221ity of cattle production in Northern Australia (Pahl et al. 2016 ). The authors suggest
that, in this particular landscape, stocking density should be increased only by 10 %
after a good growing pasture season and decreased by 20 % after a poor growing
season (Pahl et al. 2016 ). The impact of grazing on pasture and the need for man-
agement are limited, but so is the economic return when the pasture is plentiful
(O’Reagain and Scanlan 2013 ).
By contrast, variable stocking rates, involving a constant adjustment of stocking
rate in response to pasture availability, offer a more efficient use of resources.
However, variable stocking rate is a risky exercise because, to be efficient, profitable
and safe for the environment, the decisions for destocking or restocking need to be
made in a very timely fashion, possibly ahead of major changes in pasture avail-
ability. In industrialised countries such as Australia, pastoralists have access to com-
puter models (such as in Australia GeoGlam RAAP (Rangelands And Pasture
Productivity: http://www.geo-rapp.org)) to help them to predict pasture growth, or
satellite-based imaging (Hill et al. 2004 ) that is available now or in the foreseeable
future to can help them assess the biomass of vegetation. Nevertheless, in extensive
systems, it can still be difficult to change stocking rates quickly and thus make the
right decision at the right time. The accuracy and reliability of landscape prediction
tools using satellite imaging are progressing rapidly (see http://www.geo-rapp.org/
or http://www.NRMhub.com.au)) but these tools might only be available to producers with
the skills or resources to process and interpret the data. They are unlikely to be
applicable in less developed countries in the short term.
4 Towards Integrative Innovative Strategies – A Versatile
System
To address multiple challenges and opportunities, capitalise on favourable condi-
tions, and cope with the inevitable difficult conditions when they arise, we need
livestock systems that function and produce in the face of variability and change.
Many simplified agricultural systems are designed for maximum productivity, but
often this is only achieved for discrete periods of the year when the supply of water
and nutrients is optimal. Of course, in reality, livestock systems need extended peri-
ods of predictable nutrient supply. To identify potential options or solutions for a
more versatile and robust grazing system, the guidelines proposed by Hobbs and
Morton ( 1999 ) are valuable, and we have used them in our trans-disciplinary project
(‘Enrich’) in Australia (Revell et al. 2008 , Revell et al. 2013 ). An outline of this
approach was used by Revell and Sweeney ( 2004 ) to explore grazing systems that
can reduce the impact of dryland salinity.
(a) Identify system functions that are sub-optimal in current managed systems
The seasonality of feed supply imposes a major constraint on livestock produc-
tion and, in dryland areas, the resulting feed ‘gaps’ can be substantial. To reduce the
impact of seasonality in feed supply, the periods of high energy requirement in the
Integrated and Innovative Livestock Production in Drylands