Managing livestock enterprises in Australia’s extensive rangelands for greenhouse gas and environmental outcomes: a pastoral company perspective
D. Bentley A C , R. S. Hegarty B and A. R. Alford BA The North Australian Pastoral Company Pty Ltd, GPO Box 319, Brisbane, Qld 4001, Australia.
B NSW Department of Primary Industries, Armidale, NSW 2351, Australia.
C Corresponding author. Email: DBentley@napco.com.au
Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 48(2) 60-64 https://doi.org/10.1071/EA07210
Submitted: 19 July 2007 Accepted: 28 October 2007 Published: 2 January 2008
Abstract
Extensive grazing of beef cattle is the principal use of the northern Australia land area. While north Australian beef production has traditionally utilised a low-input, low-output system of land management, recent innovations have increased the efficiency with which beef is produced. Investment to raise efficiency of cattle production by improving herd genetics, property infrastructure, the seasonal feed-base and its utilisation, as well as promoting feedlot finishing can all be expected to reduce the number of unproductive animals and reduce age-at-slaughter. Consequently, these innovations can all be expected to contribute to a reduction in the emissions intensity of greenhouse gases (GHG; t GHG/t liveweight gain). The North Australian Pastoral Company (NAPCO) has adopted these technologies to enhance reproductive and growth efficiency of the herd and has coupled them with changes in other aspects of property operation, such as use of solar energy systems, establishment of introduced perennial pastures and minimum tillage, to achieve production and operational gains, which also reduce the emissions intensity of their pastoral properties. Investments to improve production efficiency have been consistent with both financial and, in principle, environmental objectives of NAPCO. While NAPCO supports the development and implementation of new mitigation strategies, the company requires greater knowledge on pastoral emission levels and clarity on the future position of agriculture in a carbon economy. This information would enable confirmation of current emission levels, modelling of mitigation options and evaluation of the efficacy of potential on-farm carbon sinks. This paper presents NAPCO’s perspective on GHG emissions in the context of its pastoral enterprise, including current and future research and mitigation objectives.
Alcock D, Hegarty RS
(2006) Effects of pasture improvement on productivity, gross margin and methane emissions of a grazing sheep enterprise. International Congress Series 1293, 103–106.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
CAS |
Alford AR,
Hegarty RS,
Parnell PF,
Cacho OJ,
Herd RM, Griffith GR
(2006) The impact of breeding to reduce residual feed intake on enteric methane emissions from the Australian beef industry. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 46, 813–820.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Hall WB,
McKeon GM,
Carter JO,
Day KA,
Howden SM,
Scanlan JC,
Johnston PW, Burrows WH
(1998) Climate change in Queensland’s grazing lands. II. An assessment of the impact on animal production from native pastures. The Rangeland Journal 20, 177–205.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Hennessy DW,
Williamson PJ, Darnell RE
(2000) Feed intake and liveweight responses to nitrogen and/or protein supplements by steers of Bos taurus, Bos indicus and Bos taurus × Bos indicus breed types offered a low quality grass hay. Journal of Agricultural Science, Cambridge 135, 35–45.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Hughes L
(2003) Climate change and Australia: trends, projections and impacts. Austral Ecology 28, 423–443.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Kurihara M,
Magner T,
Hunter RA, McCrabb GJ
(1999) Methane production and energy partition of cattle in the tropics. The British Journal of Nutrition 81, 227–234.
|
CAS |
PubMed |
Minson DJ, McDonald CK
(1987) Estimating forage intake from the growth of beef cattle. Tropical Grasslands 21, 116–122.
Prayaga KC
(2004) Evaluation of beef cattle genotypes and estimation of direct and maternal genetic effects in a tropical environment. 3. Fertility and calf survival traits. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 55, 811–824.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Van der Nagel KS,
Waghorn GC, Forgie VE
(2003) Methane and carbon emissions from conventional pasture and grain-based total mixed rations for dairying. Proceedings of the New Zealand Society of Animal Production 63, 128–132.
