RANCHING Business
tures, the most productive soils will respond best to inputs, producing more forage per acre and providing producers a better bang for the buck,” Aljoe says. “On native pastures, the poorest quality soils are the areas that producers can afford to sacrifi ce if circumstances dictate, because pouring inputs into unproductive soils won’t make them signifi cantly better.”
Weed and brush management Weed management is more art than science, Locke
says. There are no specifi c economic thresholds, such as number of plants per acre, to dictate when produc- ers should treat weeds. Instead, producers have to envision the impact of the weed stand on their grass production. For instance, if a pasture has 1 ragweed per square foot, that will equal 43,560 ragweed plants per acre. “Managers have to look at the landscape and esti-
mate how much space the weeds will take up as they mature, because that space will no longer be available for grass,” Locke says. “A general rule of thumb is 1 pound of weeds displaces 1 pound of grass.” For instance, a canopy of ragweed can easily dis-
place 1,000 pounds of grass. A 1,000-pound bale of good quality hay can cost $50 or more. Most herbicide applications for annual weed control are in the $8 to $20 per acre range, well-below $50 per acre, so weed treatment can provide a good return on investment if it is needed, he says. When treatment is necessary, producers should
apply the control before the weeds mature and cause economic hardship, he says. When economic considerations make it necessary
to choose between weed management and fertility, producers should implement weed management fi rst because weeds are more effi cient at capturing nutrients and establishing themselves than is grass, Locke says. Brush management is similar to weed management,
except that the initial investment is higher and the clearing work and reestablishment of desirable grasses takes longer, Locke says. Brush management activities can be considered capital improvements requiring
If a pasture has 1 ragweed per square foot, that will equal
43,560 ragweed plants per acre.
ongoing maintenance, he says. They, too, need to be implemented before the brush matures and establishes a stronghold. Aljoe says, “Some producers mistakenly believe
that weed or brush management requires treating the entire ranch or complete pastures at one time, but it can be done in phases, targeting your most productive soils for initial treatments.”
A sample strategy A mix of native and introduced grasses allows pro-
ducers to make the most of the natural advantages of each forage type, thus extending the grazing season and minimizing the need to feed hay. Because native grasses make better standing hay
than introduced grasses, natives can be allowed to cure in order to provide winter forage, Aljoe says. One strategy is to graze the introduced pastures
from June to December and the native grasses from January to May. This can be achieved by stockpiling introduced grasses in the fall, after fertilizing in late August or early September, and deferring grazing un- til after frost. With fall rains, this results in high-quality forage
that can be grazed during the early winter. Grazing should be managed so that introduced grasses will maintain at least a 3-inch residue and native grasses maintain a 6-inch residue, in order to minimize stand loss during the dormant season. The diffi culty is managing the forage gaps that occur
You have to have rain to grow
grass, but you also have to have grass to grow grass.
70 The Cattleman April 2015
in the spring and fall. Stockpiled bermudagrass works well to fi ll the fall gap, provided it rains. Bermudagrass pastures that have been overseeded with ryegrass can help fi ll the spring gap, if needed. In both forage gap cases, a good rule of thumb is to plan toward about 1 acre per cow unit, since that seems to be cost effective and most complementary to the annual forage fl ow in the pasture management plan. “Again, effective pasture managers make the most
of what they have,” Aljoe says. “It makes a big differ- ence to the health, productivity and long-term sustain- ability of their pastures and rangelands — and their bottom lines.”
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