Impacts of grazing management options on pasture and animal productivity in a Heteropogon contortus (black speargrass) pasture in central Queensland. 4. Animal production.

Steer liveweight gains were measured in an extensive grazing study conducted in a Heteropogon contortus (black speargrass) pasture in central Queensland between 1988 and 2001. Treatments included a range of stocking rates in native pastures, legume-oversown native pasture and animal diet supplement/spring-burning pastures. Seasonal rainfall throughout this study was below the long-term mean. Mean annual pasture utilisation ranged from 13 to 61%. Annual liveweight gains per head in native pasture were highly variable among years and ranged from a low of 43 kg/steer at 2 ha/steer to a high of 182 kg/steer at 8 ha/steer. Annual liveweight gains were consistently highest at light stocking and decreased with increasing stocking rate. Annual liveweight gain per hectare increased linearly with stocking rate. These stocking rate trends were also evident in legume-oversown pastures although both the intercept and slope of the regressions for legume-oversown pastures were higher than that for native pasture. The highest annual liveweight gain for legume-oversown pasture was 221 kg/steer at 4 ha/steer. After 13 years, annual liveweight gain per unit area occurred at the heaviest stocking rate despite deleterious changes in the pasture. Across all years, the annual liveweight advantage for legume-oversown pastures was 37 kg/steer. Compared with native pasture, changes in annual liveweight gain with burning were variable. It was concluded that cattle productivity is sustainable when stocking rates are maintained at 4 ha/steer or lighter (equivalent to a utilisation rate around 30%). Although steer liveweight gain occurred at all stocking rates and economic returns were highest at heaviest stocking rates, stocking rates heavier than 4 ha/steer are unsustainable because of their long-term impact on pasture productivity.

Managing reforestation to sequester carbon, increase biodiversity potential and minimize loss of agricultural land

Reforestation will have important consequences for the global challenges of mitigating climate change, arresting habitat decline and ensuring food security. We examined field-scale trade-offs between carbon sequestration of tree plantings and biodiversity potential and loss of agricultural land. Extensive surveys of reforestation across temperate and tropical Australia (N = 1491 plantings) were used to determine how planting width and species mix affect carbon sequestration during early development (< 15 year). Carbon accumulation per area increased significantly with decreasing planting width and with increasing proportion of eucalypts (the predominant over-storey genus). Highest biodiversity potential was achieved through block plantings (width > 40 m) with about 25% of planted individuals being eucalypts. Carbon and biodiversity goals were balanced in mixed-species plantings by establishing narrow belts (width < 20 m) with a high proportion (>75%) of eucalypts, and in monocultures of mallee eucalypt plantings by using the widest belts (ca. 6–20 m). Impacts on agriculture were minimized by planting narrow belts (ca. 4 m) of mallee eucalypt monocultures, which had the highest carbon sequestering efficiency. A plausible scenario where only 5% of highly-cleared areas (<30% native vegetation cover remaining) of temperate Australia are reforested showed substantial mitigation potential. Total carbon sequestration after 15 years was up to 25 Mt CO2-e year−1 when carbon and biodiversity goals were balanced and 13 Mt CO2-e year−1 if block plantings of highest biodiversity potential were established. Even when reforestation was restricted to marginal agricultural land (<$2000 ha−1 land value, 28% of the land under agriculture in Australia), total mitigation potential after 15 years was 17–26 Mt CO2-e year−1 using narrow belts of mallee plantings. This work provides guidance on land use to governments and planners. We show that the multiple benefits of young tree plantings can be balanced by manipulating planting width and species choice at establishment. In highly-cleared areas, such plantings can sequester substantial biomass carbon while improving biodiversity and causing negligible loss of agricultural land.