Register      Login
Animal Production Science Animal Production Science Society
Food, fibre and pharmaceuticals from animals
RESEARCH ARTICLE

Evaluation of the impact of SGS on livestock producers and their practices

C. J. Allan, W. K. Mason, I. J. Reeve and S. Hooper

Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture 43(8) 1031 - 1040
Published: 19 September 2003

Abstract

The Sustainable Grazing Systems (SGS) Program has assisted producers in the high rainfall zone (HRZ, annual rainfall >600 mm/year) of southern Australia, by developing and delivering more productive and sustainable grazing systems. It was evaluated by 2 external surveys — a benchmarking survey in 1994 before the start of SGS, and a follow-up survey of producers in 2001. The 2001 survey showed that SGS had assisted red meat and wool producers in southern Australia make significant and beneficial changes to their grazing systems.

Substantial changes in grazing practices occurred between 1994 and 2001 in the HRZ. These changes included an increase in the number of producers who rotationally graze (25%), as well as those undertaking practices aimed at improved pasture management. Participants in SGS were more likely to have made changes to their grazing systems than non-participants. There were no overt differences between regions in producer demographics, or changes made to management practices.

The survey confirmed SGS had achieved its goal. Sixty percent of producers in the target regions were aware of SGS (out of a total of 23 689 producers); 42% (9839) had some involvement with SGS and/or received the SGS magazine 'Prograzier'; while 26% (6141) actively participated in SGS through undertaking a PROGRAZE course, and/or by attending regional SGS activities.

Of the estimated 9839 producers who participated in the program, up to 8000 made beneficial changes to enhance the productivity and sustainability of their grazing operations. Active participants (6141) attributed many of these benefits to their involvement in SGS.

https://doi.org/10.1071/EA02240

© CSIRO 2003

Committee on Publication Ethics


Export Citation Cited By (8) Get Permission

View Dimensions