optimum stocking rate, monitoring, and flexibility: key...

Optimum Stocking Rate, Monitoring,

and Flexibility: Key components of

Successful Grazing Management

J. A. Ortega, S.D. Lukefahr, and F.C. Bryant

Grazing management, how long have we been working on it?

Grazing Management

art and science

Grazing management, how long have we been working on it?

Grazing management, how long have we been working on it?

Grazing management, how long have we been working on it?

Grazing management, how long have we been working on it?

SUCCESFUL GRAZING MANAGEMENT PLANS

• Objectives clearly defined

• Proper stocking rate

• Effective Monitoring

GRAZING MANAGEMENT PLANS

Flexibility!!

The Only Thing That Is Constant Is Change

Heraclitus

Flexibility!!

“The biggest problem for me is that I can never come up with a grazing plan that I can stay with- I am continually changing grazing rotations, time, and stock numbers… but that is one of the reasons that this program works. It is not a system. It is a continually changing program that moves with weather, livestock, and markets”

Frank Price, Rangelands 31 (5):5

FLEXIBLILITY!!

GRAZING MANAGEMENT PLANS

Stocking Rate Stocking rate is the most overwhelming

factor affecting the results of a grazing

management program independently of the

grazing method

Carrying capacity/Correct stocking rate

• One of the most important goals of a grazing management

program is to manage the ranch @ carrying capacity

How difficult could that be?

Carrying capacity/Correct SR

VARIATION

SPACE

• Ranch to Ranch

• Pasture to Pasture

TIME

• Year to Year

• Season to Season

South Texas

Climatic

Challenges

Changes in

Production

Systems

Grazing and Pasture

Management 1994-2001:

• Continuous grazing

• Overstocking

• Fertilization and aeration of pastures

• Minimal brush management

• Feeding hay

• The manager was often times out of forage!!!

Actions

1) Adjusting stocking rate to match forage availability

2) Eliminating the need for feeding hay

3) Utilizing appropriate cattle breeds via crossbreeding to

cope with the adverse environment

4) Creating opportunities for developing local niche markets

to increase profits

General Management:

• Commercial crossbred cow-calf operation

• Own/Lease land (Over 90% leased for ag

value)

• No hay or grain/Limited supplementation

Grazing and Pasture

Management 2001-2008:

• Reduction of SR to match forage availability

(41%)

• Rotational grazing (25 pastures)

• No hay feeding

• Stockpiling forage in pastures

• Close monitoring of pasture responses

• Flexibility to move cattle

Monitoring

Monitoring

Monitoring

Monitoring

Monitoring

Monitoring and Flexibility

Drought 2009

Month Rainfall Forage

availability lb/ac

BCS

October 08 July-Aug.

7 inches

4460 6 or

higher

April 09 0 2346 5.7

August 09 0 1427 5.7

October 08

4460 lb/ac

April 09

2346 lb/ac

August 09

1427 lb/ac

Herd Management 2001-2008:

• Late spring/Early winter breeding seasons

• Wean at 6-7 months following rain via fence-line

weaning

• No antibiotics, growth implants or deworming of

calves

• Produce female replacements mostly by Artificial

Insemination

• Moderate cow size (BW of 1,100 lbs/ frame size 4 to

5)

Red Angus Senepol

Tuli

Crossbreeding Program

Crossbreeding Program Senepol-sired calf as a cow with her Tuli-sired AI calf

Tuli-sired calf as a cow with her Red Angus-sired AI calf

Red Angus-sired cow with her Senepol-sired AI calf

The Product

We do not have to worry

about aggressiveness

Item 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Stocking rate (ac/AU) 3.4 5.8 6.6 8.4 5.7 4.7 6.0 5.2

Weaned wt/Cow (lb) 436 585 586 608 527 511 551 562

Calf Market Value ($) 339 417 501 606 553 539 568 543

Brush Manag./ac ($) 0 21 26 15 8 5 3 8

Feed Cost/Cow ($) 291 214 65 94 103 71 45 41

Lease Cost/Cow ($)** 65 117 127 184 122 91 118 103

Maint. Cost/Cow ($) 144 168 209 180 212 125 137 116

Total Costs ($) 530 526 419 481 456 313 337 291

Market-based Net

Profit/ac ($) -53 -18 12 12 14 45 40 44

Market-based Net

Profit/COW ($) -191 -110 82 125 97 226 230 252

Productivity, Expenses, and Profits of a Cow-Calf

Grazing Operation in South Texas.

Figure 1. Market-based net profit

per acre trend over eight years.

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

$Actual Trend

CONCLUSIONS

•Results of this case study demonstrate that proper

grazing and forage management with careful monitoring

and maximum flexibility - in combination with a good

cattle breeding program - can improve pasture

conditions that increase profits in a sustainable manner.

•The breeds utilized – Red Angus, Senepol, and Tuli – are

available to industry, although other breeds may be

suitable.

•Beef producers must be patient to allow time for

pastures to recover from previous managerial abuses.

Does it work?

What if it does not rain?

Results of proper grazing and beef cattle

management practices on productivity and

profitability of a commercial operation in

south Texas in the severe drought of 2009

and the extremely severe drought of 2011

and 2012.

Between October 2008 and June 2009, only

about 75 mm of rainfall was received, and

by August 24, 2009, total rainfall was only

20% of normal with a cumulative total of

only 93 mm for the year.

As stated by Bryant (2009), the most recent

serious drought between the October and

June period occurred in 1952 and 1953

when precipitation was 165 mm, which was

about 30% more than what was received in

2009.

In this area, close to 50% of forage

production occurs during the spring (April

to June), therefore, forage production was

severely affected by the drought.

In severe droughts, such as in 2009,

energy-protein supplements (whole

cottonseeds and cottonseed range cubes)

were provided from March through August

to maintain body condition scores of cows.

Based on the amount of stockpiled forage in

October 2009, the decision was made to

lease approximately 100 ac of additional

pastures to decrease grazing pressure and

maintain body condition scores in cattle .

Based on the amount of stockpiled forage in

October 2009, the decision was made to

lease approximately 100 ac of additional

pastures to decrease grazing pressure and

maintain body condition scores in cattle .

October 08, 4410 lb/ac October 09, 2646 lb/ac

•Monitoring

•Flexibility • Adjustments

• Timely decisions

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC TOTAL

2012 0.19 5.43 0.83 1.15 2.32 2.8 1.12 0.30 1.95 0.09 16.2

2011 3.44 0.01 0.21 0 2.52 0.37 0.25 0 0.9 0.38 0.29 1.36 9.7

2010 4.33 3.86 1 4.95 2.76 3.1 9.12 0.71 14 0 0.3 0.17 44.7

2009 0.25 0.16 0.46 0.14 1 0.4 0.12 1.03 12 2.6 1.65 4.81 24.7

2008 2.21 0.22 0.12 1.77 0.97 0.68 8.31 4.56 7.6 0.9 0.37 0.29 28

Rainfall

In 16 months from October 2010 to

February 2012, approximately, 10 inches

of rainfall

October 08, 4460 lb/ac October 09, 2646 lb/ac

October 11, 1764 lb/ac October 12, 988 lb/ac

Present Pasture Conditions:

Cow Body Condition:

Cow Body Condition:

Item 2001 2008 2009 2010 2011

Stocking rate (ac/AU) 3.4 5.2 6.0 8.0 7.4

Weaned wt/Cow (lb) 436 562 609 540 551

Calf Market Value ($) 339 543 610 554 637

Brush Manag./ac ($) 0 8 16 1 3

Feed Cost/Cow ($) 291 41 185 44 44

Lease Cost/Cow ($) 65 103 93 227 154

Maint. Cost/Cow ($) 144 116 122 80 134

Total Costs ($) 530 291 411 370 282

Market-based Net Profit/ac ($) -53 44 26 17 38

Market-based Net Profit/cow ($) -191 252 199 185 288

Productivity, Expenses, and Profits of a Cow-Calf

Grazing Operation in South Texas.

Can we make money in a

drought?

Do we have to lose our

herd?

•Monitoring

•Flexibility

•A proper grazing management program, including

a moderate stocking rate, stockpiling forage for

winter and droughts, and the flexibility to adjust

the grazing plan, can make the difference between

making a profit and losing your herd.

•Timely decision making based on an effective

monitoring program is the key to survive even

serious droughts.

•Even when profit per cow and per acre were

reduced during the drought of 2009, it was

possible to maintain pasture conditions, body

condition scores, and cattle productivity, and

even more important the integrity of the plant

community.

CONCLUSIONS

October 2010

100 ac more leased

4234 lb/ac

????????

• We retained bull calves for 4 months

more instead of selling at weaning

• We bought 20 stockers in December

2010.

• 10 steers

• 10 heifers

• The bull calves from the ranch were

retained 4 months more.

• Weight increased: 54 lb

• Total cost: $ 80

• Additional profit: $ 42

On the 10 steers we bought in December

2010.

• Weight increased: 67 lb

• Total cost: $ 68

• Net profit: $ 35

We bought @ $1.08 we sold @ $1.18

On the 10 heifers we bought in December

2010 and sold in June 27 2011.

• Weight increased: 126 lb

• Total cost: $ 92

• Net profit: $ 103

We bought @ $1.02 we sold @ $1.18

A proportional portion of the lease costs

were considered as part of the costs for

the stockers, therefore, the lease

expenses for 2011 for the mother cows

were reduced by $40 per cow.

Does it work?

FLEXIBILITY

Plan, Implement, Adjust

and Adapt, Monitor,

Make it work !!

Accomplish objectives!!

A few things to think about

A few things to think about

• Profitability of cow-calf operations

• East Texas $28/cow/year, Texas average

$15/cow/year

• If somebody wants to take $2000/month

pay check = $24,000 income per year

would need to have about 850 mother cows

• Cattle is not the only thing ranching

produces:

• Clean air and water

• Carbon sequestration