Photo: Glenneis Kriel
The discussion focussed on the role of extensive livestock systems. James Brodie, who farms near Graaff-Reinet in the Eastern Cape, said the carrying capacity of his farm decreased fourfold from 3ha/LSU in the 1960s to 12ha/LSU.
However, the use of regenerative farming principles and strategic grazing since 2010 has allowed him to increase the capacity again to 6ha/LSU.
READ Regenerative farming: from ‘lifeless dust’ to productive farm
Where his traditional focus was on small-stock production with 30 to 40 cattle added, the shift in his production practices allowed him to maintain his small stock numbers while increasing cattle to 700 to 800 animals, depending on climatic conditions.
“I would have had to buy a couple of other farms to expand my herd numbers like this while continuing with conventional production practices,” he said.
Danie Slabbert, who farms near Reitz in the Free State, said his 300ha of veld had always been his ‘Achilles heel’, restricting the number of cows he could keep to about 120 head.
The switch to ultra-high-density grazing of veld, mimicking rangeland migrations, and strategic grazing of cover crops as well as soya and maize stubble have allowed him to increase the herd to 700 cows.
He added that ultra-high-density grazing had resulted in an explosion of different plant species in his veld within three to five years, with dry matter production averaging around 9t/ha, compared to the 3t/ha regional average.
Prof Peter Byck, director of Carbon Nation and Roots so Deep in the US, said it was difficult to quantify the financial benefits that conservation farming and adaptive grazing practices had brought to farmers who participated in his studies.
However, most of these farmers told him “over and over again” that they were on verge of losing their farms, but the switch to conservation farming practices and adaptive grazing got them out of trouble.
READ Smallholders can help to regenerate farming
The switch also bought life back to their soils, substantially reduced their fertiliser, herbicide and pesticide costs and allowed them to sell their animals at premiums – about US$100 (R1 850) per head more than what conventional animals would fetch.
From the panel it emerged that the switch also bought various other benefits: It rendered farms more drought- and flood-resistant, resulted in cleaner run-off, provided various ecosystem services, and allowed farmers to sequestrate more greenhouse gasses.
“We need to educate end-consumers that this is healthier for everything: the soil, plants, environment and us,” Slabbert said.
In response to a question why adoption remained low, DF Fyfer, who farms near Vryburg in North West, said the switch to conservation agriculture and strategic grazing was difficult: “People will only change when the pain to stay the same is more than the pain of changing. In other words, either because of a health scare or economic shock.”
He explained that many farmers switched to conservation farming practices to reduce fuel, herbicide and pesticide costs.
READ A more holistic way of farming
“It won’t help to push people to change; we should rather pull them by showing there is an alternative and better way.”
He said that conservation farming was very “jockey and not horse dependent”.
“It does not matter whether you have a good or a bad farm. The switch, also, is not capital intensive, but it is very management intensive, which means that farmers – the jockeys – should be actively involved on the farm,” Fyfer said.
Byck foresees a huge acceleration in the number of adopters, due to the price-cost squeeze, climate change and consumer pressure: “I think we have gone through the pioneer and the second-round adopters, and that many farmers will now start to embrace conservation farming practices and adaptive grazing. The objective now should be to share knowledge to help them become more robust and prevent them from making some of the mistakes made in the past.”
