MCU14/0028 Appendix 1Techno-grazing

Page 2

34                                         Proceedings of the New Zealand Grassland Association 63:   33–36     (2001)



that are currently being developed include integrating       sowing pastures with tall fescue-based seed mixtures.
breeding ewes and yearling bulls, deer finishing and         These have proved to be successful and respond really
organic bull beef production.                                well to the K-line irrigation, which he has more recently
     The system responds particularly well to tall-          installed.
growing pasture types and there is extensive experience          Mr Holden used to buy in weaners at 100 kg, sell
with traditional ryegrass pastures, and those based on       the best stock at 15 months and the remainder at 2
tall fescue, prairie grass, annual ryegrasses, lucerne       years. He ran his one-year bulls over winter on forage
and chicory. While the system is cheaper and more            oats at heavy stocking rates (17 bulls/ha), with a twice-
labour-efficient on flatter ground, it also works well in    daily chore of moving the electric fence 50 cm forward,
hill country, although care is needed with more sensitive    but the bulls dug up ground, broke fences and were
soil types on steeper land. Wet soils will be prone to       hard to manage.
treading damage under any form of management, but                He changed to TechnoGrazing 6 years ago and now
prudent TechnoGrazing is less damaging, hoof for hoof,       runs bulls at double the stocking rate, without crops or
than any other grazing system. As with any tool, its         conserved grass, but with half the work. Animal
effective use depends on correct and commonsense             production has also doubled, with daily liveweight
application. A common misconception, that it is very         gains of more than 2 kg/ha. In his worst year, he
specific and inflexible, is unfounded. TechnoGrazing         recorded 800 kg liveweight gain/ha, 45% better than
systems offer more grazing options and applications          in his previous system, and during his best year he
than any comparable grazing system. With regard to           recorded over 1600 kg liveweight gain/ha.
environmental consideration, TechnoGrazing has been
operated commercially at Mr Wier’s farm on the same          John Hudson, Gwavas Station, Tikikino, Hawke’s
pastures for over 20 years and has proved to be a            Bay
reliable, profitable and highly sustainable concept.         Mr Hudson farms 1120 ha at Gwavas, part of which
                                                             is managed under dryland TechnoGrazing. The first
Farmer experience                                            system was installed 10 years ago and it was the
                                                             first to be developed after Harry Wier’s own system.
Jamie Gunson, Tahunga, Onga Onga, Hawke’s Bay                Pasture pests, especially grass grub and the Tasmanian
This farm receives 875 mm rainfall (ranging from 550–        grass grub, can seriously deplete the Gwavas pastures,
1250 mm) and is summer-dry. Mr Jamie Gunson has              and ryegrass staggers affects livestock production
converted 620 ha of his property over the last 5 years       seasonally.
to dairy beef production using TechnoGrazing, with an             Since August 2000 Mr Hudson has run bulls at
overall aim of increasing profitability to consistently      4.14 per ha and gained returns exceeding $2000/ha
achieve more than 10% return on capital. He has 7750         from his system (Taylor 2001). His high-performing
pasture cells, all at 0.08 ha each, and has removed          bulls went onto the TechnoGrazing system in August
almost all his stock dams after installing micro-troughs     2000 at 402 kg and were slaughtered in mid-November
fed from a large dam nearby. All monitoring is               and early December. He expects to make an economic
undertaken by computer technology, with 70% of the           farm surplus of more than $1600/ha from his
bulls weighed regularly. Soil and pasture measurements       TechnoGrazing operation this year. Gwavas Station
are taken along the first lane of each TechnoGrazing         was recently used for a Sustainable Land Management
block. Mr Gunson has stopped feeding any supplements         project (Rhodes 1999), and TechnoGrazing was
and making hay or silage, as the all-grass system            approved as a sustainable land management system.
produces enough feed for his stock.
                                                             Angus Mabin, Taniwha, Highway 2, Waipukurau,
Duncan Holden, Forest Gate, State Highway 50,                Hawke’s Bay
Onga Onga, Hawke’s Bay                                       Mr Mabin farms 655 effective ha on the Takapau
Mr Holden runs dairy bulls, deer and sheep on 340 ha         Plains near Waipukurau, including 167 ha of rolling
at Forest Gate next to Jamie Gunson and 200 ha on a          hills. Mr Mabin began his first technosystem in
nearby block at Ashley Clinton (with 2000 mm annual          1997 and is now running dairy bulls on 578 ha; deer
rainfall). Mr Holden runs four bull technosystems, two       are managed conventionally on 77 ha. The farm used
on rolling hill pastures and two on flatland, with part-     to be subdivided into 6–10-ha paddocks, set-stocked
time assistance. Though the flat land is usually more        by beef cattle at 10–25 per mob (0.6–0.75/acre),
productive, one hill technosystem has produced more          and feed shortages occurred every winter. The system
– attributed to management decisions. In 1993 he began       required excessive labour and was encouraging weed
irrigating the flatland pastures with a gun system and       invasion, even in the browntop-dominant pastures.

Page 3

TechnoGrazing™ – a new grazing concept (J.F.L. Charlton & J.H. Wier)                                                   35



He now stocks his systems at 3.5–3.7/ha of 400-kg              the sheep with cattle to clean up any taller residual
bulls, buying yearling bulls throughout the season –           pasture. Mr Scoular reports that TechnoGrazing
the first ones at around 300 kg and the last ones at           combines well with regrassing to boost his farm income.
450 kg. Animals are sold as pastures become dry,
and stocking is minimised until the autumn break.              Jerry Rowley, Loganburn Station, Ranfurly, Central
During the winter, the young stock grow at 0.6–0.75            Otago
kg/day, stocked at up to 1000 kg liveweight/ha,                Jerry and Shirley Rowley farm Loganburn Station near
whereas older animals grow at 0.3–0.4 kg liveweight/           Ranfurly, Central Otago, on 2025 ha with a short
ha, stocked at 1400–1500 kg liveweight/ha. The                 growing season due to the 550–950 m altitude and
finishing target weight is 600 kg liveweight. Mr               460 mm rainfall. The station comprises 650 ha of
Mabin now observes his stock every 2 days, disease             variable flatland, 650 ha of tussock grassland, and an
prevention is much better and animal health has                upper plateau at 900 m asl. The Rowleys installed K-
greatly improved. He considers TechnoGrazing really            line irrigation on 84 ha in September 1999 and began
comes into its own when the scale justifies a second           TechnoGrazing on 36 ha. Loganburn Station carried
labour unit.                                                   500 deer, 5000 merinos and 150 cows when purchased
                                                               in 1996. They now carry 900 deer, 5000 merinos and
Nick Prendergast, Arohena, South Waikato                       450 cattle (180 cows). Under TechnoGrazing, 270 cattle
Mr Prendergast runs a beef technosystem with a dairying        are finished each year, compared with 140 beforehand.
system as separate operations on 146 ha of rolling             The bulls are stocked at 5.5 yearling bulls/ha and have
upland hill pastures. He runs Hereford bulls for sale as       produced approximately 650 kg beef carcass/ha, with
dairy cow sires to Waikato dairy farmers. He practices         a further potential to increase this production through
Technograzing on an area that offers only limited access       fertiliser application. Cow numbers have been increased
to his dairy herd, because of a dividing gully. He             on the farm, supplying more stock for TechnoGrazing.
converted his bull unit to TechnoGrazing in 1993 and           The property is developing well and Mr Rowley reports
has doubled his stocking rate from 1.5–2.0 bulls/ha to         that its full potential will be realised within 2–3 years.
5 bulls/ha following the change. He now runs 220
bulls, stocked to maximise the spring pasture growth           Common findings by TechnoGrazing farmers
peak before they are sold during October–December.
                                                          The new system enables much better pasture feed
Andy Scoular, Threave, Poukawa, Hastings,                 utilisation, with higher sward covers and more grass-
Hawke’s Bay                                               growing time, higher feed quality and a lower incidence
Mr Scoular farms 380 ha of flat, rolling and steep        of pasture-related livestock disorders. Because the bulls
dryland near Havelock North, with 800 mm annual           are run in small groups with a stable routine, food
rainfall (only 400 mm during 2000). The operation is      conversion rates are improved. Though existing pastures
50:50 Angus/Hereford breeding-finishing cattle and        can change rapidly to ryegrass when TechnoGrazing
mainly Romney sheep. He operates 16 ha under              begins, renovating older pastures helps to gain the last
TechnoGrazing on rolling land with sheep, and has         10–15% from the intensive system.
regrassed it twice with Italian ryegrass
to increase winter growth. The hoggets     Table 1 Production gains from TechnoGrazing on several farms.
are bought in March and finished from
                                           Farmer           Before TechnoGrazing            After TechnoGrazing
June onwards, as they reach 45 kg target
liveweight. He can carry more hoggets      J. Gunson        11–12 stock units/ha            25 stock units/ha
                                                            550–560 kg liveweight gain/ha   1190 kg liveweight gain/ha
in early September, when grass growth      D. Holden        0.5–1.9 bulls/ha                1600 kg liveweight gain/ha
is accelerating, enabling him to sell when                                                  3.5–3.7/ha
prices are peaking. He also finds it a     A. Mabin         0.5–1.9 bulls/ha                3.5–3.7/ha
                                           N. Prendergast   110 bulls (1.5/ha)              220 bulls (5/ha)
much cleaner system, in terms of parasite  J. Rowley         140 bulls finished (3.9/ha)    270 bulls finished (7.5/ha)
burdens, and this saves drenching cost     A. Scoular       540 kg liveweight gain/ha       900 kg liveweight gain/ha
and effort.
     Mr Scoular has modified the specified Techno-
Grazing system to suit sheep, and subdivides at 100 m     Future prospects
width, setting the temporary fences at 50 m apart,
running two mobs of 150 hoggets (increasing to 300        Although some exciting productivity benchmarks have
per mob in spring). He moves them every 2 days on         already been set, Mr Wier and the farmers using
around a 28-day rotation during winter, and follows       TechnoGrazing feel they are still “scratching the

Page 4

36                                       Proceedings of the New Zealand Grassland Association 63:   33–36   (2001)



surface” of the system’s capacity. The inherent            REFERENCES
replication within the system gives it huge potential
for scientific research. Pasture systems are so complex    Brougham, R.W. 1970. Frequency and intensity of
that the only way to establish the effectiveness of any       grazing and their effects on pasture production.
new approach, such as pasture cultivars, endophyte            Proceedings of the New Zealand Grassland Associ-
strains, fertility treatments, and animal genetics, is        ation 32: 137–144.
through a replicated farmlet-scale trial, and Techno-      Brougham, R.W.; Causley, D.C.; Madgwick, L.E. 1975.
Grazing offers a perfect template for this approach.          Pasture management systems and animal pro-
    The terms “intensive” and “sustainable” are usually       duction. Proceedings of the Ruakura Farmers
regarded as antitheses, because intensive is associated       Conference, 1975: 65–69.
with heavy energy, machinery, fertiliser, and chemical     Brougham, R.W.; Cosgrove, G.P. 1985. Pastures and
use, nitrate leaching, animal stress, soil damage and a       pasture management for high animal production in
generally synthetic, non-biological approach. While           New Zealand. Proceedings of the XV International
TechnoGrazing is intensive in terms of subdivision            Grassland Congress, Kyoto, Japan: 1134–1136.
and stocking rate, and can be practised intensively in     Ogle, G.; Tither, P. 2000. An analysis of the risks and
that less desirable sense, there is nothing to compel         benefits of beef intensification. Proceedings of the
farmers to do that, and every reason not to.                  New Zealand Grassland Association 62: 25–29.
    Pasture-based ruminant protein production is           Rhodes, A.P.; Mackay, A.D.; Lambert, M.G.; Krausse,
relatively natural, healthy, safe and sustainable, and        M.K.; Willis, B.H.; Withell, B. 1999. Dirty habits
logically, New Zealand farmers should play that               – a basis for developing sustainable productivity.
marketing card. Good chemical-free production needs           Proceedings of the New Zealand Grassland Associ-
precision management of animal nutrition, pasture             ation 61: 79–83.
rotations and specialist forages – the very things that    Taylor, Marie 2001. “Income of $2000/ha in Bay.” The
TechnoGrazing offers. Even under organic production           New Zealand Farmer 123: 18.
rules, TechnoGrazing can achieve very high productivity                                                          !
without “mining” the environment.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors thank the farmers named above, who co-
operated with them by supplying relevant information
and hosting visits to see the systems in operation.