Reviews
"The critical aspects that I witnessed when making the video documentation of EMU are that it provides a framework for a cognitive shift -- way of thinking -- among land managers. This allows the same problems to be seen in a different way, which is the first step to managerial innovation.
The second aspect is that the EMU process allows these new thinking processes to emerge organically from the managers' own experience and understanding of their country and its limits. The process facilitates these changes at a pace set by the managers themselves. This means that the changes are 'owned', not imposed. But it also means that many of the changes are 'invisible', because they are fully integrated with, and build on existing knowledge and experience. So good is it in this aspect that I witnessed many managers leaving workshops saying 'I already knew that!'
In other words EMU 'reformats' and enhances existing knowledge.
I've done and seen a lot of innovative education and training programs but I have to say that EMU process is the most effective change process I've ever seen.”
“It remains one of the most significant practical/scientific/idealistic approaches that we've ever come across. We mention EMU whenever we can in academic circles" .
Gary Burke
B.Econs, B.A.(hons), PhD
Research Lecturer in Sustainability Economics,
Curtin University Sustainability Policy Institute
Western Australia
“For me, and I think the pastoralists, the main benefit for EMU is that it is a logical process to ensure that on-ground activities are targeted to have the biggest impact. By analysing the land / catchment as a functioning system it becomes evident where the critical points are in the landscape. At these critical points relatively small intervention can have an impact over much larger areas. This ensures the greatest “bang for your buck’”.
Coming to the rangelands from the agricultural zone I was initially overwhelmed by the scale of these properties (i.e. going from farms of about 4,000 ha to stations of 400,000 ha). There seemed to be so much needing to be done with relatively so little resources. The EMU process has allowed me to understand the processes that drive the landscape and see / interpret the landscape as a simpler functioning system. Once you understand how it works, it becomes fairly evident where it is failing and what needs to be done to fix it. With this approach I no longer feel overwhelmed by these vast properties.
My observations are that the same thing happens with the pastoralists. They develop an understanding of why things happen on their land and what to do about it. Interestingly, it is often the most experienced pastoralists who have the big “ah ha” moments. They know their land well and are keen observers, but have not always been able to explain why things happen.
I think they also have been overwhelmed by the scale of what is required. They have been reluctant to invest as stations operate on tight margins. On ground actions that cost a lot of money would only impact on such a small part of the property and result in little improvement in production or profit. With EMU they can now see where are relatively small investment will improve a large area of land, allowing them to justify spending money. I think this will trigger an increase in spending on land rehabilitation.
The stations I am working with here in the Pilbara are now starting to do work on the ground based on the new insights they have gained from the EMU approach.”
Tim Wiley,
NRM Rangelands WA.
I can't speak highly enough of the importance of EMU in the rangelands. It gives us the tools, when combined with understanding of livestock interactions
with the vegetation, to rebuild the productivity of degraded landscapes in the rangelands. Research in mediterranean arid and semi-arid rangelands suggests that rainfall use efficiency could be improved by factors of 3 to 5.
So if I was to make a suggestion for EMU, it would be to continually emphasise that it is a futile exercise to be addressing drainage dysfunctions if you are not implementing a parallel process to
control the total grazing pressure across the landscape.
Greg Brennan,
Pastoral Consultant,
"Grazing Innovation"
Geraldton, WA
I've been working in Tajikistan on and off for a couple of years, and in Ethiopia's Borana region. Rangelands in both of these semi-arid ecosystems are overgrazed, abused, degraded, eroded, shot to hell. At first glance the situation looks hopeless; the erosion is massive! Curiously, in both Central Asia and Ethiopia it is one species of perennial grass, couch grass (Cynodon dactylon), that is the last defense against ecosystem disaster, struggling to hold the soil together, growing so close to the soil surface that even goats switch to something easier to eat. The ecological magic of a species that is both stoloniferous and rhizomatous holding the soil together... but I digress.
I am prompted to join this discussion because of a comment that Hugh (EMU) made last week: that if only we can capture rainwater where it falls, then options open up. In spite of the ecological devastation, if a hectare of these degraded lands in either Tajikistan or Ethiopia is fenced for just one rainy season, the responding increase in ground cover and plant productivity is staggering. We're talking about 3 tonnes per ha inside versus 300 kg per ha DW outside the fence. The contrast from fencing an area in Libya was not so great, but then the rainfall was much less, and ground cover was down to pebbles and stones. The message there was that the cover of small ground surface impediments to water flow -- bits of litter, remnants of annual plants, ant-hill debris, pebbles, lichens, etc -- was the initial driver for ecosystem recovery when temporary protection was introduced.
Wherever I work in semi-arid rangelands, I become more and more convinced that our primary area of interest should be water management, not vegetation or livestock management per se. I think it is the secret to land rehabilitation and increased productivity. If your management focuses on how to capture rainwater where it falls, then managing livestock for that objective becomes better vegetation management which automatically gives you higher forage yield. I think that is what Hugh is driving at. And I think it is the subtext of Greg's emphasis on recovery of herbaceous perennials which will not only trap surface water flows but also yield a more nutritionally balanced diet for livestock, and more of it, and that higher yield of herbaceous material is because more rainwater is captured. Manage to capture rainfall and the rest takes care of itself, assisted by smart management.
Dr. Ben Norton,
Emeritus Associate Professor,
Department of Wildland Resources, Utah State University.