EMS in the pastoral industries of western Queensland: From customisation to implementation

This paper outlines the customisation of Environmental Management Systems (EMS) for the pastoral industry of western Queensland, the recruitment and training of pastoral producers, and their development and implementation of EMS. EMS was simplified to a 7-step process and producers were recruited to trial this customised EMS. Producers from 40 properties received EMS training, either as groups or individually. Of these, 37 commenced Pastoral EMS development through a facilitated approach that allowed them to learn about EMS while developing an EMS for their property. EMS implementation has been more effective with producers who were trained in groups. At this stage, however, most producers do not see value in EMS as there are currently no strong drivers to warrant continued development and implementation. Key findings resulting from this work were that personal contact and assistance is vital to encourage producers to trial EMS, and that a staged approach to EMS implementation, commencing with a self-assessment, is recommended. EMS training is most successful in a group situation; however, an alternative method of delivery should be provided for those producers who, either by choice or isolation, have to work alone. A support network is also necessary to encourage and maintain progress with EMS development and implementation, particularly where no strong drivers exist.

A systems evaluation of high-input management using fortified molasses for beef production in Australia's dry tropics

The potential of beef producers to profitably produce 500-kg steers at 2.5 years of age in northern Australia's dry tropics to meet specifications of high-value markets, using a high-input management (HIM) system was examined. HIM included targeted high levels of fortified molasses supplementation, short seasonal mating and the use of growth promotants. Using herds of 300-400 females plus steer progeny at three sites, HIM was compared at a business level to prevailing best-practice, strategic low-input management (SLIM) in which there is a relatively low usage of energy concentrates to supplement pasture intake. The data presented for each breeding-age cohort within management system at each site includes: annual pregnancy rates (range: 14-99%), time of conception, mortalities (range: 0-10%), progeny losses between confirmed pregnancy and weaning (range: 0-29%), and weaning rates (range: 14-92%) over the 2-year observation. Annual changes in weight and relative net worth were calculated for all breeding and non-breeding cohorts. Reasons for outcomes are discussed. Compared with SLIM herds, both weaning weights and annual growth were >= 30 kg higher, enabling 86-100% of HIM steers to exceed 500 kg at 2.5 years of age. Very few contemporary SLIM steers reached this target. HIM was most profitably applied to steers. Where HIM was able to achieve high pregnancy rates in yearlings, its application was recommended in females. Well managed, appropriate HIM systems increased profits by around $15/adult equivalent at prevailing beef and supplement prices. However, a 20% supplement price rise without a commensurate increase in values for young slaughter steers would generally eliminate this advantage. This study demonstrated the complexity of pro. table application of research outcomes to commercial business, even when component research suggests that specific strategies may increase growth and reproductive efficiency and/or be more pro. table. Because of the higher level of management required, higher costs and returns, and higher susceptibility to market changes and disease, HIM systems should only be applied after SLIM systems are well developed. To increase profitability, any strategy must ultimately either increase steer growth and sale values and/or enable a shift to high pregnancy rates in yearling heifers.

Defining and predicting the 'break of the season' for north-east Queensland grazing areas

For pasture growth in the semi-arid tropics of north-east Australia, where up to 80% of annual rainfall occurs between December and March, the timing and distribution of rainfall events is often more important than the total amount. In particular, the timing of the 'green break of the season' (GBOS) at the end of the dry season, when new pasture growth becomes available as forage and a live-weight gain is measured in cattle, affects several important management decisions that prevent overgrazing and pasture degradation. Currently, beef producers in the region use a GBOS rule based on rainfall (e. g. 40mm of rain over three days by 1 December) to define the event and make their management decisions. A survey of 16 beef producers in north-east Queensland shows three quarters of respondents use a rainfall amount that occurs in only half or less than half of all years at their location. In addition, only half the producers expect the GBOS to occur within two weeks of the median date calculated by the CSIRO plant growth days model GRIM. This result suggests that in the producer rules, either the rainfall quantity or the period of time over which the rain is expected, is unrealistic. Despite only 37% of beef producers indicating that they use a southern oscillation index (SOI) forecast in their decisions, cross validated LEPS (linear error in probability space) analyses showed both the average 3 month July-September SOI and the 2 month August-September SOI have significant forecast skill in predicting the probability of both the amount of wet season rainfall and the timing of the GBOS. The communication and implementation of a rigorous and realistic definition of the GBOS, and the likely impacts of anthropogenic climate change on the region are discussed in the context of the sustainable management of northern Australian rangelands.

Parameter estimation and sensitivity analysis of fat deposition models in beef steers using acslXtreme.

The Davis Growth Model (a dynamic steer growth model encompassing 4 fat deposition models) is currently being used by the phenotypic prediction program of the Cooperative Research Centre (CRC) for Beef Genetic Technologies to predict P8 fat (mm) in beef cattle to assist beef producers meet market specifications. The concepts of cellular hyperplasia and hypertrophy are integral components of the Davis Growth Model. The net synthesis of total body fat (kg) is calculated from the net energy available after accounting tor energy needs for maintenance and protein synthesis. Total body fat (kg) is then partitioned into 4 fat depots (intermuscular, intramuscular, subcutaneous, and visceral). This paper reports on the parameter estimation and sensitivity analysis of the DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) logistic growth equations and the fat deposition first-order differential equations in the Davis Growth Model using acslXtreme (Hunstville, AL, USA, Xcellon). The DNA and fat deposition parameter coefficients were found to be important determinants of model function; the DNA parameter coefficients with days on feed >100 days and the fat deposition parameter coefficients for all days on feed. The generalized NL2SOL optimization algorithm had the fastest processing time and the minimum number of objective function evaluations when estimating the 4 fat deposition parameter coefficients with 2 observed values (initial and final fat). The subcutaneous fat parameter coefficient did indicate a metabolic difference for frame sizes. The results look promising and the prototype Davis Growth Model has the potential to assist the beef industry meet market specifications.

The climate change risk management matrix for the grazing industry of northern Australia

The complexity, variability and vastness of the northern Australian rangelands make it difficult to assess the risks associated with climate change. In this paper we present a methodology to help industry and primary producers assess risks associated with climate change and to assess the effectiveness of adaptation options in managing those risks. Our assessment involved three steps. Initially, the impacts and adaptation responses were documented in matrices by ‘experts’ (rangeland and climate scientists). Then, a modified risk management framework was used to develop risk management matrices that identified important impacts, areas of greatest vulnerability (combination of potential impact and adaptive capacity) and priority areas for action at the industry level. The process was easy to implement and useful for arranging and analysing large amounts of information (both complex and interacting). Lastly, regional extension officers (after minimal ‘climate literacy’ training) could build on existing knowledge provided here and implement the risk management process in workshops with rangeland land managers. Their participation is likely to identify relevant and robust adaptive responses that are most likely to be included in regional and property management decisions. The process developed here for the grazing industry could be modified and used in other industries and sectors. By 2030, some areas of northern Australia will experience more droughts and lower summer rainfall. This poses a serious threat to the rangelands. Although the impacts and adaptive responses will vary between ecological and geographic systems, climate change is expected to have noticeable detrimental effects: reduced pasture growth and surface water availability; increased competition from woody vegetation; decreased production per head (beef and wool) and gross margin; and adverse impacts on biodiversity. Further research and development is needed to identify the most vulnerable regions, and to inform policy in time to facilitate transitional change and enable land managers to implement those changes.

A strategic approach to mitigating the impacts of wild canids: proposed activities of the Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre

Wild canids (wild dogs and European red foxes) cause substantial losses to Australian livestock industries and environmental values. Both species are actively managed as pests to livestock production. Contemporaneously, the dingo proportion of the wild dog population, being considered native, is protected in areas designated for wildlife conservation. Wild dogs particularly affect sheep and goat production because of the behavioural responses of domestic sheep and goats to attack, and the flexible hunting tactics of wild dogs. Predation of calves, although less common, is now more economically important because of recent changes in commodity prices. Although sometimes affecting lambing and kidding rates, foxes cause fewer problems to livestock producers but have substantial impacts on environmental values, affecting the survival of small to medium-sized native fauna and affecting plant biodiversity by spreading weeds. Canid management in Australia relies heavily on the use of compound 1080-poisoned baits that can be applied aerially or by ground. Exclusion fencing, trapping, shooting, livestock-guarding animals and predator calling with shooting are also used. The new Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre has 40 partners representing private and public land managers, universities, and training, research and development organisations. One of the major objectives of the new IACRC is to apply a strategic approach in order to reduce the impacts of wild canids on agricultural and environmental values in Australia by 10%. In this paper, the impacts, ecology and management of wild canids in Australia are briefly reviewed and the first cooperative projects that will address IACRC objectives for improving wild dog management are outlined.

Action learning in partnership with Landcare and catchment management groups to support increased pasture sowings in southern inland Queensland

The incorporation of sown pastures as short-term rotations into the cropping systems of northern Australia has been slow. The inherent chemical fertility and physical stability of the predominant vertisol soils across the region enabled farmers to grow crops for decades without nitrogen fertiliser, and precluded the evolution of a crop–pasture rotation culture. However, as less fertile and less physically stable soils were cropped for extended periods, farmers began to use contemporary farming and sown pasture technologies to rebuild and maintain their soils. This has typically involved sowing long-term grass and grass–legume pastures on the more marginal cropping soils of the region. In partnership with the catchment management authority, the Queensland Murray–Darling Committee (QMDC) and Landcare, a pasture extension process using the LeyGrain™ package was implemented in 2006 within two Grain & Graze projects in the Maranoa-Balonne and Border Rivers catchments in southern inland Queensland. The specific objectives were to increase the area sown to high quality pasture and to gain production and environmental benefits (particularly groundcover) through improving the skills of producers in pasture species selection, their understanding and management of risk during pasture establishment, and in managing pastures and the feed base better. The catalyst for increasing pasture sowings was a QMDC subsidy scheme for increasing groundcover on old cropping land. In recognising a need to enhance pasture knowledge and skills to implement this scheme, the QMDC and Landcare producer groups sought the involvement of, and set specific targets for, the LeyGrain workshop process. This is a highly interactive action learning process that built on the existing knowledge and skills of the producers. Thirty-four workshops were held with more than 200 producers in 26 existing groups and with private agronomists. An evaluation process assessed the impact of the workshops on the learning and skill development by participants, their commitment to practice change, and their future intent to sow pastures. The results across both project catchments were highly correlated. There was strong agreement by producers (>90%) that the workshops had improved knowledge and skills regarding the adaptation of pasture species to soils and climates, enabling a better selection at the paddock level. Additional strong impacts were in changing the attitudes of producers to all aspects of pasture establishment, and the relative species composition of mixtures. Producers made a strong commitment to practice change, particularly in managing pasture as a specialist crop at establishment to minimise risk, and in the better selection and management of improved pasture species (particularly legumes and the use of fertiliser). Producers have made a commitment to increase pasture sowings by 80% in the next 5 years, with fourteen producers in one group alone having committed to sow an additional 4893 ha of pasture in 2007–08 under the QMDC subsidy scheme. The success of the project was attributed to the partnership between QMDC and Landcare groups who set individual workshop targets with LeyGrain presenters, the interactive engagement processes within the workshops themselves, and the follow-up provided by the LeyGrain team for on-farm activities.

Developing sustainable banana production systems: a case study from tropical Australia

The north Queensland banana industry is under pressure from government and community expectations to exhibit good environmental stewardship. The industry is situated on the high-rainfall north Queensland coast adjacent to 2 natural icons, the Great Barrier Reef to the east and World Heritage-listed rain forest areas to the west. The main environmental concern is agricultural industry pollutants harming the Great Barrier Reef. In addition to environmental issues the banana industry also suffers financial pressure from declining margins and production loss from tropical cyclones. As part of a broader government strategy to reduce land-based pollutants affecting the Great Barrier Reef, the formation of a pilot banana producers group to address these environmental and economic pressures was facilitated. Using an integrated farming systems approach, we worked collaboratively with these producers to conduct an environmental risk assessment of their businesses and then to develop best management practices (BMP) to address environmental concerns. We also sought input from technical experts to provide increased rigour for the environmental risk assessment and BMP development. The producers' commercial experience ensured new ideas for improved sustainable practices were constantly assessed through their profit-driven 'filter' thus ensuring economic sustainability was also considered. Relying heavily on the producers' knowledge and experience meant the agreed sustainable practices were practical, relevant and financially feasible for the average-sized banana business in the region. Expert input and review also ensured that practices were technically sound. The pilot group producers then implemented and adapted selected key practices on their farms. High priority practices addressed by the producers group included optimizing nitrogen fertilizer management to reduce runoff water nitrification, developing practical ground cover management to reduce soil erosion and improving integrated pest management systems to reduce pesticide use. To facilitate wider banana industry understanding and adoption of the BMP's developed by the pilot group, we conducted field days at the farms of the pilot group members. Information generated by the pilot group has had wider application to Australian horticulture and the process has been subsequently used with the north Queensland sugar industry. Our experiences have shown that integrated farming systems methodologies are useful in addressing complex issues like environmental and economic sustainability. We have also found that individual horticulture businesses need on-going technical support for change to more sustainable practices. One-off interventions have little impact, as farm improvement is usually an on-going incremental process. A key lesson from this project has been the need to develop practical, farm scale economic tools to clarify and demonstrate the financial impact of alternative management practices. Demonstrating continued profitability is critical to encourage widespread industry adoption of environmentally sustainable practices

Seasonal changes in pasture quality and diet selection and their relationship with liveweight gain of steers grazing tropical grass and grass-legume pastures in northern Australia.

The variation in liveweight gain in grazing beef cattle as influenced by pasture type, season and year effects has important economic implications for mixed crop-livestock systems and the ability to better predict such variation would benefit beef producers by providing a guide for decision making. To identify key determinants of liveweight change of Brahman-cross steers grazing subtropical pastures, measurements of pasture quality and quantity, and diet quality in parallel with liveweight were made over two consecutive grazing seasons (48 and 46 weeks, respectively), on mixed Clitoria ternatea/grass, Stylosanthes seabrana/grass and grass swards (grass being a mixture of Bothriochloa insculpta cv. Bisset, Dichanthium sericeum and Panicum maximum var. trichoglume cv. Petrie). Steers grazing the legume-based pastures had the highest growth rate and gained between 64 and 142 kg more than those grazing the grass pastures in under 12 months. Using an exponential model, green leaf mass, green leaf %, adjusted green leaf % (adjusted for inedible woody legume stems), faecal near infrared reflectance spectroscopy predictions of diet crude protein and diet dry matter digestibility, accounted for 77, 74, 80, 63 and 60%, respectively, of the variation in daily weight gain when data were pooled across pasture types and grazing seasons. The standard error of the regressions indicated that 95% prediction intervals were large (+/- 0.42-0.64 kg/head.day) suggesting that derived regression relationships have limited practical application for accurately estimating growth rate. In this study, animal factors, especially compensatory growth effects, appeared to have a major influence on growth rate in relation to pasture and diet attributes. It was concluded that predictions of growth rate based only on pasture or diet attributes are unlikely to be accurate or reliable. Nevertheless, key pasture attributes such as green leaf mass and green leaf% provide a robust indication of what proportion of the potential growth rate of the grazing animals can be achieved.

Avocado Information Kit. Agrilink, your growing guide to better farming guide

Each Agrilink kit has been designed to be both comprehensive and practical. As the kits are arranged to answer questions of increasing complexity, they are useful references for both new and experienced producers of specific crops. Agrilink integrates the technology of horticultural production with the management of horticultural enterprises. REPRINT INFORMATION - PLEASE READ! For updated information please call 13 25 23 or visit the website www.deedi.qld.gov.au (Select: Queensland Industries - Agriculture link) This publication has been reprinted as a digital book without any changes to the content published in 2001. We advise readers to take particular note of the areas most likely to be out-of-date and so requiring further research: see detailed reprint information on first page of the kit. Even with these limitations we believe this information kit provides important and valuable information for intending and existing growers. This publication was last revised in 2001. The information is not current and the accuracy of the information cannot be guaranteed by the State of Queensland. This information has been made available to assist users to identify issues involved in the production of avocadoes. This information is not to be used or relied upon by users for any purpose which may expose the user or any other person to loss or damage. Users should conduct their own inquiries and rely on their own independent professional advice. While every care has been taken in preparing this publication, the State of Queensland accepts no responsibility for decisions or actions taken as a result of any data, information, statement or advice, expressed or implied, contained in this publication.

Papaw Information Kit. Agrilink, your growing guide to better farming guide

Each Agrilink kit has been designed to be both comprehensive and practical. As the kits are arranged to answer questions of increasing complexity, they are useful references for both new and experienced producers of specific crops. Agrilink integrates the technology of horticultural production with the management of horticultural enterprises. REPRINT INFORMATION - PLEASE READ! For updated information please call 13 25 23 or visit the website http://www.deedi.qld.gov.au/ (Select: Queenslands Industries - Agriculture Link) This publication has been reprinted as a digital book without any changes to the content published in 2000. We advise readers to take particular note of the areas most likely to be out-of-date and so requiring further research: see detailed information on first page of the kit. Even with these limitations we believe this information kit provides important and valuable information for intending and existing growers. This publication was last revised in 2000. The information is not current and the accuracy of the information cannot be guaranteed by the State of Queensland. This information has been made available to assist users to identify issues involved in the production of papaw. This information is not to be used or relied upon by users for any purpose which may expose the user or any other person to loss or damage. Users should conduct their own inquiries and rely on their own independent professional advice. While every care has been taken in preparing this publication, the State of Queensland accepts no responsibility for decisions or actions taken as a result of any data, information, statement or advice, expressed or implied, contained in this publication.

Mango Information Kit. Agrilink, your growing guide to better farming guide

Each Agrilink kit has been designed to be both comprehensive and practical. As the kits are arranged to answer questions of increasing complexity, they are useful references for both new and experienced producers of specific crops. Agrilink integrates the technology of horticultural production with the management of horticultural enterprises. REPRINT INFORMATION - PLEASE READ! For updated information please call 13 25 23 or visit the website www.deedi.qld.gov.au (Select: Queensland Industries - Agriculture link) This publication has been reprinted as a digital book without any changes to the content published in 1999. We advise readers to take particular note of the areas most likely to be out-of-date and so requiring further research: see detailed information on first page of the kit. Even with these limitations we believe this information kit provides important and valuable information for intending and existing growers. This publication was last revised in 1999. The information is not current and the accuracy of the information cannot be guaranteed by the State of Queensland. This information has been made available to assist users to identify issues involved in the production of mangoes. This information is not to be used or relied upon by users for any purpose which may expose the user or any other person to loss or damage. Users should conduct their own inquiries and rely on their own independent professional advice. While every care has been taken in preparing this publication, the State of Queensland accepts no responsibility for decisions or actions taken as a result of any data, information, statement or advice, expressed or implied, contained in this publication.

Citrus Information Kit. Agrilink, your growing guide to better farming guide

Each Agrilink kit has been designed to be both comprehensive and practical. As the kits are arranged to answer questions of increasing complexity, they are useful references for both new and experienced producers of specific crops. Agrilink integrates the technology of horticultural production with the management of horticultural enterprises. REPRINT INFORMATION - PLEASE READ! For updated information please call 13 25 23 or visit the website www.daf.qld.gov.au This publication has been reprinted as a digital book without any changes to the content published in 1997. We advise readers to take particular note of the areas most likely to be out-of-date and so requiring further research: see detailed information on first page of the kit. Even with these limitations we believe this information kit provides important and valuable information for intending and existing growers. This publication was last revised in 1997. The information is not current and the accuracy of the information cannot be guaranteed by the State of Queensland. This information has been made available to assist users to identify issues involved in the production of citrus. This information is not to be used or relied upon by users for any purpose which may expose the user or any other person to loss or damage. Users should conduct their own inquiries and rely on their own independent professional advice. While every care has been taken in preparing this publication, the State of Queensland accepts no responsibility for decisions or actions taken as a result of any data, information, statement or advice, expressed or implied, contained in this publication.

Rockmelon and Honeydew Information Kit. Agrilink, your growing guide to better farming guide

Each Agrilink kit has been designed to be both comprehensive and practical. As the kits are arranged to answer questions of increasing complexity, they are useful references for both new and experienced producers of specific crops. Agrilink integrates the technology of horticultural production with the management of horticultural enterprises. REPRINT INFORMATION - PLEASE READ! For updated information please call 13 25 23 or visit the website www.deedi.qld.gov.au (Select: Queensland Industries - Agriculture link) This publication has been reprinted as a digital book without any changes to the content published in 1997. We advise readers to take particular note of the areas most likely to be out-of-date and so requiring further research: see detailed information on first page of the kit. Even with these limitations we believe this information kit provides important and valuable information for intending and existing growers. This publication was last revised in 1997. The information is not current and the accuracy of the information cannot be guaranteed by the State of Queensland. This information has been made available to assist users to identify issues involved in the production of Rockmelon and Honeydew. This information is not to be used or relied upon by users for any purpose which may expose the user or any other person to loss or damage. Users should conduct their own inquiries and rely on their own independent professional advice. While every care has been taken in preparing this publication, the State of Queensland accepts no responsibility for decisions or actions taken as a result of any data, information, statement or advice, expressed or implied, contained in this publication.

Capsicum and Chilli Information Kit. Agrilink, your growing guide to better farming guide.

Each Agrilink kit has been designed to be both comprehensive and practical. As the kits are arranged to answer questions of increasing complexity, they are useful references for both new and experienced producers of specific crops. Agrilink integrates the technology of horticultural production with the management of horticultural enterprises. REPRINT INFORMATION - PLEASE READ! For updated information please call 13 25 23 or visit the website www.deedi.qld.gov.au (Select: Queensland Industries – Agriculture link) This publication has been reprinted as a digital book without any changes to the content published in 1999. We advise readers to take particular note of the areas most likely to be out-of-date and so requiring further research: see detailed information on first page of the kit. Even with these limitations we believe this information kit provides important and valuable information for intending and existing growers. This publication was last revised in 1999. The information is not current and the accuracy of the information cannot be guaranteed by the State of Queensland. This information has been made available to assist users to identify issues involved in the production of capsicum and chilli. This information is not to be used or relied upon by users for any purpose which may expose the user or any other person to loss or damage. Users should conduct their own inquiries and rely on their own independent professional advice. While every care has been taken in preparing this publication, the State of Queensland accepts no responsibility for decisions or actions taken as a result of any data, information, statement or advice, expressed or implied, contained in this publication.