This report outlines the results of surveys conducted by of their

membership and cotton growers from across the production valleys in eastern Australia.

Results from the grower survey show that overall, Bollgard RR was the gene stack that was planted most by

survey respondents, at 60.6 per cent of cotton planted, with Bollgard next at 24 per cent. However, this

varied by region, with Bollgard RR varieties making up 81.4 per cent of the surveyed cotton area in the

Southern zone, and only 36.8 per cent in the Northern zone (where Bollgard was higher at 47.9 per cent).

Conventional and Conventional RR varieties made up only 15.8 per cent of the total cotton area planted by

survey respondents. Conventional RR varieties were highest in the Southern zone, at 12.5 per cent (5.8 per

cent being the overall mean).

Forecasts of future variety mix by respondents showed a slight increase in the percentage of Bollgard

varieties to be planted in the upcoming 2006-2007 season. Significant increases in Bollgard plantings

included the Border Districts zone (up from 22.8 per cent to 32.4 per cent of all varieties planted), while

Bollgard RR gains were most significant in the Southern zone (up from 81.4 per cent to 92.7 per cent).

Overall, all Bollgard varieties (Bollgard and Bollgard RR), were predicted to increase as a percentage of the

total cotton crop planted from 84.6 per cent to 89.9 per cent for the sample in the survey.

Growers were also grouped in terms of their attitude to whether they considered using Roundup Ready

varieties “better in their situation” than over-the-top (OTT) herbicides. This analysis showed that growers

responding to the survey, who agreed with the statement, grew a higher percentage of RR cotton, were

younger and had been involved with cotton production for less time than other growers. These same

growers were larger employers, and had a larger percentage of their irrigation supply from ground-water

sources.

As in previous surveys of consultants the relative control of weeds in low pressure fields was considered

best where RR technology was employed in conjunction with a conventional herbicide program. A similar

outcome was recorded for those fields with high pressure whereby the combination of Roundup Ready

technology and a conventional herbicide program received the highest ranking in aggregate. A majority of

consultants were uncertain as to whether RR cotton showed a difference in yield with a slightly larger

percentage of respondents (18.9%) noting a decrease in yield as opposed to the 13.5 per cent who observed

a yield increase. A higher proportion of respondents also ranked the economic performance of RR

technology higher on high weed pressure fields in aggregate to that experienced where RR was employed

on low weed pressure fields.

A small number of respondents reported having some experience with Roundup Ready Flex technology.

Comments from these consultants suggest that pricing issues associated with the new technology’s

introduction will be important as they asses performance in future seasons. Comments on the expected

advantages and disadvantages of RR Flex were well contributed. The responses indicate that there is a

wide spectrum of opinions surrounding how RR Flex may perform, suggesting that until more commercial

results are available, consultants will be unsure of which applications of the technology will deliver greatest

value to growers.

I

ntegrated weed management and the issue of herbicide resistance was a constant theme in many of the

comments contributed by consultants. Consultants and growers know the benefits that have accrued during

the period during which Roundup Ready varieties have been available to the industry. Similarly, these crop

managers are concerned about the long-term viability of their weed management strategies and the need to

have a number of methods available to combat this constant threat to production. The advent of Roundup Ready Flex will present the industry with a range of alternative approaches to weed management, it will be in the industry’s long-term benefit to closely monitor the changes to on-farm management and weed spectrums that occur as a result.