RANCHING Business
their stocking rate on historic numbers that are based on rain patterns that don’t exist now.” In the case of introduced pastures, fertilizer use may have changed as well, because of higher prices, he says. “I wish I could quote a dollar value on what operating
at a conservative stocking rate means to an operation, but every operation is different,” he says. “However, based on the Noble Foundation’s consultants experi- ence through the years, we know the opportunity to improve net margins begins with a resilient forage base, which means working with a net forage surplus — not a defi cit — annually.”
Other considerations To set the appropriate initial stocking rate, producers
must consider factors such as kinds and types of for- ages; the soil types or range sites; management inputs to be applied; rainfall; forage demand (how much for- age is required by the type and class of animal raised); available forage (how much forage is produced during the year and how much is available for livestock con- sumption); and grazing duration (how long animals will be grazing in a given area).
Rules of thumb “The diffi culty with setting a stocking rate is that
there isn’t a simple formula,” Ellis says. “However, there are good rules of thumb for both native and in- troduced pastures.” For good condition native range, initial annual
stocking rate equals 1 cow-calf unit per inch of an- nual rainfall per section (640 acres) of open land, he says. For example, if annual rainfall is 32 inches, then
Critical decision-making times
Fall and winter — the major period in which soil mois- ture accumulates for warm-season grass production. Monitor rainfall during this period to determine your approach to managing and stocking the warm-season pastures during the next growing season.
October to March — the months in which 40 percent of the average annual rainfall can be expected
End of May — 30 percent of warm-season grass pro- duction should have occurred
End of June — 65 percent of annual forage production and 77 percent of the annual rainfall since the preced- ing October should have occurred
62 The Cattleman March 2015
thecattlemanmagazine.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132