This centres on a unique community organisation called Anabranch Water (AW) that delivers water to around 40 landholders along the Anabranch River. The Anabranch Water pipeline and infrastructure was constructed in 2006-7, after a number of years of negotiation by a small group of landholders. I was vice chair of that small group called “Darling Anabranch Management Plan” (DAMP) and had a significant input into making sure that a very robust business was developed to provide water to the region for many years to come (more history on the website).
I was also part of the original board of AW and put my hand up to be chairman of that, the current chair was successful in that election and 18 years later he still holds that position. I left AW board in 2011 as my perspective wasn’t being listened to or respected and I had run out of energy, so that attitude has existed for a long time, I need to take some responsibility for not stopping it earlier.
I have kept an eye on the business of AW as it is very important to our grazing enterprise, though at times it has been very difficult as there is scant communication from the board, mostly only newsletters in every bill. Then I might look to quiz a board member as to where the board sat on various issues, without prying too much. This poor communication and lack of transparency has been a theme for a long time as well, I brought this clearly to the board’s attention in a letter sent to the board in February 2022, when I was unable to attend the delayed AGM.
When you add to the above the ongoing issue dividing the community about “who pays for E-flows”, where those landholders with the ability & licence to crop on floodplains, were being charged. I won’t bore you with too much detail, just to say that if this issue was actually discussed in a board room that respected all input, it would be thrown out very quickly. It is the board’s responsibility to make good decisions, not those based on popularity.
In early October 2024, three weeks prior to AW’s AGM, a document turned up via email to all landholders, saying “This is your last chance to have input”. This is a document that I’d never seen before, it was full of tracked changes, multi-colour writing and as it turned out it was supposed to be the Private Water Corporation Constitution that we were meant to vote on at the AGM (It needed 66% in favour to be passed). I then proceeded to ask a number of questions that I felt we all needed answers to in order to understand what we were voting for. I also spoke to the General Manager and explained that I felt it was very poorly explained just what the document was and what we were meant to do with it. I also went on to explain that the actual document had significant holes in it, didn’t even articulate the roles that AW did, they will need to be changed in the future. This again told a story of the lack of discussion and input that the board had on issues.
As I was going to be away for the AW AGM and after the shambles that had just happened with the release of the Private Water Corporation document, I felt compelled to write a letter to the board (see pic1). To which I received the below communication from the board chairman:
“Hi Gus thanks for your advice but i would think that someone who has operated NSW water infrastructure during a flood situation without permission from relevant authority to benefit them self is not the person to be instructing Anabranch Water on how to run their organisation.”
Probably the rudest, most ignorant reply I had received in many years, if the chairman knew the full story and had any idea how the river worked, he would know how inaccurate his reply was. The thing that made the chairman’s indiscretion worse is that not one person in the organisation took him to task about it or corrected him, everyone agreed. The cost of doing nothing.
I wrote this in reply:
“To the Anabranch Water Board,
I have allowed enough time to pass since the AGM and for me to reflect on this. After the effort that I put into my letter for me to receive such a rude and ignorant reply isn’t OK on any level. I made no suggestion that I was perfect and I made sure there was no issues levelled at individuals, it is all about improving Anabranch Water, as a shareholder I consider my input relevant. The fact that my input was dismissed due to the way the chairman feels about me makes the whole organisation of Anabranch Water very unprofessional. I can only assume that either the Chairman is a bully and nobody is allowed to challenge his view, or rude and ignorant are values shared by the whole organisation.
The attitude and the behaviour that you allow is what you accept and encourage, I consider the behaviour of Anabranch Water on this issue to be totally unacceptable. Anabranch Water was a great business, well set up and should be an organisation this region can be proud of, I certainly can’t say that about the current organisation.
There needs to be a significant cultural change so that shareholders will again feel they are well represented by the board. The board needs to make this change immediately, if they don’t then I will look to enforce change and it will be inflicted on the board, causing huge social upheaval, not something I take lightly.
I look forward to dealing with a changed Anabranch Water, one that takes the responsibility of respecting the views of its shareholders seriously and brings our great community together.
Yours Angus Whyte“
At the December meeting the AW Board dismissed my concerns, made no changes at all and the chairman said that “the comments came from him and not AW. Again, nobody in the organisation or importantly the board called this out, of course they came from the chair and because he didn’t take any responsibility, he will happily do it again, maybe next time to someone close to you? By the way this isn’t about me being offended, this is about the dreadful behaviour of the board, the lack of respect, lack of integrity, amongst other values.
After reviewing the letter I then sent the below back to the General Manager:
“As the letter shows no change on a number of the issues that I pointed out, my concerns haven’t been taken seriously and that means that now I’ll take control and drive change through Anabranch Water. I’m sure you would’ve no doubt discussed the implications of this happening and how it will impact on all board members, employees and contractors in Anabranch Water. The only certainty in the future for Anabranch Water is change, this is very serious and I’m sad that the board choose to not take any responsibility.
Cheers Gus“
When I reviewed my options for change, the best one that came up was for me to join the board and talk these issues through in the privacy of the boardroom, so in mid-January I applied and was nominated for one of the 3 vacant board roles (2 had been vacant for many years). While they first up accepted my nomination, AW didn’t know how to handle an unexpected nomination, they then opened up for nominations over the region and made me change the nomination date so it came into line with their process. That told me another story about the management of the organisation.
There were three vacant spots on the AW board and there were 4 nominations and I respect the fact that 3 new people have been elected to the board and I missed out. This means that the dirty laundry of AW is now aired in public, for all to view and express judgement on.
While the misconduct from the chairman is one thing (no question a sackable offence in many organisations), the apathy of all the other board members at the time and especially the General Manager really has let the community down. I should note that the attitude of the chair to make presenting a differing perspective difficult, means that opposing them very tough.
The General Manager (GM) is actually a large professional services firm and the person performing that role is an employee, that reflects very badly on them that the GM was unwilling to take leadership and any sort of responsibility in these issues. The board members, many are neighbours, friends, mates, they have just watched this happen, done nothing. As a wise man once said; “Bad things happen, when good people stand by and do nothing”
The board needs a total change of culture, that will involve a change of leadership (same chairman and GM for 18 yrs) and also some board members as those that are part of the problem are rarely part of the solution. I would recommend an independent chair to enable an improved culture to develop and to get this organisation back on the right path. When people are appointed to a board position, they have a very clear responsibility to put their perspective forward in a way so good decisions are made together as a board. Now might be a very good time for all board members to decide if they want to continue being spectators or start fulfilling their responsibilities to the community that needs them.
The Basin Plan was brought in with the intent of improving riverine health and reducing the over allocation of water for irrigation, while still retaining the economic value within the basin communities. Or as explained on the MDBA website – The aim of the Murray–Darling Basin Plan is to bring the Basin back to a healthier and sustainable level, while continuing to support farming and other industries for the benefit of the Australian community. This is a great initiative and should result in a healthier and more productive basin for all. The reality is that there are a number of unintended consequences that need to be corrected as they occur, not after a 10 year review (due in 2026), they will only be more difficult to address, not easier. I would personally think that the role of CEO of MDB should be extremely high paid, very stressful and complex, given the autonomy required.
CoAG (Coalition of Australian Govts) agreed to apply competition policy & market principles to water in 1994, this was the push towards valuing water at the highest dollar value, good concept, we all need to value water. This is currently encouraging growing almonds, table grapes and a few other permanent plantings, at the expense of annual crops such as rice and cotton. This reduction in diversity of crops is at the detriment of the community and the region, especially in really variable climatic conditions, diversity is strength. The area that these plantings are in is mainly in the mid to lower section of the river, the drier area, where land is cheaper, there is more sand, allowing for good drainage and the land has already been cleared for dryland cropping. Due to there being no price or acknowledgement of losses in delivery, instead of water being used further up the system, this has meant more water is used further down the system, causing headaches for river managers to deliver that.
There has never been a genuine “water buyback” in the MDB to reduce water allocations, there has instead been many environmental water purchases, where irrigation water has been purchased to use for solely environmental reasons. A genuine water buyback would be when water is purchased and then the allocation is terminated, allowing extra water to flow down the river and increase reliability of existing allocations. Water being purchased for the environment is a benefit to all, no doubt, as it is accounted for every bit as carefully as irrigation water, then this has done nothing to address the over allocation issue.
Irrigation water has a significant economic impact wherever it is used around the basin, due not only to the production, also all the goods and services required to grow the crop. To give an example of this a megalitre of water might produce $500 worth of say rice, in order to deliver this $500 worth of rice the farmer would annually spend >$400 on fixed and variable costs. This annual spend of around 90% of the gross product has a significant flow on effect through the region, on freight, chemicals, fertilizers, agronomy, harvest, machinery to name a few. Such an important factor for our whole community to take into account when water allocations are purchased for environmental use, this economic flow of funds through the community is changed.
The shift in water management looking to address the decline in riverine health is exceptionally positive and a great direction, the biggest winners out of this need to be those that live in the basin. The ability to have a water allocation to improve the environment is a great tool for the basin, I do reckon that the total focus on just a few sites along the river doesn’t give the communities genuine ownership of the great environmental outcomes. I would like to see opportunities for every community no matter where they are in the basin to have ownership and deliver local environmental gains, this helps with education and culture change. An example might be when there is low flows all environmental water should be used in stream to provide diversity and maintain connectivity in river, or there might be a nice billabong near a town. The opportunity to wet floodplains should only happen when there is a higher flow and environmental water can be added on top, creating a valuable over bank flow, rather than build too many “flood mimicking” structures.
As a livestock farmer we manage multiple resources, animals, grass, water and money, to name some. We must be constantly reviewing and changing our management in order to be in line with constantly changing conditions. Currently we are allowing the price of water to dictate the management too often, there really needs to be some good conscious decisions around water management and use, to deal with the unintended consequences that invariably turn up with any new regime.
Those that know me will know that I’m a huge supporter of mental health and see it as being vital to running a business, maintaining relationships and our own physical health. I’m sure that some might say “what would you know about mental health, you are always happy?” I believe that good mental health is never luck or you being “dealt a better hand”, there is always a reason behind good mental health, it doesn’t just turn up.
First up; what is good mental health? The World Health organisation defines good mental health as:
Cope with the normal stresses of life.
Work productively.
Realise your potential.
Contribute to your community.
For me, I would define it with different words:
Able to make good timely well researched decisions
Be a productive member of a team
Strive to be your best and never stop improving
Listen well and be there to help others
Being able to get a good repairing sleep
Not allowing the weather to dictate your moods
Which ever way you define your good mental health, I reckon it is really important to understand it and do more of what keeps you in a good mental state while avoiding those things that jeopardise your wellbeing.
For me the things that I know keep me in a good state:
Lots of work variety
Being around animals
Being mindful when I’m doing a task, especially when working livestock
Having time alone to talk to myself and question my actions, self reflection.
Taking responsibility for all issues in our business, property
Identifying those issues stressing me and make clear decisions
Volunteering in the community
Meanwhile those things that will risk my mental health:
Gossiping or being derogatory towards others
Spending too much time with people that do as above
Drinking too much alcohol
Putting off decisions
Being away from animals and nature
Playing Annie
I reached the conclusion in my early twenties that I needed to place a very high value on my mental health, as it saved my life on many occasions. This happened when I was playing polo and training horses, I was never a great rider, though I worked out that horses went well for me if I was in a good mood. Now you can’t fake a good frame of mind with an animal, so you need to genuinely be in in a good place. The amount of times that I jumped on a horse feeling like you are sitting on a coiled spring that is ready to explode, by being happy relaxed and breathing, more often than not we had a good day. It was through my work with horses that I established good habits around my well being and placed a very high price on my mental health.
Playing sport, in my case polo, you also understand that Caucasian people need to be relaxed and in a good frame of mind to make creative and valuable decisions. Armed with this info it is very important to keep a cool head and put a smile on your face to help make the best decisions, no matter if it is on the sporting field or in your business.
I have also had some stressful times in my life that has helped me a lot with improving my mental health, it is so important to have stress in your life. You need to listen to it, act on it, never ever aim to cope with it, react and reassess. Avoiding stress constantly will reduce your capacity to handle those situations and thereby actually increase stress levels due to reduced ability and it will spiral. Don’t worry we all have times when we just can’t handle another issue so we put it off until we are able to deal with it, just don’t ignore it hoping it will go away.
I’m not a professional in this area, I’m passionate about it because I have seen the consequences of poor mental health and the cost to the community, especially during droughts. I really hope to encourage more to spend time doing what keeps them in good mental health so that we can all help each other.
A scary fact for you is that in Australia 30% of the people identify as living in regional areas, only 1% of the mental health budget is spent in those areas.
I was lucky to be invited to the “RMA 22” (Rural Medicine Australia) conference in Canberra 10 days ago, the invite came from the Rural Doctors foundation (RDF), they paid all my expenses and organised registration etc. they are a fantastic organisation. I have put down my perspective from the conference, I’m not saying it is definitive or accurate, these are just my observations. As those that know me understand I have no formal medical training, my interest in rural healthcare is that it underpins a healthy community, so important.
There was 3 days of presentations from various doctors, students, medical administrators, Government bodies to name a few, the main thread was the passion for rural community health and the different options that communities had to deliver this. The doctors that I spoke to all loved working in rural and remote areas and their energy and enthusiasm for good outcomes in the community they worked in was infectious.
Listening to the presenters, the theme or culture within the medical sector is that those medical professionals that want to specialise in General Practice, especially in rural Australia, were ostracised by others. The rural-urban divide is alive and well, no surprises here really, though it is very unfortunate that this sort of bias has been able to thrive. With the advent of a specialty in medicine of “Rural Generalist”, a GP that has extra skills to be able to deliver good health outcomes in remote regions, normally they would be anesthetists and/or obstetricians as well. This will hopefully raise the profile and standing, while reducing the bias of these fantastic doctors that we all depend on.
While rural areas have been warning about low GP numbers for a long time, it is starting to become an issue in urban areas, so all of a sudden it is an issue and will take many moons to turn around. I understand the bias against GP’s in the medical fraternity, most people that enter into medicine are high achievers and so want to reach for the stars and they actively encourage that. This doesn’t make it OK, to me it says that those that run medical colleges are out of touch with the communities needs and are perhaps too busy making sure that major capital city hospitals are showpieces, they forget about the whole of the country.
The other concerning issue is the lack of respect for skills that rural doctors/nurses attain and that every hospital should have a percentage of their staff with the skills of innovation, making do and ability to connect with the patients. Our society is multi-cultural as well as having a rainbow of genders that people identify with, they all make up our great community and we all work very hard to make sure that nobody feels left out, rural and remote areas shouldn’t have a bias either. Organisations such as Australian College of Rural and Remote Medicine (ACRRM) and the RDF are actively supporting and encouraging rural doctors and specialists and have been for 25 years, I hope they receive an increase in recognition and support.
I understand how medical students are attracted to large city hospitals, to aim for the top of their profession and be the best doctor they can be, I never want to discourage that. From a patients perspective, a doctor that is able to assess the whole body health, draw attention to aspects before they become issues and refer them for follow up if required, they are the heroes.
I remember hearing a presentation from a bloke that left Sydney for a professional job at Condobolin (central west NSW), on the “edge of civilisation” his mates said. He reckons after being there for a couple of years, he still reckoned he was on the edge of civilisation, he no longer knew which way it was back to civilisation. He felt so at home and part of a wonderful community he felt a major city couldn’t deliver on the same level, he has never moved back to the city, he has raised a family and retired out in western NSW. Many of the doctors that I met over the course of the conference I reckon had similar experiences and that was a driver of their passion for improved health outcomes in regional Australia.
There are some rural communities that are “lucky” when it comes to healthcare and others that don’t fare so well. Like many issues if a community bands together and understands its current healthcare, the communities needs, the resources they have and where they want to get to, they can put some great options to make sure their health is looked after. A well communicated and reasonable ask from a community to Government is rarely dismissed, this is sometimes forgotten while we blame others for our own situation. A proposal that clearly explains how a community will acknowledge and respect the health professional, look after their families with childcare, education, jobs for partners etc. and make sure they aren’t overworked, will go a long way towards encouraging great people into your community.
Water is a wonderful subject to discuss in rural areas, almost everyone has an opinion on it and I really appreciate listening to them all, it is the lifeblood of inland areas. These discussions can become very “robust” when water is scarce, then totally change tune when there is high volumes about due to the risk of flooding, it is so very Australian to have a good amount for only a very short time, compared to the extremes.
We aim to view and plan across whole basins in Australia and that makes lots of sense to connect the many communities that live along the rivers and their tributaries. One of the many issues in say the Murray Darling Basin, is the huge distances and the changes in landscape, climate and population densities. This rightly so makes “one rule for all” virtually impossible, as this in no way takes into account each unique regions issues. The thinking that it is alright to put in place plans understanding that there will always be winners and losers, means decisions makers are ensuring that water fights will continue well into the future. Just remember if it isn’t a win: win relationship, then it won’t last.
I have a lot of trouble discussing water without discussing the land that rivers are connected to, they are all part of the system, not separate. Why aren’t we talking about management of land that reduces sedimentation, salinity, nutrification and turbidity in our waterways? Why don’t we talk about “water sheds”, acknowledging the role land management has the health of our waterways? Land management, especially grazing management is vital to improve the health of our waterways and therefore our communities dependant on that. By grazing management, I’m not saying exclude grazing animals, I’m saying control them, there are many areas that really badly need grazing animals and others that need less, all areas need to be managed. All landholders are responsible for the active management of their lands in the basin, through the strategic use of fire, grazing, rest and mechanical intervention we can improve outcomes for the whole system.
I talk a lot about the over allocation of water in our basin and how enacting the Basin Plan has exacerbated this, not helped as it was intended to do. Why has this happened? When water has been purchased for environmental water, that water is then accounted for every bit as tightly as it was when used for production. Then you add to this new water allocations that have been created to account for water saving projects and the allocations that are accounted for has increased, not decreased. This makes it less reliable for communities that depend on irrigation water use and then less money is multiplied through that community, having significant impacts on small towns and communities. While water buybacks may seem the cheapest way to purchase environmental water, if the impact on communities is taken into account, then that is by far and away the most expensive water!
The next issue I would like to discuss is the respect and valuing of the water in our system, especially when there’s low inflows due to droughts. If we very simply divided rivers into two parts, the critical in river stream (looking after critical riverine life) and the floodplain section (breeding and growing the riverine species). There are times when there are low inflows, communities are on water restrictions and environmental water is being used to water floodplains. This shows a lack of understanding of natural river processes, devaluing the and disrespecting the water and the communities along the river that do respect and value the water. When flows are low it would be much more prudent and respectful to utilise ewater in improving and maintaining in stream river health, through weir pool manipulation and diversity of flow patterns.
The last point I would like to make about water is that each community needs to have ownership of changes in water management and their section of the basin. By this I mean that every section of the rivers or creeks needs their own special environmental patch that has an allocation of water and is monitored and managed. This is so important as many regions have had lots of parcels of water sold out of their region, to be used in another section of the river totally disconnected from them. Each region needs to change with our climate and the acknowledgement that no area manages the river as well as they can, so every reach needs to have benefits and tough changes, that is what ownership is about.
For the above to happen there is no secret that management needs to happen in the heart of the basin, with decisions connecting communities, that means passing on tough times and good times. Really important that our rivers dry back when the climate dictates they should, that makes us value our water, instead of taking it for granted.
Water is a wonderful subject to discuss in rural areas, almost everyone has an opinion on it and I really appreciate listening to them all, it is the lifeblood of inland areas. These discussions can become very “robust” when water is scarce, then totally change tune when there is high volumes about due to the risk of flooding, it is so very Australian to have a good amount for only a very short time, compared to the extremes.
We aim to view and plan across whole basins in Australia and that makes lots of sense to connect the many communities that live along the rivers and their tributaries. One of the many issues in say the Murray Darling Basin, is the huge distances and the changes in landscape, climate and population densities. This rightly so makes “one rule for all” virtually impossible, as this in no way takes into account each unique regions issues. The thinking that it is alright to put in place plans understanding that there will always be winners and losers, means decisions makers are ensuring that water fights will continue well into the future. Just remember if it isn’t a win: win relationship, then it won’t last.
I have a lot of trouble discussing water without discussing the land that rivers are connected to, they are all part of the system, not separate. Why aren’t we talking about management of land that reduces sedimentation, salinity, nutrification and turbidity in our waterways? Why don’t we talk about “water sheds”, acknowledging the role land management has the health of our waterways? Land management, especially grazing management is vital to improve the health of our waterways and therefore our communities dependant on that. By grazing management, I’m not saying exclude grazing animals, I’m saying control them, there are many areas that really badly need grazing animals and others that need less, all areas need to be managed. All landholders are responsible for the active management of their lands in the basin, through the strategic use of fire, grazing, rest and mechanical intervention we can improve outcomes for the whole system.
I talk a lot about the over allocation of water in our basin and how enacting the Basin Plan has exacerbated this, not helped as it was intended to do. Why has this happened? When water has been purchased for environmental water, that water is then accounted for every bit as tightly as it was when used for production. Then you add to this new water allocations that have been created to account for water saving projects and the allocations that are accounted for has increased, not decreased. This makes it less reliable for communities that depend on irrigation water use and then less money is multiplied through that community, having significant impacts on small towns and communities. While water buybacks may seem the cheapest way to purchase environmental water, if the impact on communities is taken into account, then that is by far and away the most expensive water!
The next issue I would like to discuss is the respect and valuing of the water in our system, especially when there’s low inflows due to droughts. If we very simply divided rivers into two parts, the critical in river stream (looking after critical riverine life) and the floodplain section (breeding and growing the riverine species). There are times when there are low inflows, communities are on water restrictions and environmental water is being used to water floodplains. This shows a lack of understanding of natural river processes, devaluing the and disrespecting the water and the communities along the river that do respect and value the water. When flows are low it would be much more prudent and respectful to utilise ewater in improving and maintaining in stream river health, through weir pool manipulation and diversity of flow patterns.
The last point I would like to make about water is that each community needs to have ownership of changes in water management and their section of the basin. By this I mean that every section of the rivers or creeks needs their own special environmental patch that has an allocation of water and is monitored and managed. This is so important as many regions have had lots of parcels of water sold out of their region, to be used in another section of the river totally disconnected from them. Each region needs to change with our climate and the acknowledgement that no area manages the river as well as they can, so every reach needs to have benefits and tough changes, that is what ownership is about.
For the above to happen there is no secret that management needs to happen in the heart of the basin, with decisions connecting communities, that means passing on tough times and good times. Really important that our rivers dry back when the climate dictates they should, that makes us value our water, instead of taking it for granted, then there is good times.
I do like the attitude of being the change that you want to see in others, it is always easy to criticise and tell others upstream that they aren’t valuing and respecting the river, when if we look closely at our own area we may find similar issues.
While there is good growth after the rain, there is still lots of bare soil that will allow water to run off, lots of opportunities to improve
This is a question that we constantly ask ourselves and always strive to improve the way we value our precious rainfall. This is exactly the type of question we are asking ourselves now (we have received 90+mm in the last 5 weeks), we had a good rest while it was dry, now is the time to get active and make sure we value the precious rain we have received. This can be viewed on a number of levels; infiltration into the soil, diversity of plants, amount and class of livestock grazing it and turnover of those stock.
Infiltration:
I reckon this is the most important issue here, first up you must be able to allow water into the soil at whatever rate it falls so that it can grow pasture without running off first, this is the most efficient use of rainfall. For this to happen you really need effective ground cover of vegetation as well as organic matter in the soil (carbon is a part of this), both these issues allow the soil to absorb high rates of rainfall. There are places that might need some mechanical intervention to aid the infiltration of water, at least until there is adequate vegetation to enable the natural processes to absorb the water. To harvest and best use the water that is now stored in the soil, diversity of plant species is important, so that whenever rain falls something is growing and able to use that moisture before it drops out of the root zone.
Plant diversity:
As said above, plant diversity is so very important so that you can harvest soil moisture at any time of the year. For good plant diversity you need as much diversity through your land and livestock management system as possible. By this I mean grazing paddocks at different times of the year, with different species of livestock, different classes of livestock, different grazing intensities and length of grazes. This can make management more complex, to instil some chaos in a planned system can be difficult to organise and enact.
Diversity of Livestock:
In a livestock business we have been told that you need to find out what you do well and do more of it, simple really. Under an extremely variable climate, like what we find ourselves in now, what you do well might change from year to year. While breeding livestock, especially small animals (sheep or goats) in the Southern Rangelands is normally the most profitable, that isn’t always the case. What value might we place on improving water infiltration? With this in mind having flexibility in your options, being able to manage different species, goats, sheep, cattle and different classes in the species, growing young stock, older dry stock to go with the breeders, means you can cater for most eventualities. This doesn’t mean you have small mobs of different types of stock all over the place, just might mean you have to ability to bring in a different species or class of livestock that is suited to the plants you have in your landscape. This is about harvesting the plants and having stock to sell, turning the rain into plants, into money.
Turnover, sale of stock:
Having access to a diverse range of livestock means that you can utilise the moisture and plants available, having a mix of grazers and browsers with the plant diversity to suit means that plant utilisation can be optimised. Then the inevitable happens, the stock aren’t “finished, they aren’t ready for sale”, with the access to many sale options, livestock are always ready for sale. There is always someone looking for a store article to finish, as they have a different class of feed that can take these animals to the next level. It is usually a very smart option to sell stock once they have stopped putting on weight and you think by keeping them you could risk their health and/or the health of your landscape.
Now I’m aware not everyone lives in a rangeland environment and has access to such a diverse range of plants, enabling the running of a diverse business. Which comes first though, the diverse plants enabling this to happen, or the diverse management allowing a diversity of plants to grow?
Sometimes diversity of grazing management isn’t enough, you may need mechanical intervention
I know intrinsically everyone values the environment, that is something that we have wonderful personalities such as David Attenborough to thank for making us all more aware. What I’m talking about is at a much more basic level, we value our property, our house, our car, even our time, so what value do we place on the wonderful bushland where you walk through nearby? Or the array of native parrots that fly overhead calling to their mates?
Our property is in South West NSW, with our house adjacent to the Anabranch/Talyawalka River (Part of the Lower Darling River). Water normally flows into the river from either Darling River floods or controlled managed flows from the Menindee Lakes scheme. The current flow is a combination of a managed flow out of Lake Cawndilla and an overland/spill flow from the Darling/Baaka.
The specific issue that I wish to discuss is there have been a couple of recent opportunities to deliver a small flood to the lower Darling River (Between Menindee Lakes and Wentworth) in order to water more of the floodplains and deliver a wonderful fish breeding/feeding event (Not to mention all the trees and plants that are watered!) that the area really needs after large sections dried up in 2019. Every centimetre increase in river height over the high flow level of approx. 18,000mgl/day results in more floodplain inundated, more trees and plants watered, more food for river life, fish, frogs, yabbies, turtles etc.
Unfortunately, a decision by Water NSW was unable to happen due to the State Emergency Services (SES) expressing concerns about possible inundation of some river shacks and potential property damage. I express no ill feeling towards anyone in the SES, in fact if I was in their position and could be held accountable for property damage, then I may well have made a similar decision. The ruling is that if “we can mitigate a flood we must mitigate a flood”. The question that I have is; “why do we say that our man made property trumps the environment every time, then we are left trying to repair our precious environment?” I reckon we need a much more balanced perspective on issues such as this, especially if we are to turn around the decline in our inland rivers and streams.
The risk seen in the above example was damage to property, what wasn’t reconciled was impact to the environment by not taking this missed opportunity. How would we cost out the impact to the flora and fauna in the riverine environment, especially those that directly benefit from the floodplains? You will note that I talk about the river and the floodplains, they are two parts of the one system; The river is the main channel and is the critical habitat when there are low or no flows. Then there is the floodplains where all the food is generated, the signal to breed is when the rivers spill into the floodplains, so important to not miss these breeding and watering opportunities.
I’m a farmer and I consider myself a proud caring one, it is fantastic that we are beginning to account for important issues such as biodiversity, carbon and Natural Capital. That is much more accurately accounting for the impact food and fibre production can have on the environment, good and bad. Every action has a reaction, there are winners and losers in every decision we make, the aim of resource managers is to maintain or preferably build that resource over their time. As decision makers, managing a water storage is no different. This is a component of a larger river system and the aim must be to improve the whole riverine corridor, while delivering water to the communities along the river.
In the last couple of months there has been significant flooding through many communities, especially near the coast in NSW and QLD. What impact has town and community planning had on river flows in these areas? What impact has management of farming land had on the infiltration of water into the soil? Are the impacts of these actions even accounted for? Was the value to the environment of the flood actually recognised, the fish breeding opportunities? Many questions that if we are to genuinely take our environment seriously, I reckon we need to address.
In closing I reckon we need to make our decisions around water management more complex, better communicated and more transparent. Our inland regional communities rely on these rivers, the lifeblood of the area, for economic, social and cultural reasons. The Indigenous people in our area, the Barkindji People refer to the Darling River as the “Baaka”, to them it was the lifeblood. Our culture has only been here 230 odd years and I hope we are starting to learn that.
A fairly common response I get when ask what your son/daughter is doing after school is; “They will go to Uni or get a trade before they come home to the farm”. Now while this is good thinking to broaden their horizons, how many farmers are we losing to our industry because there is no clear pathway to the “trade of Farming”?
Now I left boarding school after finishing year 12 and went to Longreach Pastoral College in QLD, I still maintain that most of what I know today had its base at LPC. Due to many reasons most of farming’s physical training facilities have shut down and I reckon we are now starting to pay that cost. The price of Ag land has spiralled in the last decade or so, the price of wool and meat has as well, so where do we find these skilled managers to look after multi-million dollar businesses?
We have tried employing managers and now happy for us to provide the management and employ workers with a good attitude, then just see where that goes. I’m hearing from investors that they would love to get into owning rangeland livestock properties, their blockage is availability of good quality staff. When I look at rangeland properties across Australia, I reckon the largest blockage to changed and improved management is the education and experience of the decision makers, property managers.
When I speak of “education and experience”, I’m not necessarily talking about university education, I’m talking about a mix of practical and theoretical learning that empowers them to make good decisions, manage people, livestock, the land and money. Currently in Ag there is no clear pathway to this end goal, especially in our vast rangelands that need good quality people. I would like to add that I’m not sure that any livestock region in Australia has an over supply of quality livestock managers that can fulfill the roles I talk about.
These concerns were exacerbated by hearing from a fellow parent of a girl at school that was told his daughter was unable to do work experience on a significant sheep stud (that is a registered training provider), as the accommodation was unsuitable (they have jillaroo quarters). In fact if you look around some regions that were renown future farmer training grounds, like Hay, most of the large properties there employ contractors, very few jack/jillaroo places. Now I’m sure there are many issues as to why training of our future farmers, safety being a key one and compliance being a barrier to employers. It is very important for us to find safe, legal and effective ways to train our next Gen of farmers.
The Hay area has taken this issue into their own hands and has put in place a training system/organisation of their own, Hay Inc. As with any issue if you are going to have a successful outcome across a large area/population, you will need many tools, this is certainly a great start. The commonest pathway that people take into management of large livestock properties is by starting off as a “ringer” on large northern pastoral stations, then slowly moving up the ladder. While this pathway producers very physically skilled people, are they armed with the appropriate skills to manage people, the landscape and money? Are they capable to give clear and articulate presentations to the investors/boards that own and set strategic direction of these large properties? The combination of these skills is what we need our future leaders in Ag to be armed with.
How many parents could confidently say that if their son/daughter approached the career advisor at their school, saying they would like to become a livestock manager of a large station, the advisor could map out a clear pathway for them? Does one actually exist? Our last employee was brand new to Ag, he bought energy and enthusiasm that we loved. Ag has lost many of our great people to other industries over the years, we need to position ourselves to win some from other sectors. Many would say that all we need is more money, bigger pay packet and people will come. Currently a person with the skills I talk about would be able to walk into a job for about $250K/yr, there are so few people in that pool they can set their price.
I reckon this is a very important issue that NFF (National Farmers Federation), MLA (Meat & Livestock Australia) and AWI (Australian Wool Innovations) and others should be involved with to make sure clear and exiting career pathways exist.
This is a lovely complex issue and I therefore want to make sure that I endeavour to respect the many different methods or decisions that people make in finding what works for them and their business. I reckon the focus on any drought management needs to happen at a number of different levels:
animal welfare – Should never compromise the welfare of the livestock.
The Land – Need to keep ecosystems and landscape integrity intact.
The People – The physical and mental well-being of those on the land is extremely important. This is critical so that good well thought out decisions can be made through this stressful period.
Finances – making sure that the period between incomes does not jeopardise the future of the business.
Community – The community needs to be able to function, support each other and provide social and fun interaction for members.
I reckon if we could agree on the above points as being the outcomes that as a society we want, then decision making through a framework can become clearer. Now you might say that this already happens, so why do we need anything formal? Well currently groups try to suggest that maybe looking after the livestock should be seen as more important than people or community, or even the land. Reality is that each individual farm has a different mix of values around these issues and we as a broader society need to support them and help individuals to make good decisions, especially when faced with a drought.
What exactly is a drought? I would define a period of drought as: “An intense dry spell that compromises the farmers “normal” operating activities reducing their income and/or causing environmental damage”.
So now if we look at the basic tools that we might have to manage drought, in no particular order:
Hand feeding – Preferably in confinement areas
Purchasing more land where feed exists
Selling stock – There are many facets here, outright sell, sell and replace with smaller animals, dry animals.
Agist stock on someone else’s grass – Build relationships in other areas, increase your network.
Lease livestock to others – so you will have your own stock when rain falls.
How do you work out what tool/s suit you best? This can take a while and should be done while there is rain about and considering the factors above. In a severe event you may at some time use all these tools, so don’t think that you just have to feed, or only sell!
Our situation:
We choose to run a property that wants to improve our landscape, build our productive capacity in a semi-arid rangeland environment. We place a very high value on our personal health and state of mind, as well as that of our community, we like being involved with our community and volunteering.
With this in mind we have a written policy in our business that “we do not hand feed commercial livestock” (we consider rams seedstock). This reduces our machinery and equipment requirements as well as our labour input. The key risk here is that this drives us to make destocking decisions early as we don’t have the feeding safety net. A key part of the thinking behind removing feeding from our options is the length of the drought that we have out here and the severity, none of which we know or can predict.
In 2019 when I reviewed the “why don’t we feed?” numbers, I worked out we would have paid just shy of $300/ewe for that year to receive a Gross Margin of $80! This of course takes into account the depreciation of machinery, storage and the labour associated with feeding, not just the cost of feed delivery.
We also choose to not purchase land elsewhere as we are very connected to our community and recognise that we don’t have the knowledge or skills to manage land in other regions. We really didn’t weigh up leasing or agisting as we are very comfortable selling our stock and then restocking due to our constant trading mentality and our relationship we have with our stock agent.
Selling decisions:
These can be really tough if you have a business that runs a similar amount of livestock, breeds all of their own replacements and only purchases seedstock. This is why I consider “conservative set stocking is the best approach to drought management”, as being a large myth! It is very tough to make good selling decisions if you have no practice and don’t have a good relationship on that level with your agent.
We are members of KLR Marketing “Mastermind” and use their spreadsheets to help us make good decisions (Kelly and I have both done the KLR course). This helps us make sure we are selling/keeping the best stock for us, as our stock agent has also done it, we all speak the same language. We also utilise a “grazing/Land management coach” Dick Richardson to help us do feed budgets as well as making sure the quality of feed is suited to the stock we want to retain, no good keeping lambing ewes when you only have dry cardboard in the paddock! Between these supporters they help us make good decisions and then support us when we make poor decisions, no decision is never an option! Our attitude is that there is no such thing as a right or wrong decision when dealing with animals and the land, you only have better or worse decisions (Dick Richardson’s thinking).
We have also both completed the RCS “Grazing for Profit (GFP)” course (I have done it twice), this means that both of us again speak the same language, we can bounce ideas and decisions off each other. Through the course, followed by Graduate Link and Executive Link, this improves the ability of working in groups, respecting and encouraging other opinions, especially when they differ from yours. This seeking out opinions that differ from yours has been key to us improving our decision making.
So how do we physically make selling decisions? Any opportunity that we have to identify diversity we take it, like scanning, shearing, weaning, classing etc. This helps us to identify different classes of livestock and enables us to prioritise a selling order/strategy. Always having a mob of stock in the sell paddock means you can have a relief valve. If you haven’t sold stock when you are under pressure of feed supply, you wouldn’t have felt the sheer relief knowing that you no longer need to find tucker for them, that is gold!
In any moment of decision, the best thing you can do is the right thing, the next best thing is the wrong thing, and the worst thing you can do is nothing.
NB: The above treatment is not recommended by anyone!!
Dags->Blowflies
Gee the flies have been persistent and as a merino sheep producer, the poor sheep have had to fend off the black mongrels fairly constantly, especially here through Oct-Dec, for some though the battle continues. I have put together the below article after discussion with an Elanco Rep, Andrew Brewer, based the Central West of NSW and I will include his expert commentary in Red.
I would like to buy into this discussion because of some of the feedback I receive from producers that “the flies are resistant to most of the chemicals”, or “due to the shearer shortage, I’m unable to keep the flies out of my sheep”. While there is truth in both of these statements, there are always options and I would just like to highlight some. With this sort of discussion we are possibly jeopardizing the main chemical that we have for protection of blowflies, Clik Extra (65g/L Dicyclanil). I am unaware of the development of other chemicals for the protection of sheep, so the correct use and application of all our current chemical groups is very important.
There are many factors that all contribute to the relative susceptibility of sheep to flies, so in order to reduce your exposure to the risk here are a few areas for you to think about:
Breed for resistance to flystrike – cull any sheep fly blown, cull any ewes/rams with suint in their wool, or yellow wool. Check with your stud to make sure they cull for flystrike as well. Aim to reduce dependence on insecticides by making sure that you have the best physical barriers in place (White wool, large bare area around the breech, low wrinkles score on breech). This season there are distinct lines of yellow, coloured wool that look like rings on a tree stump. You can accurately determine when significant rain events occurred by counting the crimp from the follicle and it is easy to see. Wool growers need to consider classing for better (more resistant) shoulder conformation. I regularly see ‘M’ shaped shoulders in sheep where as the “American barn” or inverted ‘V’ is the more desired shape. Ensure that you take shoulder conformation into consideration when classing sheep. This means you need to get your hands on every animal.
Shear or crutch at times that maximise protection against flystrike. – This may differ for each region, look at crutching options, build relationship with contractor/s, purchase crutching/handling facility.
This is a really contentious issue – if choosing to cease mulesing then additional crutching may be required, almost certainly in a year such as we have seen in 2020/2021 summer.
Time shearing to minimise fly strike risk. Also, don’t assume that 6 month shearing eliminates risk. For example, July/Feb shearing means that 5 months of wool is in place at the peak of the season in a wet summer.
Understand the wool harvesting intervals (WHI) and other withholding times and select appropriate chemical treatments to suit your calendar.
Dock tails to the correct length. – Really important, too shorter tail really makes sheep susceptible to flies as they are unable to lift wool out of the way.
Manage scouring. – egg counts, pasture management. Changes to diet, seasonal changes that cause digestive upsets can be vectors for strike as can urine stain, lambing stain and dags that build up over fly strike prevention chemicals. These can negate the protection effect as the chemical is essentially covered over.
Use breech modification if required, until sheep are genetically resistant to flystrike. Not all mulesing contractors are the same. Speak to your marking and mulesing contractors and be firm on what you want – tail length, size of mules etc. A large mules is not necessarily the best option.
Check livestock regularly, “close shepherd”, that way you can get on top of issues quickly. A sheep can be in real trouble within 48 hours in the worst conditions.
When applying insecticides, (notethat dicyclanil [e.g., CLiK] and cyromazine [e.g., Vetrazin] are insect growth regulators [IGR] and do not have any activity on adult flies. Whereas the other with known efficacy, imidacloprid [Avenge+ Fly], ivermectin [Blowfly and Lice] and spinosyn [Extinosad Eliminator and Extinosad Aerosol] do affect adults and larvae) make sure that you follow instructions and use well maintained equipment that is operating at the correct pressure and/or dose rate. A quick phone call to the company rep can help you make sure that you are applying the chemical correctly. Remember the most expensive chemical is the one that doesn’t work. Make sure the chemical is applied carefully and if any resistance is detected, please contact your supplier.
Resistance is difficult to detect and to identify. Wool growers must give chemicals the best opportunity to work. No chemical should be considered a single pronged approach to fly strike prevention. Our over reliance of the chemical treatments has seen almost every chemical enter the system and tumble out the back door due to either over use, underdosing, incorrect application and/or over reliance which cause flies to become resistant. Fly strike management requires an integrated approach. Any dag, stain or wool in the breach area must be addressed. You are not necessarily treating for the now, you are also treating for the future and if you expect the longest protection, you must prepare the sheep accordingly.
One very important thing to be aware of is that there are no new chemicals in the pipeline for some time into the future. If the current chemicals can no longer be used, there is nothing else coming over the hill to save us. What we have is all we have.
Watch the weather and be aware of the impact of multiple rain events in the warmer months, this will reduce the effectiveness of chemicals. Know the rain fast claim on the chemical you have used or intend to use. Rain fastness is a difficult thing to accurately measure but best practice indicates the following:
You should never apply fly strike prevention chemicals (or any pour-on or spray-on chemicals) to wet sheep.
You avoid applying if rain is imminent.
You should consider treating when rain has passed and when the sheep have dried.
You should consider re-treatment with an alternative chemical active when you suspect there are ‘washout’ concerns.
Avoid treating for fly strike prevention twice with the same chemical in the same wool growing season.
Avoid using the same chemical off-shears for lice then again as a fly prevention strategy. This exposes two pests to the same chemical with different application patterns and volumes which may be a risk to resistance building up.
There are fly traps that can assist in reducing the green fly (Lucilia cuprina) on your property. Even if they don’t reduce numbers, when you start seeing green flies in them, it is time to act! Fly traps can significantly reduce fly populations. One sheep blowfly can lay up to 900 eggs and one fly can kill a sheep.
In general, you own your blowflies on your property. Blowlies only travel up to about 3 km (on average but can be blow on winds a bit further) from where they pupated and they can overwinter in the pupation state to re-emerge when conditions suit. Those paddocks that were bad last year may also be the ones that are bad next year especially with flies around in autumn that pupate in early winter.
This season, dermatitis has been a significant issue for producers and a contributing factor for fly strike. This is particularly the case as young sheep are more easily wet to the skin than adult sheep especially if they are unshorn and/or unclassed. Dermatitis can become a real issue that builds quickly when sheep that have it are yarded wet and hence the bacterial infection is spread rapidly. Consider shearing lambs as early as possible if dermatitis is suspected. Dermatitis trumps chemicals and can render them less effective in the infected area which is commonly the shoulders.
When you run into difficult years like this, with lots of moisture and extended fly periods, not “normal/average” years, you will need different management. In order to make good decisions you will need good information and the best way I reckon to do this is to access your networks, there are many people/businesses out there ready to assist you to make good decisions, here are a few:
Go to ParaBoss and access Lice, Fly and Worm Control resources
Fly Boss – click on the link, put in you circumstances and look at options.
Local Merchandise store- Speak to your supplier about options.
Company Reps – Talk to Coopers, Elanco reps, find out what they recommend.
Social Media – Ask questions to find out what other producers are using, I find Twitter is very good for this.
Other Landholders – Contact mates and find out their thoughts, most are very comfortable sharing.
Flies cause huge problems in the wool and sheep industry every year and especially when most of us are recovering from a few drought years in a row, this year every dollar is critical.
