karratha Station priorto the Dampier forum. He also ran a number of very successful bull selection days in the Kimberleyin 2005.

A number of responses were received to a call for ‘expressions of interest’ to attend a BreedingEDGE workshop, published in the March 2009 Memo. Plans are now being developed for one 3-dayBreeding EDGE workshop to be held in the Pilbara in the week commencing 19 April 2010 followedby two workshops to be held in the Kimberley. These courses will be held on-property.

The Breeding EDGE workshop developed by MLA in association with the cattle industry isdesigned to assist producers to develop breeding objectives and manage breeders and breedingprograms to improve the future direction and profitability of their businesses.

The workshop program:• works through the steps involved in developing a successful breeding program• provides a thorough understanding of reproduction and genetic principles• helps evaluate the reproductive and genetic options best suited to specific situations• develops skills that can be applied on-property.

Included in the workshop will be sessions which:• demonstrate skills which allow the assessment of bull soundness• demonstrate semen collection and evaluation• put a value on the cost of a bull.

Financial support towards the cost of attending Breeding EDGE is available from Farm Ready.

(Editor: For further details on the EDGEnetwork breeding workshops, go to www.edgenetwork.com.au andselect ‘livestock’ from the menu on LHS).

For further information and to register your interest in participating in a BreedingEDGE workshop in the Pilbara during the week commencing 19 April 2010, contact:

Manus Stockdale or Peter Smith, KarrathaTel: (08) 9143 7002; Email: [email protected]

or Michael Jeffery, DerbyTel: (08) 9191 0333; Email: [email protected]

To register interest in a workshop in the Southern Rangelands, contact Greg Brennan:Tel: (08) 9956 8554; Email: [email protected]

23


Depots – the missing link in theDepots – the missing link in theDepots – the missing link in theDepots – the missing link in theDepots – the missing link in the

WA gWA gWA gWA gWA goaoaoaoaoat supply ct supply ct supply ct supply ct supply chain?hain?hain?hain?hain?Tim Johnson, Project Officer—Goat Industry Development

Tel: 9368 3585; Email: [email protected]

On 12 November 2009, MLA website ‘Over the hooks goat prices’ reported consistent and rapidgains since the low point during mid-April. Prices have risen by around 55% over the past sixmonths since a five-year low point of 147¢/kg carcase weight (cwt) in April. Goats in the 10–20 kgcwt weight range are currently averaging 228¢/kg cwt, 30% above the same week last year. Themain factors underpinning the increased prices have been the strong mutton market and atightening in supply. Mutton prices have been 20% to 55% higher than the previous year for the Mayto October time period while goat prices have been 6% to 24% higher. Demand from Taiwan andother Asian buyers has been solid through winter and into spring; however, the strong A$ is nowimpeding significant improvements in the export market.

The MLA market information above relates to the eastern states (Qld, NSW, Victoria and SA). InWestern Australia, pastoral goat prices currently range from $1.50 to $2.20/kg during the peakmarketing season (demand from Taiwan—normally from October until December). WA’s problemarises during the ‘off peak’ period—February until June—when producers become aware of at leasta 10% differential below prices paid for similar quality of goats in the eastern states. The three mostobvious reasons for this price difference are:

(a) WA’s main market is Taiwan, which is second tier price compared to the leadingmarket in the USA.

• In 2008/09, WA processors sold 46% of their product to Taiwan. Compared to EasternAustralia selling about 55% of its volume into the US market, the highest value market.However, there are additional cost factors for accessing the US market, e.g. US protocolcriteria is very stringent and the product must conform to strict product inspection at entry.

(b) WA has three export processors compared to at least eight or nine in EasternAustralia.

• Competition between a larger number of abattoirs in the eastern states has resulted ingoats being trucked from between these three states (NSW, Victoria or Queensland)during any week if higher prices are offered. Unfortunately the chances of a new abattoirbeing established in WA will be limited due to the high investment costs.

(c) The inconsistent supply and quality of goats delivered to these abattoirs.

• This is the one issue industry stakeholders can address. There is a need for more goatdepot(s) capable of receiving, drafting, holding or distributing goats to end destinations(see Figure 1).

• WA abattoirs report that they continue to be unable to meet the demand for goat meat.• The ‘back of an envelope’ financial figures indicate there is an opportunity for well managed

depots that provide a distribution and marketing service to the industry. The depot(s) couldbe linked to finishing farms in a business arrangement to ensure that good quality goatsare available to abattoirs during times of the year when pastoral goat supply is not enough,e.g. July to September period.

24


• In the eastern states, good depot operators successfully source ‘out of specification’ andspecification goats for a range of markets over an extended period. Their business isdependent upon regular contact with their markets and providing numbers of quality goatsat the appropriate time.

• The present system of opportunistic harvesting is not sustainable over the longer term.New insights are needed to stimulate the move towards a supply chain betweenproducers, processors and live exporters. This could empower producers to change theircurrent attitude of ‘price taking’ to leverage higher prices from processors and liveexporters. The higher values for goats would encourage more goat production, morefinishing farms and more feedlots, which would progress the goat industry.

• Currently there are about five depots listed in WA, a small number in comparison to theeastern states where there are at least 11 in Queensland and 13 in NSW. In WA, there aretwo depots located in the rangelands and another three AQIS accredited depots in theagricultural or metropolitan area for aggregating goats and ensuring compliance with AQISexport protocols.

With the development of new markets for breeder females (see Markets below), individualpastoralists can consider their participation in the development of a goat supply chain. There is theopportunity to develop sustainable commercial goat enterprises, based upon six-monthly trappingto turn-off rangeland or Boer cross progeny to depots.

Initial steps towards a managed Rangeland goat enterprise1. Monitor the rangeland condition to assess the amount of food on offer and keep numbers within

feed supply.2. Maintain tight control over goat numbers to ensure the health of shrubs and perennial grasses in

the system.3. Commence trapping and removal of all male goats (above 15 kg) throughout the initial year(s)—

this may amount to up to 50–60% of the present goat population on some stations. Thisprovides: (a) revenue; and (b) reduces stocking rates on the rangeland to conserve feed forbreeding females and progeny.

AQIS approved exporter depot live

export of Boer cross females

> 22 kg live weight

Agricultural farms for finishing rangeland NCV goats: (< 25 kg) (Farms must be APB approved)

Finish males to 30–40 kg (a) Export abattoirs (b) Live export to Malaysia for slaughter

Export abattoirs

ALL Rangeland males > 25 kg live weight

Domestic

market

Export

market

Wholesaler Retailer

Consumer

Air or sea

freight

Overseas depot For import

quarantine

Breeder

farms

Abattoir

Depot

Located in Agricultural

Area

Air or sea

freight

Individual pastoralists:

1. Capture ALL Rangeland male goats above 15 kg live weight

2. Send to Depot at negotiated and published price

3. Retain all females on station as breeders

4. Eventually move enterprise to improved genetics, e.g. Boer sires or Selected Rangeland sires

Figure 1 Schematic illustration of the integration of a depot into a simple supply chain

25


4. Use part of the revenue earned to establish infrastructure (traps and high quality handling yards)around water points.

5. Establish breeder herds of female goats on separate water points according to the rangecondition and assessed carrying capacity of the landscape.

6. The transition from an unmanaged goat herd to a managed breeding enterprise (using Boermales or other genetics) will not happen overnight. Immigrating rangeland males will be drawn tothe concentrated numbers of females. However, this could be viewed as a positive becausethese males are immediately saleable to abattoir.

Table 1 Number of goats processed for the past three years in Western Australia

Present marketsGoat meat

Since 2002/03, an average of about 218 000 goats are processed per year.

If the number of non-commercial value (NCV) goats (< 20 kg) delivered to abattoirs is about 10% ofthis figure, there could be 20 000 undersize goats available for finishing each year. At least oneabattoir is encouraging the opportunity for finishing farms in the agricultural area—to hold goats forperhaps 4–6 months before returning them for processing.

Supply of breeder females

The Malaysian government has on-going tenders to supply young Boer cross females to Malaysianfarmers as part of their program to increase self-sufficiency levels in goat meat. The current farmgate prices vary from $70 farm gate for average (non-brown neck and head) to $90 for classicaldark neck and head. This market can be supplied from the well-managed pastoral goat enterprise.

Slaughter males

In November, I visited a company farm that imports about 60 000 live goats per year, which is 80%of live goats imported by Malaysia. They supply goats to poor farmers (sponsored by Malaysiangovernment), other commercial farmers and their 10 retail shops selling beef and goat meat.

Currently all of their goat requirements are sourced from depots in NSW and South Australia. Theirspecifications are rangeland males, live weight 30–35 kg. Current price around $1.10 live weight. Inaddition, this company also source breeding goats, full blood Boer goats and Boer first crossfemales.

The above company complains that they experience great difficulty sourcing regular supplies of livegoats from WA.

They suggested that the WA goat industry needs a coordinated supply system involving breedingstations, holding farms and a depot system capable of drafting and holding numbers of goats priorto shipment by air freighters to their farms. They stated their willingness to source males from WA,but would only do this in conjunction with their WA exporter who also does their cattle business.

In 2010, the Department of Agriculture and Food, as part of a Memorandum of Understanding withthe Malaysian Government will begin the process of assisting the commercial partners to establisha supply chain for goats for the above markets.

Western Australia 2006/07 2007/08 2008/09

Export abattoirs 245 027 105 985 176 065 Domestic abattoirs 3 521 3 956 4 791

TOTAL 248 548 109 941 180 856 Source: WAMIA

26


MLA releases ‘The Depot Guidelines’ module

MLA has just released ‘The Depot Guidelines’ module, which forms part of MLA’s publication ‘Goinginto goats: Profitable producers best practice guide’. A goat depot is defined as an operation wheregoats, brought together for the purpose of live export, slaughter, trading fattening or growing out, areheld in a fenced area for a period of time requiring the provision of food and water.

In the eastern states, (Qld, NSW, South Australia) goat depots play an important role in improvingthe quality and consistency of goat supply for domestic and export meat and live export markets.The newly released guidelines have been developed to support this important sector of the industry.It addresses critical issues such as animal welfare, production efficiencies and industry obligations.

Please check the MLA website mla.com.au/goats for further details on how to obtain a copy of theMLA’s ‘Going into goats’ (Gig)—MLA members $60, non-members $120. The Gig publication is aprerequisite to receiving a complimentary copy of the Depot guidelines.

Please note these Depot guidelines are not available as a stand-alone publication, because it crossreferences other modules within the Gig guide.

Getting into further studyGetting into further studyGetting into further studyGetting into further studyGetting into further studyThinking of further study but not sure you could do it or what’s expected of you?

Then you should do the three-day ‘Getting into further study’ short course developed by RangelandsAustralia and supported by the Foundation for Rural and Regional Renewal.

The course covers:• effective learning practices and management of study• planning and research for assignments and reports• evaluating and using information in assignments and reports• structuring your understanding and thinking for assignments and reports• writing for easy reading (and marking)• effective presentations.The course content is suitable for anyone thinking of doing a university-level course in agriculture,range management or natural resource management, whatever the institution, and the skill learnthave been very useful in people’s local committee roles.

Feedback on the course has included:• ‘This course is essential to anyone unfamiliar with postgraduate requirements.’• ‘I feel more at ease about how to approach tertiary courses.’• ‘Confident now to embark on uni study.’• ‘It will save me a lot of time in future study.’• ‘Excellent value.’• ‘Still don’t know what I don’t know, but I’m now well prepared to find out.’• ‘I found this course very helpful, and it will help me immensely in my work and community roles.’We’ll come to you, if you can arrange a group of five or more and help us identify a mutuallyconvenient location and time.

The fee is only $150 per person, thanks to support provided by the Foundation for Rural andRegional Renewal.

To arrange a course in your area, contact: Alex Kennedy, Rangelands AustraliaTel: (07) 5460 1660; Email: [email protected]

27


LifLifLifLifLife after stae after stae after stae after stae after stationstionstionstionstionsKatrina Foulkes-Taylor, Geraldton

In June 2005 we made the heart-wrenching decision toleave our home at Twin Peaks Station. We decided forthe benefit of our children and their education that wewould make a change. Like many in the bush at themoment, we had gone a long, long time withoutadequate rainfall. Together we had worked so very hardphysically and mentally we were exhausted. We just gotsick of waiting for rain and knew that we weren’tprepared to gamble away another couple of yearswaiting for it. We were fortunate to sell the stationquickly and we headed for Carnarvon where wepurchased a small business.

We made the decision to go into small businessbecause at the time we were of the opinion that workingfor somebody else after being ‘your own boss’ for solong would come with a few issues. We were fortunatethat we had the administration and machinery skills andcould work really long hours. Somehow at the start webluffed our way through. It was quite scary stepping outof our comfort zone. Before we left the station Robbiehad said many times, ‘but what can I do, I am a stationbloke?’. He soon learnt that he had so many skills thatreally he could be good at anything he put his mind to.

This decision did actually work in our favour. We have learnt that whilst living on a station there is alot to living in urban areas that we did not know. There is a lot that our urban counterparts take forgranted and a lot that they probably have never even thought about. We found that there is so muchthat happens in rural areas that town folk really can be very insular in their manner as they whineabout the heat in Geraldton or ask, ‘where is Mullewa!!’.

We were offered a price for our business in Carnarvon that we couldn’t refuse so in 1997 our familymoved back to Geraldton. Now feeling like gypsies, Robbie went to work for Patience Bulk Haulage.The choice to go and work for somebody else is not, as we thought, always a bad idea. It reallydoes work in your favour, especially if you are considering starting up or buying a business in thefuture. One thing town people do is talk a lot and just being around to look and learn hastremendous benefits. It is highly beneficial for you to take the back seat and not be totallyresponsible for a change. Coming from station life you need time to adjust to your new environmentand getting a pay-slip every fortnight is not all that bad.

The downside of going off to work for somebody else is that you have to live by the clock and that issomething that we really miss about the station. You always have to be somewhere at a certaintime and spending time with the family is now a precious commodity that you cherish everyweekend. You no longer have sole influence over the upbringing and education of your children asthey go off to school. They constantly come home with some foreign behaviour that needs to beeducated back out of them and the poor children have to cope with town children who often seemto get more enjoyment out of computer games than throwing rocks into puddles and getting dusty.

28


We have both learnt and grown so much since leaving the station. I personally feel like achameleon since leaving South Australia where I worked for local government sitting on my bottomat a desk, to working like a bloke on the station, then building up a Concrete, Sands and GardenSupplies business; and now we are in Geraldton where I have started an internet business sellinghome décor online. We love Geraldton and here I sit again at my computer wondering, tongue incheek, how the bugs and heat are going in the Murchison and what time the sea breeze will arrivehere in town, as surely we’ve got to 30 degrees today.

I am glad for our time since leaving the station country. We realise now that we need to havesubstantial investments behind us before we will be heading back to the bush where we are truly athome.

My online home décor store: http://www.thehousequeen.com.au

FuturFuturFuturFuturFuture land use re land use re land use re land use re land use roles foles foles foles foles for tror tror tror tror treeseeseeseeseesSarah Bellamy, Policy Officer, South Perth

The proposed Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme has stimulated wide discussion and probablyused the paper equivalent of countless trees. But if it is adopted, the scheme could also lead to theplanting of many more trees.

As argument rages about the scheme’s merits and commercial operators jockey for the bestpositions, the Department of Agriculture and Food has published a discussion paper on the likelyimpacts for local and state government, communities and industry.

Under present plans, forestry will be covered on a voluntary opt-in basis from 1 July 2011, withcarbon sequestration from eligible activity as from 1 July 2010.

This would encourage reforestation or ‘carbon farming’, providing both opportunities and risks forregional communities.

Local government will need to work with the state government to identify infrastructure needs that anew forestry industry would generate. Councils would also need to work with the state governmentas the hazard management agency for fire on private property.

Many people remember the impact of blue gums which were introduced to WA in the 1980s as ameans of developing a new industry and taking the pressure off native forests. While the originalexpectation was that farmers should integrate trees into farming operations to help managefinancial and environmental risks, large blocks of farmland were converted to forests. Many farmersin the south-west and south coast sold entire farms and left the industry, with considerable effecton local populations.

Effects of the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme will be very different as it can involve manydifferent tree species over many rainfall zones, but the potential risks and opportunities could besimilar in many ways.

Bulletin 4777 Discussion paper: Trees, agriculture and emissions trading can be downloaded fromthe Department’s website at www.agric.wa.gov.au under publications and then bulletins orobtained in hard copy from the South Perth office.

29


DestocDestocDestocDestocDestockkkkking caing caing caing caing capturpturpturpturptures mores mores mores mores more carbon,e carbon,e carbon,e carbon,e carbon,

but does it pay?but does it pay?but does it pay?but does it pay?but does it pay?Mark Alchin, Development Officer, Kununurra

‘It is merely a district with fertile plains which will, I believe and hope, be suitable for pastoral purposes,and, in its more northern portion, in the future for tropical horticulture; but those who venture in itsdevelopment will have to incur a large expenditure in getting their stock to the country, and muchtrouble and difficulty and years of toil under a tropical sun, before they make their fortunes, and theyrequire the easiest terms and conditions.’

(John Forrest, Report on the Kimberley District, 1883)

Over 130 years have passed since Lord Forrest penned these words and I think even he would havebeen amazed at how important the pastoral industry was to the development of the Kimberley. LordForrest’s assessment and advice to the state government concerning the Kimberley could equally beused today concerning emissions trading. There appear to be opportunities for the trade of carboncredits in the region, however it is not without major pitfalls. If there is a desire for the pastoral industryto capitalise on the opportunity whilst limiting the risks, then like its colonial predecessors, thegovernment may have to provide ‘the easiest terms and conditions’ to assist the emerging carbonindustry through its ‘pioneering’ phase.

The Carbon Capture Project has been investigating the opportunity and risks of emissions trading onthree pastoral businesses in the Kimberley–Pilbara region. Figure 1 illustrates the estimated amountof total organic soil carbon of different land systems surveyed by the project (based on soil depth of30 cm; samples were taken at 10 cm intervals). The results support the idea that land systems whichhave a high value for pastoral production also have a higher capacity to accumulate and storecarbon. These land systems can accumulate and store more carbon primarily because they producemore pasture biomass per annum and have higher soil clay contents and deeper soil profiles.

Figure 1 Total organic soil carbon (t/ha) of land systems surveyed by the project(Standard error bars are shown which indicate the variation of the estimate)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

spinifexhills

stony plainwith

spinifex

low lyingpindan

sandplain

pindansandplain

alluvialplains

river plains coastalflats

coastalfloodplain

Land-syst em

Tota

l org

anic

soi

l car

bon

(t/h

a)

30


We have used our survey data to model the potential impact of three separate managementscenarios on the carbon stocks for each of the three partner stations. As a preview of some of ourresults, I have included the output from one of the Century model runs for the coastal floodplainland system at Roebuck Station. The Century model is able to take data and project over time whatthe impacts of different land management and climate will be on the store of carbon. Figure 2illustrates how the soil carbon stocks may change if different management regimes wereundertaken from 2010 to 2040.

The assumptions used in the Century model to make the projections of soil carbon:1. Floodplain is dominated by subtropical perennial grasses with a silty clay soil.2. Mean annual rainfall of 617 mm ± 284 mm.3. Prior to 1886 there was no livestock grazing and a ‘moderate’ fire occurred once every four

years.4. From 1886 to 2009 set-stocking occurred at approximately 15% utilisation of the total

standing vegetation per year. A moderate fire occurred once every 15 years.5. The complete destock option = no grazing and a moderate fire once every four years.6. The set-stocking option = continuation of the previous grazing and fire regime.7. The cell-grazing option = 5-day graze period at 20% utilisation and a 328-day rest period

and a moderate fire once every 15 years.

These preliminary results suggest that the management option which captures the most carbonwould be a complete destock of the site. Based on a three-year moving average, the predictedchange in total organic soil carbon between 2010 and 2040 for a complete destock was 2.29 t/ha,continuation of set-stocking was -0.03 t/ha and cell-grazing was 1.65 t/ha. Despite more carbonbeing captured by the destock option, the income generated by the trade of the carbon credits issubstantially less from this option, than if the site continues to be grazed either with set-stocking orcell-grazing, even when methane emissions from the cattle are taken into account (Table 1).

Figure 2 Difference in predicted total organic soil carbon between three management regimeson a coastal floodplain between 2010 and 2040

20

25

30

35

40

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040

Tota

l org

anic

soi

l car

bon

(t/ha

)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Annual rainfall (m

m)

Annual rainfall A. Complete destock from 2010 to 2040B. Cell-grazing from 2010 to 2040 C. Set-stocking from 2010 to 2040

AC B

Set-s tocking from 1886 to 2009

31


The financial effect of destocking may be compounded beyond 2040 when there is limited scope forfurther increases in soil carbon and yet the business would be required to manage the storedcarbon for an extended period without any income stream (the permanence period will vary with thetype of contract that is entered into).

The results highlight that you can continue to graze cattle and capture carbon, however aligningyour stocking rate to the seasonal carrying capacity is the key. Rest from grazing, particularlyduring prolonged, dry seasons, is critical for carbon capture. It is important to recognise that cell-grazing may not be the only way to store increased amounts of carbon in the soil. It was used inthis example because it provides the greatest comparison between different managementsystems. A set-stocking grazing system may also store increased amounts of carbon if livestocknumbers are regularly adjusted to the available feed supply, however patch grazing may still occur.

The results suggest that the trade of soil carbon credits on a pastoral lease could be asupplementary enterprise to the cattle enterprise, whereby pastoralists are paid to both producebeef and deliver an environmental service to society. You should note that the above analysis ishighly simplified and does not take into account a range of other factors which could impact (eitherpositively or negatively) on the expected returns from emissions trading. Nonetheless, it doesprovide an indication of the potential impact of different management regimes on the soil carbonstocks.

It is recommended that you obtain independent legal and financial advice concerning the trade ofcarbon credits in the WA rangelands.

For further information on theCarbon Capture Project contact:

Mark Alchin

Mobile: 0408 092 691Email: [email protected]

Table 1 The difference in estimated returns of three management regimes

Set-stocking 2010 to 2040

Complete destock 2010 to 2040

Cell-grazing 2010 to 2040

A. Predicted change in total organic soil carbon (t CO2e/ha/yr)* -0.003 0.278 0.201

B. Estimated livestock methane emissions (t CO2e/ha/yr)** 0.140 0 0.140

C. Net carbon sequestration potential after deducting methane emissions (t CO2e/ha/yr) A – B = C

-0.143 0.278 0.061

D. Potential income from soil carbon sequestration ($/ha/yr) based on @ $25/t CO2e -$3.57 $6.95 $1.52

E. Livestock production gross margin ($/ha/yr)*** $16.50 $0.00 $16.50

F. Estimated gross margin per ha ($/ha/yr)**** D + E = F $12.93 $6.95 $18.02

* Based on a three-year moving average; a multiplier of 3.66 is used to convert tonnes carbon into CO2e. ** Livestock methane emissions based on Intergovernmental Panel Climate Change (IPCC) 2006 guidelines (70 kg

methane per head per year-); Methane GWP of 25; stocking rate of 0.08 Cu/ha. *** No account has been made for differences in variable and overhead costs or potential differences in livestock

productivity between the set-stock and cell-grazing options. **** This does not include any accounting, legal or transaction costs associated with the trade of carbon which could

be significant.

32


ClimaClimaClimaClimaClimate cte cte cte cte changhanghanghanghange in We in We in We in We in Western Austrestern Austrestern Austrestern Austrestern Australia:alia:alia:alia:alia:positioning your industry to capitalisepositioning your industry to capitalisepositioning your industry to capitalisepositioning your industry to capitalisepositioning your industry to capitalise

on a ‘carbon-based economy’on a ‘carbon-based economy’on a ‘carbon-based economy’on a ‘carbon-based economy’on a ‘carbon-based economy’What does climate change mean to land managers and land owners inWestern Australia? Are the changing weather patterns due to climate change orare we experiencing a normal cyclical weather pattern? How will our weatherpatterns change over the next 20 to 50 years? Will sea levels rise, will ourtemperatures rise, what impact will this have on our land?

How will your business be affected? Can you protect yourself and yourbusiness from the impacts of climate change? How can you protect your revenue? How mightcarbon credit trading provide an option for business diversification? Can we capitalise on climatechange and develop a new carbon-based economy in WA?

For answers to these questions and for your chance to networkwith WA’s leading experts come to the forum on:

Monday, 10 May 2010 at Monkey Mia Dolphin Resort!

Who is it for?

This forum is for pastoralists, farmers, agriculturists, environmentalists and anyone interested inthe possibilities of capitalising on climate change within Western Australia.

Our speakers

Come and learn from WA’s experts: Professor Lyn Beazley (Chief Scientist, Western Australia);Charles Crouch (Principal Economist, Office of Climate Change, DEC); Peter Nash (SeniorConsultant, Coastal Zone Management) and Ian Foster (Research Officer, Department ofAgriculture and Food), Mark Alchin (Industry Development – Pastoral, Department of Agricultureand Food) and Vince Catania (Member for the North West).

Price

Price: $65 per person covers morning and afternoon tea and lunch. Forum space is VERYlimited. Book early to avoid disappointment! Options: Networking cruise at $43.20 per person(20% off normal rate of $54) and optional evening BBQ (price TBC).

To book

Call Monkey Mia Dolphin Resort on 1800 653 611 or [email protected] quoting ‘ClimateChange Forum’. Accommodation at Monkey Mia Resort(except Beachfront Villa and camping) is available at 20%discount (direct bookings only); powered and unpowered camping sites are available. Seewww.monkeymia.com.au.

More information please contact the forum organiser:

Jane Garrett, Global Composition & WA Best Prac FacilitatorTel: (08) 9948 3320Email: [email protected]

33


Claim the daClaim the daClaim the daClaim the daClaim the date!te!te!te!te!

‘R‘R‘R‘R‘Rain on the Rain on the Rain on the Rain on the Rain on the Rangangangangangelands’ Confelands’ Confelands’ Confelands’ Confelands’ Conferererererenceenceenceenceence

– Bour– Bour– Bour– Bour– Bourkkkkkeeeee, NSW, NSW, NSW, NSW, NSW, Se, Se, Se, Se, September 2010ptember 2010ptember 2010ptember 2010ptember 2010For most of you, knowing what you are doing tomorrow or the next week can be a challenge. Don’tbe put off by this article which hopes to attract you to an event that’s only nine months away!

The Australian Rangeland Society will be presenting its Sixteenth Biennial Conference in Bourke,New South Wales, in September 2010. These conferences are the key forum for discussing themanagement of rangelands at a national level.

Bourke provides a fitting location for such a theme given its strong links to the Darling River andcurrent issues of river flow and water use in the Murray Darling Basin. Bourke also represents theiconic ‘outback’ created through the poetry of Henry Lawson and retains strong Aboriginal links tothe land. The region demonstrates key rangeland issues, including the importance of controllingtotal grazing pressure and managing woody vegetation. Alternative land uses and conservationmanagement are well represented in the area.

Next year’s conference theme is Water, either as rain, river flow or its presence underground.Keynote speakers will target the management of water in rangeland landscapes at various levels,from the whole basin or catchment down to the individual property. The Conference will be a greatopportunity for you to share your experiences with water (or lack of it!) and mingle with respectedresearchers who have been studying water and its interactions and influences on rangelands foryears.

To make the 2010 Bourke Conference more useful to landholders, the program is being arrangedso that the first two days provide a stand-alone package focusing on practical rangelandmanagement. Day One will consist of field tours to inspect local properties and natural resourceissues. We anticipate that delegates will see good examples of river rehabilitation, precisionpastoralism, innovative grazing systems, total grazing pressure management and EnterpriseBased Conservation areas. Day Two will be a ‘practical applications’ session with speakersdiscussing on-ground aspects of sustainably managing rangelands, including case studies. We arekeen to attract papers on precision pastoralism, the management of seasonal risk, innovativegrazing systems and successful pest programs for the session. Case studies on theimplementation of successful projects will be encouraged, especially those balancing productiveland use with biodiversity management and good economic outcomes.

Day Three and Day Four will include a broad range of natural resource management presentations,but with a stronger scientific emphasis. These may also be of interest to pastoralists, exploring theinteractions between rangeland water resources, various forms of land use and biodiversity.

Pastoralists wishing to participate in the conference will have the option of registering for Days Oneand Two only, to pick up the practical sessions. We hope that you will also elect to attend the fullconference. We anticipate calling for papers and opening the registration process early in 2010.

So, pull out your 2010 calendars and diaries and mark in Bourke, Australian Rangelands SocietyConference, 26–30 September 2010. Hope to see you there. For further information, please contactRussell Grant, Western Catchment Management Authority, on telephone (02) 6836 1575 or [email protected].

34


Minimising eMinimising eMinimising eMinimising eMinimising evvvvvaaaaaporporporporporaaaaativtivtivtivtive losses fre losses fre losses fre losses fre losses fromomomomom

pastorpastorpastorpastorpastoral stocal stocal stocal stocal stock-wk-wk-wk-wk-waaaaater damster damster damster damster damsJim Addison, DAFWA, Kalgoorlie

Desert Knowledge Cooperative Research Centre recently carried out a study that looked at thescale of losses from evaporation, with particular reference to the pastoral zone, and comparedtechnologies for reducing it. These technologies included continuous plastic sheets, suspendedcovers, modular covers and chemical covers. The study identified evaporative savings from thesetechnologies and put some indicative installation and maintenance costs to each. A full copy of thestudy may be found at: http:/www.desertknowledgecrc.com.au/publications/workingpapers.html

About 30 years ago DAFWA carried out a review of anti-evaporative technologies available at thattime. It was concluded from this review that the most cost-effective option available at that time wasto focus on dam/catchment site selection, design and construction to harvest and store a greaterdepth of water—effectively using water to save water.

A number of elements of water harvesting/storage where savings may be made are identifiedbelow:

• Dam shapeA full, square 10 000 kL dam with a depth of 7.5 metres will have a surface area 7% greater thana round dam of equal volume and depth. An oblong dam (3:2 side ratio) will have a surface area9% greater. This indicates that evaporative savings may be achieved by adopting the rounddesign. It is also the most efficient earthmoving option.

• Batter slopeFor any given depth and volume steeper inside batter slopes result in reduced water surfacearea. A round 10 000 kL dam with batter slopes of 3.5:1 compared to 3:1 will have a surfacearea 9% greater. It will also produce a lesser depth of stored water for any given inflow volume.

• Storage basal areaAchieving the greatest depth of stored water from each inflow is a major goal in surface waterharvesting/storage systems. Small basal areas promote this increased storage depth. If twoempty dams (both with 3:1 batters) are compared, one with a basal diameter of 9 metres andthe other of 20 metres, it will be found that an inflow of 2000 kL will create 4.5 metres of storedwater depth in the former but only 3.0 metres in the latter.

• Stored water depthA body of deep water remains cooler than a shallow one. As cool water produces lowerevaporation losses a primary aim must be to maximise depth for volume stored.

• Windbreaks- Dam wall

Constructing the wall from excavated material as close to the stored water reduces watersurface air flow and therefore evaporation. The surface also receives solar radiation later inthe morning and loses it earlier in the evening because of the shadowing effect of the bank.Placing the excavated spoil as close as possible to the excavation also results in earthmovingefficiencies.

35


- Tree shelter beltsThese are sometimes employed in farming areas to reduce the effect of wind on the watersurface but are generally less suited to pastoral areas. DAFWA Farmnote No. 72/2002(available on DAFWA’s website www.agric.wa.gov.au) provides details of this technique.

• Pipe inlet flumingPipe inlet fluming both minimises erosion on the inside batter and also negates the requirementfor a silt-pit. The base of the pipe at the inlet should be installed at ground level to ensure thatthere is no ongoing ponding of run-off outside the dam following a rainfall event. The aim is tomaximise the transfer of run-off into the storage.

• Catchment efficiencyThe importance of site selection cannot be overstated. Selecting a catchment with high run-offcoefficient potential very often determines how ‘drought-proof’ a dam will be. Harvesting some ofthe smaller rainfall events is important for the replacement of evaporative losses. The inclusionof track and or rock catchment, especially where it is close to the dam, can be veryadvantageous.Enhanced catchments, usually in the form of grader constructed collecting drains, toconcentrate overland flows and convey run-off to the dam are generally very cost-effective.These drains should be surveyed and constructed on a grade that minimises erosion/siltingrisks. A grade of 25 cm per 100 metres of drain is recommended for drains servicingappreciable volumes of run-off.

The gains from each element of the system described above may appear modest but as a packageadd considerably to system performance. If incorporated into the planning and construction phasethere is little or no additional cost but will deliver significant benefits over the life of the waterharvesting/storage facility.

36


NaNaNaNaNational Wild Dog Manational Wild Dog Manational Wild Dog Manational Wild Dog Manational Wild Dog Managggggementementementementement

AdAdAdAdAdvisory Grvisory Grvisory Grvisory Grvisory Groupoupoupoupoup

Background

The National Wild Dog Management Advisory Group (NWDMAG) started as a steering group for theIACRC project Facilitating the strategic management of wild dog throughout Australia. Memberswere initially comprised of collaborators in the project and were from state agencies (primarilyoperational and research staff). Industry representation came from Victoria and Queensland. Oncethe group met it was evident that there were a range of issues that were outside the scope of theIACRC project that the group felt needed to be addressed on a national basis.

Once the decision was made to broaden the scope of the group and become a national advisorygroup, an independent chair was sought and additional industry representation was called for. Thegroup sought to align itself to the Vertebrate Pests Committee (VPC) and be formallyacknowledged as an advisory committee to the VPC.

Membership of NWDMAG

Member organisation RepresentativeAustralian Wool Innovation Brent Finlay (Chair)South Australian Farmers Federation Geoff Power (Deputy Chair)Department of Agriculture and Food, WA Barry DaviesDepartment of Primary Industries, Victoria Andrew CrocosAgForce Queensland Peter LucasNorth-East Wild Dog Management Group, Vic Marilyn ClydesdaleQueensland Parks and Wildlife Service Mark WeaverBiosecurity Queensland Lee AllenDepartment of Primary Industries, NSW Peter FlemingSouth Australian Arid Lands NRM Ben AllenState Council, Livestock Health and Pest Authority (NSW) Tim SeearsWool Producers Australia Greg WellarDepartment of Territory and Municipal Services Nicola WebbDepartment of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation, Peter BirdSouth AustraliaBureau of Resources Science Jeanine BakerVictorian Farmers Federation Michael McCormackCattle Council of Australia Michael McCormackNSW State Wild Dog Committee Bruce MooreWestern Australian Pastoralists and Graziers Assn Scott Pickering

Ex officio:Andrew Wilke Biosecurity QueenslandGreg Mifsud (NWDF) Biosecurity Queensland

37


PPPPPosition staosition staosition staosition staosition statements on natements on natements on natements on natements on national wild dogtional wild dogtional wild dogtional wild dogtional wild dogmanamanamanamanamanagggggement issuesement issuesement issuesement issuesement issues

The National Wild Dog Management Advisory Group has developed a range of position statementson key issues facing wild dog management. The members of NWDMAG unanimously supportthese position statements and have agreed to communicate them to their representativeorganisations, media and other interested stakeholders.

Issue 1: National approach to wild dog management

In order to achieve effective wild dog management, a range of control efforts must beapplied across all tenures by all stakeholders at a landscape level in a cooperative andcoordinated manner.

The nil tenure approach to wild dog management is the process being promoted by the nationalwild dog facilitator under the IACRC project Facilitating the strategic management of wild dogthroughout Australia. It involves local groups mapping wild dog impacts, wild dog movements andwild dog management activities at a landscape level. The approach is documented in ‘Working planto manage wild dogs’ and ‘Guidelines for preparing a working plan to manage wild dogs’(http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/agriculture/pests-weeds/vertebrate-pests/fox-dog/work-plan).

The NDWMAG acknowledges that wild dog management plans and programs developed usingthis approach need to involve the community and require the flexibility to accommodate stakeholderneeds in order to ensure their long-term effectiveness

Position Statement Number 1

Issue 2: Continued use of 1080

1080 is an important tool in wild dog management, both now and in the foreseeable future. Thecontinued use of 1080 is under considerable scrutiny from a range of animal welfare organisationsfrom within and outside Australia who are concerned about the humaneness of the toxin on pestanimals and domestic dogs accidentally baited during wild dog control campaigns. The AustralianPesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority Review of 1080 use in Australia found that thecurrent legislation and regulations imposed by state authorities did in fact provide sufficientsafeguards to prevent poisoning of non-target animals, however despite this, state and federalgovernments are being placed under increasing pressure from animal welfare and animal rightsgroups to ban the poison. In order for 1080 to remain as an effective tool for the management ofwild dogs and other vertebrate pests, state authorities and individual producers must ensurethat 1080 is used in accordance with relevant state and federal legislation.


NWDMAG supports a strategic approach to wild dog management based onthe nil tenure planning process.

NWDMAG supports and advocates the continued and long-term use of 1080 forwild dog control in accordance with relevant state and federal legislation.

38


Issue 3: Use and development of new technology

As stated in Position Statement Number 2 the NWDMAG recognises the importance of 1080 and itscontinued use, however they cannot ignore the intense scrutiny placed on this toxin by othersectors of the community and so acknowledge the need to research and develop new controltechniques and tools. There are a range of new technologies being investigated for wild dogmanagement. These include new toxins (including but not limited to PAPP), lethal trap devices andM44 ejectors, to name a few. The development of new technologies is intended to supportexisting control technologies not to replace them. Given the range of opinions and attitudes to1080 from landholders and stakeholders, the development of new control tools should increaseparticipation in wild dog management programs by providing landholders and land managers with abroader range of technologies to use in addition to 1080 and conventional trapping.


Issue 4: National Codes of Practice and Standard Operating Procedures for wild dogmanagement

The National Codes of Practice (COPS) and Standard Operating Procedures (SOPS) for wild dogmanagement were developed as a contribution to the Australian Animal Welfare Strategy (AAWS).They provide guidelines for humane pest management and will help protect the tools currentlyavailable in Australia.

They will be implemented under state animal welfare legislation. The COPS have been endorsed byVPC and the Animal Welfare and Product Integrity (AWPIT) taskforce and will now be forwarded toPISC (Primary Industries Standing Committee) and PIMC (Primary Industries Ministerial Council)for final approval.

SOPS have been developed but individual states and territories will be able to amend them to suitlocal conditions and legislation.


The NWDMAG supports the COPS and SOPS to ensure continued access tocurrent control tools.

NWDMAG supports the development, evaluation, implementation and use of newtechnologies for wild dog management where they are demonstrated to be effective.

DISCLAIMER

The Chief Executive Officer of the Department of Agriculture and Food and the State of Western Australiaaccept no liability whatsoever by reason of negligence or otherwise arising from use or release of thisinformation or any part of it.

Sthn Range Past Memo (Dec 2009) - FutureBeef · Action: Submission to be prepared for the state NRM...

Documents

Transcript of Sthn Range Past Memo (Dec 2009) - FutureBeef · Action: Submission to be prepared for the state NRM...