PLANT MORPHOGENESIS FOR SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT OF RANGE RESOURCES 



203 



Provision Of Water And Fencing 



It is logical that sufficient water and fencing 

 be provided so that the range can be fully util- 

 ized. 



In the assessment of the ability of a holding to 

 carry stock, the basis should always be based 

 on watered area and not the total area. Most 

 deterioration becomes evident during drought. At 

 these times, stock tend to graze nearer to water 

 than during periods of good rainfall and abun- 

 dant feed. "Water and fencing should be arranged 

 on the basis of grazing behavior in drought if 

 full utilization is to be obtained. 



Water and fencing should be based on land 

 type. Land types often vary over a short dis- 

 tance. In these cases, grazing needs to be related 

 to the land type most susceptible to damage. 

 Separation of land types by fencing provides for 

 greater flexibility in grazing management, fuller 

 utilization of the environment, and for the de- 

 liberate manipulation of pastures. 



Centers of livestock concentration such as water 

 and shearing sheds and yards should be located 

 on land types tolerant of erosion. 



Trend 



It is difficult to know on many of the Aus- 

 tralian rangeland types whether the trend of 

 long term productive capacity is upward or 

 downward. The high variability in rainfall and 

 the variability in seasonal occurrence leads to 

 great variation in pasture response, irrespective 

 of grazing pressures. It is important to be able to 

 recognize the effect of a particular grazing pres- 

 sure or management system on the long term 

 health of the range. 



Valentine (27) described the use of the key 

 zone concept in determining correct use. The key 

 zone is the area immediately beyond the sacri- 

 fice zone. The sacrifice zone is the area imme- 

 diately surrounding a watering point or other 

 point of livestock concentration and which is 

 subject to gross overuse by trampling. He 

 claimed that the correct stocking rate coincided 

 with proper use of the species within the key 

 zone. 



Osborn, Wood, and Paltridge (21) showed the 

 effect of grazing in relation to water, and recog- 



nized that moderate grazing was more beneficial 

 to perennial saltbush than light grazing. Barker 

 and Lange (2) extended the work and endeavored 

 to find a trend. Their work indicated the com- 

 plicated nature of the grazing pattern and the 

 lack of definitive data, which prevented a full 

 interpretation of the trend of the pasture. 



In an endeavor to measure trend, the critical 

 importance of the browse shrubs needs to be ap- 

 preciated. Goodin and McKell (11) stressed the 

 value of the browse shrubs compared to the value 

 of perennial grasses. They were mainly concerned 

 with production, but Australian browse, although 

 having an important productive role, has only 

 low to moderate palatability (16). The major 

 role of the shrub and tree is in protecting the 

 resource and maintaining the long-term produc- 

 tion. Marshall (17) drew attention to the impor- 

 tance of the shrub stratum in protecting the soil, 

 and sought a minimum shrub requirement. 



Tree density is important in the same way. 

 Burrows and Beale (3) quoted densities of 247 

 mulga trees per hectare and 173 trees per hectare 

 as necessary to assure regeneration and drought 

 reserve, respectively, in different parts of Queens- 

 land. In New South Wales, specific requirements 

 are laid down for the retention of trees for graz- 

 ing purposes and cultivation purposes in the 

 Western Division. 



Accurate monitoring of selected environments 

 is necessary to ascertain trend under different 

 management pressures. 



Drought Policies 



Much of the overutilization in arid Australia 

 has occurred because droughts have been regarded 

 as abnormal. The first requirement in manage- 

 ment policy is to accept that drought is a normal 

 experience in the rangeland. Grazing practice 

 must be adjusted to this fact. 



Ideally, stock should be removed from the 

 area during drought. The ability to move stock 

 has improved in recent years, but it is clear that 

 there is a practical limit to the flexibility that 

 can be obtained in this regard. 



Carrying only the number of stock that can 

 be supported through a drought of up to 12 

 months reduces the impact of drought. Some 



