RangelandsRangelands Copyright © Western Australian AgricultureMEMOMEMO Authority, 2011
August 2011 ISSN 1033-5757 Vol. 1, No. 2
EDITOR: Matthew Fletcher Phone: (08) 9166 4019 PO Box 19, Kununurra WA 6743 Email: [email protected]
CONTENTS
Letter from the editor ...... 2 Cattle exports to Indonesia – Information Package – July 2011 ...... 3 Indicative guide to transport costs – 2011 ...... 7 Feeding weaners – planning and management suggestions ...... 8 Lessons from the cattle crash of 1974 ...... 11 Are you bringing stock in from other states? ...... 12 Foetal aging to improve young breeder reconception rates in extensive cattle enterprises ...... 14 Pastoral industry survey of the Kimberley and Pilbara – 2010 ...... 15 Fitzroy Crossing bull sale ...... 16 Comparing HGP strategies – Dry season results from a Producer Demonstration Site...... 17 Design and fabrication of ‘Range Condition Monitoring’ site pegs ...... 19 Broad leaf Wanderrie grass...... 20 Drought – learning from history and experience ...... 21 Consider diversification ...... 22 The business of fodder production – diversification ...... 23 Developing the hay activity...... 24 Fact Sheet: Non indigenous plant species list for WA ...... 25 Lateral and centre pivot systems ...... 28 New supply chain officer in Rangelands ...... 30 On Farm/Station training ...... 30 Introducing the Precision Pastoral Management Tools (PPMT) Project ...... 31 Cattle Market Update – 29 July 2011 ...... 32
Visit http://www.agric.wa.gov.au RANGELANDS MEMO AUGUST 2011
LETTER FROM THE EDITOR
Anne Marie Huey and Peter Smith have put together a technical information package to try and minimise the long-term effects that the suspension of live cattle exports to Indonesia is having on businesses in WA’s northern pastoral region. The package provides useful information on transport requirements within WA and interstate, cattle management suggestions and potential sale opportunities. Note: Revised export control orders to open the way for trade in live feeder cattle to Indonesia were issued on 6 July 2011 (www.liveexports.gov.au). Producers looking to access meat works and store markets in southern WA or interstate will find the indicative guide to transport costs very useful—for calculating the $/hd/km travelled. Discussions with livestock trans- porters have indicated that distances of approximately 3000 km will generally cost $1.40/km/deck, over 1000 km will cost around $1.45/km/deck and shorter distances of 100 km can cost as much as $1.60/km/deck (guide only). The article ‘Feeding weaners – planning and management suggestions’ discusses the practicalities and opportunities of feeding weaners successfully. Important considerations to help ensure a successful weaning program are discussed; feed rations, cost of feed and managing in the yards. The August 2011 Memo also looks at diversification on a pastoral lease—specifically with regard to growing fodder (hay). Francis Bright has included two articles on the business of fodder production. The first article looks at how DAFWA can work with producers to help them make an informed decision regarding a sound financial investment and site specific information on soil type and water quality. The second article outlines a number of questions businesses need to consider before applying for a diversification permit, such as irrigation management skills, machinery requirements, sighting the area to be developed and business profitability. Are you bringing stock in from other states? Dave Muirson has included an article on the rationale behind border barrier control procedures. This article outlines the steps required before stock can be brought into WA, procedures once an animal has been brought in and inspected and lists the prescribed fees and charges. Broad leaf Wanderrie grass (Monachather paradoxus) is one of the more important grasses that occur in wanderrie vegetation and is relished by stock. John Stretch’s article on broad leaf Wanderrie grass looks at the plant’s habitat and distribution, pastoral value and general description of the plant’s appearance in the field.
Happy reading Broad leaf Wanderrie grass tussocks on red sand Matthew Fletcher
Please check the address label on your publication. If it is incorrect or if you would like to be included on our mailing list, let us know!
Disclaimer This material has been written for Western Australian conditions. Its availability does not imply suitability to other areas, and any interpretation or use is the responsibility of the user. Mention of product or trade names does not imply recommendation, and any omissions are unintentional. Recommendations were current at the time of preparation of the original publication.
Front page photos courtesy of Bec Dray, Karratha (Droughtmaster steer), Ruby Plains station (blue dog), Samantha Van Wyngaarden, Kalgoorlie (Damara sheep), Wynyangoo station (billy goat).
2 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au RANGELANDS MEMO AUGUST 2011
CATTLE EXPORTS TO INDONESIA
INFORMATION PACKAGE – JULY 2011
Anne Marie Huey, Broome and Peter Smith, Karratha
Introduction The suspension of the live cattle trade to Indonesia from 8 June to 6 July 2011 has had a significant impact on northern beef producers. The Australian Government has issued revised export control orders to allow the export of live cattle where animals can be tracked through supply chains that meet international standards—World Animal Health (OIE) guidelines. It is expected that the volume of cattle exported to Indonesia this year will be reduced. This means that northern beef producers are unlikely to be able to turn off the number of cattle they anticipated. This technical information package aims to detail some practical strategies that producers can implement in order to minimise the long-term effects on businesses.
Stocking rates The majority of northern Western Australia experienced an above-average wet season in 2011 which resulted in good forage production. If the resumption of live export to Indonesia is slow and the volume of exports low, followed by an average or below average wet season in 2012, the forage supply situation could rapidly become critical in the 2012 dry season. A late start to the 2012 wet season would exacerbate the situation of increased numbers. Thought needs to be given to the consequences of holding on to sale animals over the dry season. Producers with more conservative stocking rates will have higher quality forage later into the dry season. However, by late August 2011 it is likely that stock will be losing body condition as declining forage quality starts to restrict intake. Breeders will now already be in calf—with the majority of calves expected to drop in November/December. Therefore, it is worthwhile considering turning off as many animals as possible if you have concerns about feed availability or the ability of stock to meet market specs in the 2012 season. The risk associated with hanging on to animals in the hope the trade will return to ‘normal’ quickly is overgrazing, which will lead to land degradation and curtail productivity in future years.
Sale opportunities – reducing numbers The most effective turnoff strategy will need to be assessed depending on individual circumstances, but as a general principle it is important to sell cattle for which there is a market rather than try to sell cattle that no one really wants. This may mean selling cattle that are not normally sold. For example: • dry cows but in good condition to slaughter markets, and • marketable ‘out of spec’ cattle that may have been left over from the 350 kg market restriction in 2010.
Live export Live export was suspended to Indonesia only, and not to other markets. There may still be orders for cattle to the Middle East and other parts of south-east Asia. These are not as reliable as
http://www.agric.wa.gov.au 3 RANGELANDS MEMO AUGUST 2011
Indonesia has been in the past, but often accept heavier cattle. These markets may require cattle to have been in a blue-tongue free zone for at least 60 days before shipment. Your local cattle agents will have further information on any upcoming orders and cattle specifications.
Domestic markets As it stands there are currently four potential domestic markets. These are: • fatten for WA meatworks • feedlots • restockers, and • eastern states restockers. Reports suggest there is currently limited killing space at Western Australian processing plants. However, the majority of animals that were destined for Indonesia would not be suitable for immediate processing. Although not guaranteed, if there is a good growing season in the south-west of Western Australia this may provide some market opportunities. Many producers in the south have dramatically reduced stock numbers in recent years due to poor seasonal conditions. If conditions allow, it may be possible to agist cattle or enter into profit-share arrangements with southern producers. Your own personal networks, agents or transport drivers will be a good source of information for such opportunities. Initial enquiries indicate that there is presently some capacity in central and western Queensland for sales, agistment and possibly profit-sharing arrangements. One advantage of heading towards Queensland is that the majority of slaughter cattle in Queensland have significant Bos indicus content. Although transport costs to Queensland would erode much of the profit, this option should be considered. Please refer to the article ‘Indicative Guide to Transport Costs’ to estimate your transport costs. There is also the possibility of a store cattle sale being held at Tennant Creek in the Northern Territory in the near future. Again, your regular cattle agents should have more information regarding these options. Selling heavier cattle is likely to create a better return than selling younger, lighter cattle that may be marketable when the live export trade resumes fully. Selling heavier cattle will also be more effective in reducing stocking pressure on available feed.
Cattle management suggestions The following recommendations may require accepting potentially lower animal performance in future years, but will reduce expenditure now and provide more flexibility to manage the current situation.
Mustering From a management and welfare perspective, it is important that stations continue to muster cattle. The major issues with not mustering are a decreased control of body condition scores (BCS) of your breeder herd. Leaving weaners on decreases BCS of your breeders, leading to decreased fertility and less calves born per cow lifetime. There is also the issue of adverse genetic impacts from the unmarked mickies missed during the annual muster. It is recommended to complete at least one full breeder mustering round this year, but wean and cull heavily.
4 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au RANGELANDS MEMO AUGUST 2011
Weaning Calves can be successfully weaned at all ages, although the smaller the calf the higher the level of subsequent care required. Feeding younger, smaller weaners will be cheaper than conducting a second mustering round. For more information, please refer to the article ‘Feeding weaners – planning and management suggestions’.
Vaccinations If only one breeder mustering round is carried out, then vaccination protocols, particularly for botulism, should be maintained at that round. Experience during the 1970s cattle market slump indicated that significant losses from botulism occurred in groups of cattle some 18 months after their last vaccination.
Supplementation Supplementation programs should be revisited. In phosphorus deficient country the best dollar return from supplementation is likely to be from phosphorus supplementation during the growing season, where this is practical. If using supplement blocks, consider changing to loose mixes which are generally cheaper on a feed unit basis, if not as convenient. Supplement input should be focussed on ‘best bet’ response groups where possible, for example heifers calving and lactating for the first time.
Spaying Spaying surplus heifers and cull cows that are not in forward condition will impose an extra cost, but with the benefit that these cattle will not be breeding and adding to potential overstocking and will be saleable for slaughter in future years.
Fire management The excellent wet season and extended growing season has resulted in a large body of standing feed across most of the Kimberley and Pilbara. Some producers have chosen not to implement prescribed burns in order to maximise feed reserves for increased stock numbers throughout the year. The risk here is that increased fuel loads will pose a serious wildfire threat late in the dry season. To address this, it is important to ensure firebreaks, station roads, access tracks and equipment are maintained so that firefighting can be undertaken if required.
Station management Labour and cash flow restrictions may result in reduced water point infrastructure maintenance with higher associated animal welfare risks. Higher numbers of stock carried over will increase pressure on water points.
Transport requirements
Within Western Australia All cattle north of the tick line need to be dipped before they can be sent south. This requires two dips, three days apart. On the second dip, providing the cattle are tick free, they are cleared by a DAFWA stock inspector. The tick line runs below Mandora Station in the west, travels along the 20th parallel and then follows Carranya Station’s southern boundary, then across to the Northern Territory border. Wallal Downs, Bililluna and Lake Gregory all sit below the tick line. Cattle originating below the tick line and travelling within Western Australia don’t need to be dipped.
http://www.agric.wa.gov.au 5 RANGELANDS MEMO AUGUST 2011
At present, cattle need to be fitted with an NLIS tag whenever they are transported off property. The only exception to this rule has been when cattle are going directly to an export boat or abattoir. As NLIS identification is likely to be a requirement of any future live exports, it is advisable to tag all cattle destined to be transported.
Interstate • Northern Territory Cattle entering the Northern Territory must be accompanied by a certificate of health/waybill, and be identified and cleared for ticks. All cattle which are unloaded at a trucking yard or dip yard for any period of time must have their RFID numbers and transaction details recorded onto the NLIS database. Export depots and the Darwin wharves are treated in the same manner as any other property. For more information on rules and regulations regarding stock movements into the Northern Territory, please refer to the following website.
http://www.nt.gov.au/d/Primary_Industry/ index.cfm?newscat1=Livestock%20Identification&newscat2=&header=Livestock%20Identification%20and%20Movement • Queensland All cattle entering Queensland must have an NLIS tag and all cattle over 100 kg destined for sale or slaughter must be branded with a registered brand. In addition, all cattle travelling to Queensland must be accompanied by a Queensland certificate of health/waybill. For more information on rules and regulations regarding stock movements to Queensland, please refer to the following website. http://www.dpi.qld.gov.au/4790_9940.htm • Other states Other relevant web-sites include: - New South Wales http://www.dpi.nsw.gov.au/agriculture - South Australia http://www.pir.sa.gov.au/home - Victoria http://new.dpi.vic.gov.au/agriculture/beef-and-sheep/nlis/protecting-victorias-beef-and-dairy- industries
6 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au RANGELANDS MEMO AUGUST 2011
INDICATIVE GUIDE TO TRANSPORT COSTS – 2011 Example cost $1.40 Weight No/deck* $/km/deck $/hd/100km $/hd/1000km $/hd/3000km $/hd/5000km $/kg/1000km $/kg/3000km $/kg/5000km 250 38 $1.40 $3.68 $36.84 $110.53 $184.21 $0.15 $0.44 $0.74 300 34 $1.40 $4.12 $41.18 $123.53 $205.88 $0.14 $0.41 $0.69 350 30 $1.40 $4.67 $46.67 $140.00 $233.33 $0.13 $0.40 $0.67 400 28 $1.40 $5.00 $50.00 $150.00 $250.00 $0.13 $0.38 $0.63 450 26 $1.40 $5.38 $53.85 $161.54 $269.23 $0.12 $0.36 $0.60 500 24 $1.40 $5.83 $58.33 $175.00 $291.67 $0.12 $0.35 $0.58 550 22 $1.40 $6.36 $63.64 $190.91 $318.18 $0.12 $0.35 $0.58 600 20 $1.40 $7.00 $70.00 $210.00 $350.00 $0.12 $0.35 $0.58 Example cost $1.45 Weight No/deck* $/km/deck $/hd/100km $/hd/1000km $/hd/3000km $/hd/5000km $/kg/1000km $/kg/3000km $/kg/5000km 250 38 $1.45 $3.82 $38.16 $114.47 $190.79 $0.15 $0.46 $0.76 300 34 $1.45 $4.26 $42.65 $127.94 $213.24 $0.14 $0.43 $0.71 350 30 $1.45 $4.83 $48.33 $145.00 $241.67 $0.14 $0.41 $0.69 400 28 $1.45 $5.18 $51.79 $155.36 $258.93 $0.13 $0.39 $0.65 450 26 $1.45 $5.58 $55.77 $167.31 $278.85 $0.12 $0.37 $0.62 500 24 $1.45 $6.04 $60.42 $181.25 $302.08 $0.12 $0.36 $0.60 550 22 $1.45 $6.59 $65.91 $197.73 $329.55 $0.12 $0.36 $0.60 600 20 $1.45 $7.25 $72.50 $217.50 $362.50 $0.12 $0.36 $0.60 Example cost $1.50 Weight No/deck* $/km/deck $/hd/100km $/hd/1000km $/hd/3000km $/hd/5000km $/kg/1000km $/kg/3000km $/kg/5000km 250 38 $1.50 $3.95 $39.47 $118.42 $197.37 $0.16 $0.47 $0.79 300 34 $1.50 $4.41 $44.12 $132.35 $220.59 $0.15 $0.44 $0.74 350 30 $1.50 $5.00 $50.00 $150.00 $250.00 $0.14 $0.43 $0.71 400 28 $1.50 $5.36 $53.57 $160.71 $267.86 $0.13 $0.40 $0.67 450 26 $1.50 $5.77 $57.69 $173.08 $288.46 $0.13 $0.38 $0.64 500 24 $1.50 $6.25 $62.50 $187.50 $312.50 $0.13 $0.38 $0.63 550 22 $1.50 $6.82 $68.18 $204.55 $340.91 $0.12 $0.37 $0.62 600 20 $1.50 $7.50 $75.00 $225.00 $375.00 $0.13 $0.38 $0.63 Example cost $1.55 Weight No/deck* $/km/deck $/hd/100km $/hd/1000km $/hd/3000km $/hd/5000km $/kg/1000km $/kg/3000km $/kg/5000km 250 38 $1.55 $4.08 $40.79 $122.37 $203.95 $0.16 $0.49 $0.82 300 34 $1.55 $4.56 $45.59 $136.76 $227.94 $0.15 $0.46 $0.76 350 30 $1.55 $5.17 $51.67 $155.00 $258.33 $0.15 $0.44 $0.74 400 28 $1.55 $5.54 $55.36 $166.07 $276.79 $0.14 $0.42 $0.69 450 26 $1.55 $5.96 $59.62 $178.85 $298.08 $0.13 $0.40 $0.66 500 24 $1.55 $6.46 $64.58 $193.75 $322.92 $0.13 $0.39 $0.65 550 22 $1.55 $7.05 $70.45 $211.36 $352.27 $0.13 $0.38 $0.64 600 20 $1.55 $7.75 $77.50 $232.50 $387.50 $0.13 $0.39 $0.65 Example cost $1.60 Weight No/deck* $/km/deck $/hd/100km $/hd/1000km $/hd/3000km $/hd/5000km $/kg/1000km $/kg/3000km $/kg/5000km 250 38 $1.60 $4.21 $42.11 $126.32 $210.53 $0.17 $0.51 $0.84 300 34 $1.60 $4.71 $47.06 $141.18 $235.29 $0.16 $0.47 $0.78 350 30 $1.60 $5.33 $53.33 $160.00 $266.67 $0.15 $0.46 $0.76 400 28 $1.60 $5.71 $57.14 $171.43 $285.71 $0.14 $0.43 $0.71 450 26 $1.60 $6.15 $61.54 $184.62 $307.69 $0.14 $0.41 $0.68 500 24 $1.60 $6.67 $66.67 $200.00 $333.33 $0.13 $0.40 $0.67 550 22 $1.60 $7.27 $72.73 $218.18 $363.64 $0.13 $0.40 $0.66 600 20 $1.60 $8.00 $80.00 $240.00 $400.00 $0.13 $0.40 $0.67 * Australian Livestock Transporters Association (ALTA) - Loading densities. Please note that the loading densities are provided as a guide only. http://www.agric.wa.gov.au 7 RANGELANDS MEMO AUGUST 2011
FEEDING WEANERS – PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT SUGGESTIONS
Peter Smith, Karratha
The value of weaning calves to reduce the nutritional requirements of breeders is well known by pastoralists in the Pilbara and Kimberley. Weaning calves younger and at lighter weights, for example down to ~80 kg, is often used as a management tool during extended dry times and when breeders are in light condition at the second round muster. While weaning is certainly good for the breeders, it can present a management issue for pastoralists of how best to manage numbers of calves of different ages, weights and often genetics. Calves of all ages can be successfully reared without their mothers altogether. All cattle people have at some time successfully reared very young calves and dairy farmers have always reared calves with little postnatal care from their mothers. So the information, products and experience is out there to successfully rear and manage weaned calves of all ages. The issue then is not really about the technology of rearing calves; it is about the practicalities and future opportunities for the calves successfully reared. Cows usually rear their calves to ‘normal’ (say 120 kg+) weaner age/size as part of their role. These ‘normal’ weaners have a fully functional rumen and may benefit from simple urea-based supplements to ensure their survival and continued growth until the first growing season following weaning. Calves weaned at a younger age require higher quality supplements to continue to grow satisfactorily. The high quality (milk) supplement and care provided by cows needs to be replaced. Feeding and managing young weaners and growing them out to weaners where they can better provide for themselves or attain market weights is expensive. The cost of feed for young/light calves to gain around 0.5 kg a day will be in the vicinity of $1.00 a day (2011 prices) on the feed in the Pilbara and higher in the Kimberley. Heavier weaners will cost significantly more. Because there is potentially a lot of cost involved, it is important to develop a plan of the whole calf- feeding program, preferably before weaning starts. Considerations include: • How long is the program likely to be required, i.e. how long until a reasonable probability of useful rain? • How many different weight/age groups are likely to be involved? • What is the ‘vision’ for the future of the calves to be reared? - Are they to be retained as future breeders, or - sold as soon as they attain a market weight? - Consider the option of humanely destroying young calves, or calves with genetics unattractive to the general market before feeding commences. • Explore future market opportunities for the calves effectively reared. Have some serious discussions with people directly involved with the marketing of cattle. More than one opinion may be useful. • Discuss financial implications of the feeding program and potential gaps in future income with financiers. With a clear aim established, develop a feeding and management plan complete with a realistic budget.
8 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au RANGELANDS MEMO AUGUST 2011
Managing young weaners As mentioned, very young calves can certainly be successfully reared but they require a higher quality diet and closer attention than older and heavier calves. • Draft calves according to age, condition and weight. • Provide access to clean water, shade and adequate feed trough space in yards or coolers. • While mixes of grain, protein meal and other additives can certainly be formulated to successfully feed calves, feeding pellets of differing compositions and some hay is usually more convenient and effective to feed. • To reduce the likelihood and effect of Coccidia outbreaks (usually evidenced by black scours) during feeding, ensure that monensin, a coccidiostat, is included in the pellets or other feed mixes during manufacture. (See ‘Coccidia’ in the notes section below.) • Manage the whole feeding program carefully. It is often desirable to allocate a person to manage the weaner feeding program. This ensures that the weaners are observed and fed regularly and feed intake and weaner performance is recorded. • ‘Poor doers’ and non-eaters should be drafted off and managed as a separate ‘hospital’ group. Euthanasia of these animals may be appropriate in some circumstances. • Continually assess calves for performance and move them to heavier groups as they reach target weights. Rations fed to heavier groups are usually cheaper on a price per kilogram basis. • If calves are to be fed for an extended period, a 5 in 1 vaccination is recommended. Calves should be observed for symptoms of lice and worm infestations. While adequate nutrition will reduce the effect of these parasites, treatment may be justified. • Ensure calves have access to water at all times. Troughs may need cleaning on a regular basis if high grain rations are fed. • Feed at least on a daily basis in yards. If some groups of larger weaners are fed in paddocks, feeding every second day or even twice a week may be appropriate. • Feed the weaners well. As with children, young cattle need good nutrition to grow and develop. Poorly fed weaners are likely to be unsaleable and research indicates that poorly fed weaner heifers will be older and heavier at puberty and produce less calves in their lifetime. • It is usually better to do a good job on half the number than half a job on the lot.
Notes: Coccidia organisms are present in all cattle. Numbers increase in cattle suffering stress and attack the gut lining resulting in ‘black scours’. Affected calves should be isolated and treated for scours. Seek veterinary advice for appropriate products. Coccidia infections often don’t become obvious for some weeks after the stress event; in this case probably weaning. Good nutrition and management during the weaning process will reduce the likelihood of Coccidia-related problems.
Ration suggestions The ration suggestions in Table 1 are based on full hand feeding in yards using commercially available pellets. The feeding regimes and expected animal performance is based on information from the Nutrition EDGE training course and apply to healthy, well-managed animals. The effects of disease or parasites will reduce performance.
http://www.agric.wa.gov.au 9 RANGELANDS MEMO AUGUST 2011
Table 1 Example rations Disclaimer: Products manufactured by Milne Feeds are used as examples only, and are not intended as an endorsement of any particular product or supplier. Check your preferred supplier for available products and prices.
Weaner Growth Indicative Example ration DM Intake age/weight target/day cost/30 days* < 70 kg ~ 500 g 1.5 kg 20% CP pellets ~ 2.5% body weight $21 1–2 mths (e.g. Calfgro) + 250 g hay c. 1.75 kg a day 71–100 kg ~ 500 g 1 kg 18% CP ~ 2.25% body weight $24 2–3 mths (e.g. Weaner pellets) c. 2.25 kg/day + 1 kg 14% CP pellets (e.g. Easybeef) + 250 g hay 101–125 kg 250–500 g 2 kg 14% CP pellets + 500 g hay ~ 2% body weight $26 3–4 mths c. 2.5 kg a day 126–150 kg 250–500 g 2.5 kg 12%CP pellets ~ 2% body weight $28 4–6 mths (e.g. Cattle cubes) + 500 g hay c. 3 kg a day > 151 kg 250 g + 3 kg Cattle cubes + 500 g hay ~ 2% body weight $32 6 mths + c. 3.5 kg/170 kg weaner NB: All costs are based on July 2011 price ex Perth and do not include GST or freight. The rows highlighted represent the younger lighter weaners discussed in the text above.
Table 2 Energy (MJME) and Crude Protein (CP) analyses of products included in Table 1
Crude Protein Indicative price Product MJ/ME/kg % 1/7/11 Calfgro Pellets – small calves 12 20 $417 Calfgro-S Cubes – weaners 11 18 $368 Easybeef 11 14.5 $372 Cattle Cubes – live export pellets 10 12 $317 Easyway hay replacer – nugget 8.5 6 $230 Lupins 13 30 NQ Oaten hay – good quality 8.5 6 NQ short supply Note: All prices are ex Perth +GST in 1 tonne bulk bags.
Summary • Don’t fail to plan any calf feeding operation—from start to reasonable end point. • Exploring market options should be a key part of the plan. • Do the job properly. Healthy, strong, conditioned weaners are more likely to find a home than ‘poddies’. • Targeting lower growth rates, for example 250 g/day for younger calves, will be marginally cheaper per day but calves will need to be fed longer; so savings, if any, will be minimal. • The costs quoted in Table 1 are an indication only and do not include freight. • Freight costs of $250/t will increase the costs in Table 1 by around 70%. • Do the sums to ensure there are sufficient funds to see the programs through. • Keep good records of animal performance and feed intake of various groups. Weighing calves on a regular basis, say fortnightly, is good education for them and provides a good guide of how they are performing as well as helping with the progression of calves to appropriate feeding groups. • Yard reared calves have few life skills and significant (heartbreaking) losses from wild dogs and misadventure have occurred when successfully reared calves have been turned out at the end of sometimes long and expensive feeding programs.
10 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au RANGELANDS MEMO AUGUST 2011
LESSONS FROM THE CATTLE CRASH OF 1974 Bill Holmes, Principal Agricultural Economist (Retired), DEEDI, Townsville
The beef marketing crisis of 1974–78 was triggered by an oil supply and price crisis that saw Japan suspend purchases of imported beef at a time when Australian cattle numbers were at an all-time high. At the time the US was our biggest export market, not Japan. The closure of one market brought the whole industry down. Many graziers had shifted from sheep to cattle in response to the ‘wool crisis’ that had begun in the late 1960s and were still carrying the debts from the changeover. The collapse came when seasonal conditions were good, allowing producers to hold cattle back from the market, and the recovery came during a drought, when some had taken their losses and others had by then severely degraded their country. These are some of the lessons from those days: • The market fell faster and further than anyone thought possible. • It stayed down for longer than anyone expected—at first producers hoped it would turn in a matter of weeks, and then months, but in the end it took four and a half years. • When the recovery came the rise was faster than anyone expected. • While all prices fell, the fattening margin was preserved allowing some to remain profitable. • Store producers were hardest hit. The nearly lost art of spaying was rediscovered, allowing store producers to fatten and sell some cows while allowing steers to grow on. • Many producers were paralysed by the thought that they had paid so much more for steers than they were now worth, so they kept hanging on to them. The smart psychology was to accept the loss and focus on the margin between sale prices and replacement costs. • Many producers hung on to cattle waiting for the recovery. For some this worked but, for those who hung on to too many, the result was still a forced sale into a still depressed market. • In many areas 1974–78 represented an episode of massive land degradation from gross overstocking as cattle were held back from the market. • Land prices took a big hit. Mulga country could be bought for 50 cents an acre and some Gulf properties were advertised with stock for $40/head. • Cattle husbandry and mustering were in many instances abandoned leading to large numbers of cattle being rediscovered in 1978. This was a bonus to property purchasers at this time, which also coincided with the introduction of helicopter mustering. Many properties bought at this time were paid for out of the windfall mustering result. The end of the slump was a time of opportunity for the bold. One of the most important lessons to come out of the 1970s experience is that it is pointless trying to ride it out without taking any action. The key now is to focus on issues that can be controlled and try and create some flexibility in your cattle enterprise. Possible strategies include: • Don’t hold your breath waiting for the recovery. • Restructure to produce a fat turnoff. This will mean doing the sums on age of turnoff, and it may mean getting a tie-up with some fattening country. • Use good country for fattening rather than waste it on breeders. • Restructure the herd rather than hoard it—by all means hang on to steers while they grow into some value, but get rid of fat cows while doing it. • Don’t get hung up on what they still owe you—get on with the trading and take the win on the cheap replacements. • Confine the cost-cutting to the overheads but try to maintain husbandry standards. • Be ready for the bargains when things start to come good again (and they will). http://www.agric.wa.gov.au 11 RANGELANDS MEMO AUGUST 2011
ARE YOU BRINGING STOCK IN FROM OTHER STATES?
Dave Muirson, Senior Stock Inspector, Kununurra
The rationale for Border Barrier Control procedures: ‘To assist industry reduce the risk of agricultural pests and livestock disease entering and establishing in WA as a result of the transport of livestock into the state from other parts of Australia.’ Requirements prior to entry • Three days prior notice of the intention to import livestock into WA (to the Stock Inspector in Kununurra or Kalgoorlie). • Documents that establish eligibility to enter WA are faxed to Senior Stock Inspector. • Original documents to travel with stock. Essential documents • AD1071 – movement of stock into WA. • IM998 – declaration of origin – for Johne’s disease, or copy of current JD Accreditation Certificate to indicate suitable status level. • IM994 – declaration of origin—for liver fluke (if from liver fluke test exempt areas of Australia). • Laboratory test results—for liver fluke. • Veterinary certificate of treatment—for liver fluke if completed. Procedures prior to arrival Stock Inspector to receive entry documents by fax detailing: • number and description of animals • owner, property and state of origin • destination property • name of transporter • date of expected entry • freedom from liver fluke eggs (tested or declared from a test exempt area). Arrival at the checkpoint • Checkpoint staff issue Order into Quarantine Notice – form 1 (Plant Diseases Act 1914). • Checkpoint staff verify stock numbers and transporter’s details. • Stock transporter is directed to quarantine yards. Procedures at inspection post • Verify tests/treatments/declarations. • Inspect/treat animals (weed seeds/drench/dip). • Verify identification—brands/NLIS tags. • General health of animals. • Inspect all other equipment, feed, tack and fodder. • Confiscate any quarantine risk material, e.g. bedding, feed, fodder, grain.
12 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au RANGELANDS MEMO AUGUST 2011
Procedures post inspection Complete entry documents: • form No. 5 – Permit to Enter • form No. 2 – ARRPA Act (1976) • Imported Stock Quarantine Notice (ISQN) – (if further tests/treatments are required) • all originals to travel with stock • copies to destination district office. Prescribed fees and charges Fees are charged for: • shipment fee • consignment fee • inspection of the animals (per 15 mins) • travel to job • vehicle washdown • dip/spray • carcase disposal • medicine supply • yard fees • supply of fodder. Quarantine and movement controls ‘are the concern and responsibility of everyone’. Information relating to bringing stock into WA is available at: www.agric.wa.gov.au.
http://www.agric.wa.gov.au 13 RANGELANDS MEMO AUGUST 2011
FOETAL AGING TO IMPROVE YOUNG BREEDER RECONCEPTION RATES IN EXTENSIVE CATTLE ENTERPRISES
Anne Marie Huey, Broome
A recent study conducted by the Department of Agriculture and Food WA focussed on management strategies that would improve young breeder performance in the Pilbara and Kimberley regions. The findings of this study concluded that the first requirement to improve the productivity of heifers and young breeders was to keep them segregated from the breeder herd at least until they weaned their first calf. The recent pastoral industry survey conducted in the Kimberley and Pilbara indicated that while the majority of pastoralists segregate heifers from the breeder herd until first mating, less than 20% of producers keep them segregated until they wean their first calf. Segregation provides the opportunity to more intensively manage this high risk group, for example, provide supplementation, muster twice a year to wean, provide better country or better grazing management. These improved management practices may not be practically or economically feasible for the whole herd but will provide heifers and young breeders to become productive breeders for life. While there is a range of management strategies that may be implemented, optimising the time of first calving is critical to allow females the opportunity to rear and wean a calf and improve the opportunity to reconceive during their first lactation. As the peak nutritional demand occurs when calves are around three months of age, this is the time heifers should have peak nutrition in front of them. To achieve this, calving needs to commence around the time the season breaks—November–December in the Kimberley and January–February in the Pilbara. In order to dictate the time of calving, it is first necessary to control the time of mating. The heifer project demonstrated that controlling bulls as required to successfully control mating is usually not practical in extensively managed herds in northern WA. The WA work indicated that time of first conceptions of heifers was most likely determined by the onset of puberty rather than planned mating. This view is supported by survey results which show that 80% of producers in the Kimberley and Pilbara continuously mate heifers. The main reason cited for not implementing control mating was problems with controlling bulls. One strategy to overcome this problem is to pregnancy test and implement foetal aging to determine when calving will occur. Heifers and breeders can then be segregated into ‘calving intervals’ which can then be managed according to their requirements. For example, heifers due to calve too early may need to be kept in paddocks close to infrastructure in order to allow the weaners to be pulled off late in the year. It may be necessary to wean these calves to a lower weight than might normally occur. However, by establishing the timing of the calving pattern it is possible to allocate resources in advance, thereby ensuring potential problems are adequately addressed. Strategies for dealing with late calvers will depend on a number of factors including cash flow con- siderations, the amount of pasture on hand, the requirement for keeping calves and market options.
14 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au RANGELANDS MEMO AUGUST 2011
Getting the management of the first calving of young breeders right will improve opportunities for conception while lactating, reduce mortality rates, improve the cost/benefit of supplementation and improve breeder herd productivity.
Example of a calving calendar, demonstrating how breeders may be segregated into different calving intervals
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Prime time calvers 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Early calvers 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 Late calvers 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
PASTORAL INDUSTRY SURVEY OF THE KIMBERLEY AND PILBARA – 2010
Rebecca Dray, Karratha
Introduction During 2010, managers of 77 pastoral businesses (64%) throughout the Kimberley and Pilbara of northern WA were interviewed to determine the current productivity, profitability and management practices of pastoral businesses (Dray et al. 2011). In addition to providing a broad ranging ‘snapshot’ of the industry, further analysis of the information collected provides the opportunity to identify groups of businesses performing better than the average for different production and business criteria.
Results and discussion The weaning percentage recorded for first mated heifers for the whole survey averaged 66% and 57% for first lactation females. Average weaning rates of 72% for maiden heifers and 69% for first lactation heifers were recorded by the top 10% of businesses. By looking at the practices these top 10% of producers employ, it will be possible to identify what contributes to the improved productivity they achieve from their animals. High conception rates in heifers mated for the first time and improving reconception rates of young breeders during their first lactation will reduce the burden that young breeders have on a business. Segregation of heifers following weaning and into their breeding life allows for more focused management techniques to be carried out (Smith et al. 2010). All of the top producers segregated heifers until the first mating and a further 50% kept them segregated for longer. This compares to the survey average of 54% of managers segregating heifers until first mating. http://www.agric.wa.gov.au 15 RANGELANDS MEMO AUGUST 2011
Liveweight is one of many factors which determine when heifers reach puberty. It is generally accepted that Bos indicus cattle on average reach sexual maturity at around 300 kg. The average weight of heifers when first mated, recorded during the survey, was 260 kg on average. The initial mating weight of heifers recorded by the ‘top ten’ averaged 300 kg. According to survey results the use of control mating was not a contributing factor in these pastoralists having higher than average weaning rates but this may be a reflection of the generally low adoption rate of controlled mating recorded in the northern rangelands. Campylobacter (Vibrio) commonly affects the reproductive efficiency of young females. The survey recorded that 16% of managers used vibrio vaccine to protect their heifers, compared to 30% of the ‘top ten’ group. Sixty per cent of the ‘top ten’ group also vaccinated bulls compared to the survey average of only 34% vaccinating bulls. Sixty-nine per cent of pastoralists feed supplements to their cattle; 75% of the managers that feed supplements do so throughout the dry season, with 28% feeding during the growing season. Eighty per cent of the ‘top ten’ managers feed supplements throughout the dry season; 63% of these include phosphorus as a main ingredient in their supplements. Twenty-five per cent of the ‘top ten’ group feed supplements for the entire year.
References Dray, R, Stockdale, M, Huey, AM, Fletcher, M & Smith, PC, Final Report B.NBP. 628 – Pastoral industry survey of the Kimberley and Pilbara–WA, 2010, Meat and Livestock Australia, North Sydney, NSW 2060. Smith, PC, Stockdale, M, Dray, R & Jeffery, M 2010, Final Report B.NBP.345 – Industry initiative to improve young breeder performance in the Kimberley and Pilbara of Western Australia, Meat and Livestock Australia, North Sydney, NSW 2060.
16 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au RANGELANDS MEMO AUGUST 2011
COMPARING HGP STRATEGIES
Trisha Cowley, Department of Resources, Katherine
DRY SEASON RESULTS FROM A PRODUCER DEMONSTRATION SITE
Most people agree that hormone growth promotants (HGPs) work. The bulk of research on HGP use in northern Australia has shown that when used properly HGPs increase growth rates significantly. What is less certain is which is the most profitable strategy. Admittedly, there is no ‘one size fits all’ HGP program due to the number of practical factors which need to be considered, such as seasonal conditions, timing and cost of mustering, etc. With this in mind, and the lack of available local data on HGP performance, a producer demonstration site funded by MLA and sponsored by Elanco was established by the Department of Resources on Hayfield Station in 2010.
What was the aim? Key principles to keep in mind when To compare the profitability of several HGP strategies suited to herd management in the designing a HGP program: Katherine region • Greater liveweight gain from HGPs is achieved when animals are achieving What was tested? positive growth, compared to when they are maintaining or losing weight. Four different HGP treatments are being compared (the italics indicate the • More frequent application of shorter acting implants yields greater liveweight gain than abbreviations for each treatment): the use of fewer longer-acting implants, • 2 x 200 day Compudose® implant – providing the animals are experiencing inserted at the beginning of the dry and positive growth. then at the end of the dry/start of the wet • Once an implant program is commenced, it season – 2 x 200D should be continued if the growth response • 200 day Compudose® inserted at the end is to be maximised. of the dry/start of the wet season – Wet • Peak hormone release occurs during the season 200D beginning of the implant’s life; therefore the best returns are achieved when peak • 400 day Compudose® inserted at the hormone release is matched with peak beginning of the dry – 400D nutrition. • No HGP. There are pros and cons for each strategy and these are outlined in Table 1. The cost- effectiveness of each strategy will be compared, which will take into account liveweight gain performance as well as the costs of implementing each strategy.
What we have found so far The preliminary findings support the key principle of HGP use: animals must be growing in order for the implant to enhance growth. On average the Hayfield steers lost weight over the dry, which was due to a poor 2009/10 wet followed by a long dry in 2010 in the trial paddock. On average, trial steers lost 0.02 kg/day, which was a 2.6 kg loss. Not surprisingly, there was no statistically significant difference in dry season average daily gain (ADG) between the HGP treatment groups. There was a trend for animals that had received HGP to perform better than those without and for the 2 x 200D to perform better than the 400D.
http://www.agric.wa.gov.au 17 RANGELANDS MEMO AUGUST 2011
To interpret: If something is statistically significant this means that there is an extremely high probability that the differences recorded have occurred due to the factor you were assessing (in this case, HGP treatment), and gives you confidence in the results. If there is a difference, but it isn’t statistically significant, then there is a high probability that these have just occurred by chance and are not due to the factor that you were assessing.
Table 1 Pros and Cons for each HGP treatment
Strategy Pros Cons 2 x 200D The use of more shorter acting Greater cost of 2 implants implants yields greater weight gains Not practical if steers are not handled at this than less longer acting implants time of year (providing animals are achieving Extra cost of muster if animals are only being positive growth) handled for HGP implantation Matches peak nutrition/highest growth Weight loss, or potential injury due to extra with the highest release of hormone for mustering and handling second implant Wastes hormone during the dry season if animals are losing weight Wet season 200D Matches peak nutrition/highest growth Not practical if steers are not handled at this with the highest release of hormone time of year Minimises wasting hormone during Extra cost of muster if animals are only being weight loss over the dry handled for HGP implantation Weight loss or potential injury due to extra mustering and handling 400D Practical as animals already in hand for Wastes hormone during the dry season if branding animals are losing/holding weight If animals aren’t handled again, they Matches peak hormone release with period will have an active implant in ready for that animals are under the greatest stress the wet season (weaning and branding) No HGP No cost of any extra labour and Miss out on additional liveweight gain mustering required for implantation
Table 2 Dry season average daily gain for the 4 HGP treatment groups
Treatment group No HGP* 400D 2 x 200D
Dry season ADG (kg/day) -0.04 -0.01 0.00 Average liveweight change (kg) -5.8 -1.3 0.0 *Wet season 200D was effectively the same as No HGP, as the implant was only inserted after dry season weight change had been measured.
Musings These results suggest that there is no weight benefit of one HGP strategy over another during the dry season, however, there will be different labour requirements and costs associated with each strategy. This has not been considered yet, as the true comparison between each strategy will occur after the 2010/11 wet when maximum response to HGPs will have occurred. It is also very important to note that this is only one year of data. The year-to-year variation in seasonal conditions has a large impact on the response to HGPs, which will be more cost-effective in some years than others. Better indications of the true worth of such technologies can be drawn from several years of data, where an average return from each strategy can be calculated. The value of this research is that while producers are very aware of the practical pros and cons between each strategy, the actual liveweight gain differences are unknown. Research like this will provide valuable data to help producers determine the most cost-effective strategies for their businesses. For more information on the HGP Producer Demonstration Site trial, please contact Trisha Cowley (Katherine) on (08) 8973 9770.
18 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au RANGELANDS MEMO AUGUST 2011
DESIGN AND FABRICATION OF ‘RANGE CONDITION MONITORING’ SITE PEGS
Jim Addison, Kalgoorlie
The Pastoral Lands Board Range Condition Monitoring (RCM) sites will require six steel pegs per site. These are relatively easy to make up in a station workshop using either purchased steel or steel recovered from station lay-down areas. Fabricating steel site pegs, using 8 mm diameter steel bar, for 28 sites (about the average number/ lease) takes about 3 hours (50 minutes to cut to length, 60 minutes to de-burr each end with an angle grinder, and 50 minutes to bend to shape). Thirteen pegs per 6 metre length is an optimal number. Steel bar 8 mm in diameter comes in 6 metre lengths. Manageable lengths are produced if the steel merchant cuts the lengths at 2760 mm, as the resulting lengths are easily transported on a ute. The most difficult part in the fabrication is getting a tight corner when manually bending the steel bar. Commercially produced pegs that have historically been used for WARMS sites have been mechanically pressed, which achieves a tighter angle. The illustration to the left shows the design and dimensions of an 8 mm diameter steel bar RCM peg. Material cost per peg produced from 8 mm diameter steel bar is under $1. A person on an ‘average’ sized lease would be able to fabricate the pegs and pickets (recovered from the station ‘tip’ and straightened) for the lease RCM sites in half a day.
Alternatively, old mill rod can be used. This has the advantage of being cheaper in material cost but more expensive in labour requirements. Mill rod cannot be manually bent to the required shape so a ‘T’ design is adopted. A 100 mm cross member is welded to a 300 mm upright. This creates safe (to livestock and tyred vehicles) and serviceable site pegs. The illustration to the right shows the design and dimensions of a mill rod RCM peg.
http://www.agric.wa.gov.au 19 RANGELANDS MEMO AUGUST 2011
BROAD LEAF WANDERRIE GRASS
John Stretch, Carnarvon
Broad leaf Wanderrie grass (Monachather paradoxus) is one of the more important grasses that occur in wanderrie vegetation and is relished by stock. It will only germinate in the summer, but established tussocks will respond vigorously to both summer and winter rain.
Habitat and distribution Broad leaf Wanderrie grass is most common on sandy banks and sandplain; often in association with buck Wanderrie grass, the wire Wanderrie grasses, soft Wanderrie grass, Wilcox bush and wanyu. A relatively sparse population of the grass is also to be found at times on shallower sandy gravel and sandy loam soils under acacia. It occurs from central Australia to the WA coast including the Murchison, Gascoyne, Wiluna, Goldfields and Sandstone–Yalgoo–Paynes Find areas.
Indicator value Pastures dominated by broad leaf Wanderrie grass in the Gascoyne and Murchison region are usually in good condition. It is less useful as an indicator of rangeland condition in the Goldfields because it is likely to germinate only in good seasons in pasture dominated by woollybutt grass (Eragrostis eriopoda). The density of broad leaf Wanderrie grass stands in the Gascoyne and Murchison can be expected to deteriorate with the onset of below-average rainfall but population recovery should be rapid with a resumption of more favourable seasonal conditions. In these circumstances it is a good condition indicator. In areas subject to frequent heavy grazing, the population of broad leaf Wanderrie grass is likely to become patchy and confined to the under-canopy of shrubs and trees that afford it some degree of protection. In this circumstance the pasture condition is likely to be fair.
General description Broad leaf Wanderrie grass is a vigorous tussock grass that grows to about 60 cm. The basal tussocks may reach a diameter of 25 cm. Individual stems are unbranched and the individual leaves are coarse to the touch, up to 15 cm in length and around 5 mm across at the widest point. The flower spikes are a loose, open panicle that may reach a length of 15 cm in favourable seasons. As individual seeds attain maturity they detach, leaving behind persisting pairs of pale, papery bracts that resemble those typical of the diverse Yalbalgo Landsystem in good condition—Broad leaf Wanderrie grass is Wanderrie genus Eriachne. the dominant species
20 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au RANGELANDS MEMO AUGUST 2011
DROUGHT – LEARNING FROM HISTORY AND EXPERIENCE
Jim Addison, Kalgoorlie District Office
Climate variation is a fact of life throughout the pastoral areas. Fortunately most pastoral areas of the state have just experienced a good summer/autumn season. In the Southern Rangelands this has arrested a succession of seasons or years of rainfall deficiencies. The deficiencies had consequences for human and livestock hardship, that all involved could have done without. However, it would be a lost opportunity if the recent ‘drought’ experience was rapidly forgotten without some lessons being learnt. In 2004 McKeon et al. reviewed eight well documented droughts since 1898 in Pasture degradation and recovery in Australia’s rangelands: Learning from history. Some drought commonalities that were identified are presented below. • There was a general over-expectation of safe carrying capacity by managers, investors and governments. • Stock numbers and other herbivores (e.g. rabbits, kangaroos and goats), and in some cases woody weed seedlings, increased in response to a period of mainly above-average rainfall that preceded the drought/degradation episode. • Intermittent dry seasons or years resulted in heavy utilisation, damage to the ‘desirable’ perennial species, and ultimately the grazing land resource. This led to the rapid collapse in the capability of the land to carry animals at the onset of drought. • Extreme utilisation in the first years of drought by retaining stock, caused further loss of perennial species, exacerbating the effects of drought in subsequent years. • Rapid decline in, or generally low commodity prices resulted in some managers retaining stock in the hope of better prices or the fear of high cost of restocking. • Continued retention of stock through a long drought period compounded damage to the resource and delayed recovery. • The sequence of drought years resulted in rapid decline in surface cover, which revealed the extent of previous resource damage and further accelerated degradation processes. • Partial recovery occurred during sequences of above-average years, sometimes decades after the major degradation episode. The German philosopher and inventor Georg Hegel (1770–1831) stated: ‘The only thing we learn from history is that we learn nothing from history’. Sombre words indeed. It may be opportune, during the current good seasonal conditions, to better prepare for the next drought (as future drought is a ‘London-to-a-brick’ odds-on certainty). Managing stocking rate (forage demand) within carrying capacity (forage supply) is fundamental in drought risk management. Developing a plan now, during times of plenty, to match forage demand with forage supply, will salve the pain later.
http://www.agric.wa.gov.au 21 RANGELANDS MEMO AUGUST 2011
CONSIDER DIVERSIFICATION
Brian Lloyd, Pastoral Liaison Officer Department of Regional Development and Lands, Broome
Diversification on your pastoral lease can be a hedge against market changeability and can go some way to providing a more even income stream for your overall business. There is a growing interest in diversification from pastoralists across the state, with most proposals being either for growing of fodder or for pastoral-based tourism. Now is a good time to be considering a diversification proposal. Whilst you are trying to catch up with your work schedule, you can be mulling over ideas and thinking about what may and may not work…and the best part is that thinking costs nothing.
Next steps So, after thinking about it, what’s next? Give me a call and discuss your ideas and find out the best way to take the next steps towards implementing your proposal. In relation to fodder proposals in particular, you need to: • Make some preliminary site investigations, in relation to soil types, landform and water quality and quantity. Water quality may also be an important consideration for equipment maintenance. You need to make sure that all the critical factors, such as soil and water, will allow your proposal to work. • Think about which plant species best suits your needs. • Consider the overall development costs and how you might stage the development, and learn from smaller stages before expanding. • Do some sums on the economics, including costs of fuel and machinery, and the one that many tend to underestimate, labour costs. • Investigate what types of operating equipment will be needed; both what would be ‘good to have’ and what is critical to have. You also need to consider maintenance, the need for back-up equipment and the pros and cons of second-hand equipment. • Consider staff capabilities, as some of the operation and maintenance of equipment may be specialised. You may decide that you need someone dedicated to running your proposal. Give me a call on 9192 0237 and Wet season grown forage sorghum on the left and Mitchell grass alluvial we can talk about how you might plains pasture on the right on Gogo station progress your ideas.
22 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au RANGELANDS MEMO AUGUST 2011
THE BUSINESS OF FODDER PRODUCTION – DIVERSIFICATION Francis Bright, Kununurra
Hay production has traditionally been the domain of a small number of producers who grow hay and sell it across the Kimberley and Pilbara. As costs rise and demand increases, more pastoralists are weighing up the possibility of growing their own fodder and having access to improved pastures. The concept of increased production of irrigated fodder in the state’s north-west has potential as a value-adding opportunity for pastoral businesses. The department is keen to assist pastoralists interested in gaining a diversification permit to grow their own fodder – as hay or silage under irrigation, or dryland pasture if the rainfall distribution is adequate. Fodder production is a relatively simple agricultural system that can complement the existing pastoral lease. It also increases the flexibility of herd management and could be used to fast-track the growth of high value animals. As the live export trade has restricted weight limits in recent years this has led to an increased demand for hay. Potentially in the future, there may be an increased requirement to have more control of weight gain and cattle are likely to spend longer periods in the yards during the slower drafting processes required. The Department of Agriculture and Food has a number of tools that will assist pastoralists to plan and apply for the necessary permits and approvals to develop sustainable and viable irrigation systems. Investment in irrigation infrastructure requires careful consideration, unique skills and specific machinery. The financial viability differs depending on the client’s circumstances and current resources. The department can assist in interpreting site-specific information such as suitability of soils, water and fertiliser requirements, and suitability of various fodder types under the current policies. In addition, the department has developed tools to assist with economic analysis and economies of scale for pastoral businesses, looking at all costs, fixed and variable, and the contribution of value- adding to the enterprise. Some of the key issues to be considered are: 1. How much hay would I need per year? 2. How do I compare buying hay against the true cost of growing my own? 3. What quality and type of fodder do I need – when do I need it most? 4. Will I need extra skills, machinery and labour? 5. What will the investment cost me – both before and during production? 6. How much time do I need to allow for the approval processes? 7. What approvals do I need? 8. What is the most suitable fodder for my region and are there any restrictions on what fodders I am allowed to plant? These and many other questions are sure to arise and the Department of Agriculture and Food advises that you discuss them with both the Pastoral Lands Business Unit and DAFWA staff. Contact your local office for advice on who can assist you in your region. http://www.agric.wa.gov.au 23 RANGELANDS MEMO AUGUST 2011
DEVELOPING THE HAY ACTIVITY
Francis Bright, Kununurra
If growing hay fits in with the business objectives as regards labour, machinery, skills and developing a new income source, then there are a number of production steps that need to be investigated. As the whole cattle business is run on a pastoral lease, there is a need to apply for a diversification permit from the Pastoral Lands Board. Issues to consider when developing the permit application • Where to site the irrigation area - soil type and potential salinity - topography - are rocks present – amount of clearing needed - ease of access - above flood levels - availability, depth and quality of groundwater for irrigation? • What species to grow - perennial grass such as Rhodes grass or an annual crop such as a sweet sorghum, oats, or a forage sorghum? A Rhodes grass pasture will grow for more than one year but will need to be watered all year round. A sweet sorghum crop could be grown and replanted but the number of crops per year would depend on the amount of hay to be produced. Please refer to the article ‘Non indigenous plant species list for Western Australia’s rangelands’ for more information on which species can and cannot be grown. • Location - how far from the homestead, machinery sheds and hay storage areas - the state of access tracks - the ease of fencing? • Machinery - where will hay making machinery be bought - where will it be kept - who will operate the machinery - how much will drilling and casing a new bore cost or can an existing source of water be tapped? • Crop management - how will the grass or pasture be established - will it be fertilised using a spreader or a fertigation system - how will pests be kept out of the pivot area? • Making hay profitable - how many hay cuts per year - what is the cost per tonne of hay - what are the benefits? • Grazing or hay only - will grazing of the pasture be allowed - if so what does management need to do about fencing - if no grazing is done, how are stock kept out of the area? Consider also how will the area be rehabilitated if hay production stops at some point in the future?
24 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au RANGELANDS MEMO AUGUST 2011
FACT SHEET Non indigenous plant species lists for Western Australia’s rangelands – Permitted (Green list) and Not Permitted (Red list)
Background
Pastoralists, individuals or organisations proposing to plant non indigenous pasture or crop species on Crown Land in Western Australia’s rangelands require: x for a Pastoral Lease, a Permit under section 119 of the Land Administration Act 1997 from the Pastoral Lands Board; or x for any Lease under sections 47, 48 or Part 6 of the Land Administration Act 1997, approval from the Department of Regional Development and Lands, including compliance with relevant lease conditions.
Where the diversification activity involves the clearing of native vegetation, including naturally occurring native grasses, a clearing permit, under the Environmental Protection Act 1986 will also be required from the Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC).
The selection of appropriate plant species is critical because of the need to balance productivity and environmental considerations. To assist in selection of plants the Department of Agriculture and Food (DAFWA) and DEC investigated the top 100 species likely to be used for pasture or fodder crops.
Each plant was risk rated with a colour based on the traffic light system: Green (low risk), Amber (moderate risk) or Red (high risk).
Pastoralists, individuals or organisations considering planting a non indigenous pasture or crop species can determine the status of a particular plant they wish to grow before applying. The non indigenous plant species lists will assist proponents in developing their initial application, potentially reducing environmental impact assessment timeframes in application assessment.
The non indigenous plant species lists will also be considered by DEC when assessing any clearing permit application. Details on clearing permit applications can be obtained from the DEC Native Vegetation Conservation Branch (Please refer to the end of this document for contact details).
Process of non-indigenous plant selection
Western Australia has strict quarantine guidelines that have placed the State in an advantageous position by minimising the threat of introduced pests and diseases. The first step in determining the suitability of a particular plant is to refer to the Permitted Species List. This list is a quarantine measure applied at our States borders and will inform you of whether the plant is permitted into the State in the first instance, or if it is a Declared or Quarantine Weed. The list is located at www.agric.wa.gov.au/PC_93105.html. http://www.agric.wa.gov.au 25 RANGELANDS MEMO AUGUST 2011
Pastoralists, individuals or organisations can choose their preferred plant species using this document and the non indigenous plant species lists.
Plants that are rated Green are considered to be lowest risk to the environment and should be suitable for most circumstances. Green listed species may not always be permitted as they may not be suitable in all situations; for example if the area proposed for the activity is within or close to a river system or wetland and presents a very favourable environment for escape into the broader environment then it may not be permitted on those grounds. Additionally DEC assessment of the values of the native vegetation applied to be cleared may result in the clearing application being refused due to environmental considerations.
Plants rated Amber do present a risk in some circumstances and hence the context of a particular application requires a more detailed assessment. The risks may be manageable, depending upon the specific circumstances; such as soil fertility, rainfall and proximity to wetlands or river systems.
All plant species that do not appear in either the Green or Red lists are a part of the Amber rating, and as such require an environmental impact assessment on a case-by-case basis.
Species listed as Red will not be permitted under any circumstances.
The permitted plant species list will be updated as information becomes available and the status of the listed species may change over time as more information is available on the behaviour of plants under cultivation.
It is important to note that the suitability of any non indigenous plant species can only be assessed once the specific circumstances of a proposal are known. Other management guidelines will be placed on production areas, such as protective buffers and routine inspections and monitoring of non indigenous plants into the broader environment for all plant species.
GREEN LIST Permitted non indigenous plant species and their suitability for irrigated or non irrigated production
Common name Latin name Irrigated Non irrigated Forage/grain sorghum Sorghum bicolor 9 Forage sorghum - sudan grass Sorghum sudanense (aka 9 9 (open pollinated) S. drumondii) Forage sorghum - Sorghum x Sorghum bicolor x S. 9 9 sudan hybrids sudanense Forage sorghum - sweet sorghum Sorghum bicolor x S. 9 9 hybrids bicolor Forage sorghum - sweet sorghum Sorghum bicolor 9 9 (open pollinated) Maize Zea mays 9 9 Lucerne/alfalfa Medicago sativa 9 Peanut pinto Arachis pintoi 9 Peanut prine Arachis glabrata 9 Forage oats Avena sativa L 9
26 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au RANGELANDS MEMO AUGUST 2011
RED LIST Non indigenous plant species that are Not Permitted
Common name Latin name Birdwood grass Cenchris setiger Buffel grass Cenchrus ciliaris Forage pennisetum (Pearl millet) Pennisetum glaucum (americanum) Leucaena Leucaena leucocephala Stylo Stylosanthes hamata Stylo Stylosanthes scabra Burgundy bean Macroptilium bracteatum Cowpea Vigna unguiculata Maldonado Macroptilium gracile (prev longipendunculatum) Phasey bean Macroptilium lathyroides Pigeon pea Cajanus cajan
Contacts for further information:
For development proposal advice for pastoral lease Permits and Crown land leases: Department of Regional Development and Lands, Lands Division Pastoral Land (pastoral leases) Telephone: (08) 9347 5126 or e-mail [email protected] State Land (other Crown leases) Kimberley and Pilbara – Telephone: (08) 9347 5034 Mid West (Gascoyne and Murchison) – Telephone: (08) 9347 5100 South East (Goldfields and Nullarbor) – Telephone: (08) 9347 5049 e-mail: [email protected]
For clearing permit application advice: Department of Environment and Conservation Native Vegetation Conservation Branch Telephone: (08) 9219 8744 Website: http://www.dec.wa.gov.au/management-and-protection/native-vegetation/index.html
For agronomic advice: Department of Agriculture and Food - contact your local district office: Broome (08) 9194 1400 Kalgoorlie (08) 9088 6033 Carnarvon (08) 9956 3333 Karratha (08) 9143 7000 Derby (08) 9191 0333 Kununurra (08) 9166 4000
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER The State of Western Australia accepts no liability whatsoever by reason of negligence or otherwise arising from the use or release of this information or any part of it.
This Fact Sheet is current as at 16 February 2010.
http://www.agric.wa.gov.au 27 RANGELANDS MEMO AUGUST 2011
LATERAL AND CENTRE PIVOT SYSTEMS
Matthew Fletcher, Kununurra
Lateral and centre pivot systems have been in use in Australia since the 1960s and have proven their capacity to successfully grow a range of crops, including (but not limited to) peanuts, forage sorghum, cotton, oranges, lettuce, corn and sugarcane. It is a common misconception that the benefits of pressurised irrigation are limited to reduced water use. Other benefits such as even application of water across the field, reduced fertiliser input, potential for more conservative farming methods (zero and minimum tillage) and reduced labour requirement are also driving the uptake of pressurised irrigation systems across Australia. The increased usage of lateral move and centre pivot systems over the last five years has been constant, with increased mechanised irrigation taking place across a broad market segment. Main drivers of growth can be attributed to: • encouragement by the three Levels of Government to Conserve Water • ‘On Farm Efficiency’ drives by the federal and state governments enacting the water buy back scheme and efficient utilisation of the water allocation retained by farmers • modern irrigation and irrigation scheduling practices being implemented by the ‘next generation’ farmers • breaking of the prolonged drought which filled many irrigation dams and ensured a supply for the next few years; coupled with more efficient practices. A study, completed by Foley and Raine (2001) in Queensland and northern NSW cotton growing regions, estimated that the cost of a centre pivot machine is approximately $2000/ha and a lateral move machine is approximately $1800/ha. Recent discussions with a manufacturer indicated that these prices have changed very little. They may have even reduced further considering the rise of the A$ against the US$ and the € – where the majority of these machines are manufactured. It should be noted that this cost only covers the cost of the machine and does not include other costs such as drilling for water, and pump purchase and installation. It is difficult to put a $/hectare cost on a system due to factors such as its complexity, size and distance from water. The rule of thumb is the more hectares under one system, the lower the capital cost per hectare. Foley and Raine (2001) reported that the average coverage of the centre pivot machines in the cotton industry is 70 ha/machine compared to the lateral move machines at 165 ha/machine. This can vary from region to region and is controlled by climatic conditions, soil types and application rates, For example, a typical application rate in Tasmania is 5 mm/24 hours, whereas in some parts of New South Wales and Queensland a system over a similar crop may require 11–14 mm/24 hours. This higher application rate increases the quantity of water required and will affect the hydraulic design of a lateral and pivot system. A centre pivot length can range from one span to 20 spans, capping about 950 m. An end feed hose drag linear is generally no longer than 400 m, whilst a centre feed ditch feed linear can have up to 500 m on either side of the cart. Site conditions, available water, crop water requirements, quality of water and quantity of available water are all important factors to be considered when ‘sizing‘ the systems for maximum efficiency and sensibility. The longevity of a machine can be quite varied depending on water quality and the maintenance schedule provided. It is now common for a lifespan of 20 years to be used for budgeting purposes. Water quality in Australia can vary from region to region with soft water, hard water and corrosive water – water quality does need to be checked more often than is currently practised.
28 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au RANGELANDS MEMO AUGUST 2011
Running costs If a property has power via the grid then it is hard to go past an electric system for both pumping and powering the irrigator. However, most properties in the north are self-reliant for power and the most efficient pumping is direct from a diesel engine. The choice is yours as to the irrigator power. Hydraulic systems are powered by a diesel-run powerpac; maintenance and repairs can usually be tackled in-house. Electric systems are run by a diesel-driven generator; maintenance can be done in-house, however repairs are usually specialised. Water flow for a 70 ha pivot growing fodder (hay) should not be less than 70 L/s. For a 40 ha horticultural crop growing under a pivot, water flow should not be less than 50 L/s. A 40 ha pivot growing horticultural crops will draw 55 L/s from a 200 mm diameter bore using a diesel-powered turbine pump and will apply approximately 12 mm in a 24 hr rotation. It should be noted that you can not pump 55 L/s from a 200 mm diameter bore with an electric submersible – you will need a 250 mm diameter bore. Using a diesel Economy pivot in turnip crop on undulating landform pump to lift the water from the bore hole and pressurise the irrigator will require between 8–10 litres/hour. The powerpac or generator used to power the irrigator will use about 2 litres/hour. This generally equates to about 50–60 litres of diesel per megalitre of water applied. If you were to use 6 ML/ha to grow your crop, then a total of 300–360 litres of diesel/ha would be consumed. Systems that are incorrectly designed, for example with the wrong pipe sizes and a ‘one- pump-fits-all’ approach, can add considerably to running costs. Costs of over 100 litres of diesel per megalitre of water applied are not uncommon. A well-designed system starts at Pivot in background and unequipped bore hole in the the suction pipe or pump inlet, travels through foreground a correctly-sized pipeline, then delivers water to the crop via a centre pivot or linear move system to a regulated sprinkler package at spacings that give correct overlap. The teams at Valmont Irrigation Australia and Water Dynamics, Broome are thanked for their assistance in completing this article. Their respective websites are www.valley-au.com/home.aspx and www.waterdynamics.com.
Reference Foley, JP & Raine, SR 2001, Centre pivot and lateral move machines in the Australian cotton industry, National Centre for Engineering in Agriculture Publication 1000176/1, USQ, Toowoomba.
http://www.agric.wa.gov.au 29 RANGELANDS MEMO AUGUST 2011
NEW SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER IN RANGELANDS
Hi. My name is Catherine Marriott and I have just started working with DAFWA in Kununurra as the new Supply Chain Officer for the northern beef industry. I am particularly excited about working with you all in this new role. Having worked as a nutritional and feedlot consultant in the north for the last eight years, it is exciting for me to be having a more holistic contribution to the future direction of the industry. Prior to this role, I was working for MLA over in Indonesia and to a lesser extent the Philippines for three years. My main responsibility was as a feedlot nutritionist, whilst also helping with animal handling schools, breeding programs and general feedlot management. I found working with the Indonesian feedlotters extremely rewarding and believe there is a fantastic, although very different, future for Australian animals in Indonesia. When I am not working, I enjoy campdrafting, mustering, starting horses, playing tennis, hiking, camping and having a laugh with friends, I am also attempting to teach myself guitar. I would love to hear from you all and would value any of your ideas, thoughts or comments on taking the industry forward. I am very much looking forward to meeting you all at some stage in the near future.
2Q)DUP6WDWLRQ7UDLQLQJ
9RFDWLRQDO7UDLQLQJDQG(GXFDWLRQ&HQWUH 97(& GHOLYHUV&HUWL¿FDWHWR$GYDQFHG'LSORPDFRXUVHV VSHFLDOLVLQJLQJUDLQSURGXFWLRQVKHHSDQGEHHI SURGXFWLRQDQGUXUDOEXVLQHVVPDQDJHPHQW
2XU(VSHUDQFHFDPSXVGHOLYHUVWRWKHHQWLUH *ROG¿HOGV(VSHUDQFHDQG1XOODUERUUHJLRQV )RUPRUHLQIRUPDWLRQFRQWDFW$JULFXOWXUDO/HFWXUHU -RKQ%RXUNH RU 92&$7,21$/75$,1,1*$1'('8&$7,21&(175( (63(5$1&(&$0386 3KRQH $GGUHVV 3LQN/DNH5RDG(VSHUDQFH:$ (PDLO FRQWDFWHVS#YWHFZDHGXDX ZZZYWHFZDHGXDX 30 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au RANGELANDS MEMO AUGUST 2011 INTRODUCING THE PRECISION PASTORAL MANAGEMENT TOOLS (PPMT) PROJECT Sally Leigo, CRC-REP The Precision Pastoral Management Tools (PPMT) Project is being undertaken by the Cooperative Research Centre for Remote Economic Participation (CRC-REP) with DAFWA being one of the partners. The project aims to deliver a Precision Pastoralism Management System that will allow pastoralists to increase the efficiency of their pastoral enterprise through the combination of animal data collected by a Remote Livestock Management System (‘walk-over-weighing’ and automatic draft- ing) with spatial data on grazing lands to match livestock performance to environmental conditions. For those not aware, the remote livestock management system was developed by CAWD engineering as part of the Desert Knowledge CRC’s 21st Century Pastoralism project. This project was able to demonstrate that through the use of walk-over-weighing, accurate weights of cattle could be collected at watering points without any need for labour in handling the cattle. In addition, the project also demonstrated that an auto- matic drafter could be used to draft cattle according to their Remote Livestock Management System comprised of the walk-over-weighing and auto-drafter units NLIS tags without any labour requirements. By combining the Remote Livestock Management System with relevant rangeland pasture data obtained from satellite imagery, pastoralists can monitor their cattle and land condition, and in response implement management decisions to maximise their returns. The project is tied to the life of the CRC-REP and is in its first year of seven. At this stage we aim to have the project developed by the end of the year, with input from pastoralists across northern Australia and the project’s partners. If you would like to learn more about the project, please do not hesitate to contact the Project Leader: Sally Leigo Tel: (08) 8951 8144 Mobile: 0467 770 661 Email: [email protected] http://www.agric.wa.gov.au 31 RANGELANDS MEMO AUGUST 2011 CATTLE MARKET UPDATE – 29 JULY 2011 $ oil/barrel (USD) Export Numbers (Northern Ports in 2011) 0 head of cattle have left Port Hedland Port so far in 2011 55 766 head of cattle have left Broome Port so far in 2011 22 317 head of cattle have left Wyndham Port so far in 2011 32 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au