ISSUE 12 December 2012
future
farm
I N N O VAT I O N I N P R O F I TA B L E P E R E N N I A L FA R M I N G S Y S T E M S
in this issue
3 Counting the change in farming practice
4 Growing better mallee belts
12 Rejuvenate or re-sow — that is the question
Supporting Site model comes of age EverGraze evaluation reveals on-farm impacts and golden opportunities
w w w . f u t u r e f a r m o n l i n e . c o m . a u
future farm
contents • counting the change
in farming practice ........... 3
• getting the best from
mallee belts ................... 4
• EverGraze supporting site
model yields vital legacy..... 6
• balanced operation provides
in-built risk management ... 8
• managing hill country — the
challenges and benefits ... 10
• rejuvenate or re-sow
— weighing up the options ...................... 12
• students take up
the big issues ............... 14
our cover
Research environment increasingly competitive By Peter Zurzolo ceo, Future Farm Industries crc
I
t is increasingly apparent that the environment in which the crc operates has changed vastly during the crc’s tenure. An overall reduction in agricultural r&D funding has placed significant pressure on all the CRC’s participants and partners. The capacity of state and national agencies to provide research and extension services is under pressure. All the crc’s state agency participants have experienced funding shortfalls during the crc’s tenure. During the past year, state and national agencies have also had to respond to significant additional budget reductions. consequently the opportunistic r&D environment has become much more competitive rather than collaborative, as agencies seek to supplement their own diminishing budgets by seeking funds from new funding programs.
on the bright side, opportunities exist for the crc to bring extra funding to projects. For several years the crc has aimed to be the ‘go to’ organisation for future farming options for adapting to climate change. In this capacity, in the past year the crc has successfully obtained funds from commonwealth climate programs. The projects funded under these arrangements are researching farming systems in a climate change scenario. These have been initiatives the crc has led and has sought out collaboration partners. As the crc’s tenure draws to a close and its focus shifts to transition, we are concerned about the constraints the current funding environment places on opportunities for ongoing investment in our research portfolio. However, we will work within these constraints to ensure the crc’s research initiatives continue beyond 2014 and to seek partners when research funds become available.
The EverGraze supporting sites project revealed the true value of the EverGraze principle of Right Plant, Right Place, Right Purpose, Right Management. • See full story page 6. photo: EverGraze
6 Future Farm magazine is published three times a year by the Future Farm Industries crc ltd (FFI crc) AcN 125 594 765. Future Farm Industries crc is a unique co-investment between meat, grains and wool industry research corporations, the landmark agribusiness company, and the combined research power of csIro, seven state agencies and four universities. It was established in 2007 under the commonwealth government’s cooperative research centre program to build on the research of the former crc for plantbased management of Dryland salinity (crc salinity).
2
ISSUE 12 7 AprIl December 2011 2012
DISCLAIMER The information in this document has been published in good faith by Future Farm Industries CRC Limited to promote public discussion and to help improve farm profitability and natural resource management. It is general information and you should obtain specialist advice on the applicability or otherwise of the information in this document. Neither Future Farm Industries CRC Limited nor any of its Participants endorse the information contained in this document, nor do they endorse any products identified by trade name. The information in this document is made available on the understanding that neither Future Farm Industries CRC Limited, nor any of its Participants will have any liability arising from any reliance upon any information in this document. This document is subject to copyright, and the prior written consent of Future Farm Industries CRC Limited must be obtained before it is copied.
For further information about the CRC visit www.futurefarmonline.com.au E: enquiry@futurefarmcrc.com.au T: (08) 6488 2505 Future Farm editorial enquiries Jill Griffi ths Publications Manager E: jill.griffi ths@futurefarmcrc.com.au T: (08) 6488 7353 ISSN (Print) 1835-9906 ISSN (Online) 1835-9914 Published December, 2012
future farm I N N o v A T I o N
I N
p r o F I T A b l e
p e r e N N I A l
F A r m I N g
s y s T e m s
Counting the change in farming practice
I
mproved sustainability, profitability and productivity are the main aims of the majority of Future Farm Industries crc research efforts. Achieving these improvements requires raising awareness, increasing knowledge and changing farming practices, but measuring these things and determining what caused them can be difficult. The crc’s Agribusiness Director Dr scott glyde said the key to measuring changes, especially on-farm practice change, is to have a process in place from the start and to ensure people collect relevant data. “It doesn’t have to be difficult for researchers or for people participating in events,” scott said. “but it needs to be done in a disciplined way.” scott developed a monitoring, evaluation and reporting (mer) framework for the crc’s projects, which researchers can use to determine the impact of their research and the consequences of the crc’s investment. “In the short term, this process is about making sure we meet targets. In EverGraze for example, which is the project where this process is most developed, we know we are exceeding targets,” scott said. “each person in the EverGraze team was provided with training in how to collect the required data, including event feedback sheets, case studies and economic analyses. We have subsequently used that data to modify the way the project has been delivered to make it more effective. “As a result, we can confidently say EverGraze has led to changed farming practices on about 4300 farms since 2008. We also have solid evidence that by using the events and materials provided through
It is important that participants at events, such as this evergraze field day at Creightons Creek (above), are asked for feedback on the day. Future Farm Industries CRC research projects aim to change farming practices to incorporate more perennial species, such as saltbush (inset, top) and lucerne (inset, bottom). (Photos Kate Sargeant and Darren Hickey, DPI Victoria)
EverGraze, producers have been able to successfully apply the principle of ‘Right Plant, Right Place, Right Purpose, Right Management’.” As an example, an analysis conducted as part of the EverGraze Supporting Site final report indicated that 23% of the 385 producers who completed feedback sheets had already made changes and 80% intended to make changes. more detail about the EverGraze supporting sites project is given on pages 6–7 of this issue of Future Farm. “This sort of data is gold. It tells us exactly what is happening on the ground in response to what we are doing,” scott said. “In terms of mer, EverGraze is the most mature project in the crc research portfolio, but in time we will have similar data available for almost all our projects. We have set the framework in place, and have developed Industry Use plans for all the delivery projects. Industry Use plans are the first step in outlining how the research outputs will be delivered to the agricultural industry. They set a clear path for extension and adoption of the crc’s research and will form an important part of the crc’s legacy. “In the longer term, the mer framework gives us a way of making sure that what we are doing is really making a difference and that’s important on many levels. “It means we can be confident the CRC is meeting or exceeding its key targets and that research dollars are being spent in the best
w w w . f u t u r e f a r m o n l i n e . c o m . a u
possible way. And it means producers are getting the extension services and other support they need to be able to make appropriate changes.”
contact
• Dr Scott Glyde,
charles sturt University P: (02) 6933 2385 E: sglyde@csu.edu.au
ISSUE 12 December 2012
3
future farm
Getting the best from mallee belts P
lanting belts of mallee trees across wheatbelt paddocks can have significant natural resource management benefits and, as the market for biomass for biofuels and bioenergy develops, may offer a diversified income stream for farmers. but how do you grow mallee belts to get the best returns? The Future Farm Industries crc’s recentlycompleted project on managing mallee belts for profitable and sustained production sought to answer this question. researcher Adam peck (WA Department of environment and conservation) said the overall aim of the project was to build knowledge of the supply side of mallee biomass production. “In particular, we need to understand mallee biomass production and how it varies with site and timing and frequency of harvest, and in turn, how these are influenced by the key basic natural resources of water and nutrients,” Adam said.
The crc’s research explored the key processes of carbon, water and nutrient balances and their impact on biomass productivity and carbon-energy balances. The researchers thought it likely that mallee belts growing in the Western Australian wheatbelt would experience various combinations of water and nutrient limitations over the seasons. Therefore, they studied the seasonal dynamics of mallee growth over the course of a year, with the aim of being able to target timing of interventions to increase productivity. researcher richard bennett (csIro) said the work helped quantify how additional water and nutrients would affect a mallee belt. “We expected the seasonal productivity of mallees would be highest in spring, due to a combination of moist soil conditions from the preceding winter rains and ideal temperatures for growth, and that productivity would be lowest in autumn, due to insufficient soil moisture following summer,” richard said. “We thought additional water would have the greatest impact on productivity in autumn, when trees would be under the most
ABOVE: Richard Bennett (CSIRO) inspecting mallee monitoring equipment at Narrogin, WA. (Photo: John McGrath, FFI CRC) BELOW: Belts of mallee trees like these in the WA wheatbelt could offer a diversified income stream for farmers. (Photo: Cliff Winfield, courtesy DEC)
severe soil moisture stress. Adding nutrients may lead to moderate improvements in growth rates, particularly at times when ample water was available.”
Annual variation The research showed different factors limit growth during different seasons. “our results indicate that extra water and nutrients could help alleviate the annual fluctuations in tree growth cycles; trees are effectively subject to different growth limitations at various times during the year.” As expected, trees were most water stressed and responsive if additional water was available in autumn, suggesting that water availability is probably the key limitation to growth at this time of year. However, in winter when trees were not moisture
key points research shows water • New and nutrients limit mallee productivity more than researchers expected.
nutrient supply to • Improving mallee trees makes them able to use water more effi ciently.
mallee belts on the • Planting contour and incorporating bunds in the belt design can increase water available to the trees.
4
ISSUE 12 December 2012
F o c u s
o n
R e s e a r c h
future farm inn o v ati o n
in
p r o fita b l e
p e r e nnia l
fa r m in g
s y s t e m s
stressed, the growth of all treatments remained slow, indicating that short day length and cool temperatures were likely to be limiting growth. In spring, growth rates of all treatments were high — additional water had no effect — and additional nutrients showed a clear advantage. This shows that nutrient availability may be the most important limitation to productivity in spring. From the middle of summer, additional water and fertiliser had significant advantages, indicating trees were subject to the combined stresses of water and nutrient limitations during summer. Richard said the results show that extra water has the greatest impact if available in mid-summer to late autumn, when it smooths the annual cycle of summer water deficit and winter water surplus. Additional fertiliser can also provide a significant boost to mallee growth, particularly in years when a lack of water is not limiting their growth.
Mallee tree belts planted with crops can affect the way water moves through the landscape. (Photo: John McGrath, FFI CRC)
Adding water and nutrients
Water harvesting
“We all know that generally if you add nutrients to plants, they grow better,” Richard said. “But we thought that for belts of mallees growing in paddocks, water was most likely the major limiting factor.
UWA-based researcher Dr Gavan McGrath said one potential way to improve water supply to the roots of mallee belts was by using water detention structures such as banks or bunds.
“We had presumed that in fertile farmland, native mallee species, which are well adapted to low nutrient conditions, would not respond much to additional nutrients, at least not until a few harvests of the mallee biomass had depleted nutrient stores. “But one of our experiments, conducted on a farm near Narrogin, WA, showed that both fertiliser and additional water improved productivity of the trees over the year. “We measured increases in biomass using stem diameter and also using canopy dimensions. Based on the stem diameter, fertiliser increased biomass by about 68% over the year but additional water did not significantly increase biomass. However, based on canopy dimensions, the increase due to fertiliser was significant at about 26%, as was the effect of additional water at 24%,” Richard said. “There appears to be an anomaly in these figures, where the stem diameter estimates show a greater biomass increase than the canopy. More research should clarify just how much more biomass trees produced when fertilised. “But we do know that fertilised trees — or nutritionally satisfied trees — are better able to convert limited water into biomass. They have better water use efficiency. “Farmers already have the machinery, networks and knowledge to manage nutrients in agriculture. However, ways to improve water supply to mallee belts are not as well understood.” Richard said that, in practice, water limitations would only be alleviated by years with high rainfall or by improved belt design.
“The soil under mallee belts dries out as trees use the stored soil moisture and this dry soil extends some distance into the adjacent crop or pasture,” Gavan said. “Annual pasture and crop systems are often unable to fully use available water during wet winters or following heavy summer or autumn rain. “So it makes sense to create a system that shifts the excess water from the pasture or crop to the mallee belt. This would help manage the environmental impacts of the excess water — such as erosion, salinity and waterlogging — while improving mallee productivity.” The research showed that building bunds as an integral part of mallee belts planted on the contour could trap and retain water flowing down-slope from farm land. Along with the water, these bunds also capture nutrients present in the surface water run-off. The water and nutrients are redirected into the mallee tree root zone. “Bunds should continue to trap and retain water and nutrients for many years, potentially providing long-term benefits to the mallees from the once-off bund construction,” Gavan said. Older trees, which have been subject to multiple coppice rotations and are therefore more likely to have fully exhausted the water and nutrients available from their root zone, may be more responsive to the additional water and nutrients provided by the bunds.
Designing mallee belts Dr Daniel Mendham (CSIRO), who led the project, said the research was being used to
w w w . f u t u r e f a r m o n l i n e . c o m . a u
formulate recommendations on how to design mallee belts across farmland. “It’s one thing to think that something like bunds may help, but it is another thing entirely to know exactly how and where they should be built in a farm system and just how much difference they will make,” Daniel said. “Answers to these sorts of questions enable us to really refine our recommendations as to how farmers can integrate belts of mallee trees into their farms and we can quantify the benefits of different approaches and management options.” The CRC’s New Woody Crop Industries Program Leader Paul Turnbull said that while there was still more research to do, results to date prove that mallee belts integrated into crops could be a sustainable and profitable option for wheatbelt farmers. “The research used highly sophisticated equipment and complex modelling to produce data and recommendations that will truly make a difference to farmers wanting to grow mallees,” Paul said. The CRC project was supported by the Australian Government’s Second Generation Biofuels Research and Development Program (Gen 2 Grant Program). Other aspects of the project will be explored in later issues of Future Farm. The CRC’s research on mallee belt design will be compiled into a farmers’ manual to be released during 2013.
contacts
• Paul Turnbull, Future Farm Industries CRC M: 0409 402179 E: atwork@impulse.net.au
ISSUE 12 December 2012
5
future farm
EverGraze Supporting Site model yields vital legacy
A
s the EverGraze supporting sites project draws to a close, evaluation of the model reveals a plethora of positive outcomes and some ‘golden rules’ for future projects. With almost 2000 participants attending supporting site activities, such as paddock walks, formal and informal training, discussion sessions with technical experts, field days, and bus trips to see research and on-farm implementation of project initiatives, the impacts have been impressive. From feedback recorded at activities during 2011–12, the EverGraze team, led by Kate sargeant, Department of primary Industries victoria, estimates about 670 producers engaged with the supporting sites.
key points EverGraze Supporting Sites • The project (from 2009–12) has seen positive environmental, risk and production benefi ts impact across more than 200,000 ha.
studies from EverGraze • Case Supporting Sites reveal increases in ground cover and pasture persistence and reduced weeds and soil loss as a result of engaging in the project.
INSET: Group members inspect the new pasture sown at their Supporting Site at Stuart and Janet Morant’s farm in Tallangatta Valley, North East Victoria. (Photos: evergraze)
“of these participants, 43% produced beef only, 13% produced wool and lamb, 11% produced beef and lamb, 10% produced lamb, 8% produced wool and 5% produced beef and wool. A further 3% produced grain,” Kate said. Together these producers cover more than 520,000 ha of grazing and farming land carrying about 31,000 cattle and 716,000 sheep (combined lamb and wool enterprises).
grazing management changes is estimated to be 3.5 to 5.0 million kilograms of lamb (liveweight), 570,000 to 820,000 kg wool (greasy) from prime lamb enterprises, 556,354 to 796,654 kg extra wool (greasy) from wool enterprises and 14.1 to 20.2 mkg beef (liveweight). “our analysis indicated that further changes to sheep management could result in about 46,045 extra lambs weaned,” Kate said. Almost all supporting sites reported that perennials had persisted as a result of putting the Right Plant, Right Place, Right Purpose, Right Management principle into action. Density of native grasses had also increased on some sites due to a combination of management practices and season.
ts • Associated productivity benefi include increased profi ts,
While Kate readily admits that attendance doesn’t necessarily amount to action, the final project analysis demonstrated that the project (from 2009–12) created impacts across more than 200,000 ha.
Documented environmental benefits included increases in ground cover, pasture persistence, reduced weeds and reduced soil loss, which demonstrated that the dualbenefit target had been met.
Supporting Site model has • The delivered a number of ‘golden
“These impacts resulted from changes to the feedbase (establishing perennials), grazing management and soil management on almost 1500 farms,” Kate explained.
Return on investment
pasture growth, stocking rates, lamb survival and improved soil fertility.
rules’, which could be used to rapidly create and systematically roll-out a similar initiative.
6
ABOVE: Supporting Sites reported that perennials had persisted as a result of putting the right plant, right place, right purpose, right management principle into action.
ISSUE 12 December 2012
The increase in production from supporting site participants making feedbase and
F o c u s
o n
Data collected from the supporting sites made it possible to conduct a rough economic analysis on investment in pasture establishment using the EverGraze pasture Improvement calculator.
R e s e a r c h
future farm I N N o v A T I o N
I N
“From 19 paddocks established across 12 farms in north-east and south-west victoria, the average cost of establishing perennial pasture was $450/ha (ranging from $263– $757/ha),” Kate said. “The increase in average stocking rate, as a result of the improved pastures and associated management (compared to unimproved controls), was 9.4 Dse/ha. The average return on investment (including investment in extra sheep) was 32% and the payback period ranged from three to 10 years with an average of six years.” There were three examples of run-down old sown paddocks that were improved with fertiliser, weed control and grazing management. These paddocks returned similar or better return on investment to the newly-established paddocks. There were also three examples where sown pastures were run as a system (with several paddocks containing a range of summeractive and winter-active species). “The systematic approach significantly influenced the gross margin per DSE, by allowing stock to be carried for longer and finished at a higher price or by allowing a finishing enterprise to be run instead of breeding stock,” Kate said. “These examples demonstrated how the returns on investment could be achieved more quickly by putting EverGraze principles into action.” “by understanding costs and potential returns from investments in pastures and infrastructure associated with supporting sites, groups and their coordinators are better equipped to make decisions on their own farms.” EverGraze is a Future Farm Industries crc research and delivery partnership. The project delivery has also been supported by catchment management Authorities (cmAs) and Natural resource management (Nrm) bodies throughout the high-rainfall zone. From 2009–12, the EverGraze supporting site project was funded by caring for our country (cfoc) and administered through central Highlands Agribusiness Forum (cHAF).
p r o F I T A b l e
p e r e N N I A l
F A r m I N g
s y s T e m s
Golden rules of demonstration sites
S
upporting Sites have played an integral role in the EverGraze capability and adoption strategy.
A network of supporting sites was run from 2007 to provide large-scale, on-farm demonstrations, associated with existing proof sites. each site allowed for ‘innovations’ to be trialled under farm conditions and for producers to see results in-situ.
• Make it meaningful — demonstration sites need to go for more than three years to gather meaningful data. • Keep it simple — methods used to collect data need to be simple but designed to give meaningful results. • Money means more — gathering and presenting production and economic data will engage producers. • Site coordinators
each supporting site was associated with a producer group, which was provided with a coordinator (agency extension staff, Landcare officer or private consultant).
• Solid foundations — coordinators who have strong technical skills and enthusiasm will attract and maintain producer respect and interest.
one of the lasting legacies of the EverGraze supporting sites project may well be the development of some ‘golden rules’ for demonstration sites:
• Effi ciencies of scale — spreading a single coordinator across multiple sites creates efficiencies, collaboration between groups and higher impact.
• Groups and activities
Training and support — relevant training and support allows coordinators to improve their skills and delivery.
• Stay in touch — regular group meetings ensure groups stay engaged. • Be prepared — structured training before establishing and throughout the life of a demonstration site allows for greater overall impact. • Training products — existing training products provide greater structure and focus compared with ad hoc activities. However, ad hoc activities, such as field trips, are also important. • Goal setting — establishing relevant and localised group goals at the start allows for longer-term group engagement. • Joining forces — collaborating within regions avoids activity overload. • Host farmers • Common issues — select a host site that is representative of local challenges. • Local champion — select a host farmer who is a well-recognised local producer or shows strong enthusiasm. • Don’t be demanding — avoid asking for too much from host farmers. • Site design • Be fl exible — the best design is one that meets the needs of the intended purpose, but is based on sound science.
• Evaluation • gathering feedback is critical to evaluating project impacts, but needs to be managed carefully to avoid being onerous and off-putting for participants. • The data from the sites themselves can be used for measuring the potential impact of applying the science to real farm scenarios. In addition to the lessons learnt, in evaluating the supporting sites the EverGraze team recognized that the approach has provided an effective channel for two-way interaction between researchers, public and private service providers, and farmers. These interactions have proven invaluable in gaining greater understanding of on-farm issues and the practicalities of adopting new research outcomes and farming practices. lessons from the supporting sites project are expected to be incorporated into the design of future work undertaken by the crc and its partners. The initiative also creates opportunities to capitalise on momentum and relationships developed between the organisations involved in the project.
contact
• Kate Sargeant, National EverGraze project leader, DpI victoria T: (03) 5761 1598 E: kate.sargeant@dpi.vic.gov.au
w w w . f u t u r e f a r m o n l i n e . c o m . a u
ISSUE 12 December 2012
7
future farm
Balanced operation provides in-built risk management
M
ixed farming offers a range of benefits for Andrew and Mandi Bouffler, lockhart, New south Wales, including enterprise synergies and long-term risk management. An innovative approach allows Andrew to focus on his passion (sheep) while ensuring his cropping enterprise remains on the leading edge.
farm info . Case study: Andrew and mandi bouffler Location: lockhart, New south Wales Property size: 1600 ha Mean annual rainfall: 420 mm Soils: red loams through to heavy self-mulching black clays Enterprises: 50:50 sheep (wool and protein) and cropping (cereals and canola)
“At the moment we are sitting at a 50:50 land use of livestock (sheep only) and cropping,” Andrew explained.
Lucerne provides Andrew Bouffler (pictured) with pasture that delivers maximum potential regardless of when the rain falls. (Photo: Rosie O’Keeffe)
“Within the livestock we run two seed stock operations (a White suffolk stud and a merino stud) along with a commercial flock. “In the cropping program there currently are several enterprises: canola, wheat, barley and wheat with a grazing element.
to put my whole cropping program into canola and bring a heap of pastures out of the rotation to chase the dollars.
I see a lot of long-term opportunity in livestock and cropping enterprises but expect dramatic short-term volatility, particularly with commodity prices.
Now with the benefit of hindsight, and a very ordinary spring in our area, wheat and barley, with the improved prices since sowing, will deliver better gross margins than my canola.
The synergies between the two production systems work really well. I think if I pushed too much either way I wouldn’t have enough grazing wheat in the cropping program to support the livestock enterprise during the winter, or I wouldn’t have enough lucerne and clover in the grazing program to build soil fertility for the next cropping phase. productive pastures are the engine room of our whole farm program. When you get well-established lucerne pastures they give your paddocks the ability to perform to their potential regardless of when the rain falls. While the rain over the past couple of summers has had the 100% croppers in our district cursing the unseasonal events due to downgraded grain and increased summer spraying, we have been able to convert the moisture into grazing dry matter and production.
key points mixed farming • Successful operations build on people’s strengths and passions.
the right balance of • Finding livestock and cropping provides a
In the good years you can cut the surplus for fodder — there are a lot of advantages. but also day-in day-out it is fixing nitrogen, which is building on the soil fertility for the next cropping phase. since the recent decade of drought I’ve established about 600 ha of highly productive dryland lucerne in one block. my next step is to invest in a watering and electric fence system so I can fully rotationally graze that country. When it is due to re-enter the cropping phase, you just pull the temporary fencing up and you still have efficiently-sized cropping paddocks.
Flexibility and stability
I’m a big fan of sticking to your program and doing it well. In saying this, I identified the cropping enterprise was underperforming due to the fact that my passion and interest rests in my sheep operations. As a result I have put things in place to rectify this weakness. We employ a consultant who has a bias towards cropping and agronomy. These areas are where his interests lie and he brings enthusiasm and knowledge to our business. After an amicable partnership separation with my brother a few years ago, I realised I didn’t have the time, inclination or capital to invest in both sowing and harvesting plants. so I have engaged who I think is one of the better croppers in the district to do my cropping.
valuable risk management tool.
I think a 50:50 livestock to cropping ratio, with a degree of flexibility, is a pretty good mix.
This approach brings my cropping enterprises right up to the cutting edge in sowing equipment and technology without a massive investment in time and capital.
stability.
I’m not a fan at all of chasing trends — for example canola prices were historically high at the start of this year, but I wasn’t about
so I do what I do well and I’ve put things in place to make sure the cropping enterprises are optimised.
focus and avoiding • Maintaining chasing trends provides business
8
Recognising weakness
ISSUE 12 December 2012
S t o r i e s
f r o m
A u s t r a l i a n
F a r m e r s
future farm inn o v ati o n
in
p r o fita b l e
p e r e nnia l
Building on strengths
Cost control
The same goes for our sheep enterprises — sheep aren’t anywhere near as labour intensive as they seem to get the wrap for, and smart investments in the right places can pay off in terms of efficiency.
When I look at our business I think we can have little impact on commodity prices — we’re price takers with our bulk commodities. We also have little influence on production given it is so rainfall dependent. All we really have control over are our production costs.
We’ve invested in a good set of yards where sheep run through and work well. And we’ve invested heavily in electronic ID, e-tags and computer software to capture all the information we require for the intensive performance recording we carry out. A sheep-handling machine takes a lot of the physical work out of sheep and leaves me mentality alert to ensure I make the right selection and breeding decisions. Along with Mandi and I, we have another full time person. But 95% of the sheep work requires just two people. Generally, Mandi and I work together as a team, which ensures any of the physical work, such as drenching or vaccinating, can occur quickly and efficiently as we capture the required performance data such as weaning weights. It is a matter of investing in your sheep enterprise, like people seem comfortable enough to do in their cropping enterprise.
I’m certainly a lot more conservative than I was 10 years ago — 10–15 years ago we were going to increase our proportion of crop and were encouraged to push for maximum production per hectare outcomes. We pushed it all to the nth degree and had the view that if you needed hay or oats for the stock then you simply bought it. But I’ve gone a full circle on that — we conserve a lot of fodder now.
fa r m in g
s y s t e m s
like hanging 80% of all those up-front costs on the line year-in year-out in the hope of a spring. Mandi and I are a husband and wife team — we make the decisions together. A lot of the decision making is made within the context of how we feel about ourselves and how well you sleep at night. I guess it’s getting a handle on your individual risk profiles and adopting a production system to match. We use a network of professionals — consultants, accountant, bank manager — and engage our network of peers. We also use our local research and extension resources such as the university (Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga) and the EH Graham Centre, and our local district agronomist.
On the costs side of the business alone, by running a mixed operation, we have less of a gamble on the table in any one year than with 100% cropping. Five or six years ago we got to 75–80% cropping; 20–25% sheep. A run of droughts left our business exposed to large losses year-in year-out. Climatic variability is probably the biggest risk component of our enterprise. I didn’t
contact
• Andrew and Mandi Bouffler M: 0427 207 656 E: bouf@dragnet.com.au
science behind the story
Geoff Caswell, NSW DPI
• Andrew and Mandi Bouffler’s
mixed farming system typifies an approach that is spreading across much of Australia’s southern farming systems.
After 10 years of drought in the eastern states, many traditional cropping farmers are weighing up the benefits of incorporating a greater proportion of livestock into their systems to manage risk. Many cropping-dominant systems are sailing close to the wind, with high levels of capital investment and input costs up front before the season unfolds. In recent seasons, yields have been impacted by a range of conditions, including: dry finishes, wet harvests, untimely frosts, and devastation by mice and locusts, often combined with low commodity prices. In comparison, during the same period, wool, sheepmeat and beef have enjoyed relatively high returns and low risks. When seasons are fruitful, cropping delivers results and many farmers already have a lot of capital tied up in machinery, so spreading risk by incorporating livestock is undoubtedly a challenge. The big question on many farmers’ minds is what is the ideal balance between cropping and livestock to minimise risk and maximise synergies — and the answer isn’t simple.
The recent Crops, Rumps and Woolly Jumpers forum in Wagga Wagga, NSW offered a unique opportunity to discuss and highlight the issues surrounding mixed farming in southern NSW, in particular the trade-off between livestock production and cropping. The forum featured a six-member panel of specially selected farmers, including Andrew Bouffler, who represented farming systems across the region. While there is no one system that offers the perfect answer, the forum highlighted some key success factors across the featured mixed-farming businesses. Successful operations play to people’s strengths and passions. Andrew has identified his passion lies in livestock and confesses little interest or inclination towards cropping. He does however recognise the benefits offered by incorporating cropping and has found success in building a working relationship with a neighbour whose skills, interests and capital are in cropping. The answer to running a successful mixed enterprise is to set up the business so all enterprise are well managed — not necessarily by a single person. Having a sound long-term plan is also important — not trying to chase rainbows, or the latest commodity prices, but developing a workable strategy that plays
w w w . f u t u r e f a r m o n l i n e . c o m . a u
to the business’ strengths. There needs to be flexibility, but success is about following a plan and regularly revisiting that plan to evaluate progress under changing conditions. A subtle shift has been occurring along with the evaluation of mixed farming systems, away from high-input, high-risk systems, which maximise profit, towards more sustainable systems that focus on controlling costs, as Andrew has identified. The many synergies between cropping and livestock support this approach through weed control options, nitrogen fixation through legume pastures and grazing crops for livestock and cropping outcomes. Livestock also help to spread income across the year — easing the cash-flow challenges all too familiar with cropping-dominant systems.
• Geoff Casburn is a livestock officer
with NSW DPI and has a particular interest in mixed farming systems. The Crops, Rumps and Woolly Jumpers forum was supported by, AWI, NSW DPI, EH Graham Centre, MLA and the CRC’s EverCrop project.
contact
• Geoff Casburn, NSW DPI M: 0428 420 886 E: geoff.casburn@industry.nsw.gov.au
ISSUE 12 December 2012
9
future farm
Managing hill country — the challenges and benefi ts
S
farm info .
trategic grazing is proving successful for boosting native pasture content and maintaining ground cover in steep hill country for EverGraze supporting site host mark mcKew.
Case study: mark and Ange mcKew (EverGraze supporting site)
Location: Warrak, south-west victoria Property size: 600 ha
“The results of our change in grazing management from set stocking to strategic rotational grazing are encouraging, even though I realise major change is a long-term exercise,” mark said.
Mean annual rainfall: 600 mm Soils: shallow loams Enterprises: merino ewes and wethers, fine wool, prime lambs and cattle.
“I can see the potential to increase productivity and our stock are in better condition throughout the year. They also produce more wool, which is cleaner and stronger along the staple. The grazing systems make sense on our lowinput native pastures. This country consists of cleared steeper hills with grassed gullies and our soils are shallow clay-loams with low water-holding capacities, which become shallower as the country rises, with rocky outcrops on spurs. We have a diverse range of native pasture species on southerly aspects, including about 40–50% native grasses — mainly weeping grass (Microleana stipoides), common wheat grasses (Elymus spp.), wallaby grasses (Austrodanthonia spp.) and spear grasses (Austrostipa spp.). The other 50% are annuals, mostly silver grass (Vulpia spp.) with some onion grass (Romulea rosea) and yorkshire fog (Holcus lanatus). The northern aspects have more onion and wallaby grasses. Traditionally we set stocked large paddocks, mainly due to limited watering points. This led to under-utilisation of the valleys and slopes and overgrazing of the hill tops.
key points rotational grazing can • Strategic reduce the seed set of annual
continuous grazing pressure reduced the perennial pastures, allowing unwanted species to invade.
Invoking change During 2007, we established an EverGraze supporting site to try and increase the density of our perennial native species and improve the pasture productivity and utilisation in our marginal, steep hill landscapes. We also hoped to maintain ground cover above 80% and increase production.
species and encourage perennial species in steep hill pastures.
We chose a site across two paddocks, to compare rotational grazing with deferred grazing and set stocking.
can improve stock and feed allocation.
To allow rotational grazing we fenced a 100 ha paddock into six smaller paddocks, based on land classes and hill aspects. A watering system was set up to deliver stock water and two active erosion gullies were fenced out and rehabilitated.
grazing is more labour • Rotational intensive than set stocking, but challenge is to have enough • The stock and big enough mob sizes to effectively use the feed, and the extra investment in water and fencing infrastructure.
10
Zhongnan Nie and Reto Zollinger explain the most successful treatments in the onion grass trial near the Warrak Supporting Site. INSET: Mark McKew (Photos: Kate Sargeant)
ISSUE 12 December 2012
We applied ‘optimised deferred grazing’ using merino wethers together with the rotational grazing practices across the two innovation paddocks.
S t o r i e s
f r o m
An adjoining 70 ha, which contained wallaby grasses, weeping grass, fog grass, introduced annual grasses and onion grass, was used as the ‘control paddock’. We set stocked this paddock with autumn-lambing merino ewes and cattle at about 2.6–4 Dse/ha.
Optimised deferred grazing From December 2007, wethers rotated through the innovation paddock. but in early spring 2008, we increased grazing pressure when annual grass weeds set seed. Then we de-stocked the paddock as the perennials started to set seed during late spring to midJanuary. This crash grazing, with stocking rates as high as 28 Dse/ha, allowed us to target annual grass weeds such as silver grass. There was still sufficient ground cover when we removed the sheep four weeks later. stock returned to the paddock for a week during late summer to provide some soil-seed contact. This promoted the germination of the newly-dropped native grass seed. Following the initial optimised deferred grazing during spring 2008, sheep rotationally
A u s t r a l i a n
F a r m e r s
future farm I N N o v A T I o N
I N
p r o F I T A b l e
p e r e N N I A l
F A r m I N g
s y s T e m s
Strategic grazing helped control undesirable species such as silver grass (vulpia spp.) (left) while encouraging desirable native grasses, such as wallaby grass (Austrodanthonia spp.) (middle) and weeping grass (microlaena stipoides) (right). (Photos: Kate Sargeant and Meredith Mitchell)
grazed the paddock after the autumn break during 2009. sheep grazed each paddock for about a 7–10 days and were removed for 5–6 weeks.
Persistence The native perennials have persisted well to date in all six paddocks in the rotation. There has been a marked increase in perennial coverage and more feed compared with the control paddock. The capeweed has all but disappeared, probably as a result of low nutrient levels and rotational grazing, although onion grass is still a problem. between June 2008 and 2010 the control paddock had a higher stocking rate, but there was between 50% and 120% more feed in the innovation paddock. After reviewing stocking rates and feed-onoffer (Foo) in the innovation paddock, we planned to increase grazing pressure during
spring 2010. However the wet conditions made managing spring feed difficult and we couldn’t maintain high enough stocking rates. The solar pump and panels were stolen, so we stopped rotational grazing to allow access to the only dam in the paddock. Despite the challenges, the results have shown we can increase the perennial pasture component and maintain groundcover. It also demonstrated that an increase in Foo delivers potential productivity benefits. But we need to weigh up the extra infrastructure costs for fencing and water on the hill country and the cost of additional stock.
New strategy fosters a keen eye In the past, our sheep often lacked condition at shearing in August. The new grazing strategy keeps stock in better condition year round and offers greater marketing options. While the regular stock moves are labour intensive, they allow us to closely monitor
Mark McKew watches on as Julie Andrew identifies native grasses at the site. (Photo: Kate Sargeant)
pasture and animals. I can quickly adjust numbers to improve native pasture content, maintain groundcover and increase pasture utilisation. Through more regular monitoring, rotational grazing helps us stay on top of flystrike and gives us the chance to cull susceptible animals.
contact
• mark mcKew P: (03) 5354 3224 M: 0408 132 137 E: markmckew@hotmail.com
science behind the story
Zhongnan Nie and Julie Andrew, DPI Victoria
• Optimised deferred grazing is an effective way to promote native grass growth and alter species composition by increasing the proportion of perennials, while suppressing annual grasses.
At the Warrak supporting site, mark and Ange were able to increase the native grass component of their steep hill pastures by more than 50% with this approach. The timing of grazing and rest is critical and depends on the growth stage of the annual grasses in the pasture. Ideally, grazing starts after annual grass stems elongate, but before seed heads emerge during september to early october. Heavy grazing is undertaken (grazed down to approximately 1000 kg Dm/ha) to ensure the growing points of these plants are effectively removed.
stock are removed and the pasture is not grazed until the following February to march (late summer and early autumn). To be successful this grazing strategy requires a reasonably high (>20%) level of desirable species and sufficient stock to graze the pasture quickly, at the right time, so annual grass growing points can be largely removed. subdividing large paddocks is also important to achieve appropriate grazing pressures.
• Zhongan Nie is a senior research agronomist at the Department of Primary Industries Victoria, Hamilton.
• Julie Andrew was the coordinator
of the Warrak Supporting Site from 2007–10.
w w w . f u t u r e f a r m o n l i n e . c o m . a u
Acknowledgements: Warrak supporting site was funded by Wimmera catchment management Authority, AWI, caring for our country through central Highlands Agribusiness Forum, and Department of primary Industries victoria through EverGraze and the Future Farm Industries crc. The payback period for the innovation paddock at the Warrack supporting site was estimated to be 7.5 years. A full economic analysis of this case study is available at www.evergraze. com.au/information/fact sheets
contact
• Zhongnan Nie, DpI victoria T: (03) 5573 0791 M: 0428 868 011 E: Zhongnan.Nie@dpi.vic.gov.au
ISSUE 12 December 2012
11
future farm
Rejuvenate or re-sow — weighing up the options
D
uring 2010 barrie and Anne Noye, creightons creek, victoria, established an EverGraze supporting site to investigate options to increase pasture productivity in the most cost-effective way possible. “Following a number of drought years we were running a 500-head self-replacing Merino flock on our property in the foothills of the strathbogie ranges, near euroa in north-east victoria,” barry said.
farm info . Case study: barrie and Anne Noye (EverGraze supporting site)
Location: creightons creek, north-east victoria Property size: 133 ha (one block of a larger enterprise) Mean annual rainfall: 700 mm Soils: sandy loams and sandy clay loams derived from granite Enterprises: self-replacing merinos.
“The property ranges from relatively flat, arable country on the valley floor to steep, non-arable lower foothill country at the northern end of the block. pasture weeds were becoming an increasing problem and reducing the productivity of our pastures and stock. our existing system was based on set stocking and I was keen to give rotational grazing a go, knowing it would be a better way to manage our livestock and our feedbase. establishing an EverGraze supporting site helped us kill two birds with the one stone and allowed us to compare the costs and benefits of a range of options. It got me thinking about what I might be doing better – it really stirred up my grey matter.
Divide and conquer The first step was to subdivide an existing 16 ha paddock into three smaller paddocks according to land class. This left us with a paddock of old, established phalaris pasture, one of native perennial pasture, and a third, which would be sown to landmaster phalaris across the arable portion. The next step was to determine any limitations in soil fertility.
key points degraded pastures • Improving with fertiliser, weed control and
grazing can be cost effective and productive.
to land class and • Fencing reducing paddock size can
increase the ease and benefi ts of rotational grazing.
grazing can increase • Rotational ground cover and perennial plant frequency in native pastures.
12
ISSUE 12 December 2012
Barrie Noye (right) and Geoff Broughton inspect the fertilised phalaris paddock (foreground), fenced and managed separately from the unimproved native pasture (behind) in mid-September 2012, just 12 months after the new grazing, fertiliser and weed management strategy began. (See also top right, page 13.) (Photos: Jim Shovelton)
The established phalaris paddock was 3 ha of gently rising country sown to phalaris about 30 years ago. At the start of the investigation, phalaris covered most of it but there were also some native grass species and a significant level of erodium and silver grass (Vulpia spp). The erodium was a problem as it prevented grazing from mid-late spring onwards due to seed contamination of our wool. soil tests revealed acceptable pH levels but mild phosphorus and potassium deficiencies in this paddock, so we applied sufficient levels of fertiliser to ensure nutrient levels were not limiting. The native grass paddock was 5 ha of steep, non-arable country, mostly low-quality spear grasses and wallaby grasses, with small sections of the existing phalaris. Again pH levels were acceptable and no fertiliser was required in this paddock.
S t o r i e s
f r o m
The third paddock, was 8.4 ha of arable and steeper, non-arable country. This paddock was the highest point in the original 16 ha paddock and had been used by stock as a camp. The dominant species was erodium and there were few perennials. The soil tests revealed the paddock was mildly deficient in phosphorus with acceptable pH levels. During may 2009 we sowed 3.3 ha of the arable country to landmaster phalaris at a rate of 4 kg/ha, together with 8 kg/ha subclover. To address the phosphorus deficiency we incorporated 100 kg/ha mono-ammonium phosphate (mAp) fertiliser at sowing. The steep, non-arable 4.9 ha of the paddock was left as native and annual pastures.
Ongoing management During autumn 2010, we applied 35 kg/ha of phosphorus, 100 kg /ha of potassium and 60 kg/ha molybdenum (as a foliar spray) in the old phalaris paddock.
A u s t r a l i a n
F a r m e r s
future farm I N N o v A T I o N
I N
p r o F I T A b l e
We hoped this would not only boost the perennial species but also improve the content of desirable annuals, such as subclover and annual ryegrass. At the same time, we also applied grass and broadleaf herbicides (separately), to control annual grass weeds and erodium respectively. The other two paddocks did not require any further fertiliser or herbicide applications at this time.
Grazing management To maximise the benefits of the fencing and fertiliser, we made the shift from set stocking to rotational grazing. We boxed 500 ewes into one mob and moved them, depending on feed on offer, pasture growth rates and what the season was doing. each paddock had 35-60 days in between grazings to recover. At the time the supporting site was developed, we also had a break in the seasons. During 2010 and 2011, we had 1115 mm and 771 mm of rain respectively, which was well above our annual average and a vast improvement from the 553 mm received during 2009. The combination of rotational grazing and increased rainfall saw a dramatic change
p e r e N N I A l
F A r m I N g
s y s T e m s
in feed availability — especially in the new phalaris paddock.
fertiliser, herbicide and grazing in each paddock were the most influential factors.
This allowed us to effectively increase our stocking rates in this paddock to 13 Dse/ha.
Cost comparison
We left the phalaris paddock unstocked to set seed, and, to prevent spear grass seeds contaminating our wool, we removed stock from the native pasture as the grass reached seed production during mid-spring. In addition to boosting stocking rates, the approaches also impacted on pasture composition across all the paddocks. The clover content of each paddock varied throughout the year. The old phalaris paddock almost always had a greater clover content than the other two pastures, in response to fertiliser and grazing. our rotational grazing strategy was designed to leave relatively high levels of residual pasture in the new phalaris paddock, as landmaster, being an upright winter-active variety, is sensitive to heavy grazing. This also suppressed the clover in that paddock. The native grass paddock always had a low clover content, consistent with the fact it received no fertiliser. In general, the number of perennial pasture species increased over time. While the improved seasons contributed to this, the
Despite the differences in the landscape between the three paddocks, and the various constraints of the grazing strategies, the results revealed the relative benefits of pasture rejuvenation. because phalaris still existed in the old phalaris paddock, it was more cost-effective to rejuvenate the pasture with fertiliser, weed control and strategic grazing than to sow a new pasture. Where the phalaris didn’t exist in the higher part of the paddock, utilising the high fertility from the stock camp and establishing a new pasture was the best option.”
contact
• barrie Noye T: (03) 5790 3223
science behind the story
Jane Court and Kate Sargeant, DPI Victoria
• In setting up the Supporting
Site on the Noye’s property, the EverGraze principle of Right Plant, Right Place, Right Purpose, Right Management were combined with those established in the Grasslands Productivity Program (GPP) run by the Grasslands Society of Southern Australia in the early 1990s.
These earlier trials showed that by addressing the main limitations in the pasture — nutrients and species — potential stocking rates, as governed by average annual rainfall and length of the growing season, could be achieved. The gpp also showed it was possible to achieve a long-term potential stocking rate quickly, if nutrient deficiencies were addressed. In barrie and Anne’s case, the supporting site demonstrated that improving a degraded phalaris pasture through fertiliser, weed control and grazing management was not only cost-effective compared with establishing a new pasture, but could double carrying capacity.
To work out the amount of phosphorus needed in the old phalaris paddock, the starting and target colwell phosphorus were used in conjunction with the phosphorus buffering Index (pbI). soils with a low buffering index require less phosphorus fertiliser than soils with a high buffering index. The objective was to apply enough fertiliser to lift nutrients to non-limiting levels, quickly. The calculations can be done using the Feed budget and rotation planner tool found on the EverGraze website. Users enter information about each paddock, including starting and target phosphorus levels, soil type, grazing management, topography and stocking rate. These factors affect how phosphorus can be lost or maintained in the soil. The planner estimates the maintenance and capital rates of phosphorus for the paddock. The EverGraze team used a cash flow analysis to estimate the time it would take for production increases to ‘pay back’ barry’s initial investment in the two pasture improvement options.
The calculations used the income and variable costs associated with the enterprise, the capital and maintenance costs associated with improving the pasture, purchase of extra stock and interest costs to allow for both the borrowing of capital and the opportunity cost of investing. The pay-back period for the rejuvenated, old phalaris pasture was estimated to be four years. In comparison, the pay-back period for the re-sown, new phalaris pasture was at least 5.5 years. A more detailed economic analysis, including gross margins per hectare and Net present values (Npv) per hectare for the two paddock treatments at the creightons creek supporting site, are available on the EverGraze website.
contact
• Jane Court, DpI victoria M: 0427 200 451 E: jane.court@dpi.vic.gov.au W: www.evergraze.com.au
Weed risk note: A weed management guide for phalaris and weed risk assessments for phalaris and other plants being researched by the crc are available at: www.futurefarmonline.com.au/about/weedrisk.htm
w w w . f u t u r e f a r m o n l i n e . c o m . a u
ISSUE 12 December 2012
13
future farm
Students take up the big issues
T
he Future Farm Industries crc postgraduate program has enabled a wide variety of students, with an even wider variety of ideas and topics, to pursue doctoral studies. In these pages we profile three students who, from different perspectives, have all pursued their interests with passion and commitment.
Tas Thamo — a passion for sustainable agriculture
C
limate change has been the
catalyst for Tas Thamo’s phD study because, as he says: “its impact and our responses to it have the potential to affect almost everything”.
After completing his undergraduate agricultural science degree at The University of Western Australia, Tas began his phD in 2010, also at UWA. His topic: ‘costs and benefits of different options for West Australian farmers to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions’. Tas’s concern about climate change, as well as an interest in government policy and a passion for more sustainable agriculture — and society as a whole — has provided him with the impetus to help farmers find solutions in a complex environment.
“There have been many, many ‘aha’ moments so far, but then comes the challenge of checking and testing the idea, refining it if required, and then trying to communicate it as effectively as possible to others. It is these ‘aha’ moments that sustain and invigorate me as a researcher,” Tas said. “With climate change, there is so much to do because how we try to prevent it or adapt to it has such an impact. “Within my more specific area of climate change mitigation there is still a lot of research to be done on the costs and benefits for farmers and the wider community of the many potential ways of abating emissions that have ‘been tossed into the ring’. If we know more about the upsides and downsides of the options, we can design more efficient policy for farmers to work with and implement on their land.”
Tas Thamo outside the CRC offices at The University of Western Australia. (Photo: FFI CRC)
While Tas presently is focusing on his studies, he can see a range of diverse career possibilities beyond his phD, whether in academia, government or consulting. It’s the diversity of his research in the agricultural space that he’s finding so rewarding. “Agriculture is such a broad field that to understand how everything in the system fits together requires knowledge of many different things: plant biology, animal biology, soil science, pests, economics, ecology, genetics, chemistry, microbiology and more,” Tas said. “If you can understand these fundamentals, then you have gone a long way to understanding how much of the world works. I don’t think too many other fields offer this diversity.”
Helen King — a biophysical approach to support practice change
I
f ever the word ‘holistic’ applied to a research approach, Helen King’s PhD is it. As she puts it, “in Australia we’re working in a highly complex social-ecological-economic system in a landscape with highly variable climate and soils, and we need to understand the whole system.” Helen’s topic, ‘grazing, roots and soil: interactions and implications for the
14
ISSUE 12 December 2012
sequestration of soil carbon’, tackles the components she believes can lead to a greater biophysical understanding of the landscape for graziers. Following her master of environmental science, completed at the Australian National University’s (ANU) Fenner school of environment and society, Helen enrolled in her phD in 2010, also at the Fenner School, and aims to finish in 2013.
F o c u s
o n
Helen has been inspired and surprised at times during her study journey so far. “I clearly remember the ‘wow’ feeling when I first looked at soil through a microscope during a soil biology prac; another moment was learning about termites and mycorrhizal fungi — they are amazing!” Helen said. she said that, as her studies progressed, it was exciting to put her soil knowledge together with listening to graziers’ land restoration success stories, and she wants to continue
R e s e a r c h
future farm I N N o v A T I o N
I N
p r o F I T A b l e
p e r e N N I A l
F A r m I N g
s y s T e m s
Tim Hutchings — challenging best practice, risk and profi t
T
im Hutchings believes
he had a considerable advantage over some of his fellow students during his PhD studies at Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga.
Tim Hutchings (left) with client Craig Ronnfeldt inspecting a crop at Lockhart, NSW. (Photo courtesy Tim Hutchings).
As a self-proclaimed `aged’ student (Tim is 68), he says that a lifetime of experience, coupled with solid organisational and work skills, helped him to clearly know what he wanted to do, and how to do it, within the practical limits of the topic and available resources.
“I had approached the topic at many times during my career, but never had the luxury of sufficient free time to give it the attention it needed. When I sold my farm and “retired” I had that time, and the crc provided the incentive to study risk in detail,” Tim said.
Tim submitted his phD, titled ‘Financial risk on mixed farms in southern NsW’, in June this year after commencing study in 2008. He says he was drawn to the subject of risk because, as a professional agricultural consultant, he found it almost impossible to make his farmer clients profitable, no matter how good they were at best practice farming. Added to that experience, his sons, who are all business consultants to non-rural businesses, were able to quantify and therefore manage the risk faced by the businesses they advised. It seemed extraordinary to Tim that many farmers, in the most risky business of all, didn’t consider risk the same way and were certainly not able to quantify it.
“Undertaking postgraduate study postcareer meant that I knew my topic, my industry and the people in it. It also gave me the opportunity to learn new skills from skilled people, and to rub shoulders with some exceptional young scientists. I must acknowledge the drive and intelligence of the postgrads I have met, especially those in the crc family. I would like to thank them for taking such good care of the grandfather in their midst.” For Tim, the process of studying was both tedious and enjoyable, with a series of rewarding ‘eureka’ moments,
especially in the first few years, such as establishing simple correlations between rainfall and stocking rate estimates. Tim said his research has only scratched the surface of the topic of risk in agriculture and some of his data contradicts many common ideas. “my data shows that some elements of best practice are not necessarily the most profitable. More importantly, my research shows that farm viability depends more on minimising losses than on maximising profits.” Tim said. “overall, I’ve enjoyed the opportunity study gave me to concentrate on one job, and to do it well. It’s a real luxury after a busy life where deadlines tend to accumulate.”
Helen King among sunflowers in the Poitou-Charents region of France, where the traditional crop rotation of canola, wheat and barley is moving to an advanced rotation of canola, wheat, barley and sunflower for integrated pest management. (Photo courtesy Helen King).
working with graziers on developing and implementing improved grazing methods. “my master’s had an agriculture and climate change focus, and I was interested in drivers of practice change. I found that a lack of ecological literacy was a major impediment to change, and this was the catalyst for me to shift to a biophysical focus for my phD.”
Helen believes more research is needed in this area, given the complex systems in place on Australian landscapes.
In July this year Helen travelled to Italy and France to present at international conferences and visit research organisations. she said this exceptional experience has been one of the best things about being an agricultural researcher to date.
“As well as developing a biophysical understanding (of which my research is just a small part), we need to understand the whole system. We need disciplinary (agronomic, economic, social, ecological) and interdisciplinary research to facilitate practice improvement,” Helen said.
“The opportunity to meet and learn from leading researchers, here and in europe, and their generosity in giving constructive feedback, has not only opened potential future collaborations, but has encouraged me to continue in this line of research.
w w w . f u t u r e f a r m o n l i n e . c o m . a u
ISSUE 12 December 2012
15
future
farm
I N N O VAT I O N I N P R O F I TA B L E P E R E N N I A L FA R M I N G S Y S T E M S
The fi nal word
T
he mallee harvester is sold! biosystems engineering bought the Intellectual property associated with the Future Farm Industries crc-developed mallee harvester for an undisclosed sum.
SOLD
The crc’s chief Executive Officer, Peter Zurzolo, said the sale of the harvester was a significant step forward for the crc. “Developing Developing the harvester is a major achievement for this crc and its collaborators,” peter said. “To see the harvester completed and now sold is a great step forward. “The fact that commercial operators have seen the harvester’s value — and I’m talking considerable value —
supports everything we’ve ever said about this machine. “basically, without a mallee harvester there can be no industry based on mallee biomass for biofuels and bioenergy. With the harvester, this industry becomes possible.”
Subscription/change of address: Make me a free subscriber to Future Farm Do not send me Future Farm Please change my subscription address Title
First name
Surname Position Company/property name Address Suburb/town
State
Phone
Fax
Postcode
Please return this form to: Future Farm Industries CRC The University of Western Australia M081 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley WA 6009 Tel (08) 6488 2505 Fax (08) 6488 2856 Or email: enquiry@futurefarmcrc.com.au
w w w . f u t u r e f a r m o n l i n e . c o m . a u