Fibre production by beef cows

Cattle grow and shed fibre which assists them adapt to seasonal changes in the environment. In the absence of cattle fibre production data for southern Australia, Angus, Hereford, Simmental and Limousin cows and crosses between these breeds grazing perennial pastures at Hamilton, Victoria were sampled in late winter. The fibre-growing area on the sides of cattle was measured, fibre sampled at the mid-side site and the sampling area determined. Fibre was tested for fibre diameter distribution, clean washing yield and fibre length measured. Cows were 3-7 years of age, liveweights were 412-712 kg and the mean fibre-growing area was 2.2 m². This produced an average 682 g of total fibre (range 3461-175 g). The mean fibre diameter of all fibres was 51.7 μm (range 43-62 μm) and 18% of fibres were 36 μm (range 6-39%). The clean washing yield was 92.4% (range 87.4-95.8%). Fibre length averaged 21 mm. Increasing the age, liveweight and condition score of cows and increasing weight of clean fibre were associated with significant increases in mean fibre diameter. Breed of cattle did not affect fibre production (P > 0.1) but did affect mean fibre diameter (P < 0.05). The quantity of fibre production indicates potential for low value textile production. The high level of total fibre production, twice that of an earlier report, and fibre shedding from cattle suggests that white fibre-producing animals such as Merino sheep, Angora and cashmere goats and alpaca should avoid using cattle-handling facilities, particularly in the month before shearing.

Behind the conciliation doors : settling discrimination complaints in Victoria

Settling of discrimination complaints prior to substantive hearing - study of settled complaints in Victoria in the period 2006-07 - use of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms - why parties settle rather than litigate - outcomes of settlement - recommendations for reforming Australia's anti-discrimination laws.

Victoria paves the way to eliminating discrimination

In April 2010, the Victorian government passed long awaited amendments to the Equal Opportunity Act 1995, which come into force in August 2011. The changes result from a review conducted by former public advocate Julian Gardner. A parallel review examined the exceptions and exemptions. Gardner’s recommendations were aimed at strengthening the Act’s effectiveness in addressing systemic discrimination and promoting substantive equality.Consequently, the Equal Opportunity Act 2010 (Vic) (EO Act 2010) introduces unique mechanisms for addressing discrimination which are worth examining in detail. This note considers the amended definitions of discrimination and focuses on the modifications of the dispute resolution process, new measures to promote substantive equality, and changes to the Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission’s (VEOHRC) functions.Changes to the exception and exemption provisions were examined in an earlier note.

Towards more integrated natural resource management in Victoria : possible elements of an integrated state-wide policy framework

There is a growing recognition of the complexity of environmental issues and acceptance of the value of more integrated approaches to address them. Evidence of progress with the development of more integrated approaches is however less clear cut. Within this context, this paper explores how a more integrated approach 10 natural resource management at a state government level could be progressed. Using recent experience in Victoria as a focus, this paper provides an overview of environment and natural resources issues confronting the State. highlights why integration is an important element of any response. and outlines the current policy and organisational context. Possible elements of a state-wide policy framework for more integrated natural resource management across a state government organisation are also outlined and discussed.

New governance, green planning and sustainability : Tasmania together and growing Victoria together

Bridgman and Davis(2000:91) have argued that ‘ideally government will have a well developed and widely distributed policy framework, setting out economic, social and environmental objectives’. This article compares and evaluates two such frameworks or plans, Tasmania Together and Growing Victoria Together, in terms of their potential to promote sustainability. It argues that they are very different exercises in new governance, aimed at reconnecting with community priorities and at redirecting macro-policy setting away from a preoccupation with economic priorities, respectively. Nevertheless, both plans have the capacity to ‘green’ state planning, in Tasmania in terms of more purposeful benchmarks, and in Victoria in terms of enhanced sustainability emphasis in the macro-policy setting. The article encounters tensions in its review of the plans between deliberation and planning, policy empowerment and policy progress, and policy institutionalisation and politicisation as means of achieving policy change. It finds that whilst Tasmania and Victoria are re-engaged states that are reinventing state policy, as yet they are failing to meet the governance challenges of sustainability.