VegMachine - putting pastoralists in the picture

Australia’s rangelands are the extensive arid and semi-arid grazing lands that cover approximately 70% of the Australian continent. They are characterised by low and generally variable rainfall, low productivity and a sparse population. They support a number of industries including mining and tourism, but pastoralism is the primary land use. In some areas, the rangelands have a history of biological decline (Noble 1997), with erosion, loss of perennial native grasses and incursion of woody vegetation commonly reported in the scientific and lay literature. Despite our historic awareness of these trends, the establishment of systems to measure and monitor degradation, has presented numerous problems. The size and accessibility of Australia’s rangeland often mitigates development of extensive monitoring programs. So, too, securing on-going commitment from Government agencies to fund rangeland monitoring activities have led to either abandonment or a scaled-down approach in some instances (Graetz et al. 1986; Holm 1993). While a multiplicity of monitoring schemes have been developed for landholders at the property scale, and some have received promising initial uptake, relatively few have been maintained for more than a few years on any property without at least some agency support (Pickup et al. 1998). But, ironically, such property level monitoring tools can contribute significantly to local decisions about stock, infrastructure and sustainability. Research in recent decades has shown the value of satellites for monitoring change in rangelands (Wallace et al. 2004), especially in terms of tree and ground cover. While steadily improving, use of satellite data as a monitoring tool has been limited by the cost of the imagery, and the equipment and expertise needed to extract useful information from it. A project now under way in the northern rangelands of Australia is attempting to circumvent many of the problems through a monitoring system that allows property managers to use long-term satellite image sequences to quickly and inexpensively track changes in land cover on their properties

Modelling management options for management of feral camels in central Australia

Camels (Camelus dromedarius) were introduced into Australia from the 1840s to the early 1900s for transport and hauling cargo in arid regions. Feral populations remained small until the 1930s when many were released after they were superseded for transport by trucks and rail. Although camels have a relatively slow population growth (<10% per annum), the population has not reached carrying capacity and therefore, requires control to reduce the increasing impacts on central Australia. The model developed for the Northern Territory suggested that currently there are insufficient numbers being removed. The model also investigated which control options would have greatest impacts and found harvesting to be most important. The extent to which commercial harvesting can feasibly reduce camel populations requires further analysis. Due to the wide dispersal of camels in Australia, fertility control, even if technically feasible, will not target adults, the most important age class of the population. Habitat preferences were also investigated in the model but more validation is required as the population is still under range expansion. Immediate action is suggested to alleviate future costs as camel populations and their impacts rise.

Odour emissions from tunnel-ventilated broiler sheds: case study of nine Queensland farms.

Odour emission rates were measured from nine tunnel-ventilated broiler farms in south-eastern Queensland, Australia. At one farm, odour emission rates were measured over two sequential batches approximately weekly, while at the remaining farms, odour emission rates were measured just before the first pickup (around Day 35 of the batch) when bird liveweight was greatest and peak odour emission rates were expected. Odour samples were analysed using dynamic olfactometry (to AS/NZS 4323.3:2001), and an artificial olfaction system was used to continuously monitor odour emission rates at one farm. Odour emission rates ranged from 330 to 2960 ou/s per 1000 birds and from 0.19 to 2.12 ou/s.kg, with a significant amount of variability observed throughout the batch and throughout each sampling day. While the wide range in odour emission rates was primarily due to changes in bird liveweight and ventilation requirements, other factors were also involved. The artificial olfaction system proved useful for quantifying the range and variability of odour emission rates, especially when olfactometry analysis was impractical.