Prospects for sustainable use of the pastoral areas of Australia’s southern rangelands: a synthesis

There is growing recognition of the need to achieve land use across the southern Australian rangelands that accommodates changing societal preferences and ensures the capacity of future generations to satisfy their own preferences. This paper considers the prospects for sustainable use of the pastoral lands based either on continued grazing or emerging, alternative land uses. After an overview of the southern rangelands environment, the status of the pastoral industry, its environmental impacts, and key issues for pastoral management, we propose four principles and 19 associated guidelines for sustainable pastoralism. Although some continued withdrawal of land from pastoralism is anticipated, we expect that pastoralism will continue throughout much of the region currently grazed, particularly in the higher rainfall environments in the east. Within these areas, sustainable pastoral land use should be achievable by the application of four broad management principles, as follows: (1) manage grazing within a risk management framework based on the concept of tactical grazing, (2) develop infrastructure to allow best management of both domestic and non-domestic grazing pressure, (3) incorporate management of invasive native scrub, where required, into overall, ongoing property management and (4) manage grazing to enhance biodiversity conservation at landscape scale. Application of these principles and guidelines will require the development of appropriate policy settings, particularly in relation to kangaroo management, climate change, and natural resource governance, together with innovative approaches to research, development and extension. Policy development will also be required if the new industry of carbon sequestration is to deliver socio-ecological benefits without perverse outcomes. Other emerging industries based on renewable energy or ecosystem services appear to have considerable potential, with little risk of adverse ecological consequences.

Land managers’ and service providers’ perspectives on the magnitude, impact and management of non-domestic grazing pressure in the southern rangelands of Australia

In the southern rangelands of Australia, the capability of land managers to manage total grazing pressure, with support from their service providers, influences resource condition, livestock production and pastoral business profitability. This study investigated the perspectives of people who face the challenge of managing total grazing pressure. Self-administered surveys were used to collect the perspectives of 220 land managers and 46 service providers to total grazing pressure management and the impacts of grazing animals. Land managers and service providers agreed that, on average, 40 to 50% of the total demand for forage is due to non-domestic animals, that a reduction in this component is required, and that current levels are at least double the desirable level. The majority of respondents (>54%) assessed both livestock and non-domestic animals to have a negative impact on soils and pastures. However, livestock were more frequently assessed to have a positive impact on soils and pastures than non-domestic animals. The respondents commonly suggested that the impact livestock have on soils and pastures depends on management. Non-domestic animals were assessed by the majority of respondents to have a negative impact on livestock production and business profitability, apart from unmanaged goats where opinions were divided. Both land managers and service providers used the ‘large negative’ category to describe the impact on livestock production and business profitability more frequently for kangaroos than for any other herbivore. There were significant differences in the respondents’ perspectives among the States. Respondents in New South Wales and Queensland estimated a higher proportion of demand for forage from non-domestic animals than respondents from other States. The respondents in New South Wales also more frequently assessed unmanaged goats to have a positive impact on business profitability compared with the other States. Total grazing pressure management was rated as a high priority issue by 66% of respondents. ‘Improved kangaroo management’ and ‘fencing’ were the two main factors identified with potential to make a substantial difference to total grazing pressure management in the next ten years.

Public attitudes to animal welfare and landholder resource limitations: implications for total grazing pressure management in the southern rangelands of Australia

Sustainable grazing in the nationally iconic southern rangelands of Australia requires landholders to actively manage the grazing pressure from both domestic livestock and non-domestic herbivores. Landholders have primary responsibility for controlling the non-domestic herbivores. In doing so, they must meet the Australian public’s expectations for resource conservation (mainly a public good) and animal welfare. Governments are also involved in the management of non-domestic herbivores via native and feral animal legislation and control programs. The Australian public will not accept cruelty to animals, perceived or otherwise. In this paper we explore the challenges faced by landholders in their attempts to manage the grazing pressure from native herbivores, particularly kangaroos, feral goats and feral pigs, while meeting the Australian public’s expectations for animal welfare. Landholders typically live on extensive properties and their capacity to manage these is influenced by high climate variability, low labour availability, commodity price fluctuations and limited capital available for investment in new technologies. The additional requirement to reduce the grazing pressure from kangaroos, feral goats and feral pigs is a significant burden on already time-poor landholders. Hence, there is a critical disparity between landholders’ capacity and their responsibility to effectively manage the non-domestic herbivores on their properties. We suggest that current expectations of landholders to deliver public benefits by publicly acceptable practices are unreasonable. Further, we suggest that governments should accept more responsibility for managing non-domestic grazing pressure. The concept of duty of care to land management provides a means by which a more appropriate division of responsibilities between landholders and government could be achieved to ensure that valued attributes of this iconic Australian landscape are retained.

Insights on the relationship between total grazing pressure management and sustainable land management: key indicators to verify impacts

Demonstrating sustainable land management (SLM) requires an understanding of the linkages between grazing management and environmental stewardship. Grazing management practices that incorporate strategic periods of rest are promoted internationally as best practice. However, spatial and temporal trends in unmanaged feral (goat) and native (kangaroo) populations in the southern Australian rangelands can result land managers having, at times, control over less than half the grazing pressure, precluding the ability to rest pastures. Few empirical studies have examined the impacts of total grazing pressure (TGP) on biodiversity and resource condition, while the inability to manage grazing intensity at critical times may result in negative impacts on ground cover, changes in pasture species composition, increased rates of soil loss and reduce the ability for soils to store carbon. The widespread adoption of TGP control through exclusion fencing in the southern Australian rangelands has created unprecedented opportunities to manage total grazing pressure, although there is little direct evidence that this infrastructure leads to more sustainable land management. Here we identify several key indicators that are either outcome- or activity-based that could serve as a basis for verification of the impacts of TGP management. Since TGP is the basic determinant of the impact of herbivory on vegetation it follows that the ability for rangeland pastoral management to demonstrate SLM and environmental stewardship will rely on using evidence-based indicators to support environmental social licence to operate.

Facilitating feral camel removal in Australia through commercial use

Approximately 16.5% of feral camel removal under the Australian Feral Camel Management Project (AFCMP) was by commercial means, via mustering for transport to abattoir (9.3%) and pet-meating in the field (7.2%). The challenges of commercial use of feral camels as a removal method include: variable density, mobility and distribution of the feral camel population; achieving landholder collaboration; accessibility to remote areas by road; availability of yard infrastructure and trucking capacity; and distance to slaughter facilities and end-markets. However, the AFCMP recognised commercial use as important to some Aboriginal communities, bringing a range of economic and social benefits as well as environmental outcomes in terms of reduced feral camel density. To facilitate mustering offtake, a removal assistance scheme was developed, whereby a formal landholder agreement was entered into with various legal requirements, including animal welfare. The agreement incentivised removal of both sexes: payments were for cow camels received at abattoir, but with a concurrent requirement for approximately equal sexes to be delivered to abattoir in an annual contract period. Additional project costs included contract development and oversight, landholder engagement, training and animal welfare auditing. Pet-meating, by way of ground culling and in-field butchering for meat storage in mobile refrigeration units, was also supported by the AFCMP via measures to increase harvest efficiency such as satellite tracking, aerial spotting and improved road access. However, pet-meating ceased mid-project due to changed industry demands. Post-AFCMP, mustering operations continue to service market demand for camel meat. The camel industry is also looking to camel farming to ensure greater continuity and quality of supply than can be achieved through wild harvest.

A survey of the meat goat industry in Queensland and New South Wales. 1. General property information, goat and pasture management

This study aimed to survey farmers’ knowledge and practices on the management of pastures, stocking rates and markets of meat goat-producing enterprises within New South Wales and Queensland, Australia. An interview-based questionnaire was conducted on properties that derived a significant proportion of their income from goats. The survey covered 31 landholders with a total land area of 567 177 ha and a reported total of 160 010 goats. A total of 55% (17/31) of producers were involved in both ‘opportunistic harvesting’ and commercial goat operations, and 45% (14/31) were specialised seedstock producers. Goats were the most important livestock enterprise on 55% (17/31) of surveyed properties. Stocking rate varied considerably (0.3–9.3 goats/ha) within and across surveyed properties and was found to be negatively associated with property size and positively associated with rainfall. Overall, 81% (25/31) of producers reported that the purpose of running goats on their properties was to target international markets. Producers also cited the importance of targeting markets as a way to increase profitability. Fifty-three percent of producers were located over 600 km from a processing plant and the high cost of freight can limit the continuity of goats supplied to abattoirs. Fencing was an important issue for goat farmers, with many producers acknowledging this could potentially add to capital costs associated with better goat management and production. Producers in the pastoral regions appear to have a low investment in pasture development and opportunistic goat harvesting appears to be an important source of income.