The use of grazing for fuel management in the Australian Capital Territory — ASN Events

The use of grazing for fuel management in the Australian Capital Territory (#115)

Malcolm Gale 1 , Josh Clancy 1 , Scott Farquhar 1 , Adam Leavesley 1 , Dylan Kendall 1 , Neil Cooper 1 , Bruce Lambie 1
  1. ACT Parks and Conservation Service, Canberra, ACT, Australia
Fuel management is a key component of bushfire planning in the Australian Capital Territory. Grazing is preferentially employed in locations with palatable feed, stock-proof fencing, potable water and where it assists in meeting conservation aims. Grazing is not suitable directly adjacent to assets (Inner Asset Protection Zones), in recreation areas or where there are lots of dogs. To achieve best fuel management outcomes from grazing requires knowledge of the grass production rates of the parcels of land to be treated, knowledge of the consumption rates of grazing animals, clearly defined fuel standards and appropriate infrastructure. ACT Parks and Conservation Service uses the Prograze method to assess pastoral productivity and calculate stocking rates. The stock are privately owned and procured under licence. Numbers vary from year to year and throughout the season. The program accommodates this by prioritising hazardous locations and high conservation areas over sites where alternatives can be most easily employed. Stock preferentially graze certain species producing a patchy outcome in large paddocks and where stocking rates are low. Another issue is that stock lose weight as a paddock is eaten down, so owners may wish to move them before the fuel standard is achieved. These problems are resolved by constructing small paddocks close to assets and grazing at high density for short periods. Larger paddocks, more remote to assets, adjoin the series of smaller blocks so that there is always access to feed. A total of 6,500ha consisting of 78 land parcels mainly of resumed grazing land were allocated to the grazing program in 2013-14 and were monitored throughout the fire season. Of these blocks, 75 complied with the appropriate fuel standard. Problems with fences and insufficient stock were the reasons that three units failed the standard. These blocks were mown or burnt to achieve compliance.