Climate change impacts on northern Australian rangeland livestock carrying capacity: a review of issues

Grazing is a major land use in Australia's rangelands. The 'safe' livestock carrying capacity (LCC) required to maintain resource condition is strongly dependent on climate. We reviewed: the approaches for quantifying LCC; current trends in climate and their effect on components of the grazing system; implications of the 'best estimates' of climate change projections for LCC; the agreement and disagreement between the current trends and projections; and the adequacy of current models of forage production in simulating the impact of climate change. We report the results of a sensitivity study of climate change impacts on forage production across the rangelands, and we discuss the more general issues facing grazing enterprises associated with climate change, such as 'known uncertainties' and adaptation responses (e.g. use of climate risk assessment). We found that the method of quantifying LCC from a combination of estimates (simulations) of long-term (>30 years) forage production and successful grazier experience has been well tested across northern Australian rangelands with different climatic regions. This methodology provides a sound base for the assessment of climate change impacts, even though there are many identified gaps in knowledge. The evaluation of current trends indicated substantial differences in the trends of annual rainfall (and simulated forage production) across Australian rangelands with general increases in most of western Australian rangelands ( including northern regions of the Northern Territory) and decreases in eastern Australian rangelands and south-western Western Australia. Some of the projected changes in rainfall and temperature appear small compared with year-to-year variability. Nevertheless, the impacts on rangeland production systems are expected to be important in terms of required managerial and enterprise adaptations. Some important aspects of climate systems science remain unresolved, and we suggest that a risk-averse approach to rangeland management, based on the 'best estimate' projections, in combination with appropriate responses to short-term (1-5 years) climate variability, would reduce the risk of resource degradation. Climate change projections - including changes in rainfall, temperature, carbon dioxide and other climatic variables - if realised, are likely to affect forage and animal production, and ecosystem functioning. The major known uncertainties in quantifying climate change impacts are: (i) carbon dioxide effects on forage production, quality, nutrient cycling and competition between life forms (e.g. grass, shrubs and trees); and (ii) the future role of woody plants including effects of. re, climatic extremes and management for carbon storage. In a simple example of simulating climate change impacts on forage production, we found that increased temperature (3 degrees C) was likely to result in a decrease in forage production for most rangeland locations (e. g. -21% calculated as an unweighted average across 90 locations). The increase in temperature exacerbated or reduced the effects of a 10% decrease/increase in rainfall respectively (-33% or -9%). Estimates of the beneficial effects of increased CO2 (from 350 to 650 ppm) on forage production and water use efficiency indicated enhanced forage production (+26%). The increase was approximately equivalent to the decline in forage production associated with a 3 degrees C temperature increase. The large magnitude of these opposing effects emphasised the importance of the uncertainties in quantifying the impacts of these components of climate change. We anticipate decreases in LCC given that the 'best estimate' of climate change across the rangelands is for a decline (or little change) in rainfall and an increase in temperature. As a consequence, we suggest that public policy have regard for: the implications for livestock enterprises, regional communities, potential resource damage, animal welfare and human distress. However, the capability to quantify these warnings is yet to be developed and this important task remains as a challenge for rangeland and climate systems science.

Sugarcane smut after three years: a policy retrospective.

The detection of sugarcane smut disease (Ustilago scitaminea) in the Bundaberg-Childers region of eastern Australia in 2006 triggered a comprehensive and united response from BSES Limited, Queensland Government and CANEGROWERS. The response to sugarcane smut in the Bundaberg-Childers area was the first test for the Emergency Plant Pest Response Deed, an agreement between Australian governments and plant industries to facilitate a response to a plant pest incursion. As part of this response and the subsequent inquiry, economic models of the likely pattern of spread and cost of the smut epidemic were prepared. This paper reviews the predictions of those models in the light of the subsequent three years' experience. It examines reasons for divergence from the modelled outcomes, some of which were good approximations of actual experience.

Nitrogen requirements of Burdekin soils to inform Reef Policy legislation

Reef Project 20: Nitrogen fertiliser requirements of representative soils of the Burdekin (BRIA and Delta), and peaty soils of the Wet Tropics to inform the ReefWise farming Nutrient Calculator.

Wet season resting - economic insights from scenario modelling

Pasture degradation, particularly that attributable to overgrazing, is a significant problem across the northern Australian rangelands. Although grazing studies have identified the scope for wet season resting strategies to be used to rehabilitate degraded pastures, the economic outcome of these strategies has not been extensively demonstrated. An exploratory study of the prospective economic value of wet season resting is presented using an economic simulation model of a 28000 ha beef enterprise located in the Charters Towers region of north-eastern Australia to explore seven hypothetical scenarios centred on the projected performance of a wet season resting strategy. A series of 20-year simulations for a range of pasture recovery profiles, stocking capacity, animal productivity responses, beef prices and agistment options are compared with a baseline scenario of taking no action. Estimates of the net present value of the 20-year difference in total enterprise gross margins between the various resting options and the 'do nothing' option identify that wet season resting can offer a positive economic return for the range of scenarios examined, although this is contingent on the assumptions that are made concerning the trajectories of change in carrying capacity and animal productivity. Some implications for management and policy making to support the practical implementation of wet season resting strategies are discussed.

Relocation of Intensive Agriculture to Northern Queensland The Cotton Industry

Development of new agricultural industries in northern Australia is often perceived as a solution to changes in water availability that have occurred within southern Australia as a result of changes to government policy in response to and exacerbated by climate change. This report examines the likely private, social and community costs and benefits associated with the establishment of a cotton industry in the Burdekin. The research undertaken covers three spatial scales by modelling the response of cotton and to climate change at the crop and farm scale and linking this to regional scale modelling of the economy. Modelling crop growth as either a standalone crop or as part of a farm enterprise provides the clearest picture of how yields and water use will be affected under climate change. The alternative to this is to undertake very costly trials in environmental chambers. For this reason it is critical that funding for model development especially for crops being crop in novel environments be seen as a high priority for climate change and adaptation studies. Crop level simulations not only provide information on how the crop responds to climate change, they also illustrate that that these responses are the result of complex interactions and cannot necessarily be derived from the climate information alone. These simulations showed that climate change would lead to decreased cotton yields in 2030 and 2050 without the affect of CO2 fertilisation. Without CO2 fertilisation, yields would be decreased by 3.2% and 17.8%. Including CO2 fertilisation increased yields initially by 5.9%, but these were reduced by 3.6% in 2050. This still represents a major offset and at least ameliorates the impact of climate change on yield. To cope with the decreased in-crop rainfall (4.5% by 2030 and 15.8% in 2050) and an initial increase in evapotranspiration of 2% in 2030 and

Good science for improving policy: greenhouse gas emissions from agricultural manures

Australia’s and New Zealand’s major agricultural manure management emission sources are reported to be, in descending order of magnitude: (1) methane (CH4) from dairy farms in both countries; (2) CH4 from pig farms in Australia; and nitrous oxide (N2O) from (3) beef feedlots and (4) poultry sheds in Australia. We used literature to critically review these inventory estimates. Alarmingly for dairy farm CH4 (1), our review revealed assumptions and omissions that when addressed could dramatically increase this emission estimate. The estimate of CH4 from Australian pig farms (2) appears to be accurate, according to industry data and field measurements. The N2O emission estimates for beef feedlots (3) and poultry sheds (4) are based on northern hemisphere default factors whose appropriateness for Australia is questionable and unverified. Therefore, most of Australasia’s key livestock manure management greenhouse gas (GHG) emission profiles are either questionable or are unsubstantiated by region-specific research. Encouragingly, GHG from dairy shed manure are relatively easy to mitigate because they are a point source which can be managed by several ‘close-to-market’ abatement solutions. Reducing these manure emissions therefore constitutes an opportunity for meaningful action sooner compared with the more difficult-to-implement and long-term strategies that currently dominate agricultural GHG mitigation research. At an international level, our review highlights the critical need to carefully reassess GHG emission profiles, particularly if such assessments have not been made since the compilation of original inventories. Failure to act in this regard presents the very real risk of missing the ‘low hanging fruit’ in the rush towards a meaningful response to climate change