Groundswell Agronomy - Mid Project Report

6/25/2010
CHRIS
HOUGHTON
GROUNDSWELL MID PROJECT
AGRICULTURAL AGRONOMY REPORT
Prepared by: Chris Houghton

GROUNDSWELL –Chris Houghton Agricultural
Table of Contents
1 Summary
2 Background
2.1 Seasonal Conditions
2.1.1 Goulburn Site
2.1.2 Bungendore Site
2.1.3 Condobolin Site
3 Trial Objectives
4 Outcomes and observations
4.1 The Goulburn Sites
4.1.1 Introduction
4.1.2 Divall‟s trial
4.1.2.1 Site Details
4.1.2.1.1 Soils
4.1.2.1.2 Location
4.1.2.1.3 Trial Design
4.1.2.2 Measurements
4.1.2.3 Plans for 2010
4.1.3 Sieler‟s trial
4.1.3.1.1 Soils
4.1.3.1.2 Location
4.1.3.3 Plans for 2010
4.2 Bungendore trial
4.2.1 Introduction
4.2.2 Site Details
4.2.2.1 Soils
4.2.2.2 Location
4.2.2.3 Trial Design
4.2.3 Measurements
4.2.4 Discussion of measurements
4.2.5 Plans for 2010
4.3 Condobolin trial
4.3.1 Introduction
4.3.2 Site Details
4.3.2.1 Soils
4.3.2.2 Location
4.3.3 Measurements
5 Conclusion
6 Appendixes
PO Box 18 Crookwell NSW 2583 T/F: 02 48320803 M: 0409 816 433 Page 2
1 SUMMARY
A brief summary of the trial outcomes to date are as follows.
Pasture / Grazing trials.

The same trial designs were used on two properties at “Narrambulla” 20km to the east of
Goulburn, and “Strathmere”, 10 km to the west of Goulburn. The results from both were
very similar.
 The response in the compost plots is directly proportional to the application rate.
 Due to the dry year there was not much difference between the different treatment and
the control plot that received nothing.
 The cost effectiveness of these rates is yet to be determined.
Other outcomes were:

 Compost use has not reduced pasture growth.
 The levels of physical contaminants in the UW compost used in the trials were
acceptable.
 There was no evidence of toxicities having affected plant growth.
 There are no weed problems that have occurred as a result of the compost being
spread.
 There was inadequate pasture growth to determine grazing information from the three
paddock trials.
 There was no evidence of negative effects of compost use on livestock.
 There was no evidence of negative impacts on water quality from run-off from the
trial site.
Cropping trials
Two cropping trials were established, the first at “Landtasia” approximately 20 km east of
Bungendore and the second at the Condobolin Agricultural Research Station.
The results for the Bungendore trial can be summarised as follows:

 The yields were very low as a result of the dry growing conditions.
 There was no appreciable difference in plant uptake of nutrients as determined by
plant tissue tests.
 The yield graph is very similar in appearance to the graph of dry matter cuts at GS30
(See Appendix C).
 However there does appear to be a trend emerging; that yield response is proportional
to the rate of compost applied.
The results for the Condobolin trial can be summarised as follows:

 It is not advisable to read too much into the results as the dry matter and grain yields
are very low due to the dry growing conditions and lack of finishing rainfall.
 There was little appreciable difference between the treatments at the dry matter cut at
GS30.
 It appears that the herbicide treatments had a yield suppressing effect where compost
was used. In the herbicide free trial the compost treatments more than doubling the
yield of the treatments in the herbicide treated trial.
Other outcomes of both cropping trials were:

 There was no evidence of toxicities having affected plant growth.
 The levels of physical contaminants in the UW compost used in the trials were
acceptable.
 There are no weed problems that have occurred as a result of the compost being
spread.
 There was no evidence of negative effects of compost use on grain quality.
 There was no evidence of negative impacts on water quality from run-off from the
trial site.
Although some base level testing has been done of soil nutrient levels, soil carbon and soil
biota levels, further testing is required to draw any conclusions on changes due to the
application of UW compost. Also the impact of UW compost on other factors such as
changes to soil nutrient levels, grain quality, soil water holding capacity, crop water use
efficiency, soil carbon levels, and soil structure improvements are yet to be determined.
These factors will be the focus of further testing towards the end of 2010.
2 BACKGROUND
Groundswell builds on the successful City to Soil project run by DECC and Queanbeyan City
Council in 2004, and seeks to prove the wider economic viability of the City to Soil
collection system and establish composted urban organic waste as a cost effective, high
quality agricultural input. The project aims to have farmers and Councils working together to
pull urban organic waste out of the cities and back onto agricultural land, simultaneously
reducing organic waste to landfill and increasing organic levels in agricultural soils.
Between 40% and 70% of urban waste currently going to landfill is organic material. This
project is demonstrating that the most logical and economically viable use for organic waste
is, when properly composted, in agriculture.
The project aims to quantify the economic benefits to agriculture of returning quality organic
product to soil. In doing so, models aim to be identified for the development of a permanent
market for recycled urban organics in agriculture.
The Groundswell project targets 5 key needs:
 to divert organic waste from the urban waste stream

 to improve urban sustainability
 to improve agricultural sustainability including increased health and productivity of
agricultural soils
 to improve environmental sustainability
 to establish economically viable models for the collection, processing and application
of urban organic waste into agricultural land
Groundswell was developed in partnership with the Wiradjuri Condobolin Corporation

(WCC), the Palerang Agricultural Society, Bettergrow, Zero Waste Australia and the South
East office of the DECC Sustainability Programs Division.
Chris Houghton Agricultural provides agronomic services for the Groundswell project, conducting
trials at 4 sites, one at Bungendore, two at Goulburn and one at Condobolin. The Goulburn trials are
to evaluate the use of compost on pastures, and the subsequent livestock performance. The
Bungendore and Condobolin sites are cropping trials. The sites were established from Autumn 2009
and will be monitored over two years until the end of 2010.
The agronomic component of the Groundswell program is critical to the marketing and
subsequent use of the urban waste (UW) compost on farms. Before UW compost will be
accepted as a regular farm input, landholders need to know the expected production and
environmental outcomes as well as the cost benefits to be achieved.
Although the short duration of the trials (1.5 years) is not long enough to be able to generate
all of the information that is required, it should provide enough to give potential users the
confidence needed to try UW compost for themselves. It will also give the Councils involved
information about the size of the broadacre UW compost market and provide feedback on
general market acceptance.
2.1 Seasonal Conditions
Progress with the trials to date has been hampered by poor rainfall through 2009. This
restricted the benefits that could be seen in the trials and reduced the outcomes that could be
measured. Soil moisture is critical when using UW compost and other organic products as
soil organisms are needed to break the product down into plant available forms. Rainfall in
2010, however, has started well and forecasts look promising for the remainder of the year.
2.1.1 Goulburn Site

Goulburn Rainfall (Glbn TAFE weather station)
Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Glbn-09 35 27.2 8.8 69 20.4 30.4 37.2 30.8 60.6 67.8 11.2 92.4
10 Yr ave 60.0 64.5 45.6 22.4 20.1 52.8 36.5 37.5 42.9 49.8 58.7 60.1
L T ave 62.1 60 52.6 46.1 44.3 50 42.6 52.5 49.7 55.5 64.8 57.9
Divalls-09 36.3 26 7.8 62 18 30.8 26.5 25 46.8 45.6 26.5 77.8
Goulburn Rainfall - Monthly analysis

100
90
80
70
Rainfall (mm)
60 Glbn-09
50 10 Yr ave
40
L T ave
30
20 Divalls-09
10
0
Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Table: 1 Goulburn monthly rainfall analysis.
Note:
1. Goulburn 2009 figures are from the Goulburn TAFE meteorological station.
2. Sieler‟s rainfall figures are taken to be the same as the Goulburn figures.
3. Divall‟s figures are actuals from the property.
4. The 10 year and long term averages are from the Bureau of Meteorology figures for
Goulburn TAFE meteorological station.
Comments
 There has been a reduction in annual rainfall by approximately 67mm in comparison
to long term average for the Goulburn TAFE figures. This was approximately 20%
less than the long term average.
 2009 was characterised by a very dry period from May to September and a premature
end to spring flush in October.
 Divalls trial experienced less winter and spring rainfall than Goulburn resulting in a
crash in pasture production in spring. This was further exacerbated by very windy
conditions.
2.1.2 Bungendore Site
Bungendore Rainfall (Post office meteorological station)
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
B-dore 09 39.6 7 11.4 60.6 10 26.1 34 45.4 87.4 73.4 29.6 80.4
Bdore 10 Yr ave 41.6 59.1 38.1 24.4 19.6 50.1 37.5 48.3 55.4 50.1 62.2 54.2
B-dore L T ave 61.8 49.2 51 46.6 46.7 51.1 49.2 52.5 51.7 63 58.6 54.9
L-tasia 09 36 13.5 10 47 12.5 18.5 36 22 43 60 4.5 64.5
Bungendore Rainfall - Monthly analysis

100
90
80
70
Rainfall (mm)
60 B-dore 09
50 Bdore 10 Yr ave
40 B-dore L T ave
30
L-tasia 09
20
10
0
Table: 2 Bungendore monthly rainfall analysis.
Notes:
1. The figures are from the Bungendore Post Office meteorological station.
2. The Landtasia figures are for the Swamp, the part of the property where the crop was
grown.
Comments
 In 2009 there was a reduction in annual rainfall of approximately 131 mm from the
long term average. This was approximately 21% less than the long term average.
 2009 was characterised by a very dry period from February/ March and another in
May / June and a premature end to spring flush in October.
 Landtasia rainfall figures are well below Bungendore.
 The Landtasia spelt (wheat) crop went in with little moisture in the soil profile and
experienced well below average rainfall right through the growing period.
 Although some decent rain fell in October, the yield potential had already been set at
a very low level. The dry November stopped any chance of a recovery.
2.1.3 Condobolin Site
Condobolin Rainfall (Condo Research Station)
Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2009 4.2 60.6 29 44.9 14.2 52.5 23.4 10.7 16.7 34.2 17.2 90.6
10 Yr ave 23.9 54.8 25.3 16.4 24.2 40.8 27.5 27.6 29.4 25.7 41.2 35.8
L T ave 48.4 43.7 37.3 31.6 36 29.5 36.4 34.8 31.6 48.8 37.8 40.3
2010 16.6 158.6 55.4 33 38.3
Condobolin Rainfall - Monthly analysis

100 Growing season
90
80
70
Rainfall (mm)
60
2009
50
40 10 Yr ave
30 L T ave
20
10
0
Table: 3 Condobolin monthly rainfall analysis.
Notes:
1. The Condobolin figures are from the Agricultural Research Station Meteorological
Station, which is only about 500 m from the trial site.
Comments
 In 2009 there was a reduction in annual rainfall of approximately 55 mm from the
long term average. This was approximately 12 % less than the long term average.
 2009 characterised by good rains in February, April and June allowing crops to be
sown a little late but into reasonable moisture in the top 200mm of soil.
 Growing season rainfall and follow-up rain in the spring was very poor, leading to a
disappointing finish to the season.
 Although December rainfall was good it was too late as the crops had well and truly
finished by that stage.
3 TRIAL OBJECTIVES
The trial measurements in the agronomic trials have been designed to test the following
assumptions:
1. Nutrients in Urban Waste (UW) compost are available in a suitable time frame to
meet plant needs.
2. No toxicity risks to the environment or the end user exist from the use of UW
compost.
3. Limited weed risks exist through the use of UW compost.
4. The application of nutrients to a cereal crop partly by synthetic fertiliser and partly by
UW compost is a cost effective method of improving gross margin.
5. UW compost has other properties such as the presence of beneficial microorganisms

that aid in improving plant performance.
6. Soil water holding capacity is enhanced through the application of UW compost to

soils.
7. Crop water use efficiency is enhanced through the application of UW compost to

soils.
8. UW compost application enhances soil carbon levels and is a practical means of

sequestering carbon.
9. The application of UW compost to crop or pasture soils has a positive impact on soil
structure (aggregate stability).
4 OUTCOMES AND OBSERVATIONS
To be able to evaluate the use of compost as a nutrient source and a soil ameliorant suitable
for broadacre agriculture, the agronomy trials have been designed with these uses in mind.
The quantity of material produced through the wide scale production of UW compost is
potentially larger than can be used for home garden and other horticultural uses, so it is
important to evaluate the use of the products more widely than those markets.
The broadacre agriculture market is potentially larger than Councils can supply, but if the
products become popular, and are consumed in the home garden and local horticultural
markets, there would be no problem from the perspective of regional Councils. Councils
need to get the best financial return possible for the compost, but the price of the product
must be determined by market forces. The compost must be competitive with other products,
but at present there is uncertainty in a number of areas about how UW compost will perform.
The data generated from these trials will be instrumental in this process.
4.1 Goulburn Trial Sites

4.1.1 Introduction
Two sites were chosen for Goulburn, both being pasture based. It was decided that the main
opportunity for finding a market for Goulburn compost was to get it out onto grazing
properties as grazing is the main land use in the region.
Each of the two Goulburn trials involves a small plot trial and a triple paddock comparison.
A small plot trial has been established to ensure that scientifically valid data is generated, and
for comparisons to be made with other conventional fertilisers and soil ameliorants. The
triple paddock trial will allow actual paddock performance to be tested. No pasture dry
matter cuts will be taken in the triple paddock trial and data will be extrapolated from
livestock grazing records from grazing charts (See Appendix D).
4.1.2 Divall’s trial

The first property “Narrambulla” belongs to the Divall family. The property is presently
undergoing progressive pasture improvement but the paddock where the trial is located was
not sown down to improved pasture at the time of trial commencement. It has since been
sown to a perennial ryegrass base in April 2010. In 2009, at the commencement of the trial,
the paddock was dominated by residues of productive native species, annual grasses,
broadleaf weeds and subterranean clover.
4.1.2.1.1 Soils
The site soils are predominantly sandy loams, overlaying poorly decomposed rocky subsoils.
The relief of the site chosen varies from mid slope to ridgeline, and the soil depth varies
accordingly, being shallower on the upper slope. The soil test results show the soils to have
following features:
Topsoil (0 – 10 cm)
Analyte Result Unit Opt Range Comment
pH (CaCl2) 5.1 5.2 - 6 Good for regional soils
Aluminium 2.2 % <5 OK
Organic Carbon 2.4 % 2–5 Good
Phosphorus (Colwell) 13 mg/kg 25 - 35 Very low
Potassium 0.23 meq/100g 0.5 – 0.9 Very low
Sulphur (KCl 40) 5.2 mg/kg 10 - 25 Very low
CEC* 4.58 5 - 10 Low
Note: CEC = Cation exchange capacity.
Subsoil (0 – 10 cm)
Aluminium 22 % <5 High. Will restrict root growth of
sensitive plants.
4.1.2.1.2 Location
“Narrambulla” is located approximately 20 km east of Goulburn.
Divall‟s trial
Figure 1: Trial location in relation to Goulburn and Marulan.
Replicated trial site
Replicated Small Plot Trials for both Goulburn sites.
Reference point
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
A 1 2 6 5 8 4 3 7 Plots size:
2 x 4m, with a 1m
buffer between
B 2 3 6 4 8 7 5 1
each plot.
1 4 2 6 3 8 5 7 The plot trial area

C
is 322m² ( 23m x
14m).
Note: Reference Point is on SW corner of Sieler‟s trial and NE corner of Divall‟s trial. At Sieler‟s
trial Row A is on the southern side, however, for Divall‟s trial Row A is on the northern side.
Replicated trial treatments:

1 Compost at 5 m3/ha
4 Superphosphate at 125 kg/ha
5 Superphosphate at 250 kg/ha
6 Bio-phos at 125 kg/ha
7 Bio-phos at 250 kg/ha
8 Control
Treatments for the Triple Paddock Grazing Trial

Paddock A - Paddock B - Paddock C -
Small plot Small plot Small plot NOTE:
treatment 8 treatment 2 treatment 5 The aim of the triple paddock
NB: Small plot trial component is to determine the
is here. DSEs/ha carried each year on
each paddock
Information to be recorded by the farmer in the three paddocks will be:

1 Grazing duration (dates in and out)
2 Stock details (type and class)
3 Numbers grazed and their average weights.
4 Metabolic condition,( ie: 4-6 months pregnant).
Note: See Appendix D for an example of a grazing chart used at the Goulburn trials.
Small Plot Replicated Trial

First cut – Nov 2009
Treatments 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Rep A (kg/ha) 1590 2252 3683 1862 3918 4422 2098 1823
Rep B (kg/ha) 2475 3945 3945 2717 3076 3091 2760 2475
Rep C (kg/ha) 1162 2137 3055 2137 1633 1781 1633 2239
Average 1742 2778 3561 2239 2876 3098 2164 2179
Note: All numbers in kg/DM/Ha
Divall's - First cut- Nov 2009

5000
4500
4000
3500
3000
kg/DM/ha
Rep A (kg/ha)
2500 Rep B (kg/ha)
2000
Rep C (kg/ha)
1500
Average
1000
500
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Figure 2: Divall‟s first dry matter cut - Nov 2009
Comments:
There was a linear response to the compost treatments (1) (2) & (3), as shown by the red
trend line. In interpreting this response, it needs to be acknowledged that the low compost
treatment (1) actually produced less than the control treatment (8). Even taking this into
account, there was a definite and measurable response. The medium and high compost
treatments (2) & (3) were both in front of the superphosphate treatments (4) & (5).
Treatments
1 Compost at 5 m3/ha 5 Superphosphate at 250 g/ha
2 Compost at 10 m3/ha 6 Bio-phos at 125 kg/ha
4 Superphosphate at 125 kg/ha 8 Control
2nd DM cut – March 2010
After very poor rainfall during 2009, 2010 started with some excellent summer falls. I have
incorporated these into this report as this dry matter cut was done prior to the application of
the 2010 treatments. Any results achieved should be understood to be as a consequence of
the 2009 treatments.
Treatment 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Rep A (kg/ha) 4247 4258 4725 4262 4292 5421 2644 4058
Rep B (kg/ha) 5657 4401 4279 4045 3465 4041 3719 4120
Rep C (kg/ha) 4300 4344 5495 3680 5098 4604 3613 4395
Average 4734 4334 4833 3995 4285 4689 3325 4191

(See Graph overleaf).
Divall's - 2nd DM cut Mar 2010

6000
5000
4000
kg/DM/ha
Rep A (kg/ha)
3000 Rep B (kg/ha)
Rep C (kg/ha)
2000
Average
1000
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Figure 3: Divall‟s second dry matter cut - March 2010
Comments:
As can be seen by the pasture dry matter figures in the left hand column there was a
tremendous amount of material cut from the trial compared to November 2009. The trend
line for the responses is not linear as with the first cut, but the compost treatments are
incrementally better than the superphosphate treatments (4) & (5) and the control (8).
Divall’s Trial - Cumulative DM to March 2010
Treatment 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Rep A (kg/ha) 5836 6510 8408 6124 8209 9843 4742 5882
Rep B (kg/ha) 8131 8346 8224 6762 6541 7132 6478 6595
Rep C (kg/ha) 5462 6481 8551 5817 6731 6385 5246 6634
Average 6476 7112 8394 6234 7161 7786 5489 6370
Divall's - Cumulative DM to Mar 2010

12000
10000
8000
kg/DM/ha
Rep A (kg/ha)
6000 Rep B (kg/ha)
Rep C (kg/ha)
4000
Average
2000
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Figure 4: Divall‟s trial - Cumulative dry matter production at March 2010
Comments
The key points are:
 There is a linear response to the three different rates of compost.
 There is also a linear response to the two different rates of superphosphate.
 The higher rate of Bio-phos resulted in less pasture dry matter.
 The production from the control (8) was quite high in comparison to those where
nutrients were applied.
Grazing trial results

Due to the poor pasture growth from the time of the spreading of the treatments (June 2009)
until the end of December, there were no grazing of the paddocks. However, there has been
consistent grazing through 2010 to date and comparative results for the three paddocks will
be available at the end of this year.
4.1.3.3 Plans for 2010

This trail will remain the same as 2009, although at the end of the growing season additional
testing will be carried out to obtain the various data-sets required to meet the objectives
outlined in Section 3. These tests will provide the necessary information to determine
changes to soil nutrient levels, soil carbon, soil biota levels, soil water holding capacity, crop
water use efficiency, and soil structure.
4.1.3 Sieler’s Trial
“Strathmere” is owned by the Sieler family and is a grazing property, although some fodder
cropping is done. It has a range of soil types from undulating ridges with skeletal soils to
productive alluvial flats. The trial site is on the creek flats, and the pasture base is phalaris
and sub-clover.
4.1.3.1.1 Soils
The soil tests results showed the soils to have following features:
pH (CaCl2) 4.8 5.2 - 6 OK for regional soils
Aluminium 1.2 % <5 Good
Organic Carbon 3.8 % 2–5 Good
Phosphorus (Colwell) 23 mg/kg 25 - 35 Very low
Sulphur (KCl 40) 18 mg/kg 10 - 25 Good
CEC* 11 5 - 10 Low
Subsoil (0 – 10 cm)
Aluminium 12 % <5 High. Will restrict root growth of
sensitive plants.
4.1.3.1.2 Location
The property is located approximately 10km south west of the Goulburn city limits.
“Strathmere” trial
Figure 5: Sielers‟ trial location
Replicated trial site
Note: Refer to documentation on Divall‟s trial design to see Sieler‟s replicated small plot
trial design.
First cut – Nov 2009
Treatment 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Rep A (kg/ha) 2660 4452 2586 2598 3278 2850 2374 2483
Rep B (kg/ha) 3602 2910 3930 2108 3181 2475 2003 2790
Rep C (kg/ha) 2912 3366 3730 4058 3240 2751 2419 3096
Average 3058 3576 3415 2922 3233 2692 2266 2790
Sieler's - First cut- Nov 2009

5000
4500
4000
3500
kg/DM/ha
3000 Rep A (kg/ha)

2500 Rep B (kg/ha)
2000 Rep C (kg/ha)
1500 Average
1000
500
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Figure 6: Sieler‟s first dry matter cut - Nov 2009
Comment:
The results are very similar to those from Divall‟s trial.
 A linear although not as great a response to the three rates of compost (1) (2) & (3).
 A linear response to the two rates of superphosphate (4) & (5), although not equal to
the compost.
Second cut – March 2010

Treatment 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Rep A (kg/ha) 2628 2200 2693 2317 2271 2317 1950 2271
Rep B (kg/ha) 1607 1840 2545 2222 2028 2743 1870 1908
Rep C (kg/ha) 1933 2227 3310 1624 2529 2035 1973 2200
Average 2056 2089 2849 2054 2276 2365 1931 2126
Sieler's - Second cut- Mar 2010

3500
3000
2500
Rep A (kg/ha)
kg.DM/ha
2000
Rep B (kg/ha)
1500
Rep C (kg/ha)
1000
Average
500
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Figure 7: Sieler‟s second dry matter cut - March 2010
Comment:
 No spectacular results but the trends are going in the right direction of compost (1) (2)
& (3) and superphosphate (4) & (5). This demonstrates that there is a response to
applied nutrients from both compost and superphosphate.
 Again there was a fall in dry matter production from the Bio-phos treatments, (6) &
(7).
 Again the control (8) was a solid performer with no treatments.
Sieler’s Cumulative DM to March 2010

Treatment 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Rep A 5288 6652 5279 4915 5549 5167 4324 4755
Rep B 5209 4750 6474 4330 5209 5218 3873 4698
Rep C 4845 5592 7039 5682 5769 4786 4393 5296
Average 5114 5665 6264 4976 5509 5057 4197 4916
Cumulative DM to Mar 2010 - Sielers

8000
7000
6000
5000
Kg/DM/ha
Rep A
4000 Rep B
Rep C
3000
Average
2000
1000
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Figure 8: Sieler‟s trial - Cumulative dry matter production to March 2010
Treatments
1 Compost at 5 m3/ha 5 SSP at 250 g/ha
4 SSP at 125 kg/ha 8 Control
Comments:
 The red trend line shows that the response in the compost plots (1) (2) & (3) is
directly proportional to the application rate. Since 2009 was such a dry year, this
could be as a result of the increased water holding capacity of the soil, as much as the
nutrients applied. This will be further verified in 2010.
 Overall there were similar trends in the two cuts and between the two Goulburn sites.
There was a linear response to both compost (1-3) and superphosphate (3 & 4) but for
some reason the control (8) performed well.
 Not too many conclusions should be drawn from these results. Although there are
some patterns emerging it takes time for biological activity in the soil to improve and
any such improvements, as a result of these changes, may take several years to show
as improved production.
 These results shed no light on the economics of the different treatments. This will be
determined as a separate activity by Michael Reynolds, the Groundswell economist.
Grazing trial results
Due to the poor pasture growth from the time of the spreading of the treatments (June 2009)
until the end of December, there were no grazing of the paddocks. There has, however, been
consistent grazing through 2010 to date, so comparative results for the three paddocks will be
available at the end of this year.
4.1.3.3 Plans for 2010

This trail will remain the same as 2009, although at the end of the growing season
additional testing will be carried out to obtain the various data-sets required to meet
the objectives outlined in Section 3. These tests will provide the necessary information to
determine changes to soil nutrient levels, soil carbon, soil biota levels, soil water holding
capacity, crop water use efficiency, and soil structure.
4.2 Bungendore Trial
4.2.1 Introduction
It was decided that a cropping trial should be established on the Southern Tablelands to
evaluate the role that compost could play as a nutrient source, as well as a soil ameliorant.
Richard Graham had made land available for the composting site for use by the Palarang
Council as part of the Groundswell project, and this cropping paddock was within 800 m of
that site.
The property, known as „Landtasia‟, is owned by Richard Graham and is a certified organic
farm. Care had to be taken with the trial to ensure that guidelines were adhered to as set by
the accrediting body, the Biological Farmers of Australia (BFA). The crop grown was
organic spelt, an ancient grain that was grown in Ancient Egypt more than nine thousand
years ago. It is a relatively low yielding crop, but the grain can obtain high prices when
organically grown.
4.2.2 Site Details

4.2.2.1 Soils
The soil tests results showed the soils to have following features (See Appendix F for more details):
pH (CaCl2) 6.1 5.2 - 6 V good for regional soils
Phosphorus (Colwell) 37 mg/kg 25 - 35 Very good
CEC* 6.5 5 - 10 Fair
Notes: CEC = Cation exchange capacity. No aluminium was detected.
This soil test shows that this soil has had lime applied recently and plentiful quantities of
phosphorus fertiliser. Although sulphur and potassium are low, there are no major limitations
that will adversely affect the growth of the trial.
4.2.2.2 Trial location
Landtasia is approximately 20 km east of Bungendore and the trial is site about 800 m north
of the Kings Highway on a part of the property known as “The Swamp”.
Landtasia trial
Figure 9: Location of Bungendore trial.
The trial site is approximately 250 m out from the corner of a paddock (away from old
headlands) and 80m north of the laneway fence.
Laneway
80 m
250m Trial area
NW corner
N
Paddock
Treatments
1 Compost – high rate (20 m3 /ha) 5 FCMP - med rate (250 kg /ha)
2 Compost medium rate (12.5 m3 /ha) 6 FCMP - high rate (400 kg /ha)
3 Compost low rate (5 m3 /ha) 7 Control (No fertiliser)
4 FCMP – standard rate (120 kg /ha)
2 m buffer
Trial Plan
7 5 4
1.5 m buffer
6 3 2
5 1 7
4 2 3
3 7 6
2 4 1
1 6 5
Direction of sowing
NW corner
Trial details:
 The trial is replicated (3 x) and randomised.
 There will be no weed control after sowing except for possible grazing.
 Seeding was with a conventional combine (seed only). All fertiliser treatments are
put out by hand prior to seeding.
 The compost rates are:
o Low rate @ 5 m3 /ha on a DM basis.
o Med rate @ 12.5 m3 /ha on a DM basis.
o High rate @ 20 m3 /ha on a DM basis.
 The FCMP rates are:

o Low rate @ 120 kg /ha
o Med rate @ 250 kg/ha
o High rate @ 400 kg/ha
Ideally the compost should be spread 6 – 8 weeds prior to sowing to allow time for
mineralisation. This is not possible this year, but can be done for the 2010 trial in the second
year of the project.
Note:
TNN Calcium Magnesium Phosphate (FCMP) is sold as a non-acid phosphorous fertilizer
which is claimed:
 to reduce acidity in soils
 not to leach into waterways or become fixed or immobile in the soil
 to ensure stable yields for an extended period of time.
The components of FCMP are Phosphorous 7.8%, Magnesium 10%, Calcium 24%, Silicon
12%, plus traces of Sulphur, Boron, Manganese, Zinc, Nickel, Cobalt, Copper, Molybdenum.
FCMP is accredited for organic production.
4.2.3 Measurements
The first measurement taken at this site was a dry matter (Biomass) cut on 29th October 2009,
just prior to stem elongation at growth stage 30 (GS 30). See Appendix E for details on crop
growth stages. The purpose of the biomass cut was to determine whether the different
treatments had shown up as differences in the vigour of plants. Please note that additional
vigour can be a good or a bad thing depending on whether soil moisture is plentiful or
limiting.
Dry matter yield at GS 30
Treatment 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Rep A 2375 3319 3133 3790 2893 3338 3846
Rep B 3749 3429 2989 3474 3858 3670 3031
Rep C 2637 4736 3088 2718 3595 2973 2977
Average 2920 3828 3070 3327 3449 3327 3285
Spelt crop - DM yield at GS 30

5000
4500
4000
3500
3000
Kg/DM/Ha
Rep A
2500 Rep B
2000 Rep C
1500 Average
1000
500
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Treatment
Figure 10: Crop dry matter at GS30.
Treatments
1 Compost – high rate (20 m3 /ha) 5 FCMP - med rate (250 kg /ha)
2 Compost medium rate (12.5 m3 /ha) 6 FCMP - high rate (400 kg /ha)
3 Compost low rate (5 m3 /ha) 7 Control (No fertiliser)
4 FCMP – standard rate (120 kg /ha)
Comment:
Although the spelt is not a forage variety it was decided to cut and measure forage dry matter
as an early indicator of the vigour with different treatments. There are no appreciable trends.
The lack of any result was attributed to the dry growing conditions and the subsequent poor
crop vigour.
Tissue test results
Tissue tests were done on the first replicate of the trial as a means of determining whether
there was improved nutrient uptake from the plots that received the higher rate.
Sampling date: 2/11/09
Optimum REP/PLOT
Analyte Unit range Comment A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7
Nitrogen (Kjeldahl) % 5.5 to 6.5 Very Low 1.9 2.1 2.1 1.6 1.8 1.8 2.1
Nitrate Nitrogen mg/kg Very Low 50 50 50 50 50 50 50
Phosphorus % 0.44 to 0.65 Low 0.33 0.38 0.4 0.37 0.4 0.32 0.34
Potassium % 2.5 to 4 Low - Mod 2.6 3 2.7 2.7 3.2 2.1 2.3
Sulphur % 0.2 to 0.4 Very low 0.16 0.17 0.16 0.16 0.18 0.16 0.16
Calcium % 0.25 to 0.8 Low 0.23 0.25 0.2 0.19 0.23 0.27 0.18
Magnesium % 0.13 to 0.4 Low 0.1 0.11 0.09 0.1 0.12 0.13 0.1
Sodium % 0 to 0.6 OK 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.01
Chloride % 0 to 2 OK 0.62 0.64 0.46 0.49 0.58 0.44 0.43
Manganese mg/kg 25 to 300 OK 76 66 56 51 34 42 40
Iron mg/kg 25 to 100 Mod - high 75 84 76 69 66 83 61
Copper mg/kg 5 to 50 Low 3.7 4.6 4.9 5.7 5.8 5.5 6
Zinc mg/kg 20 to 70 Low 16 23 20 20 18 19 21
Boron mg/kg 5 to 10 Low 3.7 3.7 2.8 4.9 5 4 3.8
N/P Ratio 5.8 5.5 5.3 4.3 4.5 5.6 6.2

N/K Ratio 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.6 0.6 0.9 0.9
N/S Ratio 12 12 13 10 10 11 13
Note: N = Nitrogen, P = Phosphorus, K = Potassium, S = Sulfur
Table 4: Tissue test results for Bungendore trial.
Plot Treatment Description

A1 7 Control (No fert)
A2 6 FCMP - high rate (400 kg /ha)
A3 5 FCMP - med rate (250 kg /ha)
A4 4 FCMP – standard rate (120 kg /ha)
A5 3 Compost low rate (5 m3 /ha)
A6 2 Compost medium rate (12.5 m3 /ha)
A7 1 Compost – high rate (20 m3 /ha)
Comment:
There were no apparent differences in the nutrient uptake of the crop that could be attributed
to the treatments.
Grain Harvest Results
Treatment Rep 1 Rep 2 Rep 3 Ave Plot Wt Ave Yield (t/ha)

1 2.15 2.05 2.45 2.22 0.62
2 3.20 3.40 1.90 2.83 0.79
3 3.20 2.40 1.65 2.42 0.67
4 2.20 2.25 2.05 2.17 0.60
5 2.40 2.50 1.90 2.27 0.63
6 1.95 2.65 1.70 2.10 0.58
7 3.10 1.75 1.75 2.20 0.61
Spelt grain yield - Bungendore 2009

0.90
0.80
0.70 ?
0.60
(Tones/ha)
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Treatments
Figure 11: Bungendore trial crop yield.

 The yields are very low as a result of the dry growing conditions and lack of finishing
rainfall so it is not advisable to read too much into the results.
 Unfortunately there was a patchy emergence of the crop that went across some
treatments and may have skewed the results at the highest application rate (1).
 The above graph is very similar in appearance to the first graph for dry matter cuts at
GS30, which correlates with the patchy emergence in treatment 1.
 There does appear to be a trend emerging. The yield appears to be proportional to the
rate of compost applied to treatments (1) (2) & (3).

The trial has been moved for 2010 to a site just north of Goulburn. There was concern about
the possibility of contaminants compromising the organic accreditation on „Landtasia‟. The
same trial plan was used to sow down the 2010 trial apart from the addition of a
gypsum/compost treatment and a couple of plots with very high compost rates for
demonstration. The trial is now on a conventional farm and sown to a variety of oats called
“Blackbutt”. It is commonly used as a forage / hay production on the NSW Tablelands but,
in this instance, it has been sown as a seed crop.
At the end of the growing season additional testing will be carried out to obtain the various
data-sets required to meet the objectives outlined in Section 3. These tests will provide the
necessary information to determine changes to soil nutrient levels, soil carbon, soil biota
levels, soil water holding capacity, crop water use efficiency, and soil structure.
4.3 Condobolin Trial
4.3.1 Introduction
The trial is managed in conjunction with the Wiradjuri Condobolin Corporation (WCC). The
Central West Farming Systems (CWFS) have been contracted to look after the day to day
operations of the trial, such as sowing, weed and pest control and harvesting. The WCC
manage the production of the compost at a site adjacent to the Condobolin waste depot. They
also have a keen interest in the trial.
4.3.2 Site Details

4.3.2.1 Soils
The soil tests results showed the soils to have following features (See Appendix G for more
details):
pH (CaCl2) 4.8 5.2 - 6 Low
Aluminium 1.0 % <5 Good
Organic Carbon 1 % 2–5 Very low
Phosphorus (Colwell) 22 mg/kg 25 - 35 Very good
Potassium 2.0 meq/100g 0.5 – 0.9 High
CEC* 10 8 - 15 Good
The soil test results show that the soil is typical of red duplex cropping soils in the district and
there are no major limitations to production that may adversely affect the trial.
4.3.2.2 Location
The trial is located at the Condobolin Research Station.
Condobolin trial
Figure 12: Condobolin trial location.
The trial site is the south east corner of the paddock directly south east of the main
Condobolin Research Station office block, as shown below.
N
Condobolin Nyngan Road
Main
office
& sheds
Chemical free
Chemicals used

There were a number of possible trial design scenarios discussed. Alternative trial designs
included application in commercial vegetable production and for use in nursery production.
The broadacre grain production model was decided on. Although there would never be
enough compost produced for use in grain growing this trial design would allow easy
comparison with district grain yields and allow financial returns to be calculated. The trial
will be conducted on the same land for two years to determine what cumulative benefits may
be evident from compost use.
Chemical treated plots
1 Compost – high rate 3 Compost low rate 5 Control A (DAP @ 50/kg/ha)
The chemical free trial goes
chemical treated plots. after

2 Compost medium rate 4 DAP @ 30kg/ha + medium 1 Compost – high rate
on from this end of the
compost
3 Compost low rate 5 Control A (DAP @ 50/kg/ha) 2 Compost medium rate
a 15m buffer.
4 DAP @ 30kg/ha + medium 2 Compost medium rate 3 Compost low rate
compost
5 Control A (DAP @ 50/kg/ha) 1 Compost – high rate 4 DAP @ 30kg/ha + medium
compost
Chemical free plots
1 DAP @ 30kg/ha + medium 3 Compost - medium rate 5 Control C (No chemical & no
compost fertiliser)
2 Compost – high rated 4 Compost - low rate 1 DAP @ 30kg/ha + medium
compost
3 Compost - medium rate 5 Control C (No chemical & no 2 Compost – high rated
fertiliser)
4 Compost - low rate 2 Compost – high rated 3 Compost - medium rate
5 Control C (No chemical & no 1 DAP @ 30kg/ha + medium 4 Compost - low rate
fertiliser) compost
As can be seen from the trial plan, the whole trial was repeated twice, once with pre-emergent
and post –emergent herbicides, and the other without any use of any herbicide treatments.
The two trials were placed end to end with a 19m buffer in between.
Notes:
 The shaded areas received DAP® (di-ammonium phosphate) fertiliser at sowing.
This is the normal fertiliser used by farmers in the region when growing wheat.
 The herbicide treated plots received an application of Glyphosate® pre-sowing and a
broadleaf weed spray later in the season.
 If a fungicide treatment was needed, only the herbicide treated plots would have
received it.
 Buffer plots are sown on each side of the trial making the trial 7 plots wide rather
than 5.
Dimensions
Plots are to be 2m x 15m each in size. There is a 2m buffer at the end of adjoining plots.
Note: The sowing width is only 1.8m, the same as the harvester. The wheel tracks of the
seed drill make up the extra 0.2m to make the width 2m.
4.3.3 Measurements
Dry Matter production to GS30

2500
2000
1500
1000
Tonnes/DM ha
500 No Chem
Chem √
0
1 DAP @ 5b Control
3 Compost 5a Control
30kg/ha + 2 Compost 4 Compost B (No
- medium A (DAP @
medium - high rate - low rate chemical
rate 50/kg/ha)
compost & no fert
No Chem 2023 1643 1697 1883 1813
Chem √ 1773 1620 1390 1690 2060
Tonnes / Ha
Figure 13: Condobolin wheat crop dry matter production to GS30.
Condobolin Trial Grain Yields - 2009

0.350
0.300
0.250
Tonnes / Ha
0.200
0.150
0.100
No Chem
0.050
Chem √
0.000
1 DAP @ 3 5a Control
2 4 5b Control
30kg/ha + Compost - B (No
Compost - Compost - A (DAP @
medium medium chemical
high rate low rate 50/kg/ha)
compost rate & no fert)
No Chem 0.286 0.262 0.202 0.139 0.156
Chem √ 0.121 0.088 0.085 0.131 0.161
Tonnes / Ha
Figure 14: Condobolin wheat crop yield, 2009.

 It is not advisable to read too much into the results as the dry matter and grain yields
are very low due to the dry growing conditions and lack of finishing rainfall.
 There was little appreciable difference between the treatments at the dry matter cut at
GS30.
 From Fig 13 it could also be interpreted that the herbicide treatments had a yield
suppressing effect where compost was used.
 An interesting picture emerged for the herbicide free trial. In this trial, as is shown in
Fig 13, the compost treatments were much more effective, more than doubling the
yield of the treatments in the herbicide treated trial. Although the absolute yield
figures were small, this is a stand-out result for the trial.

The trials will be sown in the exact same location and to the same trial design in 2010. The
reasons for this are:
1. It will show if a cumulative benefit emerges for the compost treatments.

2. It will verify whether yield suppression of herbicides on compost treated soil is an
issue.
3. It will give time for the soil organisms to adjust to the increased organic material in
the soil.
There is a belief amongst many users of recycled organic products that it takes a couple of
years to prime the soil microbes for them to be able to best utilise the organic material and the
nutrients applied. Much of the nutrients in compost are locked up in organic matter and the
existing soil organisms may not be suitable for its decomposition.
There is also a commonly held theory amongst the biological farming fraternity that the use
of certain agricultural pesticides has a negative impact on soil biota. Glyphosate is often
mentioned as a cause of damage to populations of certain groups of soil microorganisms. It
is a long shot to say that Glyphosate has caused the above crop yield reduction in the
herbicide trial but it could, theoretically, have had a negative impact on some of the key
organisms responsible for nutrient cycling. This could have resulted in a lesser degree of
breakdown and nutrient release from the compost where the herbicides were used.
At the end of the growing season additional testing will be carried out to obtain the various
data-sets required to meet the objectives outlined in Section 3. These tests will provide the
necessary information to determine changes to soil nutrient levels, soil carbon, soil biota
levels, soil water holding capacity, crop water use efficiency, and soil structure.
5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to acknowledge several individuals and organisations for their contribution to the
Groundswell agronomy trials.
 Andrew Sieler of “Strathmere”, and Andrew Divall of “Narrambulla”, Goulburn, for

their cooperation and generous contributions of time and fencing materials. Mark and
Camilla Hart, employees of Divall‟s have also been very helpful.
 Richard Graham and Dennis Northey from “Landtasia” for their generous assistance
and cooperation.
 Noel Trevaskis and Rohan Davies of IncitecPivot for arranging a contribution of

fertiliser for the Goulburn trials over the past two years.
 Brad Davis and Jodie Dean of the Central West Farming Systems for managing much
of the Condobolin cropping trial.
 Condobolin Agricultural Research Station for providing the site for the trial.
 Lisa Hibbert, Eugene Coe and Cecil Coe and the other staff at the Wiradjuri Condobolin
Corporation (WCC) for their assistance with the Condobolin trial work.
 Andrew Galland and staff from Goulburn Mulwaree Council for their ongoing and
enthusiastic cooperation.
5 APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: Comments to research questions relevant to the agronomy
trial work.
APPENDIX B: Toxicity and weed contamination test of the Goulburn and
Condobolin composts.
APPENDIX C: Growth stages of cereal crops.
APPENDIX D: Example grazing chart used in Goulburn triple paddock
comparisons.
APPENDIX E: Soil test for Goulburn Trial Site
APPENDIX F Soil tests for Bungendore Trial Site.
APPENDIX G Soil tests for Condobolin Trial Site.
APPENDIX H Compost test results.
APPENDIX A:
Comments to research questions relevant to the agronomy trial work.
Below are the research questions that relate to the agronomy component of the Groundswell
trial. The outcomes to date and those still to be achieved are discussed under each question.
A1 What happened when composted urban organic waste (UW) was applied to
Agricultural land?
This is the basis of the agronomy trials. Preliminary evidence suggests that urban waste
compost is useful in supplying nutrients and improving soil conditions for plant growth.
A2 Where and what quantities of composted product are/were applied?
The rates per hectare used in the trials are listed in the report. The total quantities applied are
not relevant for the purpose of determining production benefits and economics.
A3 What can compost made from urban organic waste be used for?
It has been shown in these trials that it can be used as a topdressing fertiliser/soil ameliorant on
pastures providing adequate quantities are applied. A key outcome of the trial is to determine
the exact rates required and the economics of using such rates. Insufficient evidence has been
gathered to prove or disprove this to date.
A4 What are the risks from using composts? How can those risks be mitigated? Do the
rewards outweigh the risks?
There are several risks involved with the use of UW compost including:
o Physical contaminants such as glass, metal, rocks, plastic, etc. Glass being a major
concern.
o Chemical contaminants. These are most unlikely but potentially the most problematic.
They are also expensive to test for.
o The introduction of weeds with the compost.
In the process of preparing UW compost most physical contaminants can be removed if the
material is carefully sorted before starting and when it is turned. This is an essential part of
the QA process. Although it is up to the contributors of organic material to ensure that no
chemical contaminants exist, an adequate level of testing is required prior to the point of sale,
to prove that this risk is mitigated. Both of these matters are out of the hands of the end user.
There is little that can be done to remove physical or chemical contaminants once the
compost is prepared.
It has however been shown that the contributors of urban waste for composting are very keen
to do the right thing and carefully partition their wastes at the household level. It also appears
that the processes of using education and incentives must be ongoing in order to consistently
achieve the highest level of quality in the end product.
Weeds are an ongoing menace, and although farmers will not be concerned about small
amounts of some common but insignificant grass and broadleaf plants being introduced, if the
weeds present a serious threat to production, the compost should not be allowed to be used
in broadacre agriculture. This is a serious issue with significant long term implications for both
Councils and end users.
A5 What is the financial value to farmers of increased yield?
This is yet to be determined. Due to the poor rainfall received in 2009, there was little material
to harvest or graze. I am hopeful that the situation will be different in 2010, and in particular
that the cumulative benefits of two applications in consecutive years will show some
significant yield increases.
A6 What is the financial value to farmers of improved crop quality?
This is yet to be determined. Whilst it is not expected that there will be an improvement in
quality, if it does occur that will be an additional benefit. The cropping trials at Bungendore
and Condobolin in 2009 showed no difference in quality. No protein testing was done in 2009
as I was advised that it would not show any differences as because yields were so low, all of
the protein levels would have been high. In 2010 I will test Brix levels at GS30 to determine
whether there is any difference in plant sugar levels.
COMMENT: Quality is a broad term that could relate to feed value of crop or pasture material
that is grazed, or to the quality of the grain harvested. It is only really in the context of
cropping for grain that quality can be measured, and that is in terms of the protein level, for
which a premium is paid. Most comments in this study in relation to quality will be subjective.
A7 What is the financial value to farmers of reduced water use?
None of the trials involve irrigation, so reduced water use is not relevant.
A8 What is the financial value to farmers of improved water efficiency?
Further to the answer to A7, water use efficiency (WUE) is quite relevant, and has been
calculated above for all of the trials. Although WUE is useful for comparative purposes, it does
not provide measurable data for financial evaluation.
A9 What is the financial value to farmers of improved soil structure?
Improved soil structure does not relate directly to any financial benefit, and can only benefit
farmers through increased yield. Even if increased yield is the outcome, it is very difficult to
determine the role that soil structure has played in that yield increase. Soil structure will be
visually evaluated at the completion of the trials to determine the correlation that it has to
increased yield.
A 10 What is the financial value to farmers of increased microbial activity?
Improved soil microbial activity does not relate directly to any financial benefi, and can only
benefit farmers through increased yield. Even if increased yield is the outcome it is very
difficult to determine the role that improved soil microbial activity has played in that yield
increase. Soil microbial activity has been measured at the commencement of the trial, and
will be evaluated at the completion of the trials to determine any correlation to increased yield.
A11 What is the financial value to farmers of reduced nutrient leakage?
The cropping and pasture systems in which the compost is being evaluated are very low
nutrient use systems, phosphorus inputs are well below levels that could start to leak and
there is little nitrogen fertiliser used (nitrogen is usually the nutrient that leaks). Nutrient
leakage is not a problem. As no nutrients are expected to be lost, there is no economic loss to
the farmers involved.
A12 What is the financial value to farmers of reduced fertilizer costs?
As the nutrient value in all of the good quality compost sample tests that I have seen is fairly
consistent, this depends almost entirely on the cost of the compost to the farmer. The issue is
that good quality compost is difficult to get. Farmers need to be able to obtain a consistent
supply of high quality product, at the right price.
There are some other components of compost that are difficult to quantify, being the influence
on the performance of soil microbes, and the effect of the trace elements that compost
contains. Anecdotal evidence indicates that there is noticeably greater value in using compost
than what is in the nutrients that it contains. It is generally assumed by the users of organic
waste products that enhancement in the activity of soil microbes provides the additional
benefits.
A13 What is the financial value to farmers of reduced erosion?
Improved groundcover through better balanced nutrition should result in reduced erosion. As
there is no actual evaluation of erosion in the trial, I will only be able to estimate the effect of
compost application on the factors that normally contribute to erosion, ie: groundcover and
soil structure.
A14 What is the financial value to farmers of carbon sequestration?
This will be fairly easy to evaluate. The organic carbon level in the compost is measurable,
the rates applied are known, so the quantities of carbon will be able to be estimated. This will
be done at the end of the trial and the economic benefits determined.
A15 What is the financial value to farmers of increased land value?
This factor is very subjective, as land values fluctuate considerably over time, but an estimate
will be made on the completion of the trial that will be relevant at that point in time.
A20 What are the optimum rates and methods of application?
To be cost effective, the rates used need to be adequate to obtain a benefit that is equal to or
better than other normal inputs that are required for pasture or crop growth. The trials will
clearly demonstrate this outcome.
APPENDIX B:
Toxicity and weed contamination test of the Goulburn and Condobolin composts
All of the trial sites were scanned at various stages for weeds, particularly unusual weeds that
could have been introduced by the compost. Also observations were made to determine any
obvious signs of toxic effects on plants. The results are as follows:
Goulburn – Divall’s trial site.

No weeds introduced. No apparent toxins.
Goulburn - Sieler’s trial site.

Bungendore organic spelt crop trial site at “Landtasia”.

Condobolin wheat crop trial site at the Agricultural Research Station.

The following is a weed and toxic contaminant evaluation trial that was conducted with a
small sample of compost from each of the Goulburn and the Condobolin sources. Potential
toxicity is tested by germinating radish seeds and comparing the length of shoot or root
development against a known base mix to see if any toxic materials have inhibited growth.
Goulburn Compost on the left Condobolin Compost on the right
Method:
Two pots were filled with freshly made compost from both Goulburn and Condobolin landfill
and radish was planted in one of each. All pots were watered regularly until the radish and
any weed seeds had been given plenty of time to germinate (About 6 weeks).
The trial was conducted between June and October 2009.
Results:
There was almost a 100% germination of the radish plants.
There were only two weeds that germinated in the pots:
1. One brome grass plant germinated in the Goulburn compost.
2. One wild mustard plant germinated in the Condobolin compost.
Discussion:
This exercise was not designed to be scientifically rigorous, rather, as a general validation
that there were no chemical or weed contaminants in the compost that would negatively
impact on the growth of plants to which the compost was applied. This was demonstrated to
be the case.
Future implications:
In 2010 a similar trial will be done on a larger scale for each batch of compost. The compost
treatments in the trials will again be evaluated for the presence of problematic weeds that
germinate as a result of the compost.
APPENDIX C: Growth stages of cereal crops.
APPENDIX D: Example grazing chart used in Goulburn triple paddock comparisons.
Paddock 1 - Name: Paddock Area (A): (ha)
Date On DM On Date Off DM Off Total Animal Class Ave DSE No. of Total DSE Grazing
(kg/ha) (kg/ha) Days Weight Rating Animals Yield
B (kg) C D E=CxD BxE
TOTAL(F):
Average stocking rate (DSE/ha) G = F/365/A
APPENDIX E: Soil test for Goulburn Trial Site
APPENDIX F Soil tests for Bungendore Trial Site.
APPENDIX G Soil tests for Condobolin Trial Site.
APPENDIX H Compost test results.

(There was no compost test for Bungendore as
Goulburn compost was used)
Qualitative Analysis
Report prepared for:
Chris Houghton AG Report Sent: For interpretation of this report please contact:
Chris Houghton Sample#: 02-010489 | Submission:02-005200 Local Advisor: or regional lab:
PO Box 18 Unique ID: Divall Soil Foodweb Institute
Crookwell, NSW 2583 Australi Plant: Not Indicated contact@soilfoodweb.c
Invoice Number: 0 0266225150
chris@chrishoughtonag.com.au Sample Received: 23/06/2009 Consulting fees may apply
Bacteria: > 500 per field. Cocci bacteria of various sizes.

(# * 10^8/ml)
Fungi: 55%. Diversity is low. Opaque and light brown fungi only.
FD: 2.5 - 5.0 um.
Actinobacteria: None observed.

Flagellates: None observed.
Amoebae: None observed.
Ciliates: None observed.
Nematodes: None observed.
Notes:
Overal Rating: Poor.
Sample information: Sandy loam soil taken from non irrigated pasture on 15/06/09.
Overal rating is based on the percentage of organisms observed in each category.

Although a high percentage of organisms may suggest a good rating, the lack of other organisms will place the sample into a lower category.
PO Box 18 Unique ID: Andrew Seiler Soil Foodweb Institute
Crookwell, NSW 2583 Australi Plant: Not Indicated contact@soilfoodweb.c
Bacteria: > 500 per field. Cocci bacteria, various sizes.

(# * 10^8/ml)
Fungi: 20%. Diversity is low, Light brown septate fungi only.
FD: 2.5 - 5.0 um.

Notes:
Sample Information: Loam soil sample taken from non irrigated pasture on 15/06/09.
Overall rating of samples are based on the percentage of organisms observed in each category. Although high percentages of some organisms may suggest a
good rating,
the lack of other organisms will place the sample into a lower category.
SOIL ANALYSIS REPORT
Al'&
Report Numbei:352845
Chris Houghton Agricultural NATA phi ip wjliams

PO Box 1019
OUEANBEYAN Registered Signatory
NSW 2620
#S#*',""* NATA Accfedited Laboratory
Number: 1 1958
SampfeNumber: 020709792 Paddock Name: LAKE PADDOCK Date Sampled: 31-Oct 2008
Test Code: N2 Sample Name: ROA Date Received: 5 Nov-2008
Purchase Order No: 020037068 Sample Depth: 0to10 Date of Report: '12-Nov-2008
Grower Name: D VALL
Analyte Result Units Method Code Comments

Co our Brcwn 04-042-PHYS N/unsell
Texture Sandy Loam O4-O42,pHyS Fietd texture, Northcote (1984)
pH (1:5 Wate4 59 04031-PH 1:5 soit/water
pH (1 5 CaC 2) 51 04-031-PH 1:5 soiu0 01M CaCl2
Organic Carbon 24 % O4-018-UV1 Watkey& Btack(1g47)
Nitrate Nikogen <1 mg/kg O4-052-SNO3CL Water extraction
Su phate Sulphur (KCl40) 52 mg/kg O4-021-lCp2 O 2SM KC at 4O"C
Phosphorus (Colwell) 13 mg/kg O4-013-COL p 0 5M NaHCO3 (pH I5)
Potassium O23 meq/100g O4-026-tCpB Ex Cat Ammoniurn Aceiate (pH 7 0)
Calcium 35 meq/100g 04 026-tCpB Ex Cat Ammonium Acetate (pH 7 0)
Magnes um 0 68 meq/100g 04-026-lop8 Ex Cat Ammonium Acetate (pH 7 O)
Aluminiom 010 meq/100g A4-027-tCPg Ex Cat 1MKC
sodium oo74 meq/100g 04-026-lcP8 Ex cat Ammonium Aceiate (pH 7 o)
Chloride <10 mg/kg 04-OS2-SNO3CL Water extraction
Elect Conducivity (EC) 0 05 ds/m 04-031-pH 1 S so t/water
CatonExch Cap (CEC) 458 meq/100g 04-026- Cp8 Catcutation
Calcium/l\,4agnesium Ratio 51 04-026- CpB Catculation
Elec Cond (Sat Ext ) ^ 05 ds/m 04 054-WCALC Catcutation
A uminium % of Cations 22 % O4-A26-ICPB Catcutat on
Sod um % of Cations (ESP) 1 6 a/a O4-026-lCpB Catcutat on
Phosphorus Buffef lndex 55 O4-O2O-tCpj7 Catcutat on using Co we p (pBt)
The results pertain only to the sample submitted
This document sha I not be reproduced except in ful
Analyses performed on soil dried at 40 "C and ground to 2mm of less
^ Test not included n laboratory s NATA scope of accred tation
Th s document is issued in accordance with NATA s accreditation requirements
Accredited for compliance with ISO/lEC 17025
N utrient Advantage Laboratory Services Disclaimer: This analysis report is prepared solely fof the client
Nutrient Advantage is a trademark of Incitec Pivot Limited isted above To lhe extent permitted by law, ncitec Pivot L mited
Inc tec Pivot Lim ted - ABN 42 004 080 264 excludesall ability inconnectionwth this reportand where labilitv
8 Souih Rd Werribee Vic 3030 cannot be excluded lim ts its liabiity at its elect on to the re-supply
Toll-free: 1800 803 453 Fax: (61 3) 9974 0699 of the soi analysis services o. the cost of the re-supply of such
Enquiry: lab.feedback@incitecpivot.com.au servrces
Page I of 1
Report Numberl 35292A
Chris Houghton Agricultural NATA Phi ip Wi liams

PO Box 10'19
Registered Signatory
OUEANBEYAN
NSW 2620 TECHI{ICAL NATA Accred ted Laboratory
Number; 1 1958
SampfeNumber: O2O7Ogl94 Paddock Name: LAKE PADDOCK DateSampled: 31-Oct-2008

Test Codei N51 SamDle Name: ROA DateReceived: s-Nov 2008
Purchase O.der No: 020037068 Sample Depth: 1O to 20 (<U'3 S O, r--) Date ot Report: 12-Nov-2008
Analyte Result Units lVethod Code Comments

pH (115 Water) 04 031-PH 1:5 soil/water
pH (1:5 CaCl2) 45 04-031-PH 1:5 soil/o 01[,4 CaCl2
N kate Nltrogen mg/Kg 04-052-SNO3CL Water extraction
Potassium 011 meq/1009 04-026-lcP8 Ex Cat Ammonium Acetate (pH 7 0)
Calcium 12 meq/1009 04-026-tcP8 Ex Cat Ammonium Acetate (pH 7 0)
l\,4agnesium 030 meq/1009 04-026-tcP8 Ex Cat Ammonium Acetate (pH 7 0)
Aluminium 048 meq/1009 04-027-|CP9 Ex Cat 1M KCI
Sodium 0 078 meq/1009 04-026-tcP8 Ex Cat Ammoniurn Acetate (pH 7 0)
Chlonde <10 mg/Kg 04 052-SNO3CL Water extraction
Elect Conductivity (EC) 003 dS/m 04-031 PH 1:5 soil/water
Cation Exch Cap (CEC) 217 meq/1009 04-026-rcP8 Ca culation
Calcium/lvlagnesium Ratio 40 04-026-tcP8 Ca culation
Aluminium % of Cations 22 % 04-026-lcP8 Ca culation
Sod um % of Cat ons (ESP) 36 % 04-026-tcP8 Calculation
This document shall not be reproduced except in fu I
Analyses performed on soil dried at 40 "C and ground to 2mm oa less
This doc!ment is issued in accordance w th NATA's accreditation requirements
Nutrient Advantage Laboratory Services Disclaimer: This analysls report s prepared sole y for the client
Nutrient Advantage is a Vademark of Incitec Pivot Limited llsted above To the extent permitted by law nc tec P vot L mited
Incitec Pivot Limited - ABN 42 004 080 264 excludes a I iability in connection wiih this repod and, where liability
8 South Rd, Werribee V c 3030 cannot be exc uded, limits its liabil ty, at its election, to the re-supply
Toll-free 1800 803 453 Fax: (6'1 3)9974 0699 ofthe soilanays s services or the cost ofthe re-supply of such
Enqu;ry: lab.teedback@incitecpivot.com.au servrces
Page 1 of I
@&
Report Number: 352929
Chris Houghton Agricultural HATA Philip Wil iams

PO Box '1019
Registered Signatory
QUEANBEYAN
NSW 2620 TECHNICAL NATA Accredited Labofatory
Number '1 1958
SampleNumber: 020199787 Paddock Name: TRIAL PADDOCK DateSampled: 31-Oct-2008

Test Code: N2 Sample Name: ROA DateReceived: 5-Nov-2008
Purchase Order No: 020037068 Sample Depth: 0 to 10 Date of Report: 12-Nov-2008
Analyte Result l\rethod Code Comments

Colour 04-042-PHYS L4unsell
Texture SandyClayLoam 04-042-PHYS F eld texture Northcote ( 1984)
pH (1:5 Water) 57 04-031-PH 1:5 soil/water
pH (1:5 CaCl2) (1sJ 04-031-PH 1 :5 soi /0 01M CaCl2
3.8 % 04-018-UVl Walkley & Black (1947)
Nitrate Nitrogen 59 mg/Kg 04-052-SNO3CL Water extraction
Sulphate Sulphur (KCl40) 18 mg/Kg 04-021-tcP2 0 25N, KCI at 40'C
Phosphorus (Colwell) .ng/Kg 04-013-COL P 0 5[/ NaHCo3 (pH 8 5)
Potassium .to.17: meq/1009 04-026-tcP8 Ex Cat Ammonium Acetate (pH 7 0)
Calcium 80 meq/1009 04-026-tcP8 Ex Cat Ammonium Acetate (pH 7 0)
Magnesium 23 meq/1009 04-026-lcP8 Ex Cat Ammonium Acetate (pH 7 0)
Aluminium 013 meq/1009 04-427)CP9 Ex Cat 1M KCI
Sodium o44 meq/1009 04-026-tcP8 Ex Cat Ammonium Acetate (pH 7 0)
Ch orde mg/Kg 04-052-SNO3CL Water extraction
Elect Conductivity (EC) 011 dS/m 04-031-PH 1:5 soil/water
Cation Exch Cap (CEC) r 11.0 1 meq/1009 04-026-tcP8 Calculat on
Calcium/Magnes um Ratio 35 04-026-rcP8 CalculaUon
Elec Cond (Sat Ext ) ^ dS/m 04-054-WCALC Calculation
Aluminium % of Cations % 04-026-tcP8 Calcu ation
Sodium % of Cations (ESP) 40 % 04-026-tcP8 Calcu ation
Phosphorus Buffer Index 10 a4-o20-tcP 17 Calculation using ColwellP (PBl)
The results perta n only to the sample submitted
This document shall not be reproduced except in full
Analyses perforrned on soi dried at 40 "C and ground to 2mm or less
^ Test not rnc uded in laboratory's NATA scope of accreditation
This document s jssued in accordance with NATA'S accreditation requirements
Accredlted for compliance with ISO/lEC 17025
Nutrient Advantage Laboratory Services Disclaimen This analysis report is prepafed solely for the client
Nutr ent Advantage is a trademark of Incitec Pivot Lim ted listed above To the extent permitted by aw, Incitec Pivot Limited
Incrtec P vot Limlted ABN 42 004 080 264 excludes all liability n connection with this report and where iablity
8 South Rd, Werribee Vic 3030 cannot be excluded, ljmits its I ability, at its e ection to the re-supply
Toll-free: 1800 803 453 Fax: (6'1 3) 9974 0699 of the soil analysis services or the cost of the re-supply of such
Enquiryr lab.feedback@incitecpivot.com.au serv ces
Page 1 of 1
SOIL ANALYSIS REPORT A!*&
I Report Number:352930
Chris Houghton Agricultural NATA Philip Will ams

PO Box 1019
QUEANBEYAN Registered Signatory
NSW 2620 TECIINICAL NATA Accredited Laboratory
Number: '11958
SampfeNumber: A2A7A9796 Paddock Name: TRIAL PADDOCK DateSampled: 31-Oct-2OOB

Test Code: N5j Sample Name: DateReceived: 5-Nov-2008
Purchase Order No: 020037068 sampre Depthi ozo ( gvaj Saiu) Date of Report: 12-Nov-2008
Grower Name: CROUNSWEI I SITLER
Analyle Result [Jnits lllethod Code Comments

pH ('1:5 Water) 52 04-031-PH 1 5 soil/water
pH (1:5 CaCl2) r 4.3 ) 04 031 PH 1 5 soil/O 01M CaC12
Nitrate Nitrogen 18 mg/Kg 04 052 SNO3CL
Potassium o12 meq/1009 04-026-lcP8 Ex Cat Arnmonium Acetate (pH 7 0)
Calcium 45 meq/1009 04-026-tcP8 Ex Cat Arnmonium Acetate (pH 7 0)
Magnesium T9 meq/1009 04-026-tcP8 Ex Cat Arnmonium Acetate (pN 7 0)
Alumin um 095 meq/1009 04-427- CPg Ex Cat 1N,4 KCI
Sodium 044 rneq/T 009 04-026-tcP8 Ex Cat Ammonium Acetate (pH 7 0)
Ch orde 57 rng/Kg 04-052-SNO3CL Water extraction
Elect Conductivity (EC) 010 dS/m 04-031-PH 1:5 soil/water
Cation Exch Cap (CEC) 791 meq/1009 04-026-lcP8 Calcu ation
Calcium/l\,4agnesium Ratio 24 04-026-tcP8 Calculation
A urninium % of Cations % 04-026-tcP8 Calculation
Sodiurn % of Cat ons (ESP) 56 % 04-026-tcP8 Calculation
This document shall not be repfoduced except in full
Analyses pedormed on soi died at 40 'C and ground to 2mm or ess
This document s ssued in accordance with NATA s accreditation requirements
Nutrient Advantage Laboratory Services Disclaimer: This analysis report s prepaaed solely for the clent
Nutr ent Advantage s a trademaft of Incitec Pivot Limited lsted above To the extent permitted by law Incitec Pivot Limited
Incitec P vot Limiled - ABN 42 004 080 264 excludes a I liabiity jn connection wilh this report and where liability
8 South Rd, Werribee Vic 3030 cannot be excluded, limits its liabiljty, at its election to the re-supply
Toll-free 1800 803 453 Fax: (61 3) 9974 0699 of the soil ana ysis serv ces or the cost of the re-supp V oi such
Enquiry: lab.feedback@incitecpivot com.au serytces
Page 'l of 1
Soil
Foodweb Analysis
Chris Houghton AG Report Sent: 09/07/2009 For interpretation of this report please contact:
PO Box 18 Unique ID: Landtasia Soil Foodweb Institute
Crookwell, NSW 2583 Plant: Spelt contact@soilfoodweb.c
Organism Dry Weight Active Bacterial Total Bacterial Active Fungal Total Fungal Hyphal Nematode detail (# per gram or # per mL)
Biomass Data (µg/g) (µg/g) (µg/g) (µg/g) Diameter (µm) Classified by type and identified to genus.
(If section is blank, no nematodes identified.)
Results 0.840 58.3 680 3.74 99.2 2.75 Bacterial Feeders
Acrobeloides 0.16
Comments In Good Range Above range Above range In range Below range
Cephalobus 1.44
Expected Low 0.45 1 175 1 175 Chiloplacus (stubby) 0.16
Range 0.85 5 300 5 300 Eucephalobus 0.48
High
Panagrolaimus 0.80
Protozoa (Numbers/g) Total Mycorrhizal Colonization (%) Rhabditis 0.32
Flagellates Amoebae Ciliates Nematodes #/g ENDO ECTO Fungal Feeders
Eudorylaimus 0.16
Fungal/Root Feeders
Results 16440 505 16 7.99 0% 0%
Aphelenchoides Foliar nematode 1.28
Comments High Low Low Low Low Low Aphelenchus 0.32
Expected Low 5000 5000 50 10 40% 40% Root Feeders
Range Paratylenchus Pin nematode 1.60
High 100 20 80% 80%
Organism Total Fungal to Active to Total Active to Total Active Fungal Plant Available N
Biomass Ratios Tot.Bacterial Fungal Bacterial to Act.Bacterial Supply (lbs/ac)
Results 0.15 0.04 0.09 0.06 50-75

Comments Low Low Low Low
Expected Low 0.8 0.15 0.15 0.75
Range 1.5 0.2 0.2 1.5
High
1 Crawford Road East Lismore, NSW 2480 Australia

0266225150 | contact@soilfoodweb.com.au
www.soilfoodweb.com.au 02-010419: Page 1 of 2
Chris Houghton AG Report Sent: 09/07/2009 For interpretation of this report please contact:
PO Box 18 Unique ID: Landtasia Soil Foodweb Institute
Crookwell, NSW 2583 Plant: Spelt contact@soilfoodweb.c
Dry Weight: Check plant requirements, but moisture appears to be fine.
Active Bacteria Bacterial activity above expected levels; Bacterial biomass will increase as long as nutrients are available.
Total Bacteria Higher than normal bacterial biomass suggests high bacterial species diversity.
Active Fungi: Filamentous fungal activity and diversity in normal range.
Total Fungi: Need to improve total fungal biomass. Add fungal compost (2.5 to 12.5 tonnes/ha or more), or multiple applications of 200 litres/ha fungal compost tea as soil drench.
Hyphal Diameter Good balance of disease suppressive and normal soil fungi.
Protozoa Lacking amoeba numbers. Minimal nutrient cycling occurring. Need to improve protozoan numbers, need to improve soil structure by improving fungi.
Total Nematodes Low numbers, low diversity. Switchers and root feeders present. Need to add beneficial nematodes, improve conditions to allow their survival.
Mycorrhizal Col. No mycorrhizal colonization. Add an inoculum of mycorrhizal spores, then provide humic acids to feed mycorrhizal fungi and improve colonization.
TF/TB: Too bacterial dominated for spelt crops. Will lack disease suppression, nutrient retention, ability to build soil structure. Need to improve beneficial fungi to balance bacterial
biomass.
AF/TF: Low fungal activity compared to total biomass; need to add fungal foods to encourage fungi.
AB/TB: Low bacterial activity compared to total biomass: add bacterial foods.
AF/AB: Soil is bacterial dominated, and becoming more bacterial; addition of fungal foods might help maintain balance.
Nitrogen Supply Low nutrient cycling and availability. Need more protozoa and beneficial nematodes to cycle nutrients.
Interpretation Comments
Soil Type: Sand, low organic matter, Irrigated: No., Plant: Spelt.
Actinobacteria Biomass = 0.29 ug/g
1 Crawford Road East Lismore, NSW 2480 Australia

0266225150 | contact@soilfoodweb.com.au
www.soilfoodweb.com.au 02-010419: Page 2 of 2
Nutrient Recommendation Report
Agent/Dealer:
Landtasia Advisor/Contact: Chris Houghton
Phone: 02 4837 3342
Kings Hwy
Report Print Date: 06/05/2010
Sample No: 020954364
Bubgendore Test Code: A12
Paddock Name: Swamp
NSW 2621
Sample Name: Chemistry
Sample Type: Soil
Sample Depth (cm) 0 To 10
Assay Unit Value Very Low Marginal Adequate High Excess Optimal
pH (1:5 Water) 6.70
pH (1:5 CaCl2) 6.10 Neutral 5 - 6.5
Nitrate Nitrogen (NO3) mg/kg 17.00 ### 12-25
Phosphorus (Colwell) mg/kg 37.00
Phosphorus Buffer Index (PBI-Col) 34.00 Very Low
Available Potassium mg/kg 81.00
Sulphate Sulphur (KCl40) mg/kg 4.30 ### 8-15
Chloride mg/kg 20.00 ### <300
Electrical Conductivity dS/m 0.09
Cation Exchange Capacity meq/100g 6.50
Calcium (Amm-acet.) % 85.00 ### 55-80%
Calcium (Amm-acet.) meq/100g 5.50
Magnesium (Amm-acet.) % 11.00 ### 6-25%
Magnesium (Amm-acet.) meq/100g 0.69
Sodium (Amm-acet.) % 1.50 ### <6%
Sodium (Amm-acet.) meq/100g 0.10
Potassium (Amm-acet.) % 3.20
Potassium (Amm-acet.) meq/100g 0.21
Calcium/Magnesium Ratio 8.00 ### 2-6
Potassium to Magnesium Ratio 0.30
The results reported pertain only to the sample submitted.

Analyses performed on soil dried at 40 degrees Celsius and ground to <2mm (excluding moisture assay)
* One or more components of this test are below their detection limit. The value used is indicative only.
Analyses conducted by Nutrient Advantage Laboratory Services

Laboratory report is available upon request
Toll-free: 1800 803 453 Email: lab.feedback@incitecpivot.com.au
NATA Accreditation No: 11958
Lab Report No: Lab Report Date: 22/06/2009
Sample No: 020954364 Version: 1 Page 1 of 2

PO Box 18 Unique ID: Groundswell - Condo Soil Foodweb Institute
Crookwell, NSW 2583 Australi Plant: Wheat contact@soilfoodweb.c
Bacteria: >500 per field. Cocci bacteria of various sizes.

(# * 10^8/ml)
Fungi: 20%. Diversity is low, light brown septate fungi only.
FD: 3.0 - 5.0 um.

Notes:
Samle information: Clay loam soil sample taken from non irrigated wheat crop on 16/06/09.
Overal rating is based on the percentage of organisms observed in each catagort.

Although high percetages of some organisms may suggest a good rating, the lack of other organisms will place the sample into a lower category.
Nutrient Report
Agent/Dealer: Frank Cooney & Son P/L

FRANK COONEY & SONS
Advisor/Contact: Frank Cooney & Son PL
36 WILLIAM ST Phone: 02 6895 2288
Report Print Date: 24/11/2009
CONDOBOLIN
NSW 2877
Sample No 021080910
Test Code A14
Lab Report No.
Lab Report Date 05/10/2009
Paddock Name CWFS
Sample Name CONDO ARAS
Sample Type Soil

Sample Depth (cm) 0 - 10
Sampling Date 21/09/2009
Assay Unit Value
pH (1:5 Water) 5.60

pH (1:5 CaCl2) 4.80
Aluminium Saturation % 1.0

Organic Carbon (OC) % 1.00
Nitrate Nitrogen (NO3) mg/kg 37.0
Ammonium Nitrogen (KCl) mg/kg 3.8
Phosphorus (Colwell) mg/kg 22
Phosphorus Buffer Index (PBI-Col) 79

Available Potassium mg/kg 790
Sulfate Sulfur (KCl40) mg/kg 3.6
Zinc (DTPA) mg/kg 0.40
Copper (DTPA) mg/kg 0.86

Iron (DTPA) mg/kg 21.0
Manganese (DTPA) mg/kg 25.00
Boron (Hot CaCl2) mg/kg 1.70
Chloride mg/kg 21.0

Electrical Conductivity dS/m 0.11
Electrical Conductivity (Saturated Extract) dS/m 1.00
Cation Exchange Capacity meq/100g 10.10
Aluminium (KCl) mg/kg 9.00

Aluminium (KCl) meq/100g 0.10
Calcium (Amm-acet.) meq/100g 5.50
Analyses conducted by Nutrient Advantage Laboratory Services

Laboratory report is available upon request
Toll-Free: 1800 803 453 Email: lab.feedback@incitecpivot.com.au
NATA Accreditation No: 11958

Nutrient Report
Grower Name : FRANK COONEY & SONS Advisor/Contact: Frank Cooney & Son PL
Report Print Date: 24/11/2009 Phone: 02 6895 2288
Sample No 021080910
Test Code A14
Lab Report No.
Lab Report Date 05/10/2009
Paddock Name CWFS
Sample Name CONDO ARAS
Sample Type Soil

Sample Depth (cm) 0 - 10
Sampling Date 21/09/2009
Assay Unit Value
Calcium (Amm-acet.) % 54.00
Magnesium (Amm-acet.) meq/100g 2.40

Magnesium (Amm-acet.) % 24.00
Sodium (Amm-acet.) meq/100g 0.13
Sodium % of Cations (ESP) % 1.3
Potassium (Amm-acet.) meq/100g 2.00
Potassium (Amm-acet.) % 20.00
Calcium/Magnesium Ratio 2.3
Potassium to Magnesium Ratio 0.8
Soil Texture Clay Loam
Soil Colour Red
Disp. Index, Loveday/Pyle 6
Slaking 2Hrs Considerable
The results reported pertain only to the sample submitted.

Analyses performed on soil dried at 40 degrees Celsius and ground to <2mm (excluding moisture assay)
Analytical results reported by the laboratory as ‘less than’ the level of reporting, will be deemed by Nutrient Advantage Advice as being
equivalent to the level of reporting for both calculation and interpretive purposes
Disclaimer: Laboratory analyses and fertiliser recommendations are made in good faith, based on the best technical information
available as at the date of this report. Incitec Pivot Limited, its officers, employees, consultants, Agents and Dealers do not accept
any liability whatsoever arising from or in connection with the analytical results, interpretations and recommendations provided, and
the client takes the analytical results, interpretations and recommendations on these terms. In respect of liability which cannot be
excluded by law, Incitec Pivot's liability is restricted to the re-supply of the laboratory analysis or the cost of having the analysis
re-supplied.

Tel: +61 3 9701 6007
Fax: +61 3 9701 5712
Email: services@swep.com.au
ABN: 26 005 031 569
www.swep.com.au
Compost Analysis
Sustainable Soil Management with the Mikhail Balance System
DATE ISSUED : 25/05/2009

DATE RECEIVED : 20/05/2009
FILE NO : 090567211
GROUNDSWELL CLIENT ID : GRO033

ATT: SIMONE DILKARA PHONE : 02 6229 7136
C/- DECC, PO BOX 622 REFERENCE :
QUEANBEYAN, NSW 2620 REFERENCE PHONE :
SAMPLE ID : GLB001A ANALYSIS REQUIRED : Compost

& Microbes
CONTENTS:
page
1. Total Analysis, Microbial Analysis 2
2. Plant Available Nutrients 3
3. Exchangeable Cations & suggested amendments 4
4. Notes on Biology Management 5
SWEP Analytical Laboratories Web: www.swep.com.au

45 - 47 / 174 Bridge Road Email: services@swep.com.au
Keysborough VIC 3173 Australia P.O. Box 583 Noble Park VIC 3174
FILE NO : 090567211 PAGE NO : 2
Total Analysis
ITEM unit RESULT
Basic Measures:
pH (1:5 Water) 8.1

pH (1:5 0.01M CaCl2) 7.7
Electrical Conductivity EC µS/cm 3461
TOTAL SOLUBLE SALT TSS ppm 11421
Major Nutrients:
(Major Nutrients in percentages)
TOTAL NITROGEN N kg/t 15.1 1.51 %
TOTAL PHOSPHORUS P kg/t 3 0.3 %
TOTAL POTASSIUM K kg/t 11.8 1.18 %
TOTAL SULPHUR S kg/t 1.9 0.19 %
Total Cations:
TOTAL CALCIUM Ca % 1.77

TOTAL MAGNESIUM Mg % 0.3
TOTAL SODIUM Na % 0.19
Trace Minerals:
TOTAL COPPER Cu ppm 28.4

TOTAL ZINC Zn ppm 225.9
TOTAL IRON Fe ppm 10253
TOTAL MANGANESE Mn ppm 348
TOTAL COBALT Co ppm 4.58
TOTAL MOLYBDENUM Mo ppm 1 63
1.63
TOTAL BORON B ppm 2.17
Carbon Content:
TOTAL ORGANIC MATTER % 28.6

TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON % 14.3
Microbial Analysis
ITEM unit RESULT Percentage of Total Active B
ACTIVE LACTIC ACID BACTERIA 10,000,000 99.58 %
Active Fungi cells/g 10,000

Cellulose Utilisers cells/g 20,000
TOTAL ACTIVE FUNGI cells/g 21,000 0.21 %
ACTIVE YEASTS cells/g 1,000 0.01 %

ACTIVE ACTINOMYCETES cells/g 1,150 0.01 %
ACTIVE PHOTOSYNTHETIC BACTERIA cells/g 20,000 0.20 %
Total Active Population: cells/g 10042150
cells/g = cells per gram of material
Notes: See notes on Biology Management (page 5).

FILE NO : 090567211 PAGE NO : 3
Plant Available Nutrients

ITEM unit RESULT
AVAILABLE CALCIUM Ca ppm 5078

AVAILABLE MAGNESIUM Mg ppm 1081.2
AVAILABLE SODIUM Na ppm 1428.3
AVAILABLE NITROGEN N ppm 0.6

AVAILABLE PHOSPHORUS P ppm 407.2
AVAILABLE POTASSIUM K ppm 5202.6
AVAILABLE SULPHUR S ppm 21.1
AVAILABLE COPPER Cu ppm 6.4

AVAILABLE ZINC Zn ppm 101.9
AVAILABLE IRON Fe ppm 45
AVAILABLE MANGANESE Mn ppm 160
AVAILABLE COBALT Co ppm 0.3
AVAILABLE MOLYBDENUM Mo ppm 0.3
AVAILABLE BORON B ppm 0.4
Notes: These results represent the proportion of the Total nutrients (page 2) that will be immediately
available for plant uptake.
ppm (parts per million) = mg/L (milligram per litre) = mg/kg (milligram per kilogram)

FILE NO : 090567211 PAGE NO : 4
Exchangeable Cations
EXCHANGEABLE CATIONS RESULTS
CALCIUM Ca meq/100g of sample 8.82

MAGNESIUM Mg meq/100g of sample 3.13
SODIUM Na meq/100g of sample 2.16
POTASSIUM K meq/100g of sample 4.64
HYDROGEN H meq/100g of sample 4.40
ADJ. EXCH. HYDROGEN H meq/100g of sample 0
CATION EXCHANGE CAPACITY CEC 23.15

ADJUSTED CEC Adj.CEC 18.75
SATURATION BASE PERCENTAGE BSP 92
meq = milliequivalent
EXCHANGEABLE CATION BALANCE % OF ADJUSTED CEC DESIRABLE
CALCIUM PERCENTAGE 47.04 65-70%

MAGNESIUM PERCENTAGE 16.69 12-15%
SODIUM PERCENTAGE ESP 11.52 0.5-5%
POTASSIUM PERCENTAGE 24.75 3-5%
ADJ. HYDROGEN PERCENTAGE 0 <20%
CALCIUM / MAGNESIUM RATIO Ca/Mg 2.82 2-4
Actual Cation Balance Desirable Cation Balance

Exchangeable Sodium
Exchangeable Sodium
Exchangeable Calcium 5%
19% 9% 10% 5% Exchangeable Calcium
Exchangeable 15%
20% 38%
14% Magnesium 65% Exchangeable Magnesium
Exchangeable Potassium
Exchangeable Hydrogen
CATION BALANCE AMENDMENTS (For optimum effectiveness on application)
GYPSUM REQUIREMENT 2.5 kg/m3

LIME REQUIREMENT 0.0 kg/m3
DOLOMITE REQUIREMENT 0.0 kg/m3
MAGNESIUM SULPHATE 0.0 kg/m3 OR MAGNESIUM OXIDE 0.0 kg/m3
NB. The effectiveness of the compost may be improved by mixing in the suggested materials (above) prior to application.

FILE NO : 090567211 PAGE NO : 5
Notes on Biology Management
The first thing to remember is that SWEP results are for ACTIVE micro-organisms only. This means only those
that will immediately grow under ideal conditions (generally about 7-10% of total soil biomass). This allows us
to analyse samples year round, since the microbes that are active in spring will still be present in summer or
winter, but at very reduced levels of activity. Given the ideal conditions in our cultures, they will spring back to
life and grow much more quickly than others.
Active Indicator Organisms
Photosynthetic bacteria like Rhodopseudomonas spp and Bradyrhizobium spp require only sunlight, carbon
dioxide and mineral nutrients to survive. They are important in recycling organic matter, particularly compounds
that are difficult to break down - such as pesticide and petrochemical residues. They are also important for
synthesis of bio-active compounds that are known to stimulate plant growth.
Yeasts such as Saccaromyces spp, Debaryomyces spp, Torulopis spp and Rhodotrula spp synthesise plant
growth substances from amino acids and sugars that are produced by photosynthetic bacteria. These
substances also promote the growth of Lactic acid bacteria and Actinomycetes.
Lactic acid bacteria such as Lactobaccillus spp, Leuconostoc spp, Lactococcus spp and Pediococcus spp
produce Lactic Acid from sugars and carbohydrates. Lactic acid is a strong bio-suppressive compound that
helps control harmful micro-organisms. This effect, together with other trace nutrients produced by members of
this group, is particularly beneficial to the growth of Photosynthetic bacteria and Yeasts.
Actinomycetes such as Actinomyces spp and Streptomyces spp produce antibiotic compounds that are
effective suppressants of pathogenic organisms. They have also been shown to produce plant hormones -
especially when treated with kelp extracts.
Fungii such
F h as AAspergillus
ill spp, P
Penecillium
illi spp, M
Mucor spp and Rhizopus spp h
d Rhi have many beneficial
b fi i l effects
ff t on
plant growth. These include the production of enzymes, antibiotics and various growth regulators. They are
also important in the conversion of organic matter to humic substances. Some of the less complex compounds
produced from this process are also important food sources for some bacteria.
Cellulose Utilisers like Trichoderma spp require only minerals and cellulose for growth. These fungi break
down plant remains into organic materials that are beneficial to other micro-organisms such as Protozoa.

LABORATORY TEST REPORT Page 1 of 1
T his do cum ent is is sued in ac c o rdanc e ECOWISE Environmental

with NA T A 's ac creditatio n requirem ents. PO Box 1834
A c credited fo r c o m pliance with ISO/IEC 17025 Fyshw ick A CT 2609
T his do cum ent m us t no t be repro duc ed Telephone 02 6270 7650
exc ept in full. Facsimile 02 6270 7608
A B N 68 074 205 780
DECC Results Authorised by:

PO Box 622 M Radic (Supvr Micro) T Vimalasiri(Metals) C Boatwright(Manager)
Queanbeyan Customer Ref: Groundswell
NSW 2620 Customer Fax: Sample Temp. on receipt = C
Attn: Simone Dilkara Rep.Details:
FINAL REPORT These samples were analysed as received into the laboratory.
Job Name: G026_76101 NATA accreditation number 992. Tests marked # are not NATA accredited
Job Desc: Compost Sample - Goulburn Pres_Count means presumptive count.Conf_Count means confirmed count
Report Date : 29-MAY-2009 Results relate only to the samples tested
Email : simone.dilkara@environment.nsw.gov.au
Sample: 693985
Sample Point: SOIL
Description: Compost
Sampled: 18-MAY-2009
15:30
Ext.Ref: GLB001a
Method Test Unit
350# T. Phosphorous mg/kg 2600

350 Total Arsenic mg/kg 10
350 Total Cadmium mg/kg 0.3
350 Total Chromium mg/kg 19
350 Total Copper mg/kg 30
350# Total Mercury mg/kg <0.1
350 Total Selenium mg/kg <1
350 Total Nickel mg/kg 11
350 Total Lead mg/kg 110
350 Total Zinc mg/kg 260
Moisture (a.r) % 18
HCB mg/kg <0.02

BHC Total mg/kg <0.02
Lindane mg/kg <0.02
Dieldrin mg/kg <0.02
Heptachlor mg/kg <0.02
DDD mg/kg <0.02
DDE mg/kg 0.021
DDT mg/kg <0.02
Total DDT Analogs mg/kg <0.02
PCB Totals mg/kg <0.2
Aldrin mg/kg <0.02
Chlordane mg/kg <0.02
Surrogate Rec. % 101
680# Salmonella in 25 g Not Detect.
580# Faec.Coli (MPN) MPN/g <0.3
610# E.Coli (MPN) MPN/g <0.3
Tel: +61 3 9701 6007
Fax: +61 3 9701 5712
Email: services@swep.com.au
ABN: 26 005 031 569
www.swep.com.au
*Compost Analysis
Sustainable Soil Management with the Mikhail Balance System
DATE ISSUED : 5/05/2009

DATE RECEIVED : 30/04/2009
FILE NO : 090466878
GROUNDSWELL CLIENT ID : GRO033

ATT: SIMONE DILKARA PHONE : 02 6229 7136
C/- DECC, PO BOX 622 REFERENCE :
QUEANBEYAN, NSW 2620 REFERENCE PHONE :
SAMPLE ID : CONDO 001 ANALYSIS REQUIRED : *CompostAnalysis

customised
Available elements,
Total elements,
Microbes
CONTENTS:
page
1. Total Analysis, Microbial Analysis 2
2. Plant Available Nutrients 3
3. Exchangeable Cations & suggested amendments 4
4. Notes on Biology Management 5

FILE NO : 090466878 PAGE NO : 2
Total Analysis
ITEM unit RESULT
Basic Measures:
pH (1:5 Water) 7.7

pH (1:5 0.01M CaCl2) 7.2
Electrical Conductivity EC µS/cm 3327
TOTAL SOLUBLE SALT TSS ppm 10979
Major Nutrients:
(Major Nutrients in percentages)
TOTAL NITROGEN N kg/t 11.5 1.15 %
TOTAL PHOSPHORUS P kg/t 2.2 0.22 %
TOTAL POTASSIUM K kg/t 10 1 %
TOTAL SULPHUR S kg/t 1.4 0.14 %
Total Cations:
TOTAL CALCIUM Ca % 1.18

TOTAL MAGNESIUM Mg % 0.3
TOTAL SODIUM Na % 0.22
Trace Minerals:
TOTAL COPPER Cu ppm 38.9

TOTAL ZINC Zn ppm 268.2
TOTAL IRON Fe % 2.19
TOTAL MANGANESE Mn ppm 246
TOTAL COBALT Co ppm 5.56
TOTAL MOLYBDENUM Mo ppm 0.37
TOTAL BORON B ppm 23.8
Carbon Content:
TOTAL ORGANIC MATTER % 21.2

TOTAL ORGANIC CARBON % 10.6
Microbial Analysis
ITEM unit RESULT Percentage of Total Active Bacteria
ACTIVE LACTIC ACID BACTERIA cells/g 730,000 22.8%

ACTIVE YEASTS cells/g 20,000 0.6%
ACTIVE FUNGI cells/g 920,000 28.8%
CELLULOSE UTILISERS cells/g 760,000 23.8%
ACTIVE ACTINOMYCETES cells/g 710,000 22.2%
ACTIVE PHOTOSYNTHETIC BACTERIA cells/g 60,000 1.9%
TOTAL ACTIVE POPULATION cells/g 3,200,000
cells/g = cells per gram of material
Notes: See notes on Biology Management (page 5).

FILE NO : 090466878 PAGE NO : 3
Plant Available Nutrients

ITEM unit RESULT
AVAILABLE CALCIUM Ca ppm 4908

AVAILABLE MAGNESIUM Mg ppm 1078.8
AVAILABLE SODIUM Na ppm 1090.2
AVAILABLE NITROGEN N ppm 203.7

AVAILABLE PHOSPHORUS P ppm 397.9
AVAILABLE POTASSIUM K ppm 3798.6
AVAILABLE SULPHUR S ppm 15.3
AVAILABLE COPPER Cu ppm 12.4

AVAILABLE ZINC Zn ppm 105.3
AVAILABLE IRON Fe ppm 19
AVAILABLE MANGANESE Mn ppm 92
AVAILABLE COBALT Co ppm 0.7
AVAILABLE MOLYBDENUM Mo ppm 0.2
AVAILABLE BORON B ppm 2.8
Notes: These results represent the proportion of the Total nutrients (page 2) that will be immediately
available for plant uptake.
ppm (parts per million) = mg/L (milligram per litre) = mg/kg (milligram per kilogram)

FILE NO : 090466878 PAGE NO : 4
Exchangeable Cations
EXCHANGEABLE CATIONS RESULTS
CALCIUM Ca meq/100g of sample 18.03

MAGNESIUM Mg meq/100g of sample 6.60
SODIUM Na meq/100g of sample 3.48
POTASSIUM K meq/100g of sample 7.16
HYDROGEN H meq/100g of sample 5.20
ADJ. EXCH. HYDROGEN H meq/100g of sample 0
CATION EXCHANGE CAPACITY CEC 40.47

ADJUSTED CEC Adj.CEC 35.27
SATURATION BASE PERCENTAGE BSP 90
meq = milliequivalent
EXCHANGEABLE CATION BALANCE % OF ADJUSTED CEC DESIRABLE
CALCIUM PERCENTAGE 51.12 65-70%

MAGNESIUM PERCENTAGE 18.71 12-15%
SODIUM PERCENTAGE ESP 9.87 0.5-5%
POTASSIUM PERCENTAGE 20.30 3-5%
ADJ. HYDROGEN PERCENTAGE 0 <20%
CALCIUM / MAGNESIUM RATIO Ca/Mg 2.73 2-4
Actual Cation Balance Desirable Cation Balance

Exchangeable Sodium
Exchangeable Sodium
Exchangeable Calcium 5%
13% 9% 10% 5% Exchangeable Calcium
18% Exchangeable 15%
16% 44% Magnesium 65% Exchangeable Magnesium

CATION BALANCE AMENDMENTS (For optimum effectiveness on application)
GYPSUM REQUIREMENT 4.8 kg/m3

LIME REQUIREMENT 0.0 kg/m3
DOLOMITE REQUIREMENT 0.0 kg/m3
MAGNESIUM SULPHATE 0.0 kg/m3 OR MAGNESIUM OXIDE 0.0 kg/m3
NB. The effectiveness of the compost may be improved by mixing in the suggested materials (above) prior to application.

FILE NO : 090466878 PAGE NO : 5
Notes on Biology Management
The first thing to remember is that SWEP results are for ACTIVE micro-organisms only. This means only those
that will immediately grow under ideal conditions (generally about 7-10% of total soil biomass). This allows us
to analyse samples year round, since the microbes that are active in spring will still be present in summer or
winter, but at very reduced levels of activity. Given the ideal conditions in our cultures, they will spring back to
life and grow much more quickly than others.
Active Indicator Organisms
Photosynthetic bacteria like Rhodopseudomonas spp and Bradyrhizobium spp require only sunlight, carbon
dioxide and mineral nutrients to survive. They are important in recycling organic matter, particularly
compounds that are difficult to break down - such as pesticide and petrochemical residues. They are also
important for synthesis of bio-active compounds that are known to stimulate plant growth.
Yeasts such as Saccaromyces spp, Debaryomyces spp, Torulopis spp and Rhodotrula spp synthesise plant
growth substances from amino acids and sugars that are produced by photosynthetic bacteria. These
substances also promote the growth of Lactic acid bacteria and Actinomycetes.
Lactic acid bacteria such as Lactobaccillus spp, Leuconostoc spp, Lactococcus spp and Pediococcus spp
produce Lactic Acid from sugars and carbohydrates. Lactic acid is a strong bio-suppressive compound that
helps control harmful micro-organisms. This effect, together with other trace nutrients produced by members of
this group, is particularly beneficial to the growth of Photosynthetic bacteria and Yeasts.
Actinomycetes such as Actinomyces spp and Streptomyces spp produce antibiotic compounds that are
effective suppressants of pathogenic organisms. They have also been shown to produce plant hormones -
especially when treated with kelp extracts.
Fungi such as Aspergillus spp, Penecillium spp, Mucor spp and Rhizopus spp have many beneficial effects on
plant growth. These include the production of enzymes, antibiotics and various growth regulators. They are
also important in the conversion of organic matter to humic substances. Some of the less complex compounds
produced from this process are also important food sources for some bacteria.
Cellulose Utilisers like Trichoderma spp require only minerals and cellulose for growth. These fungi break
down plant remains into organic materials that are beneficial to other micro-organisms such as Protozoa.

ECOWISE Environmental
PO Box 1834
Fyshwick ACT 2609
Telephone 02 6270 7650
Facsimile 02 6270 7608
ABN 94 105 060 320
Signed :
for Manager Ecowise Environmental

PO Box 622
NSW 2620 Customer Fax: Sample Temp. on receipt = 20 C
INTERIM REPORT ONLY These samples were analysed as received into the laboratory.
Job Desc: Compost Samples Results listed as Total Metals are actually Total Recoverable Metals
Sample: 690747 690748 690749
Sample Point: SOIL SOIL SOIL
Description: Compost Compost Compost
Sampled: 29-APR-2009 29-APR-2009 29-APR-2009

09:00 09:00 09:00
Ext.Ref: 001 CONDO 001A CONDO 001B CONDO
Method Test Unit
350# T. Phosphorous mg/kg 2000

350 Total Arsenic mg/kg 25 22 14
350 Total Cadmium mg/kg 0.3
350 Total Chromium mg/kg 16
350 Total Copper mg/kg 36
350# Total Mercury mg/kg <0.1
350 Total Selenium mg/kg <1
350 Total Nickel mg/kg 10
350 Total Lead mg/kg 41
350 Total Zinc mg/kg 190
Moisture (a.r) % 22
HCB mg/kg <0.01

BHC Total mg/kg <0.01
Lindane mg/kg <0.01
Dieldrin mg/kg 0.070
Heptachlor mg/kg <0.01
DDD mg/kg <0.01
DDE mg/kg 0.011
DDT mg/kg <0.01
Total DDT Analogs mg/kg <0.01
PCB Totals mg/kg <0.1
Aldrin mg/kg <0.01
Chlordane mg/kg <0.01
Surrogate Rec. % 116
680# Salmonella in 25 g Not Detect.
580# Faec.Coli (MPN) MPN/gram 240
580 Faec.Coli (MPN) MPN/100mL
610# E.Coli (MPN) MPN/gram 240
610 E Coli (MPN) MPN/100mL
PO Box 1834
Fyshwick ACT 2609
Telephone 02 6270 7650
Facsimile 02 6270 7608
ABN 94 105 060 320
Signed :
for Manager Ecowise Environmental

PO Box 622
NSW 2620 Customer Fax: Sample Temp. on receipt = 20 C
INTERIM REPORT ONLY These samples were analysed as received into the laboratory.
Job Desc: Compost Samples Results listed as Total Metals are actually Total Recoverable Metals
Sample: 690747 690748 690749
Sample Point: SOIL SOIL SOIL
Description: Compost Compost Compost
Sampled: 29-APR-2009 29-APR-2009 29-APR-2009

09:00 09:00 09:00
Ext.Ref: 001 CONDO 001A CONDO 001B CONDO
Method Test Unit
Comments: NMI accreditation No 198

Groundswell Agronomy - Mid Project Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Groundswell Agronomy - Mid Project Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

6/25/2010

Prepared by: Chris Houghton

Pasture / Grazing trials.

Other outcomes were:

The results for the Bungendore trial can be summarised as follows:

The results for the Condobolin trial can be summarised as follows:

Other outcomes of both cropping trials were:

The Groundswell project targets 5 key needs:

 to divert organic waste from the urban waste stream

Groundswell was developed in partnership with the Wiradjuri Condobolin Corporation

2.1.1 Goulburn Site

Goulburn Rainfall - Monthly analysis

Table: 1 Goulburn monthly rainfall analysis.

Bungendore Rainfall - Monthly analysis

Table: 2 Bungendore monthly rainfall analysis.

Condobolin Rainfall - Monthly analysis

Table: 3 Condobolin monthly rainfall analysis.

3. Limited weed risks exist through the use of UW compost.

5. UW compost has other properties such as the presence of beneficial microorganisms

6. Soil water holding capacity is enhanced through the application of UW compost to

7. Crop water use efficiency is enhanced through the application of UW compost to

8. UW compost application enhances soil carbon levels and is a practical means of

4.1 Goulburn Trial Sites

4.1.2 Divall’s trial

Figure 1: Trial location in relation to Goulburn and Marulan.

4.1.2.1.3 Trial Design

Replicated trial site

1 4 2 6 3 8 5 7 The plot trial area

Replicated trial treatments:

Treatments for the Triple Paddock Grazing Trial

Information to be recorded by the farmer in the three paddocks will be:

Small Plot Replicated Trial

Note: All numbers in kg/DM/Ha

Divall's - First cut- Nov 2009

Figure 2: Divall‟s first dry matter cut - Nov 2009

Note: All numbers in kg/DM/Ha

Divall's - 2nd DM cut Mar 2010

Figure 3: Divall‟s second dry matter cut - March 2010

Divall's - Cumulative DM to Mar 2010

Figure 4: Divall‟s trial - Cumulative dry matter production at March 2010

Grazing trial results

4.1.3.3 Plans for 2010

Figure 5: Sielers‟ trial location

Replicated trial site

Sieler's - First cut- Nov 2009

3000 Rep A (kg/ha)

Figure 6: Sieler‟s first dry matter cut - Nov 2009

Second cut – March 2010

Sieler's - Second cut- Mar 2010

Figure 7: Sieler‟s second dry matter cut - March 2010

Sieler’s Cumulative DM to March 2010

Cumulative DM to Mar 2010 - Sielers

Figure 8: Sieler‟s trial - Cumulative dry matter production to March 2010

Grazing trial results

4.1.3.3 Plans for 2010

4.2.2 Site Details

Figure 9: Location of Bungendore trial.

250m Trial area

 The FCMP rates are:

FCMP is accredited for organic production.

Dry matter yield at GS 30

Spelt crop - DM yield at GS 30

Figure 10: Crop dry matter at GS30.