No Early Rainy Season Onset for 2015

Can the new science of wet season onset help the cattle/ pastoral industry of north Australia?

It is actually not that new but has been refined to provide a regular update from late June through August, with a monthly update to be provided.

Early indications are for a later than normal onset of the wet season.  

BUT.......read the information to understand what it covers, which is basically enough rain to start pasture growth [ 50mm].

Quite a strong percentage showing a highly probable late start to the rainy season, or as shown - a low chance of early season rain.

More information here - and the infographic is an extract from today's post on the seasonal outlook.

The Bureau's new northern rainfall onset outlook provides guidance on rainfall timing within the first months of the Australian northern wet season.

The northern rainfall onset occurs when enough rain has fallen to stimulate plant growth after the dry season. This is defined as the date after 1 September when a location has received a total rainfall accumulation of at least 50 mm. The outlook is the percentage likelihood of the rainfall onset beginning earlier than normal.

The outlook will be updated monthly from June to August.
 

Low chance of early rainfall onset for much of northern Australia Areas with a less than 40% chance of an early rainfall onset include northwestern Western Australia, the Top End of the Northern Territory, Cape York Peninsula and parts of inland Queensland. With El Niño conditions in the tropical Pacific, an earlier than normal onset is less likely.

Northern rainfall onset map

More information
Media liaison: 03 9669 4057  media@bom.gov.au

Using Livestock to Reduce Carbon Emissions - YES!

Cows have been pilloried as the great methane producer, and as the most potent greenhouse gas emitter of all. There are a lot of cows around the world!

Recent thinking now says that it is not cows as the culprit, but rather their management, particularly when fire is included in the system, as it commonly is.

Reduce the use of fire, often used to remove excess forage, while enhancing the consumption of forage by livestock in a way that encourages regrowth eg Savory grazing system option may offer a smart option to actually reduce greenhouse gas production, even if the forage is of poorer quality at times.

It is known that higher digestibility forage does reduce methane production in the livestock gut system, although not all plants have high digestibility, particularly in the tropics. But independent of that, livestock act as the great recyclers of carbon, by consumption and manuring, rather than seeing it lost in a fire.

It is a complex argument, with more detail here -
http://qcl.farmonline.com.au/news/nationalrural/livestock/cattle/cows-conserving-carbon/2307077.aspx?storypage=0

But the essence of it is that cows might actually be useful in the soil carbon story!

About time there was some enlightened thinking, for livestock is definitely NOT going away anytime soon

Australia's Tropical Beef Herd - Methane Emissions Lower Than Current Estimates

New CSIRO research indicates that the amount of methane emitted from cattle fed on tropical grasses in northern Australia is up to 30 per cent less than figures currently used to calculate the northern cattle industry's contribution to Australia's greenhouse gas accounts.

Speaking at a recent Lansdown Field Day near Townsville, Queensland, CSIRO research leader Dr Ed Charmley said the findings would help to refine the nation's greenhouse gas accounting."

Measurements from cattle in CSIRO's custom-built respiration chambers show that Brahman cattle fed a wide range of tropical grasses emit up to 30 per cent less methane than previously determined. "While you always have to be cautious in extending lab data to the field and across an industry, we have been able to cross-check our findings with methane detecting laser systems used in the field."

These findings, while not changing the actual emissions, could have significant implications for calculating the emission footprint of the northern cattle industry and also for Australia's greenhouse gas accounts. "Methods used to determine these national greenhouse gas accounts are regularly reviewed and if the new data are confirmed via this review process, future accounts will be adjusted to reflect the lower emissions for the northern beef herd," Dr Charmley said.

With about half of the nation's beef herd located in northern Australia, current greenhouse gas accounts indicate that methane from the northern cattle industry contributes about 4.5 per cent of Australia's greenhouse gas emissions. As a by-product of digesting plants, ruminant livestock such as sheep and cattle produce methane and, of those, beef cattle produce the most - about 200 grams a day, or about 1.5 tonnes of CO2 equivalents per animal every year."

CSIRO research also shows that northern cattle fed on a diet of predominantly Leucaena, a legume tree, emit less methane than cattle grazing on tropical grasses," Dr Charmley said. "What this nutrition research is showing is that there can be win-win scenarios for the industry and the environment if we can redirect the breakdown of plant material in a way that reduces the amount of methane produced while improving the amount of energy or weight gain that animals get from their feed. "We are addressing cattle methane emissions from several angles - from examining the gut microbes that produce methane from ingested pasture and alternative diets, to a landscape focus on northern Australia's extensive grazing systems using state-of-the-art technologies, such as lasers and wireless sensor networks, to measure and model cattle methane emissions under tropical conditions."

The Lansdown Research Station is a key part of CSIRO's broader research programs on livestock production and emissions reduction in agriculture.

Lansdown Research Station is funded by the Australian Government's Climate Change Research Program, Meat & Livestock Australia and CSIRO and is one of five national research hubs and demonstration sites for practical methane management on-farm.

While this CSIRO press release is encouraging news for the northern beef producers, it is still to be verified in other research.

It seems to also confirm that using higher digestibility forages - in this case leucaena, a legume, it is possible to further lower methane emissions. This is similar to broad results from research work in temperate regions on dairy cows where lowered methane emissions were also corelated strongly with use of higher quality [ digestibility] feed.

There has been a trend in the past 20 years to push for more grass in beef pastures as compared to earlier periods of northern development when pasture legumes were seen as more important - then related to higher protein levels in the diet. Unfortunately, most grass now eaten by stock is on the dry side, with quite low digestibility, especially in more extensive pastoral regions. Changing digestibility can be done through plant breeding, but that is unlikely to happen any time soon. Tropical grasses also tend to be of lower digestibility intrinsically than temperate pasture species.

Leucaena is a viable option in many areas, although getting pasture areas established is time consuming and costly. It does have well proven performance in growing and finishing stock across many regions of north Australia. Superb results were achieved about 25 years ago in the Ord Valley at kununurra, but not too many producers are using the system - why would you, when live export has been the normal practice and there is little bonus for good quality finished cattle, with high carcase quality, in the north of Australia.

Lowered estimated methane emissions might quell some of the wild statements made about how awful the beef herd is environmentally though!

Livestock and Soil Compaction Quantified for Tropical Regions

Most agronomists would have been aware of earlier NZ studies on the influence of livestock on soil compaction and subsequent reductions in pasture or crop yields. New Zealand conditions are wet, and soils are quite different to northern Australia.

Yet, there is this perception that livestock cause severe soil compaction. More recent Australian studies would appear to refute these earlier claims, at least for our own conditions.

The following material was in the GRDC Magazine Ground Cover, no 86 in May 2010, and reproduced with permission.
----------------------
Livestock compaction quantified

The compaction effects livestock have on soil may not be as problematic as previously thought, a Queensland-based research project is finding Livestock compaction may be less of a problem than many producers think, research by CSIRO’s Dr Lindsay Bell, who leads a GRDC-supported Southern Queensland Farming Systems (SQFS) project*, has found.

By examining numerous existing studies Dr Bell found:
• stock apply similar pressures on the soil to unloaded vehicles;
• treading by livestock can reduce soil porosity and infiltration rate, and increase soil bulk density and soil strength, although these consequences are mainly in the soil surface (the top five to 10 centimetres);
• despite these effects, reductions in crop performance have rarely been measured, possibly because effects are too small in magnitude or depth to influence plant growth significantly;
• crop simulations with reduced root growth and surface conductivity suggest that even in the most severe case a 10 to 15 per cent reduction in yield on average could occur;
• the risk of compaction can be reduced by removing stock during wet conditions and maintaining soil organic matter; and
• because compaction from livestock is shallow it is not long-lasting and is rectified by natural processes or tillage.

For example, one study Dr Bell looked at was Bruce Radford’s (Department of Environment and Resource Management, Biloela) two-year study on grey vertosol soils in Central Queensland.

It found that when cattle grazed sorghum stubble when the soil surface was dry there was no impact on subsequent crop growth or grain yield. But grain yield was reduced by 15 per cent when cattle grazed stubble when the soil was wet.

Similarly, a Western Australian study found there was no effect on grain yield from grazing a pasture the previous year. However, reduced wheat plant density did occur when sown no-till into areas that were continuously grazed the previous year.

As well as examining numerous studies, Dr Bell also undertook a modelling study using APSIM (Agricultural Production Systems Simulator) to investigate how sensitive simulated wheat yield is to livestock’s surface compaction effects. The study was modelled over a 50-year period (1956 to 2006) and explored the two main effects – reduced root growth and reduced surface water conductivity – independently and when combined. The model did not account for the possible effects of diseases or waterlogging.

Averaged over half a century, the results showed that mild surface soil compaction from livestock would result in reductions in grain yield of less than 10 per cent. These mild compaction effects are similar to most documented changes in soil conditions after treading by livestock, implying that in most cases the effects of compaction by livestock on crop performance are small. This is supported by the few studies that have investigated this experimentally, Dr Bell says.

Crop losses could be higher if more severe soil compaction occurred, especially if surface infiltration was greatly reduced and ground cover levels were low. Yield losses in the severe scenarios averaged 10 to 15 per cent, but might be as high as 30 per cent compared to the control paddock. However, these severe reductions in root growth and surface infiltration that were modelled are far more severe than most observed effects in the field.

The modelling also found that reductions in crop growth and yield were more affected by lower surface conductivity and rainfall infiltration rate rather than by reduced root growth in the surface layers. Hence, maintaining surface conditions such as stubble cover, which improves infiltration, decreased these effects.

Although this study used computer models to explore livestock compaction effects, there is a need for more experimental data to investigate how crops respond to changes in soil surface condition from livestock grazing.

* Dr Lindsay Bell leads the SQFS project ‘Short-term pastures in grain systems’.

Common sense says avoid too many stock on areas that are very wet and boggy.........but that effects are generally modest, and may not last too long. Interestingly, adequate soil organic matter mitigated compaction problems.

Phytoremediate Explosives - Plant Grass - for a Quick Solution

Mounting evidence shows native grasses could destroy explosives pollution
The Kansas City Star

Missouri researchers are investigating whether native grasses can clean up pollution caused by explosives at hundreds of locations across the country.

Besides the obvious reason, TNT is not good for you.

But grass, it turns out, might be dynamite for the problem.

TNT contaminates hundreds of sites in the US and Australia, from military firing ranges to old production dumps to waterways, and poses a threat to the human nervous system and to the liver and kidneys. It’s suspected to cause cancer. It can cause allergic reactions and attack the immune system, and it may lead to birth defects.

Left alone in the soil, TNT breaks down into an even more toxic substance.

If the problem is left in the dirt, maybe that’s where the solution can grow.

Three Missouri researchers have hit on an idea that could potentially scrub away the TNT danger:
Simply plant the right kind of grass.

The notion started with mounting evidence that native grasses could render harmless a common weed killer. That herbicide, atrazine, is the second most common herbicide used in agriculture in the U.S. and has been a stubborn pollutant in the nation’s waterways. Mounting evidence has shown that certain native grasses, and the microbes that thrive around their roots, convert the toxic leftovers from atrazine into harmless carbon dioxide.

Robert Lerch, John Yang and Chung-Ho Lin began talking about how chemically similar atrazine is to the explosives TNT and RDX. “If it worked for atrazine, we thought it might work for these things,” said Lin, a research professor for the University of Missouri Center for Agroforestry.

Should their idea succeed, it would offer a greener, cheaper and possibly quicker way to clean up more than 530 sites across the USA contaminated by the explosives.

Trinitrotoluene, or TNT, and cyclotrimethylene trinitramine, also called RDX, began creeping into U.S. soil and waterways decades ago, before the manufacturers of explosives came under stricter regulation.

The problem isn’t small. Of the 538 locations identified by the US Department of Defense with RDX or TNT contamination, 20 are Superfund sites — classified by the federal government as the country’s most dangerous abandoned toxic waste sites. Congress rejected a Pentagon proposal in 2005 to exempt the military from regulations for pollution from munitions.

“It’s a serious problem, and it’s widespread,” said Andrew Wetzler of the Natural Resources Defense Council. To clear a field tainted by those explosives — typically to haul away the dirt for incineration — can run from $100,000 to $1 million an acre.

The researchers in Columbia have doped soil samples with explosives and planted two species of grass.

In essence, the explosives practically disappear.

It’s unclear whether it’s the grasses — Eastern gamagrass and switchgrass [Panicum virgatum] seem to work best — do the work themselves, whether it’s two forms of bacteria that thrive in soils around grass roots that do the trick, or if something happens in how they work together.

But in a closet-size room basking in fluorescent lights, a solution to explosives pollution looks to be taking root.

The scientists added RDX and TNT to cup-size soil samples and planted the grasses. In just weeks, the toxic chemicals degraded harmlessly into carbon dioxide and water. “It’s a controlled situation to look at how these chemicals break down,” said Yang, the director of the Center of Environmental Sciences at Lincoln University.

The next step, perhaps still a year or two away, is to test the process outdoors.

The researchers are talking with the Army — the initial research has been covered by $110,000 in Defense Department grants — about trying the grasses on already contaminated sites.

Since the grasses are native and grow easily across the Midwest and the Southeast, they pose no threat of kudzu-like exotic species seen as their own environmental threat.

Initial tests show that the amount of RDX in soil is reduced by 50 percent in a matter of weeks, and TNT contamination drops by 95 percent. So, Lerch said, a year or two after planting, a field could be cleaned of the explosives contamination. And the cost might run less than $3,000 per acre.

“If this works, it will be great".

partially sourced ENN news
------------

Also interesting to note that switchgrass is also a promising third generation cellulosic source for ethanol production and is being researched extensively for that role as well.

Presumably the same process might be operating with a number of other grass species noted as being tolerant to atrazine. This could include a range of common tropical and warm temperate turf species that are tolerant to the herbicide.

Anyone in the Australian military out there that might want to fund a project here in Australia??

Beef is Better from Pastures and Climate Friendly Too

Grass and other perennial plants may be just what the doctor ordered for farmers facing the uncertainties of climate change. And beef and dairy products from free-ranging, grass-fed cattle--along with legumes and grains grown in addition to grass--may be just what the doctor ordered for consumers.

That's the "post-oil agriculture" vision portrayed by Agricultural Research Service (ARS) scientists and other participants at the Farming with Grass Conference held in Oklahoma in 2008. In 2009, the Soil and Water Conservation Society published the proceedings from that conference in an online book titled "Farming with Grass."

ARS scientists Jean L. Steiner and Alan J. Franzluebbers co-wrote the foreword to the book and the closing chapter, "Expanding Horizons of Farming with Grass." Steiner is at the ARS Grazinglands Research Laboratory in El Reno, Okla. Franzluebbers is at the ARS J. Phil Campbell Sr. Natural Resource Conservation Center in Watkinsville, Ga.

The closing chapter was written with Constance L. Neely, vice president of Heifer International in Little Rock, Ark. Steiner, Franzluebbers and Neely explain that perennial plants, in diverse agricultural systems, have great potential to enhance resilience against uncertain climate and market conditions.

Steiner's ARS colleagues Bill Phillips and Brian Northup--who co-wrote their own chapter on forage-based beef production--are in the second year of a 5-year study to develop a system to produce grass-fed beef for the southern Great Plains. Phillips and Northup are at the ARS lab in El Reno. ARS scientists in Booneville, Ark.; Mandan, N.D.; and Watkinsville, Ga., are also looking for innovative ways to include grazing cattle in economically diverse farming systems.

In summarizing stories from the conference, participants envisioned mixed livestock, perennial plants, and other crops, instead of large stands of a single-row crop monoculture. The goal is to sustain farms and rural communities both economically and environmentally, while offering local, healthy foods and other new products.

ARS News Service
Agricultural Research Service, USDA
Don Comis, (301) 504-1625, donald.comis@ars.usda.gov June 9, 2009 --View this report online, plus photos and related stories, at www.ars.usda.gov/is/pr
------------------

This was a recent media piece from the ARS in the US - considered the senior agriculturally focussed r and d group in the US Federal bureaucracy.

Funny about the livestock production systems, though. Sounds much like most of Australia's open grazing on pastures systems of producing cattle - right NOW and especially true of northern Australia.

It is true that finishing cattle on pasture is a bit more tricky - you do need quality pastures, with both good protein quality and higher digestibility of the forages, and often that may need [at least in Australia] some irrigation, or using high quality leguminous feed - even leucaena can assist in this task[ a tree perennial legume]. And there is a focus here in Australia also, to move more production back to pastures, rather than lot finishing.

I remember being lectured as an undergraduate in agronomy about the need for rotations, looking after soil health and quality, soil carbon issues and organic matter, and some of these principles were part of [ and still are] themes I espouse as an agricultural consultant.

It looks a lot like back to the future..........

Climate Change and Land Use

Recently released is the new World Watch Institute Report on climate change and land use.

Nothing too radical really, but a sensible approach to improving everyday land use with a focus on the actions that can mitigate climate change.

Some of the actions may not be practical - afterall, most grain crops are annuals - so you cannot farm perennials to meet the world grain needs. But you can improve what is being done now.

It is also true to say that for many countries already, some of these steps are being taken, with minimal and conservation tillage having a significant use in many of the major grain production regions of the world.

It is interesting to note they advocate using biochar [agrichar] to enrich soil carbon. Unfortunately the Australian government does not seem too interested in this option.......it needs more research! BUT.......biochar results may not start being discernible for a number of years, probably after the current term of the government; maybe it is time to start sometime soon on expanded research. At least in Australia, initial research has been quite positive on a role for this product so work on further R and D should be cranked up and not left without funding. CSIRO has got some money......for a 3 year trial period. But unfortunately, they are unlikley to do much in the tropical areas of Australia.

Read the summary. Make up your mind. Climate change is everyone's business.
------------------------


Worldwatch Report: Mitigating Climate Change Through Food and Land Use

Mitigating Climate Change Through Food and Land Use
Author: Sara J. Scherr and Sajal Sthapit ISBN 13: 978-1-878071-91-0 Paperback 50 pages
Summary Table of Contents
E-book $12.95

Summary
Land makes up a quarter of Earth’s surface,and its soil and plants hold three times as much carbon as the atmosphere. More than 30 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions arise from the land use sector. Thus, no strategy for mitigating global climate change can be complete or successful without reducing emissions from agriculture, forestry, and other land uses. Moreover, only land-based or “terrestrial” carbon sequestration offers the possibility today of large-scale removal of greenhouse gases from the atmosphere, through plant photosynthesis.

Five major strategies for reducing and sequestering terrestrial greenhouse gas emissions are:

• Enriching soil carbon. Soil is the third largest carbon pool on Earth’s surface. Agricultural soils can be managed to reduce emissions by minimizing tillage, reducing use of nitrogen fertilizers, and preventing erosion. Soils can store the carbon captured by plants from the atmosphere by building up soil organic matter, which also has benefits for crop production. Adding biochar (biomass burned in a low-oxygen environment) can further enhance carbon storage in soil.

• Farming with perennials. Perennial crops, grasses, palms, and trees constantly maintain and develop their root and woody biomass and associated carbon, while providing vegetative cover for soils. There is large potential to substitute annual tilled crops with perennials, particularly for animal feed and vegetable oils, as well as to incorporate woody perennials into annual cropping systems in agroforestry systems.

• Climate-friendly livestock production. Rapid growth in demand for livestock products has triggered a huge rise in the number of animals, the concentration of wastes in feedlots and dairies, and the clearing of natural grasslands and forests for grazing. Livestock- related emissions of carbon and methane now account for 14.5 percent of total greenhouse gas emissions—more than the transport sector. A reduction in livestock numbers may be needed but production innovations can help, including rotational grazing systems,manure management, methane capture for biogas production, and improved feeds and feed additives.

• Protecting natural habitat. The planet’s 4 billion hectares of forests and 5 billion hectares of natural grasslands are a massive reservoir of carbon—both in vegetation above ground and in root systems below ground. As forests and grasslands grow, they remove carbon from the atmosphere. Deforestation, land clearing, and forest and grassland fires are major sources of greenhouse gas emissions. Incentives are needed to encourage farmers and land users to maintain natural vegetation through product certification, payments for climate services, securing tenure rights, and community fire control. The conservation of natural habitat will benefit biodiversity in the face of climate change.

• Restoring degraded watersheds and rangelands. Extensive areas of the world have been denuded of vegetation through land clearing for crops or grazing and from overuse and poor management. Degradation has not only generated a huge amount of greenhouse gas emissions, but local people have lost a valuable livelihood asset as well as essential watershed functions. Restoring vegetative cover on degraded lands can be a win-win-win strategy for addressing climate change, rural poverty, and water scarcity.

Agricultural communities can play a central role in fighting climate change. Even at a relatively low price for mitigating carbon emissions, improved land management could offset a quarter of global emissions from fossil fuel use in a year. In contrast, solutions for reducing emissions by carbon capture in the energy sector are unlikely to be widely utilized for decades and do not remove the greenhouse gases already in the atmosphere. To tackle the climate challenge, we need to pursue land use solutions in addition to efforts to improve energy efficiency and speed the transition to renewable energy.

Yet so far, the international science and policy communities have been slow to embrace terrestrial climate action. Some fear that investments in land use will not produce “real” climate benefits, or that land use action would distract attention from investment in energy alternatives. There is also a concern that land management changes cannot be implemented quickly enough and at a scale that would make a difference to the climate.

-----------------

It is a sensible and sober assessment. But action is needed.

Clearing for Clearing

Amendments to the Interim Development Control Order 17 which had prohibited land clearing in the Daly Basin area of the Northern Territory were gazetted today. Approval will be given for modest clearing in the Daly Basin of the Northern Territory, with 2000 ha in total likely to be approved in 2009.


Work has been taking place behind the scenes in developing the now extensive requirements to meet the new criteria established for this modest clearing.


It is something many property owners have been hoping would occur and a lot of effort has been expended to develop sound criteria that satisfy the interests of the multitude of interested parties across the environmental, pastoral, fishing, rural and government areas.


The hard part now will be getting it all together to actually have clearing occur before soil conditions become too dry for effective clearing - around May / June.


There are still quite a few hurdles to negotiate for land owners, before the bulldozers start.

Tipperary Station Has New Owners

Tipperary Station is one of the iconic large pastoral properties in the Northern Territory, and along with adjacent sister properties Elizabeth Downs and Litchfield [ all operated essentially as a single entity] is well developed and capable of running around 80ooo head of cattle.

The property is about 150km south of Darwin in a seasonally wet dry monsoon area with rainfall of about 1200 - 1500mm across the property, with more near the western coastline. It also has virtually all year round access to the main developed areas closer to the Stuart Highway.

Tieerary was the first of the large properties to be cleared in the late 1960s with over 30oooha cleared for cultivation. Sorghum and other crops have been grown over the years but it is true to say that overall, grain production was not successful on that scale. Some smaller areas have been used for grain and other cultivation since then, and some areas have enormous potential for continued use including irrigation of higher value crops, for example peanuts. Maybe even cotton too.

The buyer is Australia's largest cattle operation......Australian Agricultural Company or AACo, and the seller is Melbourne barrister Alan Myers.

The $105 million purchase of the famed Tipperary Station and Litchfield, as well as 60,000 cattle, will be funded by the sale of three of AACo's properties in Queensland - Clonagh, Kalmeta and Gregory Downs, which together cover 481,000 hectares and come with 62,000 cattle, ands are being sold for $152m.

The complex deal also includes the purchase of 19.9pc of AACo for $90m by Mr Myers, as part of Futuris Corporation’s sale of its 43pc stake in AACo. Futuris, parent company of Elders, will offer its remaining 23pc to the market.

"We have been looking at a number of options for disposal of our stake in AACo as we move Futuris away from passive investments to be fully focussed on being an owner/operator of core businesses in which we have demonstrable skill and market advantage and which match our cash operating earnings objectives," Futuris chief executive Malcolm Jackman said. "In that regard, the sale of a substantial part of our holding in AACo to a committed pastoral investor is an excellent fit with all stakeholders' interests." Futuris also is the principal owner of Elders, the major Australian pastoral supply business.

AACo CEO Stephen Toms said the company, by purchasing Tipperary and Litchfield, was acquiring a valuable and unique aggregation in the Northern Territory with unlimited tenure, excellent access to the Port of Darwin, reliable high rainfall patterns and a substantial infrastructure base.

"We have been conducting due diligence on the aggregation, off and on, over the past two years," Mr Toms said. "The likely trend, over the short to medium term, in consumer sentiment to beef will be toward lower cost products. "AACo needs to respond to that and stratify its sales and production programs for the changing market. "Accordingly the business will adapt its flexible pathway system to be weighted toward less costly grass fed production."

This is an interesting development with an obvious trend seen by a very large operator back towards grass grown and presumably grass finished cattle. The export livestock business is thriving in nortern Australia, with expected numbers exported likely to increase from 600000 head a year in 2008 to over 1.2 million by 2012, according to industry projections. Most go to Indonesia, a short 7-10 day journey, with very very little in the way of transport problems.

It also opens speculation about future development on Tipperary, particularly in relation to cropping and related enterprises including hay production and even expansion of better quality pastures. Other adjacent properties have also been sold to agroforestry companies, so that enterprise would also be an option. And interestingly, the NT government is moving to allow some tenative further clearing in the Daly Basin for agriculture and property development.

The other significant isuse is - if AACo are expanding and want grass fed cattle, presumably for the domestic market too, what will be the situation in relation to an abbattoir locally or will they ship cattle out for slaughter to southern states?

Floren Bluegrass Comes of Age

Floren bluegrass was registered as a cultiver in 1995 in Australia through Plant Breeders Rights, and the IP in the variety is owned by Progressive Seeds.

This year it really seems to have made the big time with reports of the variety outyielding a number of species and varieties on the alkaline black clay soils around central Queensland. Reported yields of 25 large round hay

bales per hectare, outyielding a number of other species.

The exceptional performance of Floren bluegrass on Queensland's Isaac River frontage country inundated by the damaging January 2008 floods, has impressed a gathering of the Marlborough region's cattle producers.

Large tracts of highly productive river country throughout Central Queensland were impacted by the 2008 floods, resulting in prolonged inundation and water-logging that effectively killed off productive grasses.

Experience with Floren bluegrass, a Dicanthium aristatum cultivar first planted in April 2007 as a 25pc component of a shotgun mix of pasture seed sown under a centre pivot encouraged the opportunity for a field day and the 25 neighbouring landholders from along the Isaac and Mackenzie River systems were invited to inspect the resultant Floren bluegrass stand that has dominated and out-competed the post-flood flush of parthenium weed, a very serious weed in the region.

Floren bluegrass is now the dominant pasture species ahead of buffel and bambatsi panic, and despite some obvious denitrification of the grass following the flooding, the owner cut 200 round bales/ha from an 8ha stand in early April. A 24ha stand of forage sorghum baled at the same time after the flood inundation also cut 200 bales, an indication of the superior yield of the bluegrass. There is a bit of perennial v annual yield arguments in that equation too!

DPI&F principal experimentalist Maurie Conway said landholders who were considering introducing Floren bluegrass into non-irrigated river country should be looking at planting rates of 0.5kg/ha.
"The secret of good pasture establishment is to eliminate or reduce the competition and spraying is often the best option," Mr Conway said. "If the job is done right, then half as much seed will do the job but if it is not done properly, twice as much seed will not be enough. "Be sure to use good quality seed, plant when soil moisture is good and ensure good soil to seed contact by using a roller. Because it is highly palatable, stocking rates should be managed to allow the plants to flower and seed in autumn.

"Even with limited plant numbers, once this grass is established, it will seed prolifically and make a valuable contribution to livestock productivity," Mr Conway said.

Have a look at a few additional on line resources as listed below. It might be suitable for some areas in the NT and the NW as well.

http://www2.dpi.qld.gov.au/pastures/18121.html

http://www.progressiveseeds.com.au/floren.html

http://www.tropicalgrasslands.asn.au/Newsletter_archive/TGS%20NL%20june01no%20pix%20.pdf

Perennial Pastures in Australia Shown to Sequester Carbon

The potential role for carbon sequestration in perennial pasture plants has received a boost with the release of some important research data that has put some quantified information into the public arena. The data is broadly supported by other information beginning to emerge from other parts of Australia.

Does this begin to really show that deep rooted perennial grass pastures can be effective in raising soil carbon levels? Is there a role for other grasses eg the very deep rooted Vetiver Grass used in mining reclamation for example. It does not address the issue of burning but there is some data about grazing.

Read the material below -----

Drought-tolerant perennial pastures could make a big dent in Australia's greenhouse emissions by helping soils to soak up carbon, says one researcher. But not everyone is convinced this approach really locks away as much carbon in the soil as claimed.

Tim Wiley, a pastures agronomist from Western Australia's Department of Agriculture and Food, says early findings from a trial of perennial pastures are "exciting". "They appear to have an exceptional ability to build up carbon in the soil," he says of the naturally drought-tolerant pastures. "If this preliminary data is right and you start extrapolating it over crop and pasture land in Australia, we could make a very big dent on Australia's emissions."

Soil carbon has decreased to between a half and a third its original levels since European agriculture was introduced. Today, 16% of Australia's annual greenhouse gases come from agriculture.

Wiley says trials of deep-rooted perennial sub-tropical grasses, such as Rhodes grass, on poor sandy soils in Western Australia show they can sequester much more carbon than traditional annual pastures.
He says results from a trial, which ran for more than three years on a farm in Lancelin, show Rhodes grass can capture and sequester nearly 7 tonnes per hectare of CO2 equivalents per year more than traditional pasture. CO2 equivalents are the units the Kyoto Protocol uses to measure greenhouse gases. The methane produced from the extra animals grazing on the perennial pastures only reduces this sequestration bonus by 10-20%, says Wiley.

Wiley says if these early findings are confirmed and the perennial pastures are grown on all suitable farmland in Western Australia, they could offset the state's entire annual greenhouse emissions.
He says the results are supported by data from farmers elsewhere in the area and trials across the country in Queensland. This suggests the perennial pastures could have a similar effect in areas with very different rainfall and soils.

'Doesn't add up'

Dr Jeffrey Baldock, an expert in soil carbon sequestration from CSIRO Land and Water in Adelaide, agrees perennial pasture holds the best potential for increasing soil carbon and no one has ever tried to quantify its impact. But Baldock thinks the level of sequestration that Wiley reports doesn't add up. He says an increase of 7 tonnes of CO2 equivalents sequestered per hectare per year would require a massive increase in plant growth, measured as the amount of dried plant material. "For [Wiley's] carbon numbers to be correct he would have to be producing about 8 tonnes of extra dried Rhodes grass compared to the annual pasture," he says. "I'm not going to say it's impossible but it's a big ask."

Mycorrhiza

Wiley says he has yet to complete a full measurement of dried plant material. But he says data gathered so far suggests the increase in dried material is not enough to explain the increase in carbon. He says the conventional assumptions that Baldock uses about how much carbon can be sequestered from plants into the soil could be wrong. He suspects the deep-rooted perennials are supporting a healthy crop of mycorrhiza, fungi living symbiotically on plant roots. Wiley says there is evidence that mycorrhiza are more effective than other soil microbes at producing humus and other stable carbon compounds in the soil, which Baldock disputes. But Baldock says more research of the kind that Wiley is involved in should be carried out.

Carbon trading

Wiley says he would not normally publicise such preliminary research but for discussions on whether to include soil carbon in Australia's greenhouse emissions trading scheme. He says soil carbon is already being traded in some parts of the world and while there are many uncertainties around how to measure soil carbon, findings such as his call for it to be included in a trading system.

Meanwhile, Baldock questions the economics of soil carbon trading, arguing that soil carbon should be increased simply because of the benefits it can bring productivity. "It increases water holding capacity, soil nutrition, provides carbon substrates for the soil microbial population to live on and enhances soil structural stability," he says.

[partially sourced from the ABC website]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

All of the above about what carbon in the soil does is true. But we still need to get it there, and keep it there. For horticulture, the role of annual green manure crops is important, as a sensible means of building soil carbon and which has a direct and fairly immediate benefit to following horticulture crops. Can we both build and then keep adding to the soil carbon stores in other ways - with applied compost for example.

Both of these concepts are definitely NOT new. There is recent research data that indicates organic production can add to the soil carbon store. But that is really in most part, about the use of organic amendments, not necessarily the other factors in organic production.

legumes can be used as a green manure crop

Recycling organic waste, sequestering carbon, green manure crops, maintaining soil cover..........does one get a sense of deja vu? After all these were considered wise, prudent and profitable soil management considerations for most of the history of agriculture, especially since the Middle Ages, and most certainly taught in most agricultural science university courses world wide in the 19th and 20th centuries!

incorporating green manure crops on a large farm

Some more reading:

http://images.google.com.au/imgres?imgurl=http://www.vegedge.umn.edu/MNFruit%26VegNews/Vol4/601usda_clip_image006.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.vegedge.umn.edu/MNFruit%26VegNews/Vol4/608gm.htm&h=260&w=350&sz=25&hl=en&start=3&tbnid=sw520Ot7mca2YM:&tbnh=89&tbnw=120&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dgreen%2Bmanure%26gbv%3D2%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG

http://www.echotech.org/mambo/images/DocMan/GreenMan.pdf

Gamba Grass to be Declared a Weed

The Queensland government has succumbed to pressure from the greenies to declare gamba grass a Class 2 weed in Queensland. This is despite its role as an extremely valuable pasture species in the far north of Queensland.

The text of the Minister's statement is below:

Minister for Primary Industries and Fisheries -The Honourable Tim Mulherin
Thursday, April 03, 2008

Gamba grass to be declared a Class 2 weed

Gamba grass is to be declared a Class 2 weed in Queensland. The decision announced today by Minister for Primary Industries and Fisheries Tim Mulherin ends an extensive consultation process. “This is a sensible, balanced position that takes into account concerns from environmental and industry groups,” Mr Mulherin, said. “The reality is that gamba grass has the potential to become a major weed if not controlled but it also provides valuable cattle fodder, particularly in drought conditions. “Gamba grass is native to tropical Africa and can grow up to 4m tall. It exists in scattered areas, primarily across the Cape York and Gulf regions.’’

“It is estimated that it has been planted on around 18,000 hectares, based on the quantity of seed sold. “The decision will stop the sale of gamba grass seeds, require landholders to control it and require local governments to include it in their pest management plans for all areas.’’

Mr Mulherin said the decision did not force landowners, who had already planted the seed to provide fodder for their cattle, to immediately eradicate it from managed pastures. “But it does mean they will have to carefully control any potential spread,” he said. “This decision is to ensure that gamba grass does not get out of hand. “It is a serious offence to introduce, keep or supply a Class 2 pest without a permit issued by the Department of Primary Industries and Fisheries. Penalties of up to $30,000 apply.’’

DPI&F will produce guidelines and an enforcement policy for landowners, information on management and if necessary, research on control practices. Mr Mulherin said the decision had not been made lightly. “It was important that the economic, environmental and social impacts of the plant were carefully weighed against its benefits,” he said.

While the regulatory steps necessary to enact the Class 2 declaration are carried out, an emergency pest notice preventing the further sale of gamba grass seed will be in place from mid-April.
[from the Ministers media statement]
------------------

This decision follows a similar ban in WA, introduced a month or so back.

Gamba grass is a very valuable pasture species, a major contributor to fodder sources in Africa [ its origin], South America, Asia and Australia. The latter three are areas where it has been introduced , mostly around the 1960s and 1970s, and where the plant has made extremely valuable contributions to fodder, both for direct grazing, and as cut and carry feed.

A decision is pending in the NT.

The issue has been driven by the green movement, with a lot of emotional material, and the media has played to that. As is common, the response from agriculture has been more muted, but the media is not listening.

A lot of misinformation on the plant has been used by the green movement to achieve their aims.

Unmanaged gamba will grow tall, and is a fire issue in the dry season. Absolutely true! But managed by grazing, mowing or similar measures to be kept short, dramatically reduces seed production and seed quality as seed production is forced into the dry period of the year, at least in seasonally wet/dry regions where it has been most useful. While not eliminated, a reduction of well over 90% in seed yield can be achieved. The fodder consumed if grazed also is very major contributer to animal production, especially in the dry season or early wet season as the plant responds very quickly to moisture, including heavy dew and short quick showers. Part of the reason for this has been elucidated over recent years, and is related to nitrogen accumulation in the root system - that also helps with the excellent biomass yields too.

It is also interesting to speculate on the role of gamba grass as a high yielding perennial cellulosic source in these regions. Afterall, the US is forging ahead with plans to develop switchgrass, a similar "weedy" grass found on the edge of many US mid west crop fields, as a cellulosic feedstock for new generation ethanol production.

There is no doubt that biomass production from gamba grass in areas receiving over 1000mm annual rainnfall in the wet / dry tropics is excellent. Could it have a future as a biomass crop?

It is an interesting option worth pursuing............and remember that one of the definitions for a weed "is a plant for which a use has not yet been found". Gamba grass already has a role as a fodder plant, and maybe there are more options too.