ARCHIVE FILE
This article was published in 1966
See the original document
INSTITUTE OF INSPECTORS OF STOCK OF N.S.W. YEAR BOOK.
Some Observations of the 1964-65 Drought in the Gloucester Pastures Protection Board
R. E. MOORE, B.V.Sc., Veterinary Inspector, Wingham
The Gloucester Pastures Protection Board District embraces in the main the Manning River valley and several smaller streams to the North and South. It extends westward from the coast to the edge of the Great Dividing Range, and while some properties are located at altitudes of greater than 3000 feet, the bulk of the country would be of less than 500 feet. Rainfall averages from 50 inches on the coast to 35 inches in the West of the District and falls chiefly in the late Summer and Autumn months with Spring being the driest period. Pastures mainly consist of summer-growing species which come away in November and finish growing in March.
River and creek flats are of good fertility and the higher country of low to moderate fertility with varying areas of former rain forest country of good fertility.
The chief industries are dairying and beef raising in that order, with approximately 60 per cent of the 250,000 cattle in the district being dairy breeds and 40 per cent beef breeds. The number of stock-owners is 2700 and of these, approximately 2000 dairy or run both dairy and beef cattle.
The dairy areas predominate in the lower river valleys and extend into the mid-river areas wherever reasonable areas of river and creek flats exist. Dairying is also carried out on the undulating higher country of moderate to good fertility in the Dyers Crossing are to be located on areas of former rain forest.
The beef industry is mainly confined to the higher country of lower fertility, or country of moderate to good fertility, but not suitable for dairying, by reason of difficulties in transport and isolation. A considerable number of beef cattle are run as a sideline to dairying, as well as all beef properties of varying size up to a maximum of 8000 head. The majority of beef producers would be either fatteners or breeders and fatteners. The larger holdings would breed and fatten some steers and have stores for sale.
The district could largely be said to be self sufficient in beef cattle in that it is not dependent on cattle from outside and has few surplus stores for sale outside the district, except in special circumstances when some weaners are available.
The period from 1950 to 1963 was a time when the following factors were of significance and in themselves were important in the drought of 1964-65.
1. The period was one of years of mainly above average rainfall.
2. The district had recently been included in the Milk Zone and there was an obvious attempt by dairymen to lift both numbers and production to obtain higher quotas.
3. In the late '50s and early '60s the technique of pasture improvement had become better understood and was becoming widely applied together with increasing use of aerial top-dressing.
4. Irrigation was proving itself of particular importance to the dairy farmer in increasing all-the-year-round production.
5. Prices for beef bad risen considerably for all grades and the demand was strong for young lightweight beef.
These factors led to a lift in stock numbers from 200,060 head of livestock in 1955 to 243,466 in 1963.
In 1963 Gloucester recorded 6390 points of rain followed by 1960 points in 1964 and 2256 points in 1965. The figures for the last two years indicated that only the 1901-02 drought was comparable. In addition the Winter of 1964 was severe with record low temperatures and severe frosts. Drought conditions were well established by the Spring of 1964 and increased in severity until July, 1965, when the peak was reached and subsequently, although conditions were not good, conditions did not get as bad as they were in July, 1965.
The district was officially declared drought-stricken in August, 1964, but in some areas drought or near drought conditions were present during the Autumn and Winter. It is of interest that owners of mobs of cattle moved to the tablelands in the Spring of 1964 because of drought, were faced with additional losses from bloat on the properties where they were agisted.
Stock numbers declined in 1964 and 1965 to a figure of 214,152 at the end of 1965.
Apart from the loss of stock the greatest loss to the dairyman was in loss of production and cost of feeding.
The degree of greatest loss from:
(a) loss of stock,
(b) loss of production,
(c) cost of feeding;
varied depending on whether it was a dairy or beef herd and in the latter depending on the relative importance of
breeding or fattening.
Effect of Drought on the Dairy Industry.
At the end of the drought the dairyman was faced with indebtedness
arising out of the cost of feeding to:
(i) maintain stock numbers,
(ii) maintain production and so prevent a fall in his quota.
The factors outlined earlier, first, above-average seasons, secondly, the presence of a Milk Zone and the importance of a quota and, thirdly, development of improved pastures, all combined to cause dairymen to stock heavily for high production.
The relative good seasons and apparent success of improved pastures had led to a decline in cropping and consequently silage and hay making. Increased herd size and involvement in improved pasture had left less time for conservation of fodder and this was encouraged by the obvious success of improved pasture in a period of above-average rainfall. The undulating nature of much of the country used for dairying and late Summer and Autumn rains are a disadvantage in successful hay makings in the district.
These deficiencies can be partly overcome. The necessity to maintain production to prevent a loss of quota was an important factor in the high cost of feeding in which many dairymen became involved. Whilst in the end this loss of quota was mainly restored, this problem undoubtedly led to unnecessary high-cost production. It seems unwise to have an industry so organised that a farmer feels it is in his own interest to attempt production beyond the capacity of the farm to produce economically, particularly in time of drought, when resources should be husbanded.
It is of interest to mention here that at one dairy factory with some 270 suppliers, dairymen purchased approximately 24 times as much concentrates in 1965 as in 1963 as well as hay, and over the same time increased their indebtedness to their factory by almost $200,000. quite apart from advances from produce merchants and their own bank.
Losses of dairy stock occurred almost exclusively amongst cows late in calf or just calved. This was due to dry cattle being run on dry runs and back paddocks not getting sufficient pasture. Many dairymen underestimated the requirements of cows in late pregnancy and where hand feeding, did not give sufficient, so that these cows went down prior to or at the time of calving and were too weak to recover.
Vitamin "A" deficiency was seen at times in young heifers. In older cattle use of Vitamin "A" was argued widely by practitioners. Some claimed no benefit was obtained; others claimed it was necessary with other drugs for treatment for anoestrus, and had a place in aiding appetite in cows in low condition being introduced to supplementary feeding.
So far as fodder conservation was concerned, even farmers who made what was considered reasonable amounts of conserved fodder, found this amount inadequate. Despite this there seems to be doubt about the wisdom of storing sufficient fodder to meet a drought that may not repeat itself for 20 or 30 years. If the average dairy farmer aimed at sufficient fodder to maintain his herd and dry stock for six months and purchased concentrates for production only, then this seems a reasonable proposition. It is necessary when considering conservation of fodder to reflect that perhaps more than 50 per cent of dairymen are on leased properties or are sharefarmers and may have only a limited occupancy of a property. This is also important when one considers the type of fodder stored. Silage, whilst readily made, involves a high labour content and also facilities for feeding. This latter can be difficult to a person working a farm he does not own.
Whilst it seems that the dairy farmer needs to make more adequate provision by way of stored fodder, probably the field where a worthwhile advance can be made is in the wider use of irrigation. This has been increasingly used by farmers fronting adequate river systems and it is my observation that it is these farmers who, first, maintained a relatively steady production which is required by the Milk Board and, secondly, operated the most economically, and experienced the least stock losses. Irrigation has also by virtue of a reliable source of pasture and fodder enabled more fodder to be conserved in better seasons and generally more fodder has been conserved on farms with irrigation than those without.
The provision of adequate dams suitable for irrigation on dairy farms away from large streams appears a most desirable attempt at a long-term part-answer to droughts. It then seems that this also assists a reliable source of fodder for conservation. Irrigation however has to be integrated into normal farm activities every year to give higher production in normal years, to be economically sound. Normally the Spring is dry in this district and irrigation widely used at this period is of great advantage.
The widespread use of pasture improvement needs to be accompanied on hill farms by a greater measure of conservation. The increased use of irrigation and the use of nitrogenous fertilisers with such crops as Sudax provide a hope of conservation on farms where such was considered not possible.
One of the outstanding features of the drought in the Winter of 1965 was the success of sod-seeding of oats and nitrogenous fertilisers, into bare paddocks when some Winter rain fell which otherwise would have been of little value in promoting pasture growth. This was the sole paddock feed available to many dairy herds until well into the Spring.
During the drought it is known that 17,144 tons of hay were brought into the district. Of this, 12,200 tons came by rail, 3404 tons by road being subsidised by the Government and 1500 tons of Victorian gift hay. Approximately 1500 tons of wheat came in by rail. Most of this would have gone to dairy herds.
The subsidy of £10 ton used for transporting hay from Victoria by road came at a time when the need for fodder was desperate. The landed cost of Victorian pasture hay at £35 a ton appeared to be overvaluing hay in comparison to wheat which was available at the time as a fodder for starving stock.
The Effect of Drought on the Beef Industry.
The period of years of good rain, increased areas of improved
pasture, aerial top-dressing, rising prices for beef and the demand for lightweight beef led to:
1. Increased numbers of beef cattle.
2. A higher proportion of breeding cows in the total number of beef cattle.
This latter in some cases had meant a change from fattening steers or selling store steers to the production of vealers and sale of weaners. Both factors meant that these properties were now more vulnerable to drought than formerly.
These properties suffered from drought in the following
order:
1. Properties producing vealers or weaners.
2. Properties where breeding was carried on and fattened their own steers.
3. Properties purchasing steers for fattening.
Stock losses were in some instances approximately 30-50 per cent in the first group. The second group suffered less severely but did lose mainly older cows. The third group suffered no stock losses but only loss of income and losses associated with forced sales.
Beef cattle producers can approach drought in three ways:
(i) Sell stock they cannot carry.
(ii) Place cattle on agistment.
(iii) Feed their stock.
Some owners did all three while others varied their methods. Again the extent to which owners could take advantage of these various methods depended on the composition of their herds.
Those in the fattening group did best who initially made adequate arrangements for agistment on good country which allowed their cattle to improve and in some cases sold off their cattle as fats on agisted country. They then varied their stocking on their home properties as the drought progressed. Fortunately a good market for lean meat was available. Virtually no losses occurred amongst fattening age cattle.
Properties in the group who breed and fatten also tended to seek early agistment for steers and also young heifers. If these could not go on agistment the steers were sold and in some cases the heifers. Cows were culled for age and calves sold even if too early for weaning, to enable cows in calf to survive. Finally the owner generally did not hand feed stock except young breeding cows.
The worst affected properties were those who had breeders only, and sold weaners or vealers. These experienced heavy losses first by sale of weaners on a depressed market, then the sale of young calves and finally of breeders themselves. Deaths occurred among cows in calf where numbers were too high and because most owners who hand fed failed to feed sufficient fodder to the pregnant animal over the last two months of pregnancy. Agistment was only sought reluctantly in most cases for breeding cows and as this was often late, these owners secured the worst country. Generally agistment for breeding cows in calf requires good country soundly fenced.
Some of the shrewder and more capable cattle-owners who had some irrigation available purchased small weaners cheaply and with wheat available made up their cattle numbers in young stock whilst disposing of their older cattle.
Grain feeding of beef breeders is obviously expensive and few owners attempted it unless they felt it would continue for several months only.
It is interesting to compare the effects on two adjoining properties which concentrated on breeding. One property in the 1963-65 period had stock numbers fall from 3949 to 1744. The second fell from 1023 to 851. This second property had less good country and had a higher stocking rate but numbers were maintained by use or irrigation and hay made in better seasons and the use of irrigation in the drought.
Suggested approaches for meeting drought, following observations of this drought, are as follows:
For fattening properties, early and good agistment is desirable. The hand feeding of purchased feeds is not economic and is doubtful for home-grown feeds except where good land and irrigation are available.
The breeder and fattener also can handle the situation by disposing of his steers and, generally, if done early enough, this allows reasonably adequate grazing for his breeders.
The owner running breeders only is in the worst position to meet drought. In this area the country is sufficiently good for some fattening to be done on most holdings and those owners with breeders only, would minimise drought losses by reducing the numbers of breeders and selling either store or fat steers instead of weaners or vealers. Early weaning of calves on to whole grain feeding is successful particularly if there is some access to irrigated pastures or hay.
With increasing beef prices many beef-producers will need to adopt more than a simple grazing policy and it is already evident that some owners are installing irrigation where practical and others are beginning to grow such crops as Sudax and oats for grazing. In good seasons this suggests there could be surplus crops for ensiling or for making hay to meet future droughts.
WHEAT FEEDING
Stockowners in this area were not familiar with wheat as a stock food and were slow to adopt its use. This was overcome by grower organised talks and particularly by the success of those who led the way in feeding wheat.
A few comments on wheat feeding may be interesting.
1. No problems were present from wheat feeding where it was introduced slowly.
2. Cattle improved their strength whilst often appearing to be in worse condition.
3. Dairymen who substituted wheat for allegedly high level protein meals maintained and often improved production on virtually no paddock feed.
4. Whole grain feeding of early weaned calves with wheat was quite successful and several owners who purchased low priced early weaned calves found it quite profitable.
5. Losses occurred where there was insufficient supervision of cattle fed wheat and some cattle managed to consume more than was safe in the first few weeks of feeding.
6. Several valuable bulls were lost where, through error, the same weight of rolled wheat was fed instead of whole wheat.