PastoralPastoral MEMOMEMO Copyright © Western Australian Agriculture Authority, 2009 MEMOMEMO

Northern Pastoral Region

December 2009 ISSN 1033-5757 Vol. 30, No. 4

EDITOR: Matthew Fletcher Phone: (08) 9166 4019 PO Box 19, Kununurra WA 6743 Email: [email protected]

CONTENTS

Birds of our rangelands – how healthy is your property? ...... 3 Hello Northern Rangelanders ...... 6 Linking land condition to economic returns – the cost of degradation ...... 7 WARMS monitoring and self-assessment monitoring methods ...... 11 Monitoring method for pastoral self-assessment and reporting ...... 12 Know your pasture plants ...... 14 Destocking captures more carbon, but does it pay? ...... 16 The burning issue – using fire as a tool in the Kimberley ...... 19 Trialling check banks to stop gully erosion ...... 22 Breeding EDGE opportunity in the Kimberley and Pilbara ...... 23 Imported horses must meet post-entry liver fluke quarantine requirements...... 24 Learn to pregnancy test – courses available in the Kimberley ...... 25 ESRM to begin property planning and on-ground works in the Fortescue River catchment ...... 26 Claim the date!‘Rain on the Rangelands’ Conference– Bourke, NSW, September 2010 ...... 27 Invasive prickly weed discovered in the East Kimberley ...... 28 Pilbara Mesquite Management Committee – an update ...... 29 Baiting feral pigs in the Kimberley ...... 31 Increase in Kimberley chemical subsidy for declared plant control ...... 33 Update to all members of the Kimberley Rangelands Biosecurity Association Inc...... 34 Cattle Market Update – 4 December 2009 ...... 35

Visit http://www.agric.wa.gov.au PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

Chance of exceeding median rainfall December 2009 – February 2010

Median rainfall December to February, based on 105 years of data (1900–2005)

Based on 105 years of data 1900 to 2005

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 photo courtesy of Michael Jeffery, Derby

2 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

BIRDS OF OUR RANGELANDS – HOW HEALTHY IS YOUR PROPERTY?

Andrew Huggett and Kevin Marshall

Why we need birds For more than 5000 years birds have been used to supply us with food, clothing, medicine, sport, and quiet enjoyment. The ancient Egyptians used birds to help indicate the time to sow and harvest crops, the quality of water supplies, and the health of soil and vegetation. Another highly advanced civilisation—the Inca of the South American Andes—understood how the farming cycle was connected to nature and could ‘read’ the health of their land from signs provided by birds and other animals. Today, we depend on birds for many services, from canaries detecting poisonous gases in underground mines to the control of pests and diseases in crops and the pollination of many economically valuable plants. Many people, including farmers, attach high value to individual bird species such as Malleefowl and Bush Stone-curlew in Western Australia and Seriema (or Road Runner—known as the farmer’s friend because of its control of damaging crop insects and taste for rodents and snakes) in Brazil, Bolivia and Argentina.

Birds as indicators and planning tools Recent work in the northern WA wheatbelt has shown just how important some birds can be as indicators for the health of our farming landscapes and as tools for their restoration. In the Buntine– Marchagee Natural Diversity Recovery Catchment—a 180 000 ha area threatened by secondary salinity between Coorow, Wubin and Dalwallinu—six species of declining small woodland and shrubland birds have been used to design and implement a strategic, long-term revegetation and habitat restoration program. These are birds that are unable to cross gaps between remnants of more than about 400–1000 metres and depend on large enough (i.e. 40 ha or more) high quality habitat fenced off from stock for their survival and reproduction. Over 522 000 trees and shrubs have been planted at key sites on farms in the catchment since 2004 while more than 150 ha of priority remnants have been fenced (Plate 1). The project was recently highly commended by the Society for Ecological Restoration International. Many of you reading this article will have observed birds on your ‘patch’ and how they use different resources. For example, you may have noticed how many different bird species use your cattle troughs as watering points in increasingly dry times (Plate 2). Their very presence on your property can indicate just how well your land is faring in providing food, water, shelter and breeding sites for bird species that may be in decline or threatened elsewhere (such as in the wheatbelt). This can also be an indirect measure of how you are performing as a manager of natural resources. In the southern rangelands, several bird species can be used to indicate both the quality of habitat on your property and the overall health and performance of your farming operation. These include a number of threatened and near-threatened birds (e.g. Malleefowl, Carnaby’s Black-Cockatoo, Major Mitchell’s Cockatoo, Bush Stone-curlew, Australian Bustard, Peregrine Falcon—Plates 3–4) and declining woodland and shrubland birds (e.g. Gilbert’s Whistler, Southern Scrub-robin, Varied Sittella, Regent Parrot—Plates 5–6). These species require either hollow tree branches or sufficient shrub or mallee cover for nesting and protection from predators. Some forage for insects on the ground or along bark-covered branches.

http://www.agric.wa.gov.au 3 PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

Plate 1—An 80 metre-wide by 1.2 km-long wildlife linkage planted in 2004 on a farm at Wubin in the northern wheatbelt to Plate 2—Flocks of Zebra Finch at a trough in the connect two key remnants for threatened and declining bush Gascoyne. (Photo: Kevin Marshall) birds. (Photo: Andrew Huggett)

Plate 5—Southern Scrub-robin – a Plate 3—Malleefowl – a nationally declining shrubland bird that threatened ground-dwelling bird of Plate 4—Bush Stone-curlew – a vulnerable species in WA, extinct in requires at least 29 ha of heath/ mallee in the southern rangelands and shrub/mallee with gaps between wheatbelt. (Photo: B&B Wells/DEC) much of the wheatbelt through habitat loss and fox predation. these patches of no more than (Photo: Wikipedia) 1 km in Buntine–Marchagee Recovery Catchment. (Photo: B&B Wells/DEC)

Plate 7—Large numbers of Plate 6—Regent Parrot (Smoker) – Budgerigar irrupt in the wheatbelt parrot requiring hollow tree rangelands after good rains. branches for nesting, moves north (Photo: Kevin Marshall) and inland after good rains. (Photo: Graeme Chapman)

Plate 8—Spiny-cheeked Honeyeaters forage in flowering Plate 10—The Scarlet-chested Grevillea, Banksia and other nectar- Parrot is a nomad of mallee producing plants across parts of the and other eucalypt woodland in wheatbelt and rangelands. Plate 9—A bird found across many the southern rangelands. (Photo: Arthur Grosset) inland and coastal habitats is the (Photo: Stan Sindel) Common Bronzewing. (Photo: Kevin Marshall)

4 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

In the northern rangelands, some bird species are direct indicators of exceptional seasonal conditions. For example, wet seasons that only occur once in several years, numbers of the common Crimson Chat, Zebra Finch, Cockatiel and Budgerigar (Plate 7) can explode as multiple nestings occur in response to the favourable conditions. Across the northern and southern rangelands, the presence of small insect-eating, ground-dwelling passerines can indicate healthy native vegetation and pasture condition. Stable numbers of species such as Crimson Chat, Orange Chat, Variegated, Splendid, and White-winged Fairy-wrens, Thick- billed Grasswren, Brown Songlark, Red-capped Robin, and Australasian Pipit indicate adequate supply of insects and shrubs and groundcover for breeding and shelter. The protection of these habitats from livestock trampling (through fencing), wildfire, feral animals and clearing activities is central to sustainable natural resource management (NRM). Birds that feed on nectar and insects play a vital role in helping to pollinate our unique, endemic plant species, as well as regulating insect numbers. Some honeyeaters such as the White-fronted, Black, and Pied and the Red Wattlebird are blossom-nomads or seasonal migrants, travelling hundreds of kilometres or more through parts of the rangelands, wheatbelt and coastal zone to feed on nectar from eucalypts, banksias and flowering shrubs in spring and/or autumn. Others in the rangelands such as Grey-fronted, Brown-headed, Spiny-cheeked (Plate 8), and White-eared Honeyeaters are locally nomadic or part nomadic-part sedentary while still others (e.g. Singing, White-plumed, some Brown Honeyeaters, and Yellow-throated Miner) are true locals inhabiting woodland and mallee patches and street/garden vegetation in towns. Seed-eating birds are also important indicators of the health of our semi-arid rangelands. These include some well-known non-passerines such as Common Bronzewing (Plate 9), Crested Pigeon, Spinifex Pigeon, Diamond Dove, Budgerigar, Bourke’s Parrot and Scarlet-chested Parrot (Plate 10). These birds require abundant supplies of seeding grasses to survive and breed. This is often indicative of well managed productive land.

Working with birds and climate change Using birds as indicators of farm health and vegetation condition and monitors of NRM performance requires the collection of quality biological and ecological data through a systematic scientific approach. This draws on local farmer and volunteer bird observer knowledge, historical records and professional baseline field surveys of bird communities present on farms. Aerial photographs and GIS data are used to map the distribution of native and planted vegetation. The location, abundance, diversity, and habitat use of birds surveyed at different sites over time are then related to this information. For many of our dryland bird species, the rangelands may well be their last stronghold. As our climate gets hotter and drier in the south and probably wetter and warmer in the north, significant changes to bird distribution and abundance are expected. Some species that are already imperilled will go extinct while others that are likely to be more resilient and adaptable may actually increase. This highlights the importance of improving our knowledge of how birds live in their altered landscapes, how we currently manage our natural resources to affect these landscapes, and especially how we may be able to adapt to the impacts of climate change. Hopefully this article has helped stimulate you to consider birds a little closer when thinking about how healthy your property might be for wildlife or to help plan a new restoration or monitoring project. Feel free to contact the authors should you have any queries or require more information. Andrew Huggett is a consultant ornithologist and NRM-focused ecologist from Coffs Harbour NSW who has been working in Australian farming landscapes for the past 21 years. He can be contacted at [email protected] or (02) 6653 7973. Kevin Marshall is a Regional Wildlife Officer (Nature Protection) with Department of Environment & Conservation at Geraldton. He has over 30 years of experience working in the northern and southern WA rangelands. He can be contacted at [email protected] or (08) 9964 0904, (08) 9921 5955. http://www.agric.wa.gov.au 5 PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

HELLO NORTHERN RANGELANDERS

Thanks to all staff who have contributed to the December 2009 Pastoral Memo. We have certainly served up a spread of articles that will keep the Pilbara and Kimberley pastoral industry glued to their favourite seat over the festive season! The 2009/10 wet season (November–April) is off to a good start in some areas of the Pilbara with Ethel Creek Station, Wittenoom and Tom Price reporting combined falls of over 50 mm. A deluge of rain (44 mm) in Broome broke the previous record set in 1943 for the most rain received on a single day in November. According to the Bureau of Meteorology, four times more rain fell on that one day than is usually recorded over the entire month. The Kimberley has not started the wet season so well, with no decent falls of rain reported.

Details of the 2009/2010 tropical cyclone seasonal outlook for north-west Australia: • lower than normal risk of a coastal impact before Christmas • average to below average number of cyclones in waters off the north-west coast (average number is five) • likelihood of around two coastal impacts • significant risk of at least one severe tropical cyclone coastal impact during the season. Source: www.bom.gov.au/weather/wa/cyclone/seasonal/ The Bureau of Meteorology predicts that there is an equal chance of receiving above average or below average rainfall for the period between December 2009 and February 2010 (see maps on page 2). This means that for every 10 years with ocean patterns similar to those currently existing, about five years could be expected to be drier than average, while about five years could be wetter. This forecast is a real ‘fence sitter’ and will require managers to plan ahead as to how they will manage an above or below average wet season. With a 50% chance of receiving below average rainfall over the 2009/10 wet season it would be prudent for leases in poor range condition and dominated by annual grasses to plan ahead in case the wet season fails. One of the best tools available to help plan ahead is a pasture budget. Accurately completing a pasture budget will provide a good indication of how much forage should be available for stock over the coming dry season. The feature article for the December 2009 Pastoral Memo, ‘Linking land condition to economic returns – the cost of degradation’, discusses the step-by-step process necessary to complete a pasture budget on your lease—definitely worth a read. Breeding Edge workshops are planned for the Pilbara and Kimberley in mid–late April. This will be a great opportunity for pastoralists to gain pointers on the fine tuning of their breeding herds from experienced local and interstate speakers. We have heard plenty about the Emissions Trading Scheme in the news lately but did you know that the Carbon Capture Project has been investigating the opportunity and risks of emissions trading on three pastoral businesses in the Kimberley–Pilbara region? This project has made some good inroads into quantifying the impact of different management regimes on the soil carbon stocks—for more information see inside the Memo. Happy reading Matthew Fletcher

6 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

LINKING LAND CONDITION TO ECONOMIC RETURNS – THE COST OF DEGRADATION

Michael Jeffery, Derby

Land degradation—the loss of topsoil and perennial grasses from grazing country—has one of the biggest impacts on long-term production and profits in the Australian beef industry. For pastoralists, maintaining land and pastures in good condition is one of the biggest challenges they face when dealing with the seasonal variations which exist in northern Australia. But what is land condition… From a grazing perspective, a definition of grazing land condition is ‘The ability of the land to respond to rainfall and grow useful forage’. That is, how much of the rainfall is held in the soil or how much is wasted in run-off, and how much feed will be grown. Grazing land condition can also be described by its features: • Excellent condition: no signs of erosion, large numbers of palatable perennial (long-lived) grasses. • Good condition: minimal signs of erosion, fewer numbers of palatable perennial grasses. • Fair condition: some signs of erosion with a loss of topsoil and few palatable perennial grasses but often lots of annual grasses. • Poor condition: severe erosion with bare areas, no palatable perennial grasses, often large scalded areas. Grass production is therefore heavily influenced by the land condition. As land condition declines, perennial grass production also decreases, with land in good condition producing 75% of the pasture yield of land in excellent condition, fair condition producing 45% and poor condition less than 25%. The cost of the loss of this grass is either being able to run less animals or poorer production (lower growth or reproductive rates) from the cattle being run. In good seasons, the loss of land condition through overgrazing is often hidden by the growth of highly productive annual grasses. These annuals provide very high quality feed which leads to high animal production during good seasons. However, when the season fails, these annuals are not available to the animals and they have to rely on low levels of perennials to get through the dry season, often with large drops in production and even survival. It is in these times of poor rainfall that most damage is done to the pasture and land condition, and most loss is felt in the pocket. Responding to seasonal variation in rainfall and pasture production is critical in maintaining good land condition. The only tool most pastoralists have to do this is by adjusting grazing pressure and matching animal requirements with pasture supply. In order to do this, pastoralists must do pasture budgets.

Pasture and land condition monitoring – responding to seasonal variation Seasonal pasture budgeting allows managers to be proactive and match pasture utilisation with the amount of pasture available.

http://www.agric.wa.gov.au 7 PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

The greatest challenge to sustainably managing grazing land from a natural resource perspective is in dealing with the seasonal variation in time and amount of rainfall. This directly impacts on how much grass grows and consequently, how many animals can be carried on that country. The only real way pastoralists have of dealing with seasonal and climactic variation is through managing grazing pressure which matches the pasture utilisation to the amount of pasture available. This procedure is Pasture budgeting.

Overcoming the hype – the Kimberley is difficult to assess Despite what most people believe, much of the Kimberley is easy to assess. Despite where the property is, what land types they have on the whole property or how much rain they may have received during the wet season, one factor makes pasture budgeting easy. This one factor is, that for at least 90% of the Kimberley, from April to November (vary the dates for your own place) there is no pasture growth. This means that what grass you have at the end of April must provide the feed for your cattle until the next wet season. The fundamental questions of management are therefore: 1. How much feed do I have on hand? 2. Do I have enough feed to sustain my current number of cattle for 210 days (7 months April–December) before new growth is expected? 3. Can I leave enough groundcover to prevent soil erosion and allow pasture growth? 4. How can I adjust grazing pressure to prevent overgrazing and land condition degradation, or take advantage of the good seasons and good grass growth?

How to assess 1. Pasture assessments for forage budgeting need to be done on a land type x paddock basis. 2. They only need to be ballpark figures—they are guides to allow seasonal management. 3. They need to be done where the cattle are grazing—usually between 1 and 5 km from water points. 4. They need to be able to be done quickly.

The assessment process 1. Determine the main land types or soil types in the paddock you are going to assess. 2. Establish a site on each of these soil types within 1–5 km of water (usually 3 km), where you know the cattle are grazing and mark these with a picket. 3. Look at your grasses and estimate what percentage the cattle will eat. 4. Look at the edible grasses and estimate the dry matter yield (kg/ha) to the nearest 500 kg. Write this down. (A) 5. Work out how much of this yield you want left in the paddock at the end of the dry season. This residual provides groundcover and the basis for regrowth during the following wet season. (Most grasses need between 500 and 1000 kg left in order to survive and reproduce the next year.) (B) 6. Take B from A and this gives you the amount of feed available until next wet season. (C)

8 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

For example: After looking at the black soil or creek lines, we determine there is 2500 kg of grass per hectare and 75% of it will be eaten. There is therefore 1875 kg/ha available for grazing. However, we want to leave 800 kg/ha for soil cover and regrowth so there is only 1075 kg available to feed the cattle on. Unfortunately cattle and other factors tend to damage pasture so a further 15% (160 kg) is lost through detachment, trampling, termites and wind etc., leaving only 915 kg of feed/ha on the black soil. When we assessed the spinifex areas, we determined there was 4000 kg of grass per hectare, but only 1000 kg would be eaten (palatable). Again, we want to leave some of this and will eat down to 500 kg, so we have a further 500 kg available to the cattle in the spinifex areas. With detachment, this further reduces to 425 kg of feed/ha on the spinifex pastures.

Paddock make-up Determine what percentage of each of the main soil types are in the paddock. In this case, the paddock is pretty good, with 80% black soil and 20% spinifex. So for each hectare, there is a total of approximately 820 kg of feed per hectare (915 x 80% (732 kg) + 425 x 20% (85 kg)).

How many cattle can you run? The size and class of the cattle is very important in working out how many head can be carried in a paddock. Obviously, as the size of the cattle increases, feed requirements also increase. Also, a heavily pregnant or wet cow feeding a calf will eat 1.5 times as much as the same cow when she is dry. As a rough guide to intake: • a cattle unit (dry cow, steer or bull) of 450 kg will eat about 10 kg per day • weaners (180 kg) will eat about 6 kg/day • wet cows and calf (450 kg) and 600 kg bulls will eat about 15 kg per day • 300 kg yearlings will eat 8 kg/day. Therefore, between April and December (210 days) each cattle unit will consume about 2100 kg of feed. As each hectare of land has available 820 kg of feed, in order to provide enough feed for the animals, each cattle unit needs: 2100/820 = 2.6 hectares for the period between April and December. If the cattle are to stay in this area until after the wet, i.e. for the full year, then the area needed is: 365 days x 10 kg per day/820 kg feed/ha = 4.5 ha/cattle unit. By working through this process, the pastoralist has: • separated the palatable species from the ones the cattle ignore, ensuring the health of those species which provide the feed • ensured there is sufficient groundcover to prevent or reduce soil erosion through rain damage • allowed enough grass remaining to get good response to rainfall by not overgrazing, and • will increase rainfall effectiveness and allow maximum regrowth the following wet season.

http://www.agric.wa.gov.au 9 PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

Matching grazing pressure to pasture production ensures good land condition and good animal production.

Do a second assessment By going back to the same site during the season, an assessment on how the pasture is surviving and adjustments to grazing pressure can be made. Where an overestimate of feed has been made, the number of cattle units or time the cattle are in the paddock should then be reduced. This can be done in a number of ways, such as removing cattle or through weaning. Where the amount of feed has been underestimated, other management decisions such as delaying weaning or increasing the number of cattle can also be taken.

Managing for seasonal variation At the end of the second wet season, a further assessment will show how much feed has been grown during the wet and again allow necessary adjustments to numbers and planning for the mustering program.

Be responsive and take control – or risk being managed Regardless of whether leasehold land is self-assessed or continues to be assessed by Pastoral Lease inspectors, the Lands Board has a responsibility to maintain leasehold country in a productive and healthy state. Where assessments are showing land condition is deteriorating, steps will be taken and management orders issued to address this problem. By implementing a seasonal pasture budget, pastoralists and land managers are able to assess the carrying capacity of paddocks and hence adjust grazing pressure to match what the wet season has dealt up. In this way, the managers can manage, rather than being told what to do.

For further information on setting up pasture budgets and monitoring sites, please contact: Michael Jeffery, Beef Development Officer, DAFWA Derby on (08) 9191 0352

10 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

WARMS MONITORING AND SELF-ASSESSMENT MONITORING METHODS Kath Ryan, Carnarvon

Several questions and some misconceptions about Western Australian Rangeland Monitoring System (WARMS) sites on pastoral leases were discussed at the Halls Creek PGA meeting last month, prompting the following comparison between WARMS and self-assessment monitoring.

Differences & Similarities WARMS monitoring Self-assessment monitoring Responsibility On-going WARMS monitoring conducted by DAFWA is A self-assessment monitoring system to be utilised by the continuing for the foreseeable future. lessee has been sought and approved by the Pastoral Lands Board. Assessment and reporting capability Regional monitoring provides ‘trend-over-time’ reports on a Lease monitoring will provide ‘trend-over-time’ reports at large spatial scale. the local scale. Method complexity The method includes assessment of range condition, The method will include assessment of range condition, perennial pasture composition (100 repetitions), landscape perennial pasture composition (~25 repetitions) and a function, shrub/tree canopy cover and a photographic record. photographic record. Site size Site size is 2500 sq m Site size will be 121.5 sq m Sites per lease There are 1600 sites spread across the rangelands of WA There will probably be less than 30 sites per lease. (between nil and 12 sites per lease). Site location protocols Strict protocols on site location and selection have been Guidelines on site location, selection and installation developed specifically for WARMS. specifically designed for the self-assessment monitoring system will be provided by DAFWA. Re-assessments Sites in the Kimberley are assessed every 3 years and sites Sites will all be assessed at installation, and every 3 years in the Pilbara and southern shrublands are assessed every after that (one-third of all sites assessed each year after 5 years. initial set-up). Reporting Copies of site information and photographs obtained on a Copies of site information and photographic records obtained lease are provided to the lessee for their records on by the lessee will have to be provided to the PLB. request. Uses of assessed information Information from WARMS monitoring is used to answer the Information from the monitoring sites provides evidence question, ‘are WA’s rangelands changing, and if so, are (objective data) to support the lessees’ assessment of they improving or declining?’. change in range condition on the lease. Comparison of information Information from WARMS monitoring gives the regional Information from self-assessment monitoring may be context for changes in range condition observed at lease compared with regional information (from WARMS) to see scale, e.g. is the regional trend positive, negative or stable? if regional changes are reflected locally. Lastly… Audits of self-reported information may be required by the PLB.

In summary: WARMS monitoring vs. Self-assessment monitoring Coverage: all of WA rangelands vs. coverage: one pastoral lease. More detailed, slow and complex assessment vs. less detailed, quick and simple assessment. Bigger sites, less sites per lease vs. smaller sites, more sites per lease.

http://www.agric.wa.gov.au 11 PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

MONITORING METHOD FOR PASTORAL SELF-ASSESSMENT AND REPORTING

David Warburton, Northam

The Pastoral Lands Board (PLB) has adopted a system of Pastoral Lessee Self-Assessment and Reporting (PSR) based upon permanent photographic monitoring sites. PSR will replace the current system of periodic Range Condition Assessments conducted by the Department of Agriculture and Food WA (DAFWA). This article explains the monitoring process that will be required by the PLB for PSR. All pastoral lessees will be invited to attend district training workshops in PSR, conducted by DAFWA, prior to the implementation of the system. These important workshops will familiarise lessees in all aspects of site installation, assessment and on-line reporting.

Rangeland type A feature of Western Australia’s vast pastoral rangelands is the diversity of the vegetation in different areas of the state. In the northern rangelands, livestock productivity and ecological health are driven mainly by the cover and composition of the perennial grass component of pastures. This requires that PSR in the northern rangelands will employ the ‘grassland’ monitoring method. (The southern rangelands will employ a different ‘shrubland’ monitoring method.) A number of pastoral leases are situated in the transition between shrub-based and grass-based rangeland. On these leases the composition of the rangeland at each site will determine which monitoring method to use. It is likely some leases in this transition zone will require both shrub and grass monitoring sites.

Frequency and timing of assessment Following initial installation, assessment of monitoring sites will take place over a rolling three- year interval. This means that every year a lessee must assess one-third of their sites, resulting in all sites being assessed over the three-year period. Sites due for assessment will be highlighted on the PSR web page. Assessment of monitoring sites must take place at the end of the normal growing season. Therefore in the northern rangelands sites will need to be assessed during the early dry season (May to June).

Numbers of monitoring sites per lease The number of monitoring sites on each lease will be calculated according to a formula that takes account of: • lease area, and • rangeland productivity based on rangeland survey determinations of potential carrying capacity. Therefore larger pastoral leases and/or those comprised of more productive pasture types will employ more monitoring sites, up to a maximum of 45. The minimum number for a lease will be six.

12 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

The final number of sites per lease must be a multiple of three (i.e. 15, 24, 30, etc.) so that the same number of sites will be re-assessed every year. The majority of pastoral leases will require between 15 and 30 monitoring sites.

The grassland monitoring method Monitoring grass-based rangeland for PSR requires that pastoral lessees install permanent monitoring sites according to the layout in Figure 1.

Not to scale

Figure 1 Grassland monitoring site layout

As illustrated in Figure 1 the grassland monitoring site layout is based upon the existing Photographic Monitoring Sites (PMS) already installed on many leases. When selecting a grassland monitoring site, the lessee identifies a location which: • is within the grazing radius from water (1.5–3.5 km) • is preferred by livestock • has pasture in ‘fair’ condition (has the capacity to improve or decline). Ideally, the site will contain four perennial grass species important to the pasture type of which two would be desirable and two undesirable. However it is recognised that this combination of species may not always be present. In some situations, monitoring of ’intermediate’ perennial grass species may be appropriate. The frequency of the selected four grasses is recorded using the frequency rating method. This requires the lessee to place a measuring tape (one supplied) clockwise around the perimeter and along the centre-line of the site (keeping the tape drawn tight). A quadrat (one supplied) is placed initially at the 1.0 m mark and then moved progressively to points exactly 2 m apart (1, 3, 5 m, etc.) along the measuring tape. The lessee records the presence of each of the four indicator grass species at each of the required 25 points (as in Figure 1). The frequency data are submitted on-line to the PLB, together with a digital photograph of the site, and a broad assessment of soil stability and the occurrence of woody weeds.

http://www.agric.wa.gov.au 13 PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

At each re-assessment of a particular site, the lessee will measure and report the occurrence of the same four species that were selected at the time of installation, using the same frequency rating method. The site is re-photographed, and an assessment made of soil stability and the occurrence of woody weeds. The new information is submitted as before. Finally, after carefully reviewing the data collected, the lessee must assess and report range condition trend to the PLB (i.e. has the site improved, remained stable, or declined since last assessment?).

If you have any queries please contact: David Warburton, Department of Agriculture and Food WA Tel: (08) 9690 2235 Mobile: 0408 905 344 Email: [email protected]

KNOW YOUR PASTURE PLANTS

Kath Ryan, Carnarvon

A few decent early storms and the increased humidity of the hot weather before the wet season can be enough to bring out some green pick from long-lived perennial grasses on light soils, while those on the heavier soils will need more recharge of soil moisture to commence growth. One perennial grass that may provide some early green pick is silky browntop, this issue’s featured plant.

Silky browntop Silky browntop is a widespread native grass in the Kimberley, though it is usually a relatively minor component of pastures. It is a long-lived, drought-resistant, flood-tolerant perennial with a strong root system, producing abundant foliage. It is usually only palatable before flowering and is generally ignored by stock for the rest of the year. Scientific name: Eulalia aurea (formerly Eulalia fulva) Other plants it may be confused with: Other robust tussock grasses that have a reddish-brown to purple appearance when hayed off (e.g. bundle- bundle, kangaroo grass; also large bluegrass (Ischaemum australe) and Eulalia mackinlayi, found along stream banks in the north Kimberley.

14 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

Description: Silky browntop is a dense tussock grass that generally grows to a height of about 1 m. The leaf blades are flat, about 20 cm long and 0.5 cm wide at their broadest point, tapering to a fine point. When dry, the leaves usually turn a reddish shade of brown, but these can appear almost purple on very heavy clay soils in high rainfall areas. The seed heads have two to five golden-brown flower spikes up to 10 cm long, radiating out from a cup-like depression at the top of the stalk. The silky, golden-brown hair on the flower spike is the feature that gives this plant its common name. Occurrence: Silky browntop favours deep soils in low lying country (e.g. creeks and black soil depressions), but will grow on a wide variety of soils in the Kimberley. The abundance of silky browntop in lower rainfall areas of WA is improved by strong summer rains. It has been recorded as growing on sand, clay, limestone, ironstone gravel, mud, creek and river beds, sand dunes and lagoons. It is common at low density throughout the Kimberley, northern Australia more generally and central Australia. While it may be found as far south as Geraldton in WA, the range does not include southern WA. Silky browntop is found in all mainland states and its distribution includes environmental conditions ranging from wet to arid and inland to coastal. Desirability: Silky browntop is considered an intermediate value species in the Kimberley because of its low density within pastures and limited palatability, but it is desirable in spinifex pastures in the Kimberley because it has relatively high palatability compared with most spinifexes. It is generally considered desirable in lower rainfall areas (Pilbara, Gascoyne–Murchison), but it is restricted to wet areas with deep soils in the shrublands, limiting its value as a reliable indicator of pasture condition. Forage value: The initial early wet season flush of growth in the Kimberley is highly nutritious and may be grazed (particularly in the wet season following a fire); however, a very wet season can cause it to become rank and unpalatable even faster than an average wet. Acceptability to cattle and nutritional value of silky browntop drop off sharply as flowering begins. It is considered moderately palatable and nutritious in lower rainfall areas, but is thought to remain palatable for longer than in the Kimberley, possibly because of the greater delay between first flush growth and flowering. Detailed nutritional information for animal production is not currently available for silky browntop in WA.

References Petheram, RJ & Kok, B 2003, Plants of the Kimberley Region of Western Australia, revised edition, University of Western Australia Press, Perth. Mitchell, AA & Wilcox, DG 1994, Arid Shrubland Plants of Western Australia, second edition, University of Western Australia Press in association with the Department of Agriculture Western Australia.

Want to get to know more plants? Let us know what plants you would like to know more about in your pasture. Contact Kath Ryan Email: [email protected] Tel: (08) 9956 3338

http://www.agric.wa.gov.au 15 PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

DESTOCKING CAPTURES MORE CARBON, BUT DOES IT PAY?

Mark Alchin, Development Officer, Kununurra

‘It is merely a district with fertile plains which will, I believe and hope, be suitable for pastoral purposes, and, in its more northern portion, in the future for tropical horticulture; but those who venture in its development will have to incur a large expenditure in getting their stock to the country, and much trouble and difficulty and years of toil under a tropical sun, before they make their fortunes, and they require the easiest terms and conditions.’ (John Forrest, Report on the Kimberley District, 1883) Over 130 years have passed since Lord Forrest penned these words and I think even he would have been amazed at how important the pastoral industry was to the development of the Kimberley. Lord Forrest’s assessment and advice to the state government concerning the Kimberley could equally be used today concerning emissions trading. There appear to be opportunities for the trade of carbon credits in the region, however it is not without major pitfalls. If there is a desire for the pastoral industry to capitalise on the opportunity whilst limiting the risks, then like its colonial predecessors, the government may have to provide ‘the easiest terms and conditions’ to assist the emerging carbon industry through its ‘pioneering’ phase. The Carbon Capture Project has been investigating the opportunity and risks of emissions trading on three pastoral businesses in the Kimberley–Pilbara region. Figure 1 illustrates the estimated amount of total organic soil carbon of different land systems surveyed by the project (based on soil depth of 30 cm; samples were taken at 10 cm intervals). The results support the idea that land systems which have a high value for pastoral production also have a higher capacity to accumulate and store carbon. These land systems can accumulate and store more carbon primarily because they produce more pasture biomass per annum and have higher soil clay contents and deeper soil profiles.

40

35 )

30

25

20

15

10 Total organic soil carbon (t/ha 5

0 spinifex stony plain low lying pindan al luvi al river plains coas tal coastal hills with pindan s andplain plains fl ats floodplain spinifex sandpl ai n La nd-sy st em

Figure 1 Total organic soil carbon (t/ha) of land systems surveyed by the project (Standard error bars are shown which indicate the variation of the estimate)

16 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

We have used our survey data to model the potential impact of three separate management scenarios on the carbon stocks for each of the three partner stations. As a preview of some of our results, I have included the output from one of the Century model runs for the coastal floodplain land system at Roebuck Station. The Century model is able to take data and project over time what the impacts of different land management and climate will be on the store of carbon. Figure 2 illustrates how the soil carbon stocks may change if different management regimes were undertaken from 2010 to 2040. The assumptions used in the Century model to make the projections of soil carbon: 1. Floodplain is dominated by subtropical perennial grasses with a silty clay soil. 2. Mean annual rainfall of 617 mm ± 284 mm. 3. Prior to 1886 there was no livestock grazing and a ‘moderate’ fire occurred once every four years. 4. From 1886 to 2009 set-stocking occurred at approximately 15% utilisation of the total standing vegetation per year. A moderate fire occurred once every 15 years. 5. The complete destock option = no grazing and a moderate fire once every four years. 6. The set-stocking option = continuation of the previous grazing and fire regime. 7. The cell-grazing option = 5-day graze period at 20% utilisation and a 328-day rest period and a moderate fire once every 15 years.

40 2500 A Set-stocking from 1886 to 2009 C B

2000 35 A nnual rainfall (mm) rainfall nnual

1500

30

1000

25

Total organic soil carbon (t/ha) carbon soil organic Total 500

20 0 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040

Annual rainfall A. Complete destock from 2010 to 2040 B. Cell-grazing from 2010 to 2040 C. Set-stocking from 2010 to 2040

Figure 2 Difference in predicted total organic soil carbon between three management regimes on a coastal floodplain between 2010 and 2040

These preliminary results suggest that the management option which captures the most carbon would be a complete destock of the site. Based on a three-year moving average, the predicted change in total organic soil carbon between 2010 and 2040 for a complete destock was 2.29 t/ha, continuation of set-stocking was -0.03 t/ha and cell-grazing was 1.65 t/ha. Despite more carbon being captured by the destock option, the income generated by the trade of the carbon credits is substantially less from this option, than if the site continues to be grazed either with set-stocking or cell-grazing, even when methane emissions from the cattle are taken into account (Table 1).

http://www.agric.wa.gov.au 17 PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

Table 1 The difference in estimated returns of three management regimes

Set-stocking Complete destock Cell-grazing 2010 to 2040 2010 to 2040 2010 to 2040

A. Predicted change in total organic soil carbon (t CO2e/ha/yr)* -0.003 0.278 0.201

B. Estimated livestock methane emissions (t CO2e/ha/yr)** 0.140 0 0.140 C. Net carbon sequestration potential after deducting methane emissions (t CO2e/ha/yr) -0.143 0.278 0.061 A – B = C D. Potential income from soil carbon sequestration ($/ha/yr) -$3.57 $6.95 $1.52 based on @ $25/t CO2e E. Livestock production gross margin ($/ha/yr)*** $16.50 $0.00 $16.50 F. Estimated gross margin per ha ($/ha/yr)**** $12.93 $6.95 $18.02 D + E = F

* Based on a three-year moving average; a multiplier of 3.66 is used to convert tonnes carbon into CO2e. ** Livestock methane emissions based on Intergovernmental Panel Climate Change (IPCC) 2006 guidelines (70 kg methane per head per year-); Methane GWP of 25; stocking rate of 0.08 Cu/ha. *** No account has been made for differences in variable and overhead costs or potential differences in livestock productivity between the set-stock and cell-grazing options. **** This does not include any accounting, legal or transaction costs associated with the trade of carbon which could be significant.

The financial effect of destocking may be compounded beyond 2040 when there is limited scope for further increases in soil carbon and yet the business would be required to manage the stored carbon for an extended period without any income stream (the permanence period will vary with the type of contract that is entered into). The results highlight that you can continue to graze cattle and capture carbon, however aligning your stocking rate to the seasonal carrying capacity is the key. Rest from grazing, particularly during prolonged, dry seasons, is critical for carbon capture. It is important to recognise that cell- grazing may not be the only way to store increased amounts of carbon in the soil. It was used in this example because it provides the greatest comparison between different management systems. A set-stocking grazing system may also store increased amounts of carbon if livestock numbers are regularly adjusted to the available feed supply, however patch grazing may still occur. The results suggest that the trade of soil carbon credits on a pastoral lease could be a supplementary enterprise to the cattle enterprise, whereby pastoralists are paid to both produce beef and deliver an environmental service to society. You should note that the above analysis is highly simplified and does not take into account a range of other factors which could impact (either positively or negatively) on the expected returns from emissions trading. Nonetheless, it does provide an indication of the potential impact of different management regimes on the soil carbon stocks. It is recommended that you obtain independent legal and financial advice concerning the trade of carbon credits in the WA rangelands.

For further information on the Carbon Capture Project contact: Mark Alchin Mobile: 0408 092 691 Email: [email protected]

18 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

THE BURNING ISSUE – USING FIRE AS A TOOL IN THE KIMBERLEY

Anne-Marie Huey, Derby

There is no doubt that fire is a contentious issue in the Kimberley. However, there is also no escaping the fact that fire has, and always will be, an important component of the northern environment. The timing and intensity of fires, whether they are ‘natural’ or deliberately lit, continues to play a significant role in determining which plants are present in the landscape and in what proportion. Before pastoralism fires were either natural (i.e. caused by lightning strikes) or deliberate (i.e. part of a traditional system of indigenous fire management). The difference today is the increased frequency of fires in the same area and the incidence of fire at times when they would not have occurred previously. These ‘out-of-season’ fires are the ones that occur throughout the dry season up until the onset of lightning strikes. These fires are particularly damaging for the following reasons. They can: • reduce the amount of feed for livestock for extended periods of time • damage infrastructure • destroy livestock • leave soil vulnerable to erosion • increase the soil temperature which can have negative impacts on the seed bank and soil organisms • promote woody thickening • have negative impacts on biodiversity, and • alter the species composition of native pastures. It is these out-of-season fires that are primarily responsible for fire having such a bad reputation in the Kimberley. This is unfortunate as, used correctly, prescribed fire can have significant benefits to a pastoral operation.

Prescribed and unplanned fires Prescribed fire is the planned, managed use of fire to achieve a specific objective. Depending on the purpose, prescribed burns can be carried out from the late dry season through the early wet and into the early dry season. Unplanned fires, as the name suggests, are those that are unexpected and have not been planned. They may or may not be out-of-season, may be caused by lightning strikes but are often caused by people, whether accidently or deliberately. It is these burns that are the most dangerous and destructive. When deciding whether it is worth fighting an unplanned fire there are a number of factors that should be considered. These include: • What is the cost of putting out the fire? • What is the damage or benefit from the fire? • What dollar value can be placed on ecological effects? • Can we do the job without putting staff and equipment at risk?

http://www.agric.wa.gov.au 19 PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

Using fire to fight fire Of course, as with most nasty surprises in life, prevention is far preferable to cure and this is one area where prescribed fire can be a definite advantage. Burning in the early dry season will result in cool fires that are relatively low risk. The idea is to reduce the potential fuel load so that any unplanned fires later in the season will be easier to contain. The EcoFire project which has been running in the Kimberley has clearly shown the advantage of working cooperatively with neighbours to achieve the most effective fire breaks. However, it is uncertain what the effects of repeatedly burning the same patch of country will have on pasture composition and the tree–grass balance. Many species, such as wattles, are extremely well adapted to fire and may re-sprout or germinate after a cool burn, simply creating another problem. Where wildfires are a continuous threat it may be necessary to sacrifice a small portion of the property to protect a greater area. Another potential advantage of burning early in the dry season is that it may be useful in producing green pick, especially on heavier soils that retain moisture. If using this strategy, however, it is essential to carefully manage the grazing pressure on the burnt country as the regenerating grasses are most vulnerable to overgrazing in the early stages of growth. This can be done by either burning a large enough area to spread the grazing pressure or reducing cattle numbers on the burnt area. If woody thickening is becoming a problem, fire is probably the most cost-effective way of restoring the balance. Studies in the Northern Territory have shown that in order to effectively reduce tree numbers a hot intense fire is necessary, particularly on lighter soil types such as pindan and red soils. These fires would need to occur late in the dry season and would be of similar nature to fires caused by lightning strikes. The major risk with these prescribed burns is that they run the very real risk of turning into dangerous unplanned fires, so careful preparation is essential. Points to consider before implementing a hot burn include: • weather—temperature and humidity • wind speed and direction • curing (greenness) of fuel • safety—good fire breaks • manpower • grader/water cart • permit (very likely to be required) • method—ground or air. Studies have also shown that once trees reach about 2 metres in height they are very difficult to kill with fire. In addition, when adult trees are killed by fire large numbers of seedlings often germinate. Therefore, when using fire to control woody thickening it is important to ensure you have a long- term plan for follow-up in place. Most wattles take at least two years to reach maturity, so it may be necessary to repeat the process until the seed bank has been sufficiently depleted. Fire is also an excellent way to address the problems of patch grazing occurring in favoured parts of the paddock. How often have you seen cattle consistently grazing in one area while other sections of the paddock that appear to have exactly the same grasses go untouched? Putting an early wet season burn into the paddock can help by removing old, rank grasses that are unpalatable to cattle and promoting green pick. Cattle will usually move to these areas which then allow the heavily utilised area to be spelled, which has long-term benefits for the pastures.

20 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

Fire calendar

Fuel load Management objective Fire intensity Season of burn Issues (kg DM/ha)

Change woody vegetation High–Very high 2500–4500 Late dry season Risk of becoming structure, control exotic weeds destructive, unplanned fires Hazard reduction – reducing Low–Moderate > 1500–2000 Early dry season May have long-term negative the risk of wild fires impacts on pasture Hazard reduction and provide Low–Moderate > 1500 Early dry season Grazing pressure needs to early dry season green pick be managed to avoid damage to pastures Remove old, rank pasture, Low–Moderate > 1500 Early wet season Grazing pressure needs to modify grazing distribution be managed to avoid damage to pastures

A few scientific studies are available that show that fires during breaks in the wet season can play a role in reducing less favourable species such as annual sorghum. As almost 100% of the seed germinates each year, annual sorghum can be reduced if the plant is burned before it reaches maturity and sets seed. Of course, as with any fire regime, careful grazing management must be implemented post-burn to ensure there is no collateral damage to other favoured pasture species. Fire can also play a role in controlling other weeds such as rubber vine, bellyache bush and parkinsonia. Contact your nearest biosecurity officer for advice on the best time to implement such burns. Finally, periodic fire is important for maintaining biodiversity. This includes all the living components that make up the environment in which we live and work. While the most obvious of these are native animals, trees and grasses, it also includes all the often disregarded species such as forbs, legumes and soil organisms that play such an important role in the ecosystem. If you would like any more information on how you can use fire as a management tool please contact: Anne-Marie Huey, Derby Tel: (08) 9191 0354 Andrew Craig, Kununurra Tel: (08) 9166 4015 Rebecca Dray, Karratha Tel: (08) 9143 7006

Further reading Savanna burning – Understanding and using fire in northern Australia

Hot fire on Brooking Springs Station.

http://www.agric.wa.gov.au 21 PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

TRIALLING CHECK BANKS TO STOP GULLY EROSION

Dick Pasfield, Ord Land and Water, Kununurra

Actively eroding gully systems can move large amounts of soil downstream over the course of a wet season. Landcare group, Ord Land and Water, conducted a trial over the past two wet seasons (2007/08 and 2008/09) using a series of check banks to minimise erosion by slowing the water flow down within an actively eroding gully system. The gully selected had two arms which branched out either side up towards the base of a low ridge. The paddock had been destocked for a number of years and a track that once ran through it had been Vegetation starting to regain a foothold inside the gully system cut by the gully and was no longer downstream of a check bank. accessible to large vehicles. In July of 2007, 10 earthen banks (each with a spillway) were placed across the gullies. In January 2008 two banks along the main gully were breached by heavy rain but the remaining banks held for the rest of the wet. During the following dry season (2008) a further four banks were installed and the two breached banks repaired. There was no breaching of the banks over the 2008/09 wet. Measurements were taken to determine how much soil was moving off the 31 hectare site and being trapped by the banks. It was estimated that 210 tonnes of soil, coming largely from collapsed gully walls, settled out at the base of the banks over two wet seasons. Noticeably, where the banks had slowed down the water flow, gully walls still collapsed but the soil did not move downstream, providing a niche for vegetation such as rubber bush and kapok bush to establish and begin stabilising the gully. This was observed after the first wet season. The total cost of the earthworks over the two seasons came to just under $11 000 for the initial installation and maintenance of 14 banks. An aerial shot of erosion banks at the control site taken in October 2007 during the Halls Creek East Kimberley LCDC Roadshow.

22 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

BREEDING EDGE OPPORTUNITY IN THE KIMBERLEY AND PILBARA

Michael Jeffery, DAFWA, Derby and Peter Smith, DAFWA, Karratha

Arrangements are in place for John Bertram, cattle breeding authority with Queensland Primary Industries & Fisheries, to visit the northern rangelands in April 2010. We are developing workshop opportunities with John for pastoralists and others involved in the northern cattle industry. John presented breeding information at the Dampier and Derby Beefup Forums in April 2009. His presentation at the forums was rated highly by pastoralists attending the forums. John also conducted a well-attended morning session on breeding and bull selection at Karratha Station prior to the Dampier forum. He also ran a number of very successful bull selection days in the Kimberley in 2005. A call for ‘expressions of interest’, published in the March 2009 Memo, to attend a Breeding EDGE workshop, received a number of responses. Plans are now being developed for one 3-day Breeding EDGE workshop to be held in the Pilbara in the week commencing 19 April 2010 followed by two workshops to be held in the Kimberley. These courses will be held on-property. The Breeding EDGE workshop, developed by MLA in association with the cattle industry, is designed to assist producers to develop breeding objectives and manage breeders and breeding programs to improve the future direction and profitability of their businesses. The workshop program: • works through the steps involved in developing a successful breeding program • provides a thorough understanding of reproduction and genetic principles • helps evaluate the reproductive and genetic options best suited to specific situations • develops skills that can be applied on property. Included in the workshop will be sessions which: • demonstrate skills which allow the assessment of bull soundness • demonstrate semen collection and evaluation • put a value on the cost of a bull. Financial support towards the cost of attending Breeding EDGE is available from Farm Ready.

For further information and to register your interest in participating in a Breeding EDGE workshop in the Pilbara during the week commencing 19 April 2010, contact: Manus Stockdale or Peter Smith, Karratha Tel: (08) 9143 7002 Email: [email protected] or Michael Jeffery, Derby Tel: (08) 9191 0333 Email: [email protected]

http://www.agric.wa.gov.au 23 PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

IMPORTED HORSES MUST MEET POST-ENTRY LIVER FLUKE QUARANTINE REQUIREMENTS

Western Australia is currently free of liver fluke and so imposes a post-entry quarantine and specifies treatment and testing of susceptible animals imported from other states that could carry liver fluke under the Enzootic Diseases Regulations 1970. Horses are one of several species that can become infected with liver fluke and spread it to other species. If liver fluke became established in WA, it could potentially cost the state’s grazing industries $10 million annually in treatment and lost production. People importing horses need to ensure they are aware of all of the steps involved in the import process, both pre-entry and post-entry, to minimise the risk of the introduction of liver fluke into WA. Liver fluke needs aquatic snails to live and reproduce. These snails exist in many areas of the south-west. Only one infected animal is needed to establish liver fluke infection in an area.

Import protocol for liver fluke The import protocol for liver fluke consists of four steps: • negative liver fluke faecal test before arrival • treatment for liver fluke on arrival or just before arrival • treatment for liver fluke 21–35 days after arrival • negative liver fluke faecal test 90–100 days after arrival. All imported horses must stay in quarantine for 100 days under an Imported Stock Quarantine Notice (ISQN) on their destination property until their post-entry treatment and testing has been completed. The horses must be kept on ‘high and dry’ ground during the quarantine period to minimise the chance of any liver fluke eggs the horse may be carrying from coming into contact with aquatic snails, which could allow them to grow and breed.

Auditing of ISQN compliance During the 100-day quarantine period, horses are not allowed to be moved from the quarantine property without a permit issued by a Department of Agriculture and Food stock inspector. Stock inspectors carry out random audits of properties with ISQNs issued to them to ensure horses are on the quarantine property. If a horse is not on the quarantine property and the owner does not have a permit for this, the owner may be prosecuted. For the purposes of the ISQN, the definition of ‘owner’ includes anyone who is an agent of the owner, or has possession of, or is in charge of the horse.

Fees and charges Private veterinarians carry out treatment and faecal sampling of imported horses. If a private veterinarian is not available, a stock inspector is permitted to supervise the owner administering the treatment. Stock inspectors are not permitted to administer treatments to horses. When all post-entry treatments and testing have been completed by a private veterinarian, DAFWA currently charges $61.50 for processing and release of each quarantine.

24 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

Fees for a stock inspector to supervise treatments are currently $28.25 per 15 minutes. Travel is charged at $28.25 per 25 kilometres. It is charged from the nearest DAFWA office where a stock inspector who can supervise treatments is normally based. These charges are for services provided in normal hours (6 am to 6 pm Monday to Friday). Services provided outside these hours attract additional charges. For more information about importing horses into Western Australia, visit the department’s livestock movement page at http://www.agric.wa.gov.au/PC_91943.html.

LEARN TO PREGNANCY TEST – COURSES AVAILABLE IN THE KIMBERLEY

Two pregnancy testing courses have been organised next year for the Kimberley. When: Course 1 – Monday 22 – Wednesday 24 March 2010 Course 2 – Wednesday 24 – Friday 26 March 2010 Both courses will run from lunch-time day 1 to lunch-time day 3. Where: Liveringa homestead yards Costs: $650 per participant Numbers: Each course is limited to 6–9 people. The courses will be conducted by Dr Peter Letchford, well-known industry vet based in Kununurra and Michael Jeffery, DAFWA Derby. The training will include both practical learning of pregnancy testing, as well as discussions on how to use pregnancy testing in herd management.

To indicate interest and secure your place, please contact: Michael Jeffery Tel: (08) 9191 0352 Email: [email protected]

http://www.agric.wa.gov.au 25 PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

ESRM TO BEGIN PROPERTY PLANNING AND ON-GROUND WORKS IN THE FORTESCUE RIVER CATCHMENT

Richard Glover, Development Officer, Carnarvon

ESRM will be offering their planning and rangeland support services to land managers within the Fortescue catchment over the next two years. This follows on from their successful property planning and on-ground works in the Lower Gascoyne catchment and collaboration with the Gascoyne Catchment Group.

Property planning The ESRM property plans, developed for participating stations in cooperation with land managers, will include: • a detailed landscape ecology map • up-to-date infrastructure, topographic, satellite and land system maps • a property action plan, with costs and time lines included • an infrastructure plan, designed using the latest knowledge of sustainable systems as well as the land manager’s own ideas • a weed management plan (for those properties managing Weeds of National Significance) • herd models (where required), using the Breedcow software package • rainfall and climate data.

On-ground works At the end of the planning period ESRM will fund on-ground projects that support soil and biodiversity conservation in the Fortescue catchment and assist land managers in their pastoral operations. These projects may include fencing to manage valuable land systems, relocating waters away from sensitive areas, mechanical regeneration where appropriate and trap yards and fencing to allow for easy management of stock in sensitive riparian and wetland areas. ESRM is also hoping to run several workshops in the area dealing with issues relevant to the industry. This project offers a starting point for ESRM and the Department of Agriculture and Food to work on landscape ecology and integrated business planning in the Pilbara, and is funded via Rangelands NRM WA. If you are a land manager in the Fortescue catchment and would like to work with ESRM, please contact Richard Glover at [email protected] or on (08) 9956 3313 to express your interest. Planning visits will begin early next year after the (hopefully) wet.

26 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

CLAIM THE DATE! ‘RAIN ON THE RANGELANDS’ CONFERENCE – BOURKE, NSW, SEPTEMBER 2010

For most of you, knowing what you are doing tomorrow or the next week can be a challenge. Don’t be put off by this article which hopes to attract you to an event that’s only nine months away! The Australian Rangeland Society will be presenting its Sixteenth Biennial Conference in Bourke, New South Wales, in September 2010. These conferences are the key forum for discussing the management of rangelands at a national level. Bourke provides a fitting location for such a theme given its strong links to the Darling River and current issues of river flow and water use in the Murray Darling Basin. Bourke also represents the iconic ‘outback’ created through the poetry of Henry Lawson and retains strong Aboriginal links to the land. The region demonstrates key rangeland issues, including the importance of controlling total grazing pressure and managing woody vegetation. Alternative land uses and conservation management are well represented in the area. Next year’s conference theme is Water, either as rain, river flow or its presence underground. Keynote speakers will target the management of water in rangeland landscapes at various levels, from the whole basin or catchment down to the individual property. The Conference will be a great opportunity for you to share your experiences with water (or lack of it!) and mingle with respected researchers who have been studying water and its interactions and influences on rangelands for years. To make the 2010 Bourke Conference more useful to landholders, the program is being arranged so that the first two days provide a stand-alone package focusing on practical rangeland management. Day One will consist of field tours to inspect local properties and natural resource issues. We anticipate that delegates will see good examples of river rehabilitation, precision pastoralism, innovative grazing systems, total grazing pressure management and Enterprise Based Conservation areas. Day Two will be a ‘practical applications’ session with speakers discussing on- ground aspects of sustainably managing rangelands, including case studies. We are keen to attract papers on precision pastoralism, the management of seasonal risk, innovative grazing systems and successful pest programs for the session. Case studies on the implementation of successful projects will be encouraged, especially those balancing productive land use with biodiversity management and good economic outcomes. Day Three and Day Four will include a broad range of natural resource management presentations, but with a stronger scientific emphasis. These may also be of interest to pastoralists, exploring the interactions between rangeland water resources, various forms of land use and biodiversity. Pastoralists wishing to participate in the conference will have the option of registering for Days One and Two only, to pick up the practical sessions. We hope that you will also elect to attend the full conference. We anticipate calling for papers and opening the registration process early in 2010. So, pull out your 2010 calendars and diaries and mark in Bourke, Australian Rangelands Society Conference, 26–30 September 2010. Hope to see you there. For further information, please contact Russell Grant, Western Catchment Management Authority, on telephone (02) 6836 1575 or email [email protected].

http://www.agric.wa.gov.au 27 PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

INVASIVE PRICKLY WEED DISCOVERED IN THE EAST KIMBERLEY

East Kimberley landholders and the public are urged to be on the lookout for an invasive weed which has been discovered for the first time in Western Australia. Mimosa pigra, a Weed of National Significance that poses a threat to the northern pastoral industry, has been found near Kununurra. Mimosa is a branched, prickly shrub, growing up to 6 metres. The stem is greenish in young plants but becomes woody as the plant matures. It has fern-like green leaves, which fold together at night or when touched. Thorns up to 10 mm long are found on the stem, with smaller thorns on branches between leaves. Round flower heads, 10–20 mm in diameter, are composed of numerous pink-mauve individual flowers. They each produce between 10 and 20 olive-green seed pods, up to 80 mm long, which turn brown and break into segments when mature. Mimosa reproduces by seed with one plant capable of producing about 9100 seeds per square metre per year. The highest known production from a plant is 220 000 seeds annually. Seeds are spread by water, animals and human activities. Floodwaters in particular can spread the seeds over huge distances. Depending on soil type, moisture, temperature and other factors, seeds can remain dormant in the soil for at least five years ... often much longer. The prickly weed could spread easily, outcompeting native plant species for water, nutrients and sunlight. This weed thrives particularly in wetlands of the north, forming dense stands that replace native vegetation. It displaces native animals and indigenous cultural activities such as hunting. Thickets can also be a refuge for feral animals such as pigs. The weed is already widespread in the Northern Territory and found in one area of northern Queensland. Anyone with information is urged to call the department’s Pest and Disease Information Service on 1800 084 881. More information on Mimosa pigra can be found at www.weeds.org.au or www.agric.wa.gov.au.

28 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

PILBARA MESQUITE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE – AN UPDATE

Linda Anderson, Project Manager

Coming to the end of what has been an eventful 2009, the Pilbara Mesquite Management Committee (PMMC) is still forging ahead with project activities in the Pilbara and Kimberley regions. As it’s been a while since our last update in the Pastoral Memo, below is a quick glance at our activities over the past two years and what’s on our calendar for 2010. Enjoy!

Looking back at 2008 and 2009 The start of 2008 saw the PMMC heading down a new path. With the research trials on Mardie Station coming to an end, the group shifted their focus to mapping and strategically reducing the size of the mesquite infestation in the Pilbara, with some localised work also done in the Kimberley and Gascoyne. External funds for our projects were sourced from Rangelands NRM and Caring for Our Country, with support provided by pastoral station lessees and industry partners.

Mapping and surveying We survey likely or known infestations of mesquite mainly by helicopter, as this method gives us the quickest, cheapest and most accurate picture of where mesquite is and the density of the infestation. Using this map, we plan a control program where work is conducted from the source of the infestation to the sink. In 2005 the PMMC mapped Mardie, Yarraloola and Peedamulla stations, and in 2008/09 this continued with: • filling in gaps in the mesquite maps along the Lyons and Gascoyne rivers (2006) • completely grid surveying and mapping the Carnarvon North Common (coastal zone) • completing the first aerial surveys of known mesquite infestations in the Kimberley (Nicholson and Thangoo stations) • mapping and controlling mesquite at the mouth of the Fitzroy River on Yeeda Station. On-ground control On-ground control has been occurring across the Kimberley, Pilbara and around Carnarvon (see Table 1). Using the maps generated from aerial surveys or hand-drawn maps from pastoralists, priority areas of mesquite have been identified and targeted by contractors or station staff for control. Table 1 Priority areas targeted for mesquite control 2008–09

Total person Station name Total area treated Areas treated days Carnarvon town 100 7700 ha with 600 ha South Common (behind the airport) of follow-up Bibbawarra Bore tourist area North Common (north of Gascoyne River) Mardie Station 274 43 800 ha 2 km buffer zone south Holding paddocks around two sets of yards Central area south from 6 mile containment fence to Ballabony containment fence, east to highway, west to coast Minderoo Station 218 33 000 ha with some Adjacent to Ashburton River follow-up Southern edge of infestation (3 km south of homestead) working north Urala Station 153 20 000 ha with some Coastal grazing paddocks follow-up West of Ashburton River

http://www.agric.wa.gov.au 29 PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

Yet to be completed, an additional 70 days of control work are to be undertaken on Peedamulla Station in the Pilbara and Thangoo, Yeeda and Nicholson stations in the Kimberley by the end of 2009.

Blade ploughing We tried to doze, we tried to double chain, but denser hybrid mesquite at Mardie seemed resilient of the machinery we threw at it! Enter a unique design idea by Richard Climas to trial a purpose- built blade plough, with the theory it would sever the root system of the mesquite while leaving the grass layer intact. In June of 2008, the plough arrived at Mardie. After some initial alterations, the blade was rear mounted to a D9 dozer and put to work in some dense mesquite on the Fortescue River. While only about 2 ha of mesquite were ploughed that day, the results look amazingly positive with very few plants coming back. In late 2009, we are again putting a blade plough into the mesquite, but this time a different plough will be used to overcome some of the drawbacks of the previous design. Keep an eye out in the Pastoral Memo for the exciting results of this trial!

Extension The PMMC is getting out and about, and now have a good network of mesquite-ID’ers out there on the lookout for new infestations. Very isolated plants have been picked up on several pastoral leases in the Gascoyne, a plant in Karratha and one in the Unallocated Crown Land in the east Pilbara. Each of these occurrences appears to be a local historic planting, and land managers are now aware of their responsibilities to control the plants.

What’s coming up in 2010 Exciting times are ahead for the PMMC in 2010. Through a partnership with Rangelands NRM and Caring for Our Country, the PMMC is continuing with the on-ground control of mesquite within the region. The project is targeting areas requiring follow-up control work, commencing control in new areas and finalising the aerial survey and mapping of all known infestations. To access funds under this project, each station must complete a mesquite action plan detailing targets for the next five years of control work. We are continuing on with the blade ploughing on Mardie Station as mentioned, hoping to expand this trial to cover an area of 30-plus hectares. We are also implementing fire treatments in tree-form mesquite on Minderoo and Urala stations, in areas where the thickets are so dense that other control methods are just not an option. Regular updates of the activities of the PMMC will be in upcoming Pastoral Memos, so keep tuned for the progress the Pilbara is making against this thorny devil. Linda Anderson, Project Manager Email: [email protected] Tel: (08) 9144 1844

30 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

BAITING FERAL PIGS IN THE KIMBERLEY

Susan Campbell1, Michael Everett2, Jason Wishart3, Michelle Smith4, Peter Adams5 and Steven Lapidge3

1 Research Officer, VPRS, DAWFA, Forrestfield 2 Biosecurity Officer, DAFWA, Derby 3 Invasive Animal Cooperative Research Centre, 48 Oxford Tce, Unley, SA 4 Animal Control Technologies Australia, Somerton, Vic. 5 Murdoch University, Murdoch, WA

Feral pig numbers are on the rise throughout the Kimberley, increasing the risk of disease transmission and spread, degrading watering points and spreading unwelcome weeds. In the event of a disease outbreak, effective control would require a rapid, efficient response over a potentially large area. Researchers from the Invasive Animal CRC, Animal Control Technologies Australia, Murdoch University and the Department of Agriculture and Food (DAFWA) are taking steps to provide a practical solution to the feral pig problem. An existing 1080 bait product known as PIGOUT® is already registered for use as a feral pig bait, however it has seen limited use to date in the Kimberley. A new product, HOG-GONE®, is currently being developed that contains an alternative toxin, the common food preservative sodium nitrite. Pigs are highly sensitive to this toxin, which interferes with the red blood cells’ ability to carry oxygen. Once trials and registration of HOG- GONE® are completed, it could be made directly available to pastoralists as an off-the-shelf product. During the last two weeks of October 2009, DAFWA helped run PIGOUT® and HOG-GONE® trials on Brooking Springs Station, Gogo Station and Jubilee Station. An initial flight over the study area showed that there was no shortage of feral pigs, and we located 22 isolated water points where pigs were present to set up our bait stations. Each bait station consisted of a monitoring camera (triggered by movement to take photos), a pile of pre-feed (non-toxic) baits and a barbwire fence to exclude cattle once toxic baiting began. Both bait products are made of a grain mixture flavoured with fish oil, resulting in baits that are especially attractive to feral pigs. Few other animals are interested in eating either PIGOUT® or HOG-GONE® pre- feed baits. Of the thousands of cattle that curiously sniffed at our piles of pre-feed only two individuals chose to taste a single PIGOUT® bait each. Single baits were also seen to be taken by dingoes, but they seemed to enjoy rolling in them more than actually eating them. Despite the disinterest shown by cattle in actually eating the baits, the manufacturer of both products recommend de- stocking paddocks where toxic baits are to be laid just in case. From the left: Mick Everett, Michelle Smith and Jason Wishart setting up a pig baiting station.

http://www.agric.wa.gov.au 31 PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

To give us an idea of the pig activity going on behind the scenes, we set up a second monitoring camera away from the pile of baits, focussing on the waterhole and pig wallowing areas in particular. These monitoring cameras provided an independent estimate of mob size at each waterhole, and also took some great pictures of other wildlife that depend on these precious resources. Pigs are known to be ‘wise’ creatures of habit, so it was important that we gave them enough time to become familiar with the pre-feed baits and to recognise them as a reliable (and tasty!) source of food. Once pigs were comfortably and reliably feeding on the pre-feed baits, we could then switch them for toxic baits and return the next day to count the carcasses. Temperatures on the ground during the two-week trials often reached in excess of 50 ºC. Such intense heat appeared to act differently on the two types of baits. HOG-GONE® baits became a bit oily and greasy and retained some of their odour, whereas the PIGOUT® baits formed a hard crust that ‘locked in’ their odour, rendering them less effective at luring pigs to the bait stations. So while we knew pigs were still frequenting the waterholes, they were not ‘coming on’ to enough of the bait stations to allow us to conduct official efficacy trials. Where mobs did discover the pre-feed baits, they fed ferociously, indicating that they do indeed find the pre-feed very palatable once they know it’s there. Whilst the best time to attempt feral pig baiting is thought to be in the dry season when pigs are congregated around isolated water points, August may be a more effective time to conduct baiting as temperatures are relatively cooler and the baits retain their ‘attractive’ odour. Previous work by the department on Gogo Station during late August has shown that it is possible to attract pigs onto bait stations at this time of year. By the end of the two-week trial we had the opportunity to conduct two nights of opportunistic toxic-baiting using HOG- GONE® at the few stations that had mobs regularly feeding on the pre-feed. Promising results from these two nights were obtained, with eight carcasses located after the first night of baiting and another four after the second night. Although only 7% of toxic baits were taken on the first night, this increased to 32% on the second night, suggesting that pigs may have become desensitised to the slightly different smell of the toxic baits and that a greater knock- down may have been obtained over further nights of toxic baiting. The lessons learned from the recent trial will contribute towards the ongoing development of this product. We are very grateful to Jill Jenyns, Dan Grant and Keith Anderson for providing access to these properties and to Tom Murray and Anthea Haywood of Fitzroy Crossing Helicopters for taking us up in their R44 helicopter when needed. Funding for the project was HOG-GONE!—There will be no more wallowing in the Fitzroy generously provided by the Kimberley ZCA, River for these hogs after a successful night’s baiting. DAFWA and the Invasive Animal CRC, under DAFWA ethics approval #4-09-25/26 and APVMA permit #11617.

32 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

INCREASE IN KIMBERLEY CHEMICAL SUBSIDY FOR DECLARED PLANT CONTROL

The chemical subsidy that has been available to Kimberley pastoralists for a number of years has been increased from $3000 and is now up to $6000 per pastoral lease per year for herbicides used in the control of declared plants. The subsidy is funded by the Kimberley Zone Control Authority (ZCA).

Conditions To be eligible for the subsidy, pastoralists must meet the following conditions: • A 3–5 year weed management plan (template can be supplied) must be developed and signed off by your local biosecurity officer. (This should be done before control work is carried out.) • The herbicide used must be registered for use, specifically for the declared plant to be controlled. • A biosecurity officer must inspect the area treated. How to make a claim • Complete a chemical subsidy form, available from your local biosecurity officer. • Return the form with the tax invoice for the chemical to your local biosecurity officer. This is an ideal time of year to be carrying out weed control, when the plants are actively growing. If you are interested in the scheme, please contact your local biosecurity officer. Your local biosecurity officers are: Mick Everett West Kimberley Tel: (08) 9191 0328 Mobile: 0418 904 971 Maree Glasby Broome Tel: (08) 9194 1425 Mobile: 0404 819 626 Jessica Paterson Halls Creek Tel: (08) 9166 4020 Mobile: 0407 022 348 Tracey Vinnicombe Kununurra Tel: (08) 9166 4047 Mobile: 0438 966 219

Rubber vine seedpod. Rubber vine is a well established weed throughout Queensland and there are two isolated infestations in the Kimberley—keep an eye out for this weed on your lease! http://www.agric.wa.gov.au 33 PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

UPDATE TO ALL MEMBERS OF THE KIMBERLEY RANGELANDS BIOSECURITY ASSOCIATION INC.

Our newly incorporated Association held its inaugural Annual General Meeting in Halls Creek on Tuesday, 20 October 2009 as advertised. I am very pleased to advise that a Management Committee was duly elected in accordance with the procedures laid down within our official Constitution. It comprises the following persons:

Office Holder Contact Term Chair Jim Motter PO Box 115 3 years (Bulka Station) FITZROY CROSSING WA 6765 Tel: 9191 7141 Fax: 9191 7146 Vice-Chair Lynette ‘Jim’ Craig PO Box 199 1 year (Sophie Downs/Fox River stations) HALLS CREEK WA 6770 Tel: 9168 8913 [email protected] Secretary/Treasurer Joanna Koeyers PMB 9 1 year (Drysdale River Station) KUNUNURRA WA 6743 Tel: 9161 4326 [email protected] Member Jack Burton PO Box 610 2 years (Kilto/Yeeda stations) BROOME WA 6725 Tel: 9191 4766 Fax: 9191 7193 [email protected] Member Pete De Long PO Box 170 2 years (Dampier Downs Station) DERBY WA 6728 Tel: 9191 4674 [email protected] Member Merv Wortley PMB 130 3 years (Ruby Plains Station) HALLS CREEK WA 6770 Tel: 9168 8915 Fax: 9168 8925 [email protected] Associate Member Department of Agriculture and Food Kimberley Regional Office (Designate: Noel Wilson) Durack Drive PO Box 19 KUNUNURRA WA 6743 Tel: 9166 4001 Fax: 9166 4066 [email protected] Associate Member Department of Environment and Kimberley Regional Office Conservation PO Box 942 (Designate: Darryl Moncrieff) KUNUNURRA WA 6743 Tel: 9168 4200 Fax: 9168 2179 [email protected] Associate Member Ord Land & Water Inc. Lot 1 Lotus Court (Designate: Dick Pasfield) KUNUNURRA WA 6743 Tel: 9169 2222 [email protected] Associate Member Shire of Derby/West Kimberley PO Box 69 (Designate: Peter Kneebone) DERBY WA 6728 Tel: 9191 1112 [email protected] Shire of Wyndham–East Kimberley (contact: John Moulden) to be co-opted to assist the Management Committee as required.

This group of people will be responsible for guiding the day-to-day affairs of the new Association. I encourage you to contact them as and when necessary, to discuss any issues or concerns of relevance to the Association’s objectives. At this stage, it is expected the KRBA will operate in parallel with the existing Kimberley Zone Control Authority, until the latter is abolished in conjunction with the full introduction of the Biosecurity and Agriculture Management Act 2007 with effect from 1 July 2010. Joanna Koeyers, Secretary/Treasurer October 2009

34 http://www.agric.wa.gov.au PASTORAL MEMO – NORTHERN PASTORAL REGION DECEMBER 2009

CATTLE MARKET UPDATE – 4 DECEMBER 2009

Export numbers (Northern Ports 2009) • 27 832 head left the Broome Port between September and 4 December 2009 • 19 897 head left the Port Hedland Port between September and 4 December 2009 • 18 849 head left the Wyndham Port between September and 4 December 2009

http://www.agric.wa.gov.au 35