Several grazing strategies are recommended to manage sustainably for rainfall variability in northern Australia, but there is little objective data on their profitability relative to less sustainable management systems such as heavy stocking. In 1997, a large cattle grazing trial was initiated in northern Queensland to quantify the relative performance of a range of grazing strategies in a variable climate. These strategies were (i) moderate stocking (MSR) stocked at the calculated long-term carrying capacity (LTCC), (ii) heavy stocking (HSR) at twice LTCC, (iii) rotational wet-season spelling (R/Spell) at 1.5 LTCC, (iv) variable stocking (VAR), with stocking rates adjusted in May based on available forage and (v) a southern oscillation index (SOI)-variable strategy, with stocking rates adjusted in November based on available forage and SOI-based seasonal forecasts.Rainfall varied over the 12-year trial period, with sequences of dry and wet years. Gross margins (GM) in the HSR were initially high but collapsed in drier years due to high costs and reduced product value. GMs only recovered in later years with a reduced stocking rate and increased rainfall. The VAR and SOI were also initially very profitable, but GMs plunged as rainfall declined due to reduced animal performance and the sale of poor-condition cattle. This sharp cut in stocking rates nevertheless allowed GMs to recover well in subsequent years. In the MSR, GMs remained relatively constant across most years due to low costs and a higher product value. The R/Spell also performed relatively well despite being compromised by an ill-timed fire, drought and the subsequent sale of poor-condition cattle.
Rainfall variability is a challenge to sustainable and profitable cattle production in northern Australia. Strategies recommended to manage for rainfall variability, like light or variable stocking, are not widely adopted. This is due partly to the perception that sustainability and profitability are incompatible. A large, long-term grazing trial was initiated in 1997 in north Queensland, Australia, to test the effect of different grazing strategies on cattle production. These strategies are: (i) constant light stocking (LSR) at long-term carrying capacity (LTCC); (ii) constant heavy stocking (HSR) at twice LTCC; (iii) rotational wet-season spelling (R/Spell) at 1.5 LTCC; (iv) variable stocking (VAR), with stocking rates adjusted in May based on available pasture; and (v) a Southern Oscillation Index (SOI) variable strategy, with stocking rates adjusted in November, based on available pasture and SOI seasonal forecasts. Animal performance varied markedly over the 10 years for which data is presented, due to pronounced differences in rainfall and pasture availability. Nonetheless, lighter stocking at or about LTCC consistently gave the best individual liveweight gain (LWG), condition score and skeletal growth; mean LWG per annum was thus highest in the LSR (113 kg), intermediate in the R/Spell (104 kg) and lowest in the HSR (86 kg). Mean LWG was 106 kg in the VAR and 103 kg in the SOI but, in all years, the relative performance of these strategies was dependent upon the stocking rate applied. After 2 years on the trial, steers from lightly stocked strategies were 60–100 kg heavier and received appreciable carcass price premiums at the meatworks compared to those under heavy stocking. In contrast, LWG per unit area was greatest at stocking rates of about twice LTCC; mean LWG/ha was thus greatest in the HSR (21 kg/ha), but this strategy required drought feeding in four of the 10 years and was unsustainable. Although LWG/ha was lower in the LSR (mean 14 kg/ha), or in strategies that reduced stocking rates in dry years like the VAR (mean 18 kg/ha) and SOI (mean 17 kg/ha), these strategies did not require drought feeding and appeared sustainable. The R/Spell strategy (mean 104 kg/ha) was compromised by an ill-timed fire, but also performed satisfactorily. The present results provide important evidence challenging the assumption that sustainable management in a variable environment is unprofitable. Further research is required to fully quantify the long-term effects of these strategies on land condition and profitability and to extrapolate the results to breeder performance at the property level.
Rainfall variability is a major challenge to sustainable grazing management in northern Australia, with management often complicated further by large, spatially-heterogeneous paddocks. This paper presents the latest grazing research and associated bio-economic modelling from northern Australia and assesses the extent to which current recommendations to manage for these issues are supported. Overall, stocking around the safe long-term carrying capacity will maintain land condition and maximise long-term profitability. However, stocking rates should be varied in a risk-averse manner as pasture availability varies between years. Periodic wet-season spelling is also essential to maintain pasture condition and allow recovery of overgrazed areas. Uneven grazing distributions can be partially managed through fencing, providing additional water-points and in some cases patch-burning, although the economics of infrastructure development are extremely context-dependent. Overall, complex multi-paddock grazing systems do not appear justified in northern Australia. Provided the key management principles outlined above are applied in an active, adaptive manner, acceptable economic and environmental outcomes will be achieved irrespective of the grazing system applied.
On-going, high-profile public debate about climate change has focussed attention on how to monitor the soil organic carbon stock (C s ) of rangelands (savannas). Unfortunately, optimal sampling of the rangelands for baseline C s -the critical first step towards efficient monitoring -has received relatively little attention to date. Moreover, in the rangelands of tropical Australia relatively little is known about how C s is influenced by the practice of cattle grazing. To address these issues we used linear mixed models to: (i) unravel how grazing pressure (over a 12-year period) and soil type have affected C s and the stable carbon isotope ratio of soil organic carbon (δ 13 C) (a measure of the relative contributions of C 3 and C 4 vegetation to C s ); (ii) examine the spatial covariation of C s and δ 13 C; and, (iii) explore the amount of soil sampling required to adequately determine baseline C s . Modelling was done in the context of the material coordinate system for the soil profile, therefore the depths reported, while conventional, are only nominal. Linear mixed models revealed that soil type and grazing pressure interacted to influence C s to a depth of 0.3 m in the profile. At a depth of 0.5 m there was no effect of grazing on C s , but the soil type effect on C s was significant. Soil type influenced δ 13C to a soil depth of 0.5 m but there was no effect of grazing at any depth examined. The linear mixed model also revealed the strong negative correlation of C s with δ 13 C, particularly to a depth of 0.1 m in the soil profile. This suggested that increased C s at the study site was associated with increased input of C from C 3 trees and shrubs relative to the C 4 perennial grasses; as the latter form the bulk of the cattle diet, we contend that C sequestration may be negatively correlated with forage production. Our baseline C s sampling recommendation for cattle-grazing properties of the tropical rangelands of Australia is to: (i) divide the property into units of apparently uniform soil type and grazing management; (ii) use stratified simple random sampling to spread at least 25 soil sampling locations about each unit, with at least two samples collected per stratum. This will be adequate to accurately estimate baseline mean C s to within 20% of the true mean, to a nominal depth of 0.3 m in the profile.Crown
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.