Salisbury Plains Blueprint

Trial Period Goals & Actions

Project Blueprint

Lab Analysis Results

Photo Storage - Salisbury Plains

Untitled page

Explore

Project Blueprint

Key Metrics

Soil Carbon% (0-30cm)

Soil Carbon Stocks 0-30cm

Property Carrying Capacity

Median

1.1%

42 t C/ha

10 SDH/100mm

Range

0.36 - 1.57%

16 - 64 t C/ha

3-8 SDH/100mm (actual 2yr history)

There are no rows in this table

⁠

Farm Profile

Property

Salisbury Plains’

Location

Bowen, Qld

Enterprise

Stud Cattle | Cattle Trading

There are no rows in this table

⁠

Your Goals

...these are what we have heard so far, they will change... please update as applicable

Livestock

Grow the breeder herd towards 3000+ from the current 2000 head

Land

Raise Carrying Capacity towards 18 SDH/100mm

Build on the natural capital aspects inherent in various wetlands, forest to continue the family legacy

People

Actively build options for succession, via another property development

Business

Continue Stud Bull enterprise Strengthen the capability to provide weaners to Breadalbane

Grazing

Continue the development plans in place with respect to increasing the reticulated stock watering system

There are no rows in this table

⁠

Strategic Grazing

Assessment

Metric

Current Value

Trial Goals

Long Term Target

Comments

Carrying Capacity

The long term LSU Days /Ha per 100mm rainfall (SDH/100mm)

6 SDH/100mm

no change

Farm Average: 12 SDH/100mm

Rest to Graze %

Average % of days paddocks are in recovery versus being grazed

60-65%

no change

90%+

This is the rolling proportion of time paddocks spend in rest versus graze

# Paddocks per Mob

Average across the recent 12mths

5-6 :1

3-4

15+

Will improve as the planned water points and paddock sub-divisions allow larger mobs

Density Average graze density as Head/Ha

2 Hd/ha

No Change

15+ head/ha

Can become a greater focus once greater control over desired recovery period is achieved

Stocking Rate : Carrying Capacity

There are no rows in this table

⁠

Observations

Carrying Capacity

There are 24 months of graze data in MaiaGrazing that provides a good indication of the spread in production, on a per paddock basis to help visualise where the actual carrying capacity has been in order to be realistic about future increase.

⁠

Infrastructure

NOTE: It is recommended that the majority of new fencing & water point infrastructure be delayed until after Carbon project baselining is completed to allow this to be included in additionality requirements for any potential project registration.

Paddocks

⁠

15 paddocks (roughly a third of paddocks) represent 76% of total farm area, meaning there is still large areas of development remaining to bring increase paddock count per mob, increase recovery rates and density required to achieve potential soil Carbon increases

The constraint to potential sub-division is adequate water points to meet the needs of larger mobs for reduced graze periods necessary in a greater number of smaller paddocks

Stock Water

Each Cell has its own dedicated reticulated water system, with direct injection (DIT) for nutrient by-pass protein potential, which is excellent capacity building

There are multiple Bores ranging in depth from 6m on the eastern side of property to 20m on Rosella Cell

Rosella Cell recently has 5 bores/pumps installed, and had 40km x 3” pipe laid and connected, with tanks and 2 x trough per point.. fences are yet to be completed. It is expected this will be done by the end of dry season 2023

All waters are minimum 2L/s and better, up to 5-15L/s capacity, so water capacity really is well in hand for development

Pastures

Comments

When sampling in Splitters and Cell 1, there were 450 cows were in good quality feed, 650-700LSU for a week, circa 50SDH graze, on their way to yards for Stud AI ... ie going slowly to time arrival, which flushed out considerations for lifting stocking rate versus genetics/Bulls/admin.

For a season like presently enjoyed there is opportunity to put mobs together to reduce selectivity in grazes, increase recovery and start to see animal impact.. AFTER registration.

Recommendations

Note: If you plan on committing to a registered carbon project then we recommend applying the recommendations in below AFTER project registration.

Take your time to develop confidence in rotation of livestock, we actually want to limit the implementation of any significant change prior to a Carbon Project registration and baselining.

Take your time to develop confidence in rotation of livestock, we actually do not want to implement any significant change prior to a Carbon Project registration and baselining.

The priority is to find the boundaries of confidence with larger mobs, water sufficiency and plant recovery and feed ahead of stock.

⁠

Land Health

Assessment (Topsoil)

Assessments

Zone 1 | Rosella

Zone 2 | Kangaroo Cell

Zone 3 | Silly Buggers

Zone 4 | MEDQ or Ginas

Outlier

Outliers

Sample sites

Elliot River Top | Kellys West | Springs

Cell 1 | Top Plain Creek | Kangaroo pdk

Splitters | Burnett

Cayley Vally | Kelmans

Cell 7

Elliot River

Soil Type & Observations

Brown Clay loam Lots of earthworm castings visible

Lighter Clay Loam

Medium clay loam, heaiver at depth

Kelmans is stronger, better structured better chemistry. Cayley Valley gets into heavier clay, more sodium

Salt scald with extreme sodium (75% ESP), will be prone to erosion

Coarse sand overlying dispersive high Sodium subsoil, at risk of erosion if exposed

Water Infiltration

Target = 25 mm/hr

250mm/hr

300mm/hr

400-500 mm/hr

400mm/hr

Bulk Density (avg)

1.33

1.25

1.33

1.54

1.3

Soil Penetrometer

Target < 300 psi

800psi 0-10cm, ie compacted Then low psi to 80cm

Pasture Type & Observations

Grasses:

Buffel

Blue grass (type?)

Legume:

Wynn Cassia (Chamaecrista)

Siratro (Macroptilium atropurpureum

Seca Stylo (Stylosanthes)

Verano Stylo

Good mix of 50/50 grass/legume Primarily Buffel & Secca Noticable grazing pattern of under-stocked and overgrazed

Splitters Creek was a good example of phase 1 cover, ie over-grazed but not overstocked. Burnett looks strong

Does hold decent quality Parra & Rhodes grass but very low levels

Urochloa dominant

Groundcover (%)

Target = 90%+

50-90% large variation Good mix of herb/forbes/legume

90%

95-100% Good 50/50 mix of legume / grasses

Cover varies greatly from near zero in worst of scalds to good, higher quality feed within same paddock

30-40% ground cover Trees dominated by Casuarina

Species Diversity

Bloodwood & Iron Bark tree veg

Rhodes, Seca

Comments

Better sections of Kangaroo Cell (eg Cell 1) could/should be included in a Carbon project

Current reticulated water system is not adequate to meet needs of larger mobs.

Achieving ground cover on scalds is the priority to reduce erosion potential

There are no rows in this table

⁠

Estimate of Management Interventions Costs

Zone

Approx Area (Ha)

Intervention

Est. $/ha

Later

Total 10 Yrs

Comments

1. Rosella

2,355

Water/Wire

$290

$245

$707,600

Includes the circa $600k already committed to Rosella cell in 2023 to now

2,355

Soil inputs

$50

$25

$122,000

P & S could become highly profitable once they are the only limiting factor to grass harvest. $50/ha of P for 5ppm consideration/challenge

2,355

Pasture

$40

$97,600

$50/ha buffer for failed succession

2. Kangaroo West

980

Water/Wire

$150

$147,000

Staggered start to let western Kangaroo get going as priority

980

Soil inputs

P & S levels should suffice

980

Pasture

$25

$24,500

Budget just to have buffer built in for year 5-10 when W&W is flying

3. Kangaroo East

870

Water/Wire

$150

$75

$120,000

Start here for greater bang for buck than western Kangaroo dev

870

Soil inputs

Nil Soil inputs

870

Pasture

$25

$40,000.00

Rely on succession

Total

$657,800

$263,300

$232,100

$105,500

$1,258,700

⁠

Natural Capital Monetisation

Carbon Estimation Areas (CEA’s)

Carbon Estimation Areas (CEA’s)

CEA

Est Area* (Ha)

Est Area after further exclusions (Ha)

Current Soil Carbon Level (%)

Estimated Sequestration Rate (t C/Ha/Yr)

CEA 1

2583

2440

1.48%

0.25-0.4

CEA 2

994

888

0.79%

0.25-0.4

CEA 3

865

800

0.85%

0.25-0.4

There are no rows in this table

⁠

(Note: maps below are in being refined as at 10th July 23 to reflect discussions with Paul Rogers regarding southern Rosella soil type change)

⁠

Salisbury Plains CEA areas_14 July 2023.png

⁠

⁠

⁠
⁠
⁠

The average of estimated SOC gains, weighted to Area, are further modelled in below, with the following comments:

Break-even rate required means the annual rate of increase in SOC% to cover all estimated Carbon project costs, including 6 x sample events, 3 x audits, ACCU commission, government discounts and administration

The Lower Bound is the weighted average of various in-house modelling tools used to provide a conservative estimate of estimated SOC% gains where the intended management interventions of grazing and soil management are achieved

The Upper Bound is the estimate of SOC% gains we believe are possible based on comparable farms with comparable management intervention outcomes

⁠
⁠
⁠

Want to print your doc?
This is not the way.

Try clicking the ⋯ next to your doc name or using a keyboard shortcut (

CtrlP

) instead.

Project Blueprint

Key Metrics

Farm Profile

Your Goals

Strategic Grazing

Assessment

Observations

Carrying Capacity

Infrastructure

Pastures

Recommendations

Land Health

Assessment (Topsoil)

Estimate of Management Interventions Costs

Natural Capital Monetisation

⁠⁠⁠

⁠⁠⁠

⁠
⁠
⁠

⁠
⁠
⁠