Grazing for Healthy Coastal Wetlands: Guidelines for managing coastal wetlands in grazing systems.

Grazing for Healthy Coastal Wetlands has been developed to provide graziers, landowners and extension officers with information on managing grazing in and around Queensland’s coastal wetlands to maintain healthy coastal wetlands and productive grazing enterprises. It provides practical advice on how grazing and associated land management practices can be implemented to support the long-term health of coastal wetlands whilst maintaining production. The guidelines have been compiled from published literature, grazier knowledge, wetlands managers and the experience of extension and natural resource management professionals. They reflect the current knowledge of suitable management practices for coastal wetlands. They are designed to complement and be considered in conjunction with existing information resources including the EDGEnetwork Grazing Land Management series and best management practice guidelines from regional Natural Resource Management (NRM) groups. While the recommendations apply broadly to Queensland’s coastal wetlands, regional, catchment and landscape-scale variations in wetland characteristics and the objectives of the individual grazing enterprise should be taken into account in planning and deciding management actions for wetlands. An individual grazing property may even have a range of wetland types with different management needs and objectives which should be identified during whole of property planning. Specific land and wetland management advice should also be sought from local grazing extension officers and NRM professionals.

Boosting the productivity and profitability of northern Australian beef enterprises: Exploring innovation options using simulation modelling and systems analysis

The financial health of beef cattle enterprises in northern Australia has declined markedly over the last decade due to an escalation in production and marketing costs and a real decline in beef prices. Historically, gains in animal productivity have offset the effect of declining terms of trade on farm incomes. This raises the question of whether future productivity improvements can remain a key path for lifting enterprise profitability sufficient to ensure that the industry remains economically viable over the longer term. The key objective of this study was to assess the production and financial implications for north Australian beef enterprises of a range of technology interventions (development scenarios), including genetic gain in cattle, nutrient supplementation, and alteration of the feed base through introduced pastures and forage crops, across a variety of natural environments. To achieve this objective a beef systems model was developed that is capable of simulating livestock production at the enterprise level, including reproduction, growth and mortality, based on energy and protein supply from natural C4 pastures that are subject to high inter-annual climate variability. Comparisons between simulation outputs and enterprise performance data in three case study regions suggested that the simulation model (the Northern Australia Beef Systems Analyser) can adequately represent the performance beef cattle enterprises in northern Australia. Testing of a range of development scenarios suggested that the application of individual technologies can substantially lift productivity and profitability, especially where the entire feedbase was altered through legume augmentation. The simultaneous implementation of multiple technologies that provide benefits to different aspects of animal productivity resulted in the greatest increases in cattle productivity and enterprise profitability, with projected weaning rates increasing by 25%, liveweight gain by 40% and net profit by 150% above current baseline levels, although gains of this magnitude might not necessarily be realised in practice. While there were slight increases in total methane output from these development scenarios, the methane emissions per kg of beef produced were reduced by 20% in scenarios with higher productivity gain. Combinations of technologies or innovative practices applied in a systematic and integrated fashion thus offer scope for providing the productivity and profitability gains necessary to maintain viable beef enterprises in northern Australia into the future.

Bioeconomic modelling of woody regrowth carbon offset options in productive grazing systems

Agricultural land has been identified as a potential source of greenhouse gas emissions offsets through biosequestration in vegetation and soil. In the extensive grazing land of Australia, landholders may participate in the Australian Government’s Emissions Reduction Fund and create offsets by reducing woody vegetation clearing and allowing native woody plant regrowth to grow. This study used bioeconomic modelling to evaluate the trade-offs between an existing central Queensland grazing operation, which has been using repeated tree clearing to maintain pasture growth, and an alternative carbon and grazing enterprise in which tree clearing is reduced and the additional carbon sequestered in trees is sold. The results showed that ceasing clearing in favour of producing offsets produces a higher net present value over 20 years than the existing cattle enterprise at carbon prices, which are close to current (2015) market levels (~$13 t–1 CO2-e). However, by modifying key variables, relative profitability did change. Sensitivity analysis evaluated key variables, which determine the relative profitability of carbon and cattle. In order of importance these were: the carbon price, the gross margin of cattle production, the severity of the tree–grass relationship, the area of regrowth retained, the age of regrowth at the start of the project, and to a lesser extent the cost of carbon project administration, compliance and monitoring. Based on the analysis, retaining regrowth to generate carbon income may be worthwhile for cattle producers in Australia, but careful consideration needs to be given to the opportunity cost of reduced cattle income.