How effective are broad-scale nutrient mass balances for determining the sustainability of lot-feed manure application?

Nutrient mass balances have been used to assess a variety of land resource scenarios, at various scales. They are widely used as a simple basis for policy, planning, and regulatory decisions but it is not clear how accurately they reflect reality. This study provides a critique of broad-scale nutrient mass balances, with particular application to the fertiliser use of beef lot-feeding manure in Queensland. Mass balances completed at the district and farm scale were found to misrepresent actual manure management behaviour and potentially the risk of nutrient contamination of water resources. The difficulties of handling stockpile manure and concerns about soil compaction mean that manure is spread thickly over a few paddocks at a time and not evenly across a whole farm. Consequently, higher nutrient loads were applied to a single paddock less frequently than annually. This resulted in years with excess nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium remaining in the soil profile. This conclusion was supported by evidence of significant nutrient movement in several of the soil profiles studied. Spreading manure is profitable, but maximum returns can be associated with increased risk of nutrient leaching relative to conventional inorganic fertiliser practices. Bio-economic simulations found this increased risk where manure was applied to supply crop nitrogen requirements (the practice of the case study farms, 200-5000 head lot-feeders). Thus, the use of broad-scale mass balances can be misleading because paddock management is spatially heterogeneous and this leads to increased local potential for nutrient loss. In response to the effect of spatial heterogeneity policy makers who intend to use mass balance techniques to estimate potential for nutrient contamination should apply these techniques conservatively.

Validating economic and environmental sustainability of a short-term summer forage legume in dryland wheat cropping systems in south-west Queensland.

The present study set out to test the hypothesis through field and simulation studies that the incorporation of short-term summer legumes, particularly annual legume lablab (Lablab purpureus cv. Highworth), in a fallow-wheat cropping system will improve the overall economic and environmental benefits in south-west Queensland. Replicated, large plot experiments were established at five commercial properties by using their machineries, and two smaller plot experiments were established at two intensively researched sites (Roma and St George). A detailed study on various other biennial and perennial summer forage legumes in rotation with wheat and influenced by phosphorus (P) supply (10 and 40 kg P/ha) was also carried out at the two research sites. The other legumes were lucerne (Medicago sativa), butterfly pea (Clitoria ternatea) and burgundy bean (Macroptilium bracteatum). After legumes, spring wheat (Triticum aestivum) was sown into the legume stubble. The annual lablab produced the highest forage yield, whereas germination, establishment and production of other biennial and perennial legumes were poor, particularly in the red soil at St George. At the commercial sites, only lablab-wheat rotations were experimented, with an increased supply of P in subsurface soil (20 kg P/ha). The lablab grown at the commercial sites yielded between 3 and 6 t/ha forage yield over 2-3 month periods, whereas the following wheat crop with no applied fertiliser yielded between 0.5 to 2.5 t/ha. The wheat following lablab yielded 30% less, on average, than the wheat in a fallow plot, and the profitability of wheat following lablab was slightly higher than that of the wheat following fallow because of greater costs associated with fallow management. The profitability of the lablab-wheat phase was determined after accounting for the input costs and additional costs associated with the management of fallow and in-crop herbicide applications for a fallow-wheat system. The economic and environmental benefits of forage lablab and wheat cropping were also assessed through simulations over a long-term climatic pattern by using economic (PreCAPS) and biophysical (Agricultural Production Systems Simulation, APSIM) decision support models. Analysis of the long-term rainfall pattern (70% in summer and 30% in winter) and simulation studies indicated that ~50% time a wheat crop would not be planted or would fail to produce a profitable crop (grain yield less than 1 t/ha) because of less and unreliable rainfall in winter. Whereas forage lablab in summer would produce a profitable crop, with a forage yield of more than 3 t/ha, ~90% times. Only 14 wheat crops (of 26 growing seasons, i.e. 54%) were profitable, compared with 22 forage lablab (of 25 seasons, i.e. 90%). An opportunistic double-cropping of lablab in summer and wheat in winter is also viable and profitable in 50% of the years. Simulation studies also indicated that an opportunistic lablab-wheat cropping can reduce the potential runoff+drainage by more than 40% in the Roma region, leading to improved economic and environmental benefits.

Poor adoption of ley-pastures in south-west Queensland: biophysical, economic and social constraints.

The present review identifies various constraints relating to poor adoption of ley-pastures in south-west Queensland, and suggests changes in research, development and extension efforts for improved adoption. The constraints include biophysical, economic and social constraints. In terms of biophysical constraints, first, shallower soil profiles with subsoil constraints (salt and sodicity), unpredictable rainfall, drier conditions with higher soil temperature and evaporative demand in summer, and frost and subzero temperature in winter, frequently result in a failure of established, or establishing, pastures. Second, there are limited options for legumes in a ley-pasture, with the legumes currently being mostly winter-active legumes such as lucerne and medics. Winter-active legumes are ineffective in improving soil conditions in a region with summer-dominant rainfall. Third, most grain growers are reluctant to include grasses in their ley-pasture mix, which can be uneconomical for various reasons, including nitrogen immobilisation, carryover of cereal diseases and depressed yields of the following cereal crops. Fourth, a severe depletion of soil water following perennial ley-pastures (grass + legumes or lucerne) can reduce the yields of subsequent crops for several seasons, and the practice of longer fallows to increase soil water storage may be uneconomical and damaging to the environment. Economic assessments of integrating medium- to long-term ley-pastures into cropping regions are generally less attractive because of reduced capital flow, increased capital investment, economic loss associated with establishment and termination phases of ley-pastures, and lost opportunities for cropping in a favourable season. Income from livestock on ley-pastures and soil productivity gains to subsequent crops in rotation may not be comparable to cropping when grain prices are high. However, the economic benefits of ley-pastures may be underestimated, because of unaccounted environmental benefits such as enhanced water use, and reduced soil erosion from summer-dominant rainfall, and therefore, this requires further investigation. In terms of social constraints, the risk of poor and unreliable establishment and persistence, uncertainties in economic and environmental benefits, the complicated process of changing from crop to ley-pastures and vice versa, and the additional labour and management requirements of livestock, present growers socially unattractive and complex decision-making processes for considering adoption of an existing medium- to long-term ley-pasture technology. It is essential that research, development and extension efforts should consider that new ley-pasture options, such as incorporation of a short-term summer forage legume, need to be less risky in establishment, productive in a region with prevailing biophysical constraints, economically viable, less complex and highly flexible in the change-over processes, and socially attractive to growers for adoption in south-west Queensland.

Fenja Rost with two unidentified men on a horse drawn cart working on a farm Portraits Groups

Digital Image

Hans Krakauer and Elizabeth Krakauer nee Gottschalk; Boston, New York. Portraits Couples

Photograph taken in front of the house in Boston, in upstate New York outside of Buffalo, where in 1939 they set up their private medical practice. After WWII, they built a new house next door.

Therese Godshaw's nee Molling 70th birthday party at the Krakauer home; Boston Portraits Family

Left to right behind table: John Krakauer, Donald, Michael and Robert Godshaw (Children of Hal and Anne), Grandma Therese Godshaw nee Molling, Julius Pick (Grandfather of Robert, Michael and Donald). In front of table: Wendy and Gerry Godshaw (children of Kurt and Edith.

Leo Baeck with group; Boston Portraits; Groups; Men

Page 58 of the "American Jewish Cavalcade" scrapbook of Leo Baeck in New York found in ROS 10 Folder 3

Hans Krakauer and Elizabeth Krakauer nee Gottschalk; Boston, New York. Portraits Couples

Photograph taken in front of the house in Boston, in upstate New York outside of Buffalo, where in 1939 they set up their private medical practice. After WWII, they built a new house next door.

Ruth Weiss nee Stern with Annette, Meir, and David Weiss at Mortimer Hill Farm; Mortimer, England.

Digital Image

Ruth Weiss nee Stern with Annette, Meir, and David Weiss at Mortimer Hill Farm; Mortimer, England..

Digital Image

Elizabeth nee Gottschalk and Hans Krakauer's first house in Boston with descriptions on the picture; Boston, Erie County, New York.

Digital Image

Objective `Safe' Grazing Capacities for South-West Queensland Australia: Model Application and Evaluation

This paper describes the employment of two experienced graziers as consultants to apply and evaluate a model for calculating 'safe' long-term grazing capacities of individual properties. The model was based on ecological principles and entailed estimates of average annual forage grown (kglha) on the different land systems on each property and the calculation of the number of livestock (dry sheep equivalents, DSE) required to 'safely' utilise this forage. The grazier consultants applied and evaluated the 'safe' grazing capacity model on 20 properties of their choosing. For evaluation, model results were compared with; (a) the Department of Lands rated carrying capacities for those properties and (b) the grazing capacity assessed independently by the owners of those properties. For the 20 properties, the average 'safe' grazing capacity calculated by the model (21.0 DSE/kmZ) was 8% lighter than the average of the owner assessed capacities (22.7 DSE/kmZ), which in tum was 37% lighter than the average of the pre-1989 Department of Lands rated carrying capacity (31.0 DSE/kmZ). The grazing land management and administrative implications of these results and the role graziers played as consultants are discussed.

Objective `Safe' Grazing Capacities for South-West Queensland Australia: Development of a Model for Individual Properties

Few tools are available to assist graziers, land administrators and financiers in making objective grazing capacity decisions on Australian rangelands, despite existing knowledge regarding stocking rate theory and the impact of stocking rates on land condition. To address this issue a model for objectively estimating 'safe' grazing capacities on individual grazing properties in south-west Queensland was developed. The method is based on 'safe' levels of utilisation (15%-20%) by domestic livestock of average annual forage grown for each land system on a property. Average annual forage grown (kglha) was calculated as the product of the rainfall use efficiency (kglhdmm) and average annual rainfall (mm) for a land system. This estimate included the impact of tree and shrub cover on forage production. The 'safe' levels of forage utilisation for south- west Queensland pastures were derived from the combined experience of (1) re-analysis of the results of grazing trials, (2) reaching a consensus on local knowledge and (3) examination of existing grazing practice on 'benchmark' grazing properties. We recognise the problems in defining, determining and using grazing capacity values, but consider that the model offers decision makers a tool that can be used to assess the grazing capacity of individual properties.

Hans Krakauer and Elizabeth Krakauer nee Gottschalk; Boston, New York. Portraits Couples

Photograph taken in front of the house in Boston, in upstate New York outside of Buffalo, where in 1939 they set up their private medical practice. After WWII, they built a new house next door.

Therese Godshaw's nee Molling 70th birthday party at the Krakauer home; Boston Portraits Family

Left to right behind table: John Krakauer, Donald, Michael and Robert Godshaw (Children of Hal and Anne), Grandma Therese Godshaw nee Molling, Julius Pick (Grandfather of Robert, Michael and Donald). In front of table: Wendy and Gerry Godshaw (children of Kurt and Edith.