Developing the role of perennial forages for crop–livestockfarms: a strategic multi-disciplinary approach

Rick S. LlewellynA,F,G, Michael J. RobertsonB,F, Richard C. HayesC,F, David FerrisD,F,Katrien DescheemaekerE, and Clinton RevellD,F

ACSIRO, Waite Road, Urrbrae, SA 5064, Australia.BCSIRO, Underwood Avenue, Floreat, WA 6014, Australia.CGraham Centre for Agricultural Innovation (an alliance between NSW Department of Primary Industriesand Charles Sturt University), Wagga Wagga Agricultural Institute, Pine Gully Road, Wagga WaggaNSW 2650, Australia.

DDepartment of Agriculture and Food Western Australia, 3 Baron-Hay Court, South Perth, WA 6151, Australia.EPlant Production Systems, Wageningen University, PO Box 430, 6700 AK Wageningen, The Netherlands.FFuture Farm Industries Cooperative Research Centre, 35 Stirling Highway, Crawley, WA 6009, Australia.GCorresponding author. Email: Rick.Llewellyn@csiro.au

Abstract. Developing new and improved grazing systems for crop–livestock farms where crop production is the majordriver of farm management decisions presents a unique research and development challenge. In southern Australia,a substantial proportion of animal production from grazing comes from regions and farms where cropping is the majorenterprise. In this paper, we describe a multi-disciplinary farming-systems research approach (EverCrop) aimed atimproving farm profitability, risk management and environmental impacts through the development and integration ofnew grazing options with an emphasis on perennial species. It has been used to analyse and target new opportunities forfarmers to benefit from perennial species across dry Mediterranean-type and temperate regions of southern Australia.It integrates field experimentation, on-farm trialling, farmer participatory research, soil–plant–climate biophysicalmodelling, whole-farm bioeconomic analysis and evaluations of adoptability. Multi-functional roles for summer-activegrasses with winter cropping, integration of forage shrubs and establishment of new mixes of perennial grasses in croprotations to improve farming system performance are identified, along with an analysis of factors likely to affect rate ofuptake by farmers.

Additional keywords: adoption, decision-making, economics, mixed farming, Australia, perennial, grasses, shrubs.

Received 9 April 2014, accepted 8 August 2014, published online 7 October 2014

Introduction

Grain cropping in Australia is predominantly carried out inconjunction with grazing and livestock production, so-calledmixed farming. The dominant farming system of the 1970sand early 1980s—cereal crops in short rotations with annuallegume-based pastures such as Medicago spp. and Trifoliumsubterraneum L.—arose in response to the combination ofhigh wool prices, declining soil nitrogen fertility, andtechnological opportunities such as new pasture cultivars andsynthetic fertilisers (Wolfe 2011). By the turn of the 20thCentury, these annual-based, mixed-farming systems wereincreasingly dominated by cropping because of changes interms of trade, such as a decline in the price of animalproducts (particularly wool) relative to crops and improvedcropping technology. The narrative of ‘decline’ in mixed-farming systems in Australia has been challenged by Bell andMoore (2012); however, it does face several threats and

opportunities that could be met through the development ofnew grazing options and systems (Bell et al. 2014).

A majority of grain-producing farms still include grazingenterprises as an important, but usually secondary component,of the farmbusiness (Bell andMoore 2012).This is also reflectedin the attitude to cropping versus livestock management,whereby most farmers with both livestock and croppinghave a personal preference for cropping (Table 1). Therefore,special consideration needs to be given to the ‘fit’ for grazingoptions, including potential synergies or conflicts withcropping enterprises (Dear et al. 2004; Casburn et al. 2013),their place within rotations or spatially within the farmingsystem and their role in reducing business risk and increasingprofitability (Hutchings and Nordblom 2011), and other non-financial costs and benefits (such as natural resourcemanagement outcomes) and increased management demands(e.g. Doole et al. 2009).

Journal compilation � CSIRO 2014 www.publish.csiro.au/journals/cp

CSIRO PUBLISHING

Crop & Pasture Science, 2014, 65, 945–955http://dx.doi.org/10.1071/CP14111

Australian mixed-farming systems are typically dominatedby annual plant species; however, perennial forages and shrubsplay a range of roles. They have the potential to increaselivestock productivity through the utilisation of summer andearly autumn rainfall (Wolfe et al. 1980; Papanastasis et al.2008), shrubs can provide shelter for vulnerable livestock(Bird et al. 1992), and legumes such as lucerne (Medicagosativa L.) can fix atmospheric nitrogen (Peoples et al. 2012).The hydrological advantages of perennial plants over annualcrops and pastures in terms of managing threats such asdryland salinity are well understood (e.g. Ward 2006). Thiscan be an important reason for planting perennial species inlocations where there is a high risk of recharge or secondarysalinity.

However, the current level of adoption and scope for furtheradoption of perennial pastures varies with biophysical andsocioeconomic factors and is region-specific. At face value,there is a conflict between expanding the role of perennialplants and the dynamics of an annual-based cropping system.Oliver et al. (2005) and Bell and Moore (2012) describedways of incorporating grazing options, including the conceptof ‘rotate–separate–integrate’. Rotation involves temporalseparation (i.e. sequences) of livestock and crop productionenterprises on the same area of land. Separation involves thespatially distinct use of grazing options and crops, with eachcontributing to farm productivity but not from shared areas ofland on the farm (e.g. permanent pastures). Integration involvesboth crop and livestock enterprises using the same resources(e.g. soil, water or nutrients) simultaneously or in the samemanagement cycle (e.g. grazing crops, pasture cropping orundersowing of forages with crops). Potential value foreach of rotation, separation and integration is explored in thispaper.

The aim of this paper is to demonstrate how the EverCropapproach was used across a diverse range of farming-systemcontexts in Australia to develop the role of perennial options inthe crop–livestock zone. The study involves a range of agro-ecological regions, with very low to moderate current levels ofuse of perennials and varying potential for increasing the use ofperennials by farmers. The options explored ranged fromthose suited to rotation with crops on cropping land, to othersintegrating perennials with crops on marginal land, to thosewhere perennials are suited to use on non-arable land wherethey are separate from crops.

A description of EverCrop

Identification and development of the role of perennials toimprove farming systems across southern Australian croppingregions was a core objective of the EverCrop project, initiatedby the Future Farm Industries Cooperative Research Centre(FFI CRC) in 2008. The FFI CRC was a collective effortbetween the Australian Commonwealth Government, variousState Government agencies, universities, industry groups andbusiness. The EverCrop project used a participatory, multi-disciplinary research and development approach, with farmersand regional partners aimed at improving the performance ofmixed-farming systems.

Other programs focused on Australian grain and livestockproduction system have successfully included a participatoryapproach based on strong farmer involvement. SustainableGrazing Systems (Mason et al. 2003), in the high-rainfall zoneof Australia, included emphasis on the social process of practicechange among graziers (Nicholson et al. 2003) and had hightargets for uptake of established practices. Compared with thisand other programs focused on graziers in high-rainfall regions(e.g. Avery et al. 2009), EverCrop generally has more incommon with the Grain and Graze program (Price and Hacker2009), due to its focus on Australian mixed farming. Thisprogram also had a multi-disciplinary approach but placedheavy emphasis on local farming systems demonstrations andextension by regional groups. Unlike EverCrop, it was aimed atextensive practice change within a short time-frame. A research-focused component existed in a second, national-level ‘tier’,which started later (Price and Hacker 2009).

The EverCrop approach had objectives and characteristicsdifferent from the much larger, extension-oriented programsdescribed above (Mason et al. 2003; Price and Hacker 2009).The design recognised the challenge of developing the role ofperennials in cropping-oriented regions (Byrne et al. 2010)and the low current level of perennial use in most Australiangrain-growing regions. Because of the focus on perennial plantoptions, with their inherent level of ‘irreversibility’ comparedwith more immediate and simple practices that do not havehigh upfront investment costs, greater emphasis was placedon the need to test and demonstrate the value proposition. Lessreliance could be placed on extensive demonstrations byfarmers to achieve high uptake levels within a short time-frame.

The objectives of EverCrop did not include large adoptiontargets within the initial 6-year project period, but insteadfocused on a participatory farming-systems research anddevelopment approach aimed at achieving better understoodand more adoptable perennial options (Fig. 1). Initial scopingstudies recognised the potential in each region, but also thatmore was needed than just agronomic trials and extension toprogress the role of perennials with long time-frames expected.A participatory farming-systems research approach (Collinson2000) was established to ensure that the ‘fit’ and constraints toperennial options in the whole-farm management context werewell understood, and included input from a range of disciplinesincluding agronomy and agricultural economics together withsystems modelling (Fig. 1).

Biophysical modelling was used to define knowledge gapsand provide focus for plot-scale agronomic experimentation.Whole-farm economic modelling and farm surveys wereused to define the potential scale (area) and benefits (perhectare) under a range of scenarios for the proposedoptions. The approach relied on the close involvement ofend users in the research and development process,including innovative farmers and their advisors. Userevaluation and on-farm, demonstration-scale trials wereused to validate the practical implementation of the newtechnology and to quantify less tangible benefits unable tobe captured in the agronomic and modelling analyses, suchas impacts on natural resource base, farm labour or machineryrequirements.

946 Crop & Pasture Science R. S. Llewellyn et al.

Use of perennials in cropping systems in contrastingagro-ecological zones

The diversity of the three agro-ecological zones that are thefocus of the EverCrop project is demonstrated in Table 1 andFig. 2. In all three regions, cropping is typically the dominantenterprise over grazing (Table 1). Only in the uniform rainfallzone are perennial pastures an extensive component of currentagricultural land use.

The low-rainfall zone of South Australia and Victoria(SA–Vic. Mallee)

This region is characterised by an average annual rainfall of250–350mm, of which ~70% falls during the April–Octobercereal growing season (see localities of Waikerie, Karoondaand Hopetoun in Fig. 2), with highly variable soils often in a

dune–swale complex. The dryland farming system is typicallybased onwheat (Triticum aestivumL.), barley (Hordeum vulgareL.) and annual pasture, with relatively small areas of canola(Brassica napus L.) and legume crops such as peas (Pisumsativum L.) and lupins (Lupinus angustifolius L.). Farmbusinesses with both cropping and livestock remain commonin the Mallee (Table 1) but more intensive cropping rotationshave evolved relatively recently, with greater use of no-tillagesystems reducing the erosion risk from continuous cropping andnon-cereal crops on the light-textured sands (Llewellyn et al.2012).

Of particular relevance to EverCrop and the potential nichefor perennials is the relatively common application by Malleefarmers of site-specific management by soil-based zones. Thedune–swale landform commonly results in large within-paddock variation in plant production, with fine-textured, oftenchemically constrained soils in the swales, and coarse-textured,often erosion-prone sands on the dunes (Whitbread et al. 2008;Monjardino et al. 2013). The Mallee region has one of thehighest proportions of farmers in Australia using some form ofzonal management for fertiliser inputs (Robertson et al. 2012).This usually involves reducing inputs and thereby the riskexposure on poor-performing soils, and increasing inputs onhigher potential soils where high returns are more likely(Monjardino et al. 2013). Interest in alternative uses formarginal cropping soils is also increasing, with grazing ofcereals on soils with subsoil constraints being one example.The perennial options being explored in this region focuslargely on the ‘separate’ approach, using the less profitablecropping soils.

The area of perennials in the Mallee region is currently low.The use of perennial grasses and lucerne is very low in the lowerrainfall areas and EverCrop engagement with previous lucernegrowers confirmed that the area of lucerne is not likely to increase.

Fig. 1. The approach taken in the EverCrop project, linking evaluation, engagement and problemdefinition in research and development for perennial-based options inmixed farming systems inAustralia.

Table 1. Characteristics typical of grain-producing farms and farmersin the EverCrop regions

The regions are low-rainfall zone of South Australian–Victorian Mallee(250–350mm annual average rainfall (AAR)); medium-rainfall zone(350–450mm AAR) of northern and midlands wheatbelt of WesternAustralia (includes some low-rainfall regions); uniform-rainfall zone ofsouthern NSW (450–600mm AAR). Data collected in 2008 (from

Llewellyn et al. 2012)

Lowrainfall

Mediumrainfall

Uniformrainfall

Farm area managed (average arable ha) 2820 4403 1836Proportion of arable land cropped (%) 65 64 62Farms with sheep (%) 70 73 83Farms with >1000 head of sheep (%) 48 78 74Farmers with stated preference

for cropping over livestock (%)71 91 58

Perennial forages for crop-livestock farms Crop & Pasture Science 947

This reflects the limitations of lucerne in such low-rainfallenvironments, low willingness and infrastructure for moreintensive livestock and pasture management over the pastdecade, and the general shift to more intensive croppingagainst lucerne’s requirement for soil types that are well suitedto cropping (Robertson 2006). It is likely that new options withimproved suitability for the cropping-oriented low-rainfallfarming system where annual average rainfall is <350mm willneed to emerge if perennial legume adoption is to increase inthe Mallee. The potential for tropical grasses to fill a small nicheon marginal soils aimed at providing summer–autumn feed wasidentified as being worth testing (Whitbread and Craig 2010;Descheemaeker et al. 2014).

The most commonly grown perennial forage shrub is oldman saltbush (Atriplex nummulariaLindl.). It has a demonstratedability to grow on soils marginal for cropping and providesummer–autumn feed as well as shelter for livestock (DeKoning and Milthorpe 2008). However, an EverCrop study(Llewellyn et al. 2010) found that plantings of shrubs on 124farm blocks in the SA Mallee were generally small in area andonly a small proportion of farmers had established multiple

forage plantings. It was concluded that there is potential forgreater use of forage shrubs on soils marginal for cropping,but improved plant options or species mixtures are likely to beneeded, in particular options offering improved feed quality,together with a clearer demonstration of the economic value,if substantial increases in perennial forage shrub plantings areto occur.

The medium-rainfall zone of Western Australia’s (WA)northern grainbelt

The Northern Agricultural Region of WA has a Mediterranean-type climate (Fig. 2) and is dominated by broadacre cropping(Table 1) based on wheat and barley in rotation with narrow-leaf lupins, canola and annual pastures. The region is highlysusceptible to wind erosion due to a high proportion of sandysoils. Van Gool et al. (2008) described the mounting concernsabout the sustainability of continuous cropping in the region,because of the increasing fertiliser costs, weed problems dueto herbicide resistance, and the risks of dry winters anddrought. These factors have led to increasing emphasis on risk

100Mingenew

Climate classes (based on mm/year)

Summer dominantMore than 1200More than 1200 More than 800More than 800 More than 800 Less than 350

650–1200 650–1200 500–800

250–500

500–800

250–500

500–800

250–500350–650 350–650

Summer Uniform Winter Winter dominant Arid

Moora

Waikerie Karoonda Hopetoun Albury

Wagga Wagga

Cowra

Condobolin

80

60

40

20

0F M A M J J A S O N DJ

100

8060

40

20

0F M A M J J A S O N DJ

100

8060

40

20

0F

0N

500 km

M A M J J A S O N DJ

100

8060

40

20

0F M A M J J A S O N DJ

100

8060

40

20

0F M A M J J A S O N DJ

100

8060

40

20

0F M A M J

Seasonal Rainfall Zones of Australia: Bureau of MeteorologySource:

J A S O N DJ

100

80

60

40

20

0F M A M J J A S O N DJ

100

80

60

40

20

0F M A M J J A S O N DJ

100

80

60

40

20

0F M A M J J A S O N DJ

Fig. 2. Average rainfall distribution at localities of the EverCrop project shown on a map that indicates the major climate classes within Australia based onmean annual rainfall and seasonality of rainfall. Developed from map drawn by Australian Government Bureau of Meteorology for the period 1900–99 andlong-term rainfall records.

948 Crop & Pasture Science R. S. Llewellyn et al.

management and the need for lower input, lower cost croppingsystems. Several farmers in the region grow tropical perennialgrass pastures including panic grass (Megathyrsus maximus(Jacq.) BK Simon & SWL Jacobs) and Rhodes grass (ChlorisgayanaKunth), although mainly on soils unsuited to continuouscropping. An estimate of the area of tropical perennial grasspastures in the region is ~50 000 ha (Moore et al. 2014), with~10% of farms having some perennial grasses.

Pasture cropping involves planting a winter crop into a livingsummer-active perennial pasture. The growth period of thewinter-active crop complements the high summer activity(and low winter activity) of the C4 perennial grass, reducingcompetition between the two species (Lawes et al. 2014; Wardet al. 2014). The expected benefits for livestock-dominant farmsare that the crop could provide winter feed to supplement theperennial pasture and rest the pasture from grazing, with cropsopportunistically allowed to grow through to grain harvest onlyin years with excess feed (Thomas et al. 2014). For cropping-dominant systems, where feed is often a secondary consideration,pasture cropping can potentially stabilise fragile soils, improvesoil quality, prevent growth of summer weeds, and provide anopportunity to increase farm income through the harvest of grainon soils not frequently cropped. Only a small number of growersin the region have trialled pasture cropping since 2009, typicallyon small areas (<100 ha). As a result, the research focused ongaining a better understanding of ‘integrated’ crop and pastureperformance with pasture cropping and improving theagronomy to support greater use (Lawes et al. 2014; Wardet al. 2014).

The uniform-rainfall zone of southern New South Wales(NSW) and northern Victoria

Average monthly rainfall in this region follows a relativelyuniform distribution, with ~60% of annual rainfall occurringduring the April–October winter growing season in atypical year (see localities Wagga Wagga, Cowra, Albury,Condobolin in Fig. 2). Despite the term ‘uniform’ implyingsome level of reliability, monthly rainfall in this zone is highlyvariable, particularly during summer (McCormick et al. 2014).Farm enterprises typically comprise a combination of cropping(wheat, barley, canola, oats, grain legumes) and livestockactivities (cattle, and sheep for meat and wool) based largelyon pastures grown typically for 3–6 years in phased rotationswith crops (Table 1). This combination of livestock and cropsin rotation conveys several advantages including incomediversification, minimisation of risk from variation in climateand commodity prices, as well as production advantagesincluding weed control, restoration of soil fertility andimprovement in soil structure. However, the managementdisadvantages associated with a complex enterprise mix can besubstantial (Casburn et al. 2013).

A survey of farmers with both crops and livestock in southernNSW indicated that, at any one time, ~52% of land is under crop,29% contains perennial pasture and 19% annual pastures (Dearet al. 2010). Lucerne is the dominant perennial pasture grown,present on 84% of farms. Bioeconomic modelling showedthat typical levels of perennial pasture adoption were alreadyclose to the profit-maximising optimum (Bathgate et al. 2010).

Small plantings of other perennial pasture species such aschicory (Cichorium intybus L.; currently grown on 26% offarms) and perennial grasses such as phalaris (Phalarisaquatica L.; grown on 48% of farms) could offer additionalfinancial and non-financial benefits, particularly on constrainedsoil types (Casburn et al. 2014). However, practical constraintscontinue to hamper the use of these and other species in croppingenvironments (Hayes et al. 2012). The focus of research inthe uniform-rainfall zone was on maintaining relatively highlevels of perennial use by refining the pasture–crop interfacewhen in rotation, balancing multiple enterprises and improvingthe establishment and performance of mixed pasture swards.

Demonstrating potential for increased adoptionof perennials

The potential for increased adoption of perennials wasestablished through surveys and workshops with farmers todetail the existing levels of adoption and perceived benefits,together with whole-farm bioeconomic modelling to quantifypotential monetary benefits of increased adoption (Fig. 1).A range of tools was used for evaluating the potential roleof perennials in each region and the outputs were used as a basisfor discussion on research, development and extension needswith regionally based groups of farmers and advisers (calledlocal adaptation groups). Research tools used in each regionincluded existing biophysical simulation models such asAPSIM (Keating et al. 2003) and AUSFARM/GRAZPLAN(Moore et al. 1997) and bioeconomic models MIDAS(Kingwell and Pannell 1987; Pannell 1996). The project wasalso associated with the development of the socioeconomicmodel ADOPT (Adoption and Diffusion Outcome PredictionTool) to evaluate likely rates and peak levels of adoption fora particular innovation by a specified target population offarmers (Kuehne et al. 2013; Robertson et al. 2012; www.csiro.au/ADOPT). This included assessment of the innovationsand target farmer populations by regional expert panelscomprising ~six local farm advisers and farming-systemsresearchers in each region. Assessment was based on the 22innovation and population-related characteristics included inthe ADOPT model (Table 2) and the resulting representativeassessments are presented here (Table 3).

The low-rainfall zone of South Australia and Victoria

In the low-rainfall zone, farmers report the multiple benefits offorage shrub plantings. These include summer–autumn feed thatcan reduce supplementary feeding costs and/or maintainlivestock after crop stubbles have been utilised; a productiveoption for land that is unprofitable for cropping because of soilconstraints (e.g. fine-textured, chemically constrained soils;sandy erodible soils; stony soils); and feed and containmentoptions during critical farm-management periods, such as whenlambs are weaned. Whole-farm bioeconomic modellingshowed that small gains in average farm profit can typicallybe achieved with an allocation of 5–10% of the farm to shrubplantings (Monjardino et al. 2014). The study also showedthat larger areas are profitable where farms have larger areas ofmarginal soil for cropping, or are less intensively cropped with

Perennial forages for crop-livestock farms Crop & Pasture Science 949

Table 2. Assessment of perennial options using questions and response options associated with peak and/or rate of adoption in the ADOPT modelLRZ, Low-rainfall zone, adoption of new forage shrubs and other perennials on land marginal for cropping by crop–livestock farmers; MRZ, medium-rainfallzone, adoptionof pasture croppingwith perennial grasses by crop–livestock farmers;URZ,uniform-rainfall zone, phase farmingwith lucerne andother perennials

chicory, cocksfoot and phalaris by crop–livestock farmers

ADOPT variable Question asked in ADOPT Shrubs LRZ Pasture cropMRZ

Perennialphase URZ

1. Profit orientation What proportion of the target population hasmaximising profit as a strong motivation?

Majority Majority Majority

2. Environmental orientation What proportion of the target population hasprotecting the natural environment as a strongmotivation?

About half About half About half

3. Risk orientation What proportion of the target population has riskminimisation as a strong motivation?

Majority About half About half

4. Enterprise scale Onwhat proportion of the target farms is there a majorenterprise that could benefit from the innovation?

Minority Minority Majority

5. Management horizon What proportion of the target population has a long-term (>10 years) management horizon for theirfarm?

Majority About half Majority

6. Short-term constraints What proportion of the target population is underconditions of severe short-term financialconstraints?

Minority About half Minority

7. Trialling ease How easily can the innovation (or significantcomponents of it) be trialled on a limited basisbefore a decision is made to adopt it on a largerscale?

Moderately Moderately Moderately

8. Innovation complexity Does thecomplexityof the innovationallow theeffectsof its use to be easily evaluated when it is used?

Moderately Moderately Moderately

9. Observability To what extent would the innovation be observable tofarmerswhoareyet to adopt itwhen it is used in theirdistrict?

Easily Easily Moderately

10. Advisory support What proportion of the target population uses paidadvisors capable of providing advice relevant to theinnovation?

Minority Majority Minority

11. Group involvement What proportion of the target population participatesin farmer-based groups that discuss farming?

About half Majority Minority

12.Relevant existing skills andknowledge

What proportion of the target population will need todevelop substantial new skills andknowledge to usethe innovation?

Majority Majority About half

13. Innovation awareness What proportion of the target population would beaware of the use or trialling of the innovation in theirdistrict?

About half Majority About half

14. Relative upfront cost ofinnovation

What is the size of the up-front cost of the investmentrelative to thepotential annual benefit fromusing theinnovation?

Large Large Moderate

15. Reversibility of innovation Towhat extent is the adoption of the innovation able tobe reversed?

Difficult Easily Easily

16. Profit benefit in years that itis used

To what extent is the use of the innovation likely toaffect the profitability of the farm business inthe years that it is used?

Small Small Moderate

17. Profit benefit in future To what extent is the use of the innovation likely tohave additional effects on profitability in the future?

None None None

18. Time for profit benefits tobe realised

How long after the innovation is first adopted would ittake for effects on future profitability to be realised?

n/a n/a n/a

19. Environmental impact To what extent would the use of the innovation havenet environmental benefits or costs?

Small Small Small

20. Time for environmentalimpacts to be realised

How long after the innovation is first adopted would ittake for the expectedenvironmental benefits or coststo be realised?

3–5 years 3–5 years 3–5 years

21. Risk To what extent would the use of the innovation affectthe net exposure of the farm business to risk?

Small reduction Small reduction No net effect

22. Ease and convenience To what extent would the use of the innovation affectthe ease and convenience of the management of thefarm in the years that it is used?

No net effect No net effect No net effect

950 Crop & Pasture Science R. S. Llewellyn et al.

more livestock, and if forage-shrubs options with higher feedquality become available.

The upfront investment costs and relatively low averagecontribution of the small forage-shrub areas to whole-farmprofitability were identified in the ADOPT analysis assubstantial constraints to adoption (Table 2). However, theexpected potential of new shrub types with improved feedquality and profitability (Norman et al. 2013) and the greaterprofitability of forage shrubs on farms with more marginalcropping soils and greater reliance on livestock (Monjardinoet al. 2014) suggest that adoption strategies should targetparticular subsets of farmers.

The medium-rainfall zone of northern Western Australia

In the medium-rainfall zone, farmers report the main benefits oftropical perennial grass pastures as stabilising soils prone towind erosion, providing out-of-season feed in response tosummer rainfall, and improving soil-quality measures suchas soil organic carbon (Ferris et al. 2010). EverCrop hasalso demonstrated their potential in the low-rainfall zone(Descheemaeker et al. 2014).

The case for pasture cropping on land with a perennialpasture already in place rests on the likelihood of additionalincome from a winter crop (for grain or forage) (Ferris et al.2010; Barrett-Lennard et al. 2012), with yield penalties dueto competition between the arable crop and the perennial animportant factor. Bioeconomic modelling (Finlayson et al.2012) showed that the profitability and adoption of tropicalgrasses is also likely to be strongly influenced by theproportion of the farm with pale sands, where perennialpastures are comparatively more productive than crops or

annual pastures. Profitability was also higher and likely toinvolve a larger area of the farm when a meat rather than awool-dominant sheep system was present (Finlayson et al.2012). Other important factors were the feed quality of thetropical grass, the biomass production in summer and earlyautumn, and whether the production emphasis of the farm ison grazing or cropping.

Even with this favourable combination of circumstances,pasture cropping would be unlikely to exceed 10% of thearable area on most target farms in the region (Finlayson et al.2012). The main constraints to adoption of pasture croppingcited by farmers are the possible crop yield reductions and costto establish perennial pastures (Barrett-Lennard et al. 2012; Ferriset al. 2010). Analysis with the ADOPT tool identified thatadoption could be considerably faster and greater for farmerswho are already using perennial pastures than for farmersneeding to learn and invest in prior establishment of theunderlying perennial pasture. The former group of farmerslargely became the focus of project activities. Peak adoptionamong farmers with both crops and livestock in the target regionwas expected to be modest, largely because of the niche rolefor pasture cropping on highly erodible soils and the relativelysmall average impact on whole-farm profit (Table 2).

The uniform-rainfall zone of southern New South Walesand northern Victoria

In the uniform-rainfall zone, the benefits of perennials are wellrecognised, and current adoption rates, particularly of lucerne,are already moderate. The researchable questions thereforelargely revolved around refining management strategies tomaximise the profitability of the technology, particularly in the

Table 3. Summaryof perennial options, adoptionby crop–livestock farmers andbenefits for three agroecological regions inAustralia’s crop–livestockfarming zone

Agro-ecological region Low rainfall Medium rainfall Uniform rainfall

Method of incorporatingperennial options

Separate Integrate Rotate

Perennial option and landscapeniche

Improved forage shrubs andother perennials on landmarginal for cropping

Subtropical perennial grasseswith pasture cropping onWA northern sand-plainsoils unsuitable forcontinuous cropping

Phase farming with lucerneand perennials chicory,cocksfoot and phalaris

Current level of perennial usein farming system (% oftarget region)

Very low (<1%) Low (2%) Medium–high (25–30%)

Estimated potential adoption(% of farmer population)

20–25% peak in 21 years15–20% in 10 years

25–30% in 19 years 20–25% in10 years

70–75% in 19 years 60–65% in10 years

Estimated potential whole-farm financial benefits

+21% +22% +40%

Financial gains achieved byincreases in:

Livestock production; reducedsupplementary feedingcosts

Grain production in addition tosummer–autumn feedsupply

Stocking rate; biological N2

fixation

Non-financial benefits Reduction in farm businessrisk during dry periods

Protection from soil erosion Soil fertility, protection fromsoil erosion

Key constraint to adoption Adequate feed value to justifycost of establishment. Smallaverage contribution towhole-farm profit fromtypically small shrub areas

Risk of crop yield penalty.Limited extent ofsubtropical grasses

Cost and reliability ofestablishment of perennialsin crop sequences

Perennial forages for crop-livestock farms Crop & Pasture Science 951

context of a complex enterprise mix (Casburn et al. 2013)and minimising farm business risk (Hutchings and Nordblom2011). This required improving the success of pastureestablishment, because the cost was a major impediment totheir broader use (Scott et al. 2000; Dear et al. 2010). Withspecies such as lucerne, where seedling recruitment rarely occurs(Lodge 1991), the initial plant density is often the maximumachieved. Therefore, poor establishment density usually means ashorter pasture life, because poor sward performance was shownto be a key reason for farmers to end the pasture phase and returnthe land to cropping (McCormick et al. 2012b).

Establishing pastures under a grain cover-crop is used tooffset the initial costs of establishment (Swan et al. 2014), butthe competition from the crop may lead to reduced establishmentsuccess (McCormick et al. 2014). Longer perennial pasturephases are important not only to achieve greater water use(Hayes et al. 2010), but also to increase the financial returnfrom the initial investment in establishing the pasture phase(Scott et al. 2000; Bathgate et al. 2010). In this context, weidentified a self-perpetuating cycle whereby the desire to offsetthe cost of establishment has led to practices such as cover-cropping, which can often reduce the productivity of perennialpastures and their associated benefits to the farming system.

Whole-farm economic analyses conducted in this zonedemonstrated benefits from relatively small increases in theadoption of alternative pasture species (Bathgate et al. 2010),specifically phalaris, chicory and cocksfoot (Dactylis glomerataL.), which are among the few genuine alternatives to lucerneadapted to this region (Hayes et al. 2012). Commercial adoptionof perennial grasses is currently constrained by the pooravailability of seed of well-adapted cultivars (Clark et al.2012; Culvenor et al. 2012). The paucity of knowledgeregarding the appropriate strategies to establish the alternativeperennials reliably was addressed (Li et al. 2014; Swan et al.2014), together with improved understanding of how toachieve robust and resilient mixtures with legumes, becausethere are few, if any, viable alternative perennial legumes tolucerne (Li et al. 2008). Key factors likely to slow the level ofadoption of the alternative pastures included the complexityand time required to observe the integrated benefit of themixes to the farm business (Table 2), with the peak level ofadoption likely to be constrained by the proportion of farmersin the region with pasture-based enterprises as a majorcomponent of their farm business.

Determining performance of new perennial-basedsystems and decision support

Evaluation of the biophysical performance of perennial-basedsystems was conducted through plot-scale experimentation,farm-scale trialling and modelling (Fig. 1). The plot-scaleexperimentation produced data to fill key information gapsand has informed the biophysical simulation modelling. Theidentified gaps and opportunities have informed the developmentof tools for workshop learning and decision support.

The low rainfall zone of South Australia and Victoria

In the low-rainfall zone, it was recognised that farmers wereconsidering forage-shrub plantings on a range of soil types but

little work had been done on the likely influence of soil typeon production by season. Whole-farm bioeconomic analysisincluding multiple soil types indicated that some of the poorercropping soils were likely to be the most profitable location forshrub plantings despite lower relative growth rates (Monjardinoet al. 2014). The production of two forage shrub species atthree positions along a dune–swale soil–landscape catena wasmonitored over 3 years. In addition, a model was constructedin the APSIM framework that simulates leaf (edible) biomassper shrub in response to daily weather, soil type, and grazing(Descheemaeker et al. 2014). The field measurements showeda 2-fold difference in production between the swale and dunesoil types, and the model was able to account for this throughdifferences between soil types with regard to water availabilityfor plant growth. Numerous location� soil type� grazingmanagement scenarios were simulated to incorporate shrubsinto feed-base decision-support tools (Moore et al. 2009) andto engage with farmers about the potential reliability of forageshrubs, particularly during the late summer–autumn feed gap andduring drought conditions when feed is of most value.

The medium rainfall zone of northern Western Australia

In the medium-rainfall zone, lack of knowledge about the cropgrain yield penalty with pasture cropping was identified as amajor constraint to adoption by producers with perennialpastures (Barrett-Lennard et al. 2012). The potential crop yieldpenalty and the agronomic strategies to mitigate it wereaddressed in field experiments and simulation modelling(Thomas et al. 2014). The field experimentation has generatednew understanding of the nitrogen- and water-related drivers ofyield penalties (Ward et al. 2014) and demonstrated thepotential for, often, only small crop yield penalties (Laweset al. 2014). A combination of field measurements andsimulation modelling has informed the development of a toolfor evaluating the range of factors likely to determine the netvalue of pasture cropping over a base of tropical grasses.

The uniform-rainfall zone of southern New South Walesand northern Victoria

In the uniform-rainfall zone, where pasture-phase establishmentis an important constraint, the majority of farmers establishpastures under a cover-crop (Dear et al. 2010). The range,complexity and poor understanding of factors and trade-offsinvolved with cover-cropping (McCormick et al. 2014) wereidentified as a constraint to decisions. To address this, theeffects of different establishment methods within croppingsystems were investigated over multiple years (Li et al. 2014;Swan et al. 2014). This has supported the development ofa cover-cropping decision-support tool (McCormick et al.2012a). It incorporates the likely biophysical responseand economics to assist decision-makers to identify thecircumstances (pasture phase length; crop value, etc.) underwhich establishing pasture phases with or without a cover-cropis likely to be most beneficial.

The above examples from the uniform-rainfall zonedemonstrate how the EverCrop approach has shaped theresearch, development and extension. The project revisited anissue that has been researched in Australia for at least 80 years

952 Crop & Pasture Science R. S. Llewellyn et al.

(Moodie 1936) by using new tools and understanding. In areview of existing research, McCormick et al. (2014) showedthat, overwhelmingly, the previous recommendation has beenthat pastures should not be sown under cover-crops because ofthe negative effects of interspecific competition on pastureestablishment. However, a baseline survey of farmers in south-western NSW during 2008 showed that most farmers establishedpastures under a cover-crop (Dear et al. 2010; Swan et al. 2014),highlighting a clear disconnect between previous researchfindings and farmer practice. In the case of EverCrop, detailedsmall-plot studies were conducted evaluating the practice ofcover-cropping described by Li et al. (2014), but a key aspectwas that it was part of the integrated approach (Fig. 1).

In the uniform-rainfall zone, farm-level activity (Swan et al.2014) and analysis led to greater capacity for farmers and/oradvisors to investigate for themselves the impact of differentvariables on likely financial outcomes within their own farmingsystems context. Given that the farmer participatory approachand whole-farm economic analysis suggested that manyfarmers with crops and livestock were near their preferred areaof perennial species, this effort became increasingly focusedon improved crop–pasture integration rather than promotinglarge-scale expansion of perennial areas. Similarly, activities inother nodes have been shaped by the EverCrop approach. Thisincludes recognising the farmer need to address agronomicmanagement constraints in pasture-cropping systems that ledto additional herbicide studies and recommendations. In thelow-rainfall zone, the strong preference of farmers for plantingon areas with poor cropping potential was acknowledged. Thiswas reflected in the outputs and new on-farm trial plantings,together with the recognised value of shrub types with improvedfeed quality.

Conclusion

Mixed farming systems remain common to grain-producingregions of southern Australia, although increased managementemphasis on cropping has meant that consideration ofcompatibility, labour demands and risk are increasinglyimportant to the successful introduction of grazing options.This requires a multi-disciplinary approach involvingsubstantial farmer and industry contribution to the researchand development process at the regional level. The complexityand the long time-frames also mean that analysis benefits frommodelling combined with field experimentation.

Differences and similarities across the three distinct agro-ecological zones in which EverCrop is examining perennial-based options can be summarised as in Table 3. The greatestpotential for widespread adoption and financial benefits forfarmers remains in the higher rainfall areas, but valuableniches are also identified in lower rainfall zones. Using acommon approach, locally applied across diverse regions, acombination of local-level partnerships with farmers, fieldexperimentation, on-farm trialling, simulation modelling andsocioeconomic analysis has worked to identify the fit andpotential value for specific grazing options within cropping-oriented systems. In some cases, these are now able to entermore extension-oriented phases of regional delivery (e.g.pasture cropping among growers with perennial grasses),

supported by the findings of EverCrop. In other cases, this willoccur when new plant-types become widely available in thenear future (e.g. improved shrub types). The EverCropapproach and tools continue to be used in ongoing researchand development activities to identify and develop thepotential role of grazing options for crop–livestock farmers,including new options for other regions.

Acknowledgements

EverCrop is a Future Farm Industries Co-operative Research Centreproject funded by the Grains Research and Development Corporation, theAustralian Government and the participating research organisations. Thecontribution of EverCrop research and technical staff in each region andthe collaborating farmers, advisers and industry groups is gratefullyacknowledged, including Perry Dolling and Geoff Kuehne forcontributions to adoption evaluations and major contributions by BrianDear and Anthony Whitbread. Feedback from two reviewers has greatlyimproved the manuscript.

References

Avery A, Saul P, Sanford R, Behrendt R, Friend M, Mitchell M, Virgona J,Badgery W, Lodge G (2009) EverGraze—Right plant, right place,right purpose. In ‘Taking up the challenge. Proceedings 50th AnnualConference of the Grassland Society of Southern Australia’. pp. 59–68.(Grassland Society of Southern Australia)

Barrett-Lennard P, Dolling P, Ferris D (2012) The advantages anddisadvantages of pasture cropping in Western Australia. In ‘Capturingopportunities and overcoming obstacles in Australian agronomy.Proceedings 16th Australian Agronomy Conference’. Lincoln, NewZealand. (Australian Society of Agronomy/The Regional Institute Ltd:Gosford,NSW)Available at:www.regional.org.au/au/asa/2012/pastures/8052_dollingp.htm

Bathgate A, Reynolds M, Robertson M, Dear B, Li G, Casburn G, Hayes R(2010) Impact on farm profit from incorporating perennial pastures inthe rotation of crop-livestock enterprises in southern New South Wales.(1) Base model scenarios for lucerne, chicory and perennial grasses.Future Farm Industries Technical Report 5. Future Farm Industries CRC,Perth, W. Aust.

Bell LW, Moore AD (2012) Integrated crop–livestock systems in Australianagriculture: Trends, drivers and implications. Agricultural Systems 111,1–12. doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2012.04.003

Bell LW, Hayes RC, Pembleton KG, Waters CM (2014) Opportunitiesand challenges in Australian grasslands: pathways to achieve futuresustainability and productivity imperatives. Crop & Pasture Science65, 489–507. doi:10.1071/CP13420

Bird PR, Bicknell D, Bulman PA, Burke SJA, Leys JF, Parker JN, van derSommen FJ, Voller P (1992) The role of shelter in Australia forprotecting soils, plants and livestock. Agroforestry Systems 20, 59–86.doi:10.1007/BF00055305

Byrne F, Robertson MJ, Bathgate A, Hoque Z (2010) Factors influencingpotential scale of adoption of a perennial pasture in a mixed crop-livestock farming system. Agricultural Systems 103, 453–462.doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2010.04.003

Casburn GR, Burns HM, Anderson M, Nugent TM, Sproule P, Olsen M,Hayes RC (2013) Crops, rumps and woolly jumpers: An innovativeextension approach enabling the complexities of mixed farming to beshared and understood. In ‘Proceedings 22nd International GrasslandsCongress’. Sydney. pp. 1934–1935. (International Grasslands Congress)

Casburn G, Hayes R, Li G, Bathgate A, Robertson M (2014) EverCropUniform Rainfall Zone – Assessing the impact of soil type change onwhole farm performance indicators for the uniform medium rainfallzone of southern New South Wales. Future Farm Industries TechnicalReport 12. Future Farm Industries CRC, Perth, Western Australia. www.

Perennial forages for crop-livestock farms Crop & Pasture Science 953

futurefarmonline.com.au/publications/Technical%20Reports/Technical_Reports

Clark S, Culvenor R, Gardner M, Harris C, Hayes R, Li G, Nie Z, Norton M,Clark B (2012) Novel cocksfoots for SE Australia: Establishmentand production. In ‘Capturing opportunities and overcoming obstaclesin Australian Agronomy. Proceedings 16th Australian AgronomyConference’. 15–18 October, Armidale, NSW. (Australian Society ofAgronomy/The Regional Institute Ltd: Gosford, NSW) Available at:www.regional.org.au/au/asa/2012/pastures/8011_clarksg.htm

Collinson M (2000) ‘A history of farming systems research.’ (CABIPublishing: Wallingford, UK)

Culvenor R, Clark S, Li G, Gardner M, Harris C, Hayes R, Nie Z, Norton M(2012) Evaluating new phalaris populations for lower rainfall marginsin SE Australia. In ‘Capturing opportunities and overcoming obstaclesin Australian Agronomy. Proceedings 16th Australian AgronomyConference’. 15–18 October, Armidale, NSW. (Australian Society ofAgronomy/The Regional Institute Ltd: Gosford, NSW) Available at:www.regional.org.au/au/asa/2012/pastures/8044_culvenorr.htm

De Koning C,Milthorpe P (2008) Integrating forage shrubs: their potential inmixed-farming enterprises in low rainfall regions. RIRDC PublicationNo. 08/044. Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation,Barton, ACT.

Dear BS, Sandral GA, Virgona JM, Swan AD (2004) Yield and grain proteinof wheat following phased perennial grass, lucerne, and annual pastures.Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 55, 775–785. doi:10.1071/AR04018

DearBS,LiGD,CasburnGR,ReynoldsM,BathgateA,HayesRC,RobertsonM, Llewellyn R (2010) Impact of including lucerne and otherperennials on crop–livestock enterprises in southern NSW. In ‘Foodsecurity from sustainable agriculture. Proceedings 15th AustralianAgronomy Conference’. 15–18 November 2010, Lincoln, NewZealand. (Australian Society of Agronomy/The Regional Institute Ltd:Gosford, NSW) Available at: www.regional.org.au/au/asa/2010/pastures-forage/lucerne/6905_dearbs.htm

Descheemaeker K, Llewellyn R, Moore A, Whitbread A (2014) Summer-growing perennial grasses are a potential new feed source in the lowrainfall environment of southern Australia. Crop & Pasture Science65, 1033–1043.

Doole GJ, Bathgate AD, Robertson MJ (2009) Labour scarcity restricts thepotential scale of grazed perennial plants in the Western Australianwheatbelt. Animal Production Science 49, 883–893. doi:10.1071/EA08284

Ferris D, Dolling P, Wiley T, Barrett-Lennard P (2010) Is pasture croppingviable in WA? Grower perspectives and EverCrop initiatives toevaluate. Crop Updates Perth, 25 February, pp. 110–114. Available at:http://archive.agric.wa.gov.au/objtwr/imported_assets/content/amt/agb/crop_update_proceedings_2010.pdf?noicon

Finlayson JD, Lawes RA, Metcalf T, Robertson MJ, Ferris D, Ewing MA(2012) A bio-economic evaluation of the profitability of adoptingsubtropical grasses and pasture-cropping on crop-livestock farms.Agricultural Systems 106, 102–112. doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2011.10.012

Hayes RC, Li GD, Dear BS, Conyers MK, Virgona JM, Tidd J (2010)Perennial pastures for recharge control in temperate drought-proneenvironments. Part 2: soil drying capacity of key species. New ZealandJournal of Agricultural Research 53, 327–345. doi:10.1080/00288233.2010.525784

Hayes RC, Li GD, Hackney BF (2012) Perennial pasture species for themixed farming zone of southern NSW - We don’t have many options. In‘Proceedings 27th Annual Conference of the Grassland Society of NSWInc.’.WaggaWagga,NSW.pp. 92–100. (GrasslandSociety ofNSWInc.)

Hutchings TR, Nordblom TL (2011) A financial analysis of the effect ofthe mix of crop and sheep enterprises on the risk profile of dryland farmsin south-eastern Australia. Australian Farm Business Management 8,19–42.

Keating BA, Carberry PS, Hammer GL, Probert ME, Robertson MJ,Holzworth D, Huth NI, Hargreaves JNG, Meinke H, Hochman Z,McLean G, Verburg K, Snow V, Dimes JP, Silburn M, Wang E,Brown S, Bristow KL, Asseng S, Chapman S, McCown RL, FreebairnDM, Smith CJ (2003) An overview of APSIM, a model designed forfarming systems simulation. European Journal of Agronomy 18,267–288. doi:10.1016/S1161-0301(02)00108-9

Kingwell RS, Pannell DJ (Eds) (1987) ‘MIDAS, a bioeconomic model of adryland farm system.’ (Pudoc: Wageningen The Netherlands)

KuehneG, LlewellynR, Pannell D,Dolling P,WilkinsonM,EwingM (2013)Identifying opportunities for improved adoption of new grazinginnovations. In ‘Proceedings 22nd International Grasslands Congress’.Sydney. pp. 1878–1880. (International Grasslands Congress)

Lawes RA, Ward PR, Ferris D (2014) Pasture cropping with C4 grasses in abarley–lupin rotation can increase production. Crop & Pasture Science65, 1002–1015.

Li GD, Lodge GM, Moore GA, Craig AD, Dear BS, Boschma SP, AlbertsonTO,Miller SM, Harden S, Hayes RC, Hughes SJ, Snowball R, Smith AB,Cullis BR (2008) Evaluation of perennial pasture legumes and herbs toidentify species with high herbage production and persistence in mixedfarming zones in southern Australia. Australian Journal of ExperimentalAgriculture 48, 449–466. doi:10.1071/EA07108

Li GD, Hayes RC, McCormick JI, Gardner MJ, Sandral GA, Dear BS (2014)Time of sowing and the presence of a cover-crop determine theproductivity and persistence of perennial pastures in mixed farmingsystems. Crop & Pasture Science 65, 988–1001.

Llewellyn RS, Whitbread A, Lawes R, Raisbeck-Brown N, Hill P (2010)Fork in the road: forage shrub plantings by crop-livestock farmers in alow rainfall region of southern Australia. In ‘Food security fromsustainable agriculture. 15th Australian Agronomy Conference’. 15–18November 2010, Lincoln, New Zealand. (Australian Society ofAgronomy/The Regional Institute Ltd: Gosford, NSW) Available at:www.regional.org.au/au/asa/2010/pastures-forage/dryland-perennials/7179_llewellynr.htm

Llewellyn RS, D’Emden FH, Kuehne G (2012) Extensive use of no-tillagein grain growing regions of Australia. Field Crops Research 132,204–212. doi:10.1016/j.fcr.2012.03.013

Lodge GM (1991) Management practices and other factors contributing tothe decline in persistence of grazed lucerne in temperate Australia: areview. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 31, 713–724.doi:10.1071/EA9910713

Mason WK, Lamb K, Russell B (2003) The Sustainable Grazing SystemsProgram: new solutions for livestock producers. Australian Journal ofExperimental Agriculture 43, 663–672. doi:10.1071/EA02087

McCormick J, Hayes R, Li G, Nordblom T, Casburn G, Hutchings T, MooreAD, Zurcher E, Peoples M, Swan T (2012a) To under-sow or not?A decision support tool to determine the most profitable method ofpasture establishment. In ‘Capturing opportunities and overcomingobstacles in Australian agronomy. Proceedings 16th AustralianAgronomy Conference’. 15–18 October, Armidale, NSW. (AustralianSociety of Agronomy/The Regional Institute Ltd: Gosford,NSW) Available at: www.regional.org.au/au/asa/2012/pastures/8079_mccormickji.htm

McCormick J, Li G, Hayes R, Casburn G, GardnerM, Sandral G, PeoplesM,Swan T (2012b) A survey of farmer practice on the establishment,duration and production of pastures in the mixed farming zone ofsouthern New South Wales. In ‘Capturing opportunities andovercoming obstacles in Australian agronomy. Proceedings 16thAustralian Agronomy Conference’. 15–18 October, Armidale, NSW.(Australian Society of Agronomy/The Regional Institute Ltd: Gosford,NSW) Available at: www.regional.org.au/au/asa/2012/pastures/8077_mccormickji.htm

McCormick JI, Hayes RC, Li GD, Norton MR (2014) A review ofpasture establishment by undersowing with special reference to the

954 Crop & Pasture Science R. S. Llewellyn et al.

mixed farming zone of south-eastern Australia. Crop & Pasture Science65, 956–972.

Monjardino M, McBeath TM, Brennan L, Llewellyn RS (2013) Are farmersin low-rainfall cropping regions under-fertilising with nitrogen? A riskanalysis. Agricultural Systems 116, 37–51. doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2012.12.007

Monjardino M, Bathgate A, Llewellyn R (2014) Opportunities for plantimprovement to increase the value of forage shrubs on low-rainfallmixed farms. Crop & Pasture Science 65, 1057–1067.

Moodie AWS (1936) Sowing lucerne with wheat. The Agricultural Gazetteof New South Wales 47, 419.

Moore AD, Donnelly JR, Freer M (1997) GRAZPLAN: decision supportsystems for Australian grazing enterprises. III. Growth and soil moisturesubmodels, and the GrassGro DSS. Agricultural Systems 55, 535–582.doi:10.1016/S0308-521X(97)00023-1

Moore AD, Bell LW, Revell DK (2009) Feed gaps in mixed-farmingsystems: insights from the Grain & Graze program. Animal ProductionScience 49, 736–748. doi:10.1071/AN09010

Moore GA, Albertsen TO, Ramankutty P, Nichols PGH, Titterington JW,Barrett-Lennard P (2014) Production and persistence of subtropicalgrasses in environments with Mediterranean climates. Crop & PastureScience 65, 798–816. doi:10.1071/CP13424

Nicholson C, Barr N, Kentish A, Dowling PM, McCormick LH, Palmer M,Simpson I, Simpson K, Walsh J (2003) A research–extension model forencouraging the adoption of productive and sustainable practice inhigh rainfall grazing areas. Australian Journal of ExperimentalAgriculture 43, 685–694. doi:10.1071/EA02212

Norman HC, Masters DG, Barrett-Lennard EG (2013) Halophytes asforages in saline landscapes: Interactions between plant genotype andenvironment change their feeding value to ruminants. EnvironmentalBotany 92, 96–109. doi:10.1016/j.envexpbot.2012.07.003

Oliver Y, Lefroy T, Stirzaker R, Davies C, Waugh D (2005) Integrate,segregate or rotate trees with crops? – Measuring the trade-off betweenyield and recharge control. RIRDC Report No. 04/177, Rural IndustriesResearch and Development, Barton, Australia.

Pannell DJ (1996) Lessons from a decade of whole-farm modelling inWestern Australia. Review of Agricultural Economics 18, 373–383.

Papanastasis VP, Yiakoulaki MD, Decandia M, Dini-Papanastasi O (2008)Integrating woody species into livestock feeding in the Mediterraneanareas of Europe. Animal Feed Science and Technology 140, 1–17.doi:10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2007.03.012

Peoples MB, Brockwell J, Hunt JR, Swan AD,Watson L, Hayes RC, Li GD,Hackney B, Nuttall JG, Davies SL, Fillery IRP (2012) Factors affectingthe potential contributions of N2 fixation by legumes in Australianpasture systems. Crop & Pasture Science 63, 759–786. doi:10.1071/CP12123

Price RJ, Hacker RB (2009) Grain & Graze: an innovative triple bottom lineapproach to collaborative and multidisciplinary mixed-farming systemsresearch, development and extension. Animal Production Science 49,729–735. doi:10.1071/EA08306

Robertson M (2006) Lucerne prospects: Drivers for widespread adoption oflucerne for profit and salinity management. Cooperative Research Centrefor Plant-based Management of Dryland Salinity, Perth, W. Aust.

Robertson MJ, Llewellyn RS, Mandel R, Lawes R, Bramley RGV, Swift L,Metz N, O’Callaghan C (2012) Adoption of variable rate technology inthe Australian grains industry: status, issues and prospects. PrecisionAgriculture 13, 181–199.

Scott JF, Lodge GM, McCormick LH (2000) Economics of increasingthe persistence of sown pastures: costs, stocking rate and cash flow.Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 40, 313–323.doi:10.1071/EA98016

Swan AD, Peoples MB, Hayes RC, Li GD, Casburn GR, McCormick JI,Dear BS (2014) Farmer experience with perennial pastures in themixed farming areas of southern New South Wales: on-farmparticipatory research investigating pasture establishment with cover-cropping. Crop & Pasture Science 65, 973–987.

Thomas DT, Lawes RA, Descheemaeker K, Moore AD (2014) Selection ofcrop cultivars suited to the location combined with astute managementcan reduce crop yield penalties in pasture cropping systems. Crop &Pasture Science 65, 1022–1032.

Van Gool D, Vernon L, Runge W (2008) Land resources in the South-WestAgricultural Region; a shire-based summary of land degradation andland capability. Resource Management Technical Report 330.Department of Agriculture and Food WA, South Perth, W. Aust.

Ward PR (2006) Predicting the impact of perennial phases on averageleakage from farming systems in south-western Australia. AustralianJournal of Agricultural Research 57, 269–280. doi:10.1071/AR04137

Ward PR, Lawes RA, Ferris D (2014) Soil-water dynamics in a pasture-cropping system. Crop & Pasture Science 65, 1016–1021.

Whitbread A, Craig S (2010) The potential of summer-growing grassesto persist and produce out-of-season forage in the Victorian Mallee. In‘Food security from sustainable agriculture. Proceedings 15th AustralianAgronomy Conference’. 15–18 November 2010, Lincoln, New Zealand.(Australian Society of Agronomy/The Regional Institute Ltd: Gosford,NSW) Available at: www.regional.org.au/au/asa/2010/pastures-forage/lucerne/6979_whitbreada.htm

Whitbread A, Llewellyn RS, Gobbett D, Davoren B (2008) EM38 andcrop-soil simulation modelling can identify differences in potentialcrop performance on typical soil zones in the Mallee. In ‘Globalissues. Paddock action. Proceedings 14th Australian AgronomyConference’. 1-25 September 2008, Adelaide, S. Aust. (AustralianSociety of Agronomy/The Regional Institute Ltd: Gosford, NSW)Available at: www.regional.org.au/au/asa/2008/poster/agronomy-landscape/5823_whitbread.htm

Wolfe EC (2011) Interactions between crop and livestock activities inrainfed farming systems. In ‘Rainfed farming systems’. pp. 271–298.(Springer: Berlin, Heidelberg)

Wolfe EC, FitzGerald RD, Hall DG, Southwood OR (1980) Beefproduction from lucerne and subterranean clover pastures. 1. Theeffects of pasture, stocking rate and supplementary feeding. AustralianJournal of Experimental Agriculture and Animal Husbandry 20,678–687. doi:10.1071/EA9800678

Perennial forages for crop-livestock farms Crop & Pasture Science 955

www.publish.csiro.au/journals/cp