Management of grazing systems to 2030 - Melissa Rebbeck

348 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
348
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Management of grazing systems to 2030 - Melissa Rebbeck

  1. 1. Management of grazing systems to 2030 Melissa Rebbeck - SARDI – Climate Applications Acknowledge – Russell Pattinson, Phil Graham, Andrew Moore, Peter Hayman
  2. 2. Adaptation project <ul><li>Grass Gro </li></ul><ul><li>Look at management, production, genetic and financial changes on livestock enterprises (50 ) </li></ul><ul><li>Current base line enterprises vs base line under climate stress </li></ul><ul><li>Approaches for adaptation </li></ul><ul><li>Projections for 2030 </li></ul><ul><li>Trends – eg 1995 to 2005 </li></ul><ul><li>Other approaches by this project </li></ul><ul><li>Sensitivity – Warmer and drier or wetter </li></ul><ul><li>Spatial – Warmer and drier or wetter location. </li></ul>What we did
  3. 4. Role of livestock producers <ul><li>Confirm base case scenarios </li></ul><ul><li>Suggest adaptations strategies </li></ul><ul><li>Confirmed which adaptations they are most likely to implement </li></ul>
  4. 5. Today <ul><li>Impacts of climate stress on livestock systems </li></ul><ul><li>Adaptations tested (to date) </li></ul><ul><li>What we have learned </li></ul><ul><li>What producers have learned </li></ul><ul><li>Conclusions </li></ul>
  5. 6. Impact of climate projections on key indicators <ul><li>Such as: </li></ul><ul><li>Supplementary feeding </li></ul><ul><li>Minimum Ground Cover </li></ul><ul><li>Pasture growth </li></ul><ul><li>Gross Margins </li></ul><ul><li>Ewe or Steer Sale weight </li></ul><ul><li>Wool Cut/ha </li></ul><ul><li>Sale times </li></ul>
  6. 7. Lucindale Median Pasture Growth Rate – Impacts Historical vs Future (A2) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1/01/2009 15/01/2009 29/01/2009 12/02/2009 26/02/2009 12/03/2009 26/03/2009 9/04/2009 23/04/2009 7/05/2009 21/05/2009 4/06/2009 18/06/2009 2/07/2009 16/07/2009 30/07/2009 13/08/2009 27/08/2009 10/09/2009 24/09/2009 8/10/2009 22/10/2009 5/11/2009 19/11/2009 3/12/2009 17/12/2009 Kg DM/ha/d Base CCSM 3 CSIRO 3.5 ECHAM5 OM GFDL 2.1
  7. 8. Gross Margins Merino x terminal sire Lucindale 1995-2005 stocking rate x lambing time Mar Jun Jul 5.5/ha Mar Jun Jul 7/ha Mar Jun Jul 8.5/ha Month Lamb Stocking Rate
  8. 9. Supplementary Feed Merino x terminal sire 1995-2005 stocking rate x lambing time - Lucindale Mar Jun Jul 5.5/ha Mar Jun Jul 7/ha Mar Jun Jul 8.5/ha Month Lamb Stocking Rate
  9. 10. Ground Cover Merino x terminal sire 1995-2005 stocking rate x lambing time Mar Jun Jul 5.5/ha Mar Jun Jul 7/ha Mar Jun Jul 8.5/ha Month Lamb Stocking Rate
  10. 11. March Lambing June Lambing July Lambing 5.5/ha 7/ha 8.5/ha 8.5/ha Sub Clover Phalaris
  11. 13. Other approaches <ul><li>Comparing enterprises </li></ul><ul><li>Sensitivity </li></ul><ul><li>Spatial </li></ul>
  12. 14. Comparing enterprises – dry and wet years - 2030 <ul><li>Big differences between wet & dry years </li></ul><ul><li>Sheep more resilient in dry years while cattle perform well in wet years </li></ul>
  13. 15. Sensitivity approach <ul><ul><li>Surface charts – Brendan Cullen </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>See Brendan Cullen talk Thurs arvo </li></ul></ul>Warmer Drier 1971-2000 Warmer Drier 1971-2000
  14. 16. Spatial approach – dry and wet years – 2030 <ul><li>Predicted climates change even between regions </li></ul><ul><li>Can have big differences on profits </li></ul>114 5.5 +6% 0% Wet (UK) -17 2.5 +8% -13% Dry (G) Grenfell 240 5.8 +6% -2% Wet (UK) 63 3.6 +10% -17% Dry (G) Yass Profit $/ha Stocking rate Temperature Rainfall
  15. 17. Impacts <ul><ul><li>No one future </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Generally shorter growing seasons </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Reduced farm Gross Margins and more variability </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Greater Variability in growth </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Feed available for less time </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Perennials not growing as well in higher rainfall areas (South east SA) </li></ul></ul>
  16. 18. Conclusions <ul><ul><li>Climate change negatively impacts most enterprises </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Value of adaptations vary across regions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Difficult to get over 50% pasture utilisation without grazing management </li></ul></ul>What we learned
  17. 19. What livestock producers learned <ul><li>Minimise need for supplementary feed by; </li></ul><ul><li>Reviewing lambing and calving times (as per tests in Grass Gro) </li></ul><ul><li>Review age at first joining </li></ul><ul><li>Reviewing stocking rates </li></ul><ul><li>Reviewing sale times </li></ul><ul><li>Core Breeding and more trading </li></ul><ul><li>Flexibility to adjust numbers as season progresses </li></ul><ul><li>Match to livestock condition </li></ul>
  18. 20. What livestock producers learned <ul><li>Increase flexibility in their systems by; </li></ul><ul><li>Varying sale times/rules, confinement feeding, movement, more animal trading (core breeding), self replacing system, agistment </li></ul><ul><li>Better pasture utilisation by grazing management systems </li></ul><ul><li>Controlled, cell, rotational, confinement, movement </li></ul><ul><li>Larger mobs for shorter periods of time </li></ul><ul><li>Match livestock feed demand to pasture production </li></ul><ul><li>Maintain high pasture quality by adequate fertiliser </li></ul><ul><li>Maintaining pasture in growth stage 2 </li></ul>
  19. 21. Conclusions discussed <ul><li>Total dry matter less with perennials but better feed utilisation </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Need good grazing management </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Lucerne not as good with less summer rain </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Good on non wetting sands or deeper sand (Lucerne) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Provide protein </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Provide ground cover </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Annuals </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Performed better than perennials alone in higher rainfall areas </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Better digestibility </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Cut excess for feed supplement </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>May incorporate more annuals and less perennials </li></ul></ul>
  20. 22. Further recommendations <ul><li>Know your cost of production </li></ul><ul><li>Good labour efficiency </li></ul><ul><li>Genetic improvements will lessen the impacts </li></ul><ul><li>Maximise production /ha not necessarily numbers per ha </li></ul><ul><li>Increasing livestock trading does not remove the threat in many areas </li></ul><ul><li>Wool provides a shock absorber in poor seasons </li></ul><ul><li>Diversify across locations </li></ul><ul><li>More work on pasture species mixes </li></ul><ul><li>More analyses and workshops in all southern Australian states </li></ul>
  21. 23. <ul><li>Thank you </li></ul>Thank you
  22. 24. Long term average rainfall - Lucindale Historical vs Future (2030 A2)
  23. 25. Sale weight wether lambs Merino x terminal sire Lucindale 1995-2005 stocking rate x lambing time Mar Jun Jul 5.5/ha Mar Jun Jul 7/ha Mar Jun Jul 8.5/ha Month Lamb Stocking Rate
  24. 26. Emissions Scenarios Projections – A2 Scenario focus Range of outputs from 23 GCM’s
  25. 28. Gross Margins stocking rate x time of lambing CCSM 3.0 CSIRO 3.5 ECHAM5 OM GFDL 2.1 70-00 01-08 Base A2 Scenarios by 2030 1970-2000 2001-2008 Echam GFDL CCSM Hadgem Stocking Rate 5.5, 7, 8.5 cont. March, June and July lamb Why we chose 1995 – 2005 This is Lucindale Merino enterprise

×