Best-practice pasture renewal for forage production and sustainability: description of a farmer-led study and initial findings.

cropping phase. One of the factors that is likely to limit the success of pasture renewal is that much of the readily-available information is largely out of date (e.g. Anonymous 1993). With the advent of novel grass/endophyte combinations (Bluett et al. 2003; Bluett et al. 2005; Hume et al. 2007), new pests (Barratt et al. 1996), recognition of new pest species (Mercer et al. 1997) and new weeds (Tozer et al. 2008), new strategies need to be developed and communicated to farmers and contractors. The opportunity to suppress weed and pest populations through herbicide treatment, physical disruption or host plant removal (Barker 1990; Bell et al. 2004; Bell et al. 2006; Davison et al. 1979) is one of the driving forces behind pasture renewal. Another major driver is incorporation of new germplasm to the pasture, in particular new grass/endophyte combinations (Bluett et al. 2004). The potential production and persistence of these new technologies is considerably higher than from older cultivars (Hume et al. 2007; Thom et al. 2008). A project is now underway to investigate factors that affect pasture establishment after renewal so that recommendations can be given to farmers which will help ensure the renewal process is successful. This paper examines the pest and beneficial soil-dwelling invertebrate populations present in recently renewed and non-renewed pastures in the Bay of Plenty, as an initial step towards forming integrated pest management recommendations for pasture renewal.