What Are The Animal Units For Grazing In Jefferson County Montana

Past: Larry D. White and Allan McGinty

On whatever ranch, decisions must be made as to the management of each ranch resource (land, animals, personnel, facilities and finances). When those decisions are made with specific brusk- and long-term goals in mind, and when all the sociological, political and ecology aspects of direction are taken into consideration, the consequence volition be successful ranch management.

The decisions that will achieve successful ranch management are unlike for each enterprise because each ranch has its own resources. Rangeland is a ranch's master resource for producing income and other benefits to the ranch and lodge. The use of the range affects all other ranch resources, the achievement of goals and the sustainability of the ranch. The stocking charge per unit for grazing animals is a crucial determination which affects the rangeland and, therefore, the success of the ranch.

How Does Stocking Rate Bear upon Ranch Success?

Stocking rate determines animal operation, financial return and the long-term condition of the range. Proper stocking rates volition: ane) produce optimum animal operation; ii) make the ranch profitable; and iii) sustain or ameliorate the range resources.

Stocking charge per unit is defined as the area of state which the operator has allotted to each fauna unit of measurement for the unabridged grazable catamenia of the twelvemonth (Range Term Glossary Committee, 1974). An animate being unit is equivalent to an 1,110-pound dry cow at maintenance (Forage and Grazing Terminology Committee, 1991). The daily forage consumption of an animal unit of measurement is 17.64 pounds. The number of animal units grazed determines the amount of forage that will exist consumed each day and over the entire grazing menses.

The amount of forage consumed in relation to forage supply determines the productivity of both the animals and the fodder. This ratio of forage demand (forage intake needed by livestock) to forage supply is chosen grazing pressure. As grazing pressure level increases, there is less forage from which animals can select (Figure 1). Point 1 represents a threshold of grazing pressure level beyond which individual brute performance is reduced. Reduced performance, as measured by decreased weight proceeds and reproductive capability, translates to lower economic returns per brute. When feed is purchased to offset this higher grazing pressure level, the internet render per creature is even lower. Proper stocking rates occur between the threshold points for individual animal operation (betoken 1) and unit expanse performance (signal 2).

High grazing pressure causes nutritional stress and greater health problems in animals, and increases the possibility that they may consume poisonous plants. High grazing pressure level likewise increases labor requirements and competition between animal enterprises using the aforementioned range.

As regrowth is repeatedly grazed, the forage supply is depleted, the more than desirable plants become unhealthy and don't reproduce well, and the diversity of constitute species decreases. The loss of vegetative cover volition preclude rainfall from moving into the soil and crusade erosion and the pollution of surface water with sediment. High grazing pressure level continued over several years causes the range to deteriorate and time to come productivity to exist lost. If this situation develops, the enterprise may not exist able to survive crises acquired past climate and market place variability.

Ranch fiscal success depends on vi factors: 1) overhead expense (fixed costs); 2) enterprise(s) selection; 3) production per unit; 4) value per unit; v) direct cost per unit of measurement; and 6) the number of beast units grazed, i.e., the stocking rate. The optimal stocking rate required to maximize product per unit of measurement of land area varies with the quantity and quality of forage produced (Conner, 199 1). This variation is reflected in the ranch's profits, because with loftier stocking rates product costs more often than not increment at a faster charge per unit than do gross returns (Figure ii). Equally profit levels decline, there is a greater chance the ranch volition suffer a catastrophic loss.

Ranchers must select stocking rates with express cognition of future forage and market place conditions. Just they can use past records, experience and range surveys to brand realistic projections of forage and market conditions (Effigy 3). Then, the planned stocking charge per unit should exist adjusted seasonally according to actual ranch conditions (Figure 4). If a conservative stocking rate is chosen initially, the rancher may not have to reduce the number of grazing animals, but may underharvest the provender resource. With this surplus forage the rancher might bring in stocker animals, charter grazing or use prescribed burning to better the range.

At each stride of the decision-making process a rancher must balance fodder need with fodder supply and ensure economic survival. Both the number of animals grazed and the financial needs of the enterprise must exist realistic in relation to potential forage production. Past analyzing previous rainfall, beast performance, stocking rates and financial records, a rancher can better evaluate both potential fodder product and risk.

How Does Stocking Rate Chronicle to Carrying Capacity?

The long-term conveying chapters of rangeland refers to the average stocking rate a given corporeality of country can back up for several years without impairment to that resource. Estimates of this average stocking rate can be obtained past conducting range condition surveys (McGinty and White, 1991). Stocking rate refers to the actual number of animals grazed, which may not match fodder production.

If livestock numbers arc based primarily on the average carrying capacity, the range volition be overgrazed in dry years and undergrazed during wet years. To achieve maximum product and profit, livestock numbers must be matched to current and projected forage levels, not to an average carrying capacity.

What Factors Impact Stocking Rate Decisions?

The stocking rates selected must enable the ranch to survive financially (run into electric current obligations and provide for hereafter needs), give satisfactory animal performance and allow for the future regrowth of forage. Many ranchers try to graze the maximum number of animals they believe possible nether current and "hoped for" conditions. Then if forage shortfalls and overgrazing occur, they are ofttimes blamed on drought. In fact, information technology is not drought nor the amount or distribution of rainfall that is the prime cause of range degradation. The most common cause of degradation is only that ranchers wait animal productivity from their rangelands to be much college than is realistic (Pressland and Graham, 1989).

Financial obligations often "force" a rancher into selecting a stocking rate too high for the forage supply available. Then, if rainfall or marketplace prices are not adequate, a crisis develops and the range deteriorates. The fiscal needs of the ranch must not be allowed to dictate an unrealistic stocking rate. Loftier overhead and high family expenses, coupled with excessive stocking rates, will jeopardize the ranch and all its resources.

Crises usually occur gradually and have many early on alarm signs. If forage supplies and fiscal needs are carefully monitored and if timely decisions are made about stocking rates and other product and financial matters, most crises can exist avoided.

When Should Stocking Rate Decisions be Made?

Stocking rate decisions should be made earlier the ranch'southward resources are jeopardized, and adjusted seasonally to balance forage demand with fodder supply. The stocking rate chosen initially may not be the correct ane all year. Therefore, a rancher must constantly observe fodder supply, creature functioning, financial needs, etc., and decide if stocking rate adjustments are necessary. Forage supply can be estimated by making fodder surveys in late June or early July, October and March (White and Richardson, 1989). At the aforementioned time, projected forage demand in the coming months can be determined and compared to the forage supply to determine if adequate forage is available.

Once stocking charge per unit decisions are made, they should be implemented every bit presently as appropriate. If it is projected that at that place will be a forage shortfall several months in the future, in that location is time to take action. Ranchers shouldn't go forced into crises that are preventable.

How Much Forage Should exist Ungrazed and How Much Can be Eaten?

Certain amounts of plant residue (ungrazed herbage) must exist maintained to protect the soil, ensure rainfall infiltration and sustain provender production. Ungrazed herbage is an investment in hereafter fodder production. The minimum balance levels needed to sustain product are 300 to 500, 750 to i,000 and 1,200 to 1,500 pounds per acre (oven dry out weight) of shortgrasses, midgrasses and tallgrasses, respectively. Figure five shows the proper residue level (1,500 pounds per acre) for a tallgrass prairie site near Bowie, Texas. When forage is reduced below threshold levels, rainfall doesn't infiltrate the soil equally deeply and animals don't perform as well. But when proper amounts of forage are left ungrazed, rainfall infiltrates the soil and preferred plant species become better established and produce more than forage than if grazed too closely.

In i study in s Texas, when grazing pressure reduced forage supplies beneath about 750 pounds per acre, cattle consumed more browse and their intake of organic matter, digestible energy and rough protein rapidly declined (Hanson and Stuth, 1988). In a like study in the eastern Rolling Plains of Texas, organic matter intake declined when forage supply was below 623 pounds per acre (Pinchak, et al., 1990). In both studies animal performance declined when forage supplies fell below these threshold levels.

The principle governing stocking rate decisions is to "take half and exit half." This means that of the total forage produced during the year, half should remain ungrazed. Of the half that is available for livestock consumption, half of that amount (25 percentage of the total forage production) will generally be lost to insects, weathering, trampling, other animals and decomposition. Thus, when properly stocked, rangeland volition reach almost a 25 percent harvest efficiency (25 percent actually consumed by livestock).

With intensive direction, including frequent stock rotations, it is sometimes possible to reach a slightly higher harvest efficiency past getting animals to eat forage before information technology is lost to trampling, weathering and other causes, However, 25 percent hat-vest efficiency is considered a moderate stocking rate and is the level about ranchers should strive for.

Since an fauna unit consumes 17.64 pounds of forage daily, in 1 year an animal unit requires 6,439 pounds of provender (365 x17.64). This amount is called an fauna unit of measurement year (auy). The minimum provender product required for different harvest efficiencies and stocking rates can be determined from Table 1.

If, for example, a rancher chose a stocking rate of 25 acres per animal unit year (auy) with a moderate harvest efficiency (25 percent), an average of one,030 pounds per acre of forage would accept to produced on the expanse that is grazable. At this rate, forage consumption by livestock would be approximately 258 pounds per acre, leaving approximately 515 pounds per acre of residue. The rancher would then take to decide if the grazable area could realistically produce the minimum forage supply required. If not, the grazing pressure would be higher than desired. Since the initial stocking rate is selected on the basis of projected forage product, the stocking rate has to be adjusted seasonally, according to actual forage product, to maintain a moderate stocking charge per unit. Otherwise, at some signal the forage supply might reach the threshold residuum level and livestock would take to exist removed completely until fodder regrows.

The proper stocking charge per unit for a pasture is affected by its topography, accessibility and range site characteristics, besides every bit by animal diet preference and grazing behavior. Cattle may overgraze the most productive sites and preferred species before they employ less preferred sites and species. Ranchers can achieve adept grazing distribution and more compatible apply of all available provender species by grazing adapted animal species and by properly locating fences, h2o and minerals.

How Practise I Determine Actual Forage Production?

A rancher can never come across exactly how much forage has been or is being produced, because it is constantly growing and continuously beingness consumed by livestock or lost to other causes. Even so, if he tin can quantify the amount of forage on the land at any given fourth dimension, he can project how much of it will need to exist reserved as residue and how much can be used. Naturally, this is an on-going process and the rancher must make these evaluations frequently.

How does a rancher decide the quantity of fodder he has and is likely to produce in coming months? At that place are three approaches to this problem.

The rancher can carry periodic range status surveys to compare current species composition with known ratings in the Soil Conservation Service Technical Site Guides. These provide a guideline for establishing an annual stocking charge per unit (McGinty and White, 1991 ). Near ranchers are unable to project how long their current forage will last by simply observing fauna and pasture weather. Merely with photo guides they can amend quantify forage supplies and then (with a planned stocking rate and grazing program) estimate the amount of forage needed for consumption from each pasture and from the whole ranch (forage demand) so that seasonal adjustments can be fabricated (White and Richardson, 1989).

A second arroyo to quantifying forage production is to monitor the disappearance of range provender by comparing grazed areas with small, fenced areas which are left ungrazed (Figure 7). These enclosures allow the rancher to visualize how much forage has been produced and how much has been consumed or lost. The cages should be moved periodically so that the impact of grazing on fodder growth can be adamant, and many exclosures are needed for an accurate assessment, With this method, the rancher measures the charge per unit of forage disappearance at frequent intervals, which allows him to predict provender shortfalls orexcesses. The animal unit days of grazing for the pasture since the last observation, divided into the amount of forage disappearance, provide an estimated daily disappearance rate (forage eaten by livestock plus natural disappearance). For example, if an exclosure was established on July 1 and on Baronial 1 (31 days subsequently) the divergence in forage supply between the grazed surface area and the exclosure equalled 75 pounds per acre, the disappearance would equal ii.iv pounds per day. If the remaining grazable fodder (amount higher up desired residual) equalled xc pounds per acre, so approximately 38 days of grazing would remain at the current stocking rate.

A tertiary approach uses estimator software to help with stocking rate decisions. APSAT (Annual Planning Stock Adjustment Templates) uses pasture utilization ratings and actual versus expected growing weather condition to project needed stocking rate adjustments (Kothmann and Hinnant, 1990). The software will warn of potentially heavy utilise early plenty and so that adjustments in stock numbers tin can be made earlier overgrazing occurs.

Areas that do non provide fodder must be excluded from stocking rate calculations. The employ of stocking charge per unit guidelines to make up one's mind the number of animal units a pasture can carry frequently results in overstocking unless the ungrazable area is taken into account.

The process of estimating annual forage production becomes easier if a rancher gathers historical data and pays attention to trends. A useful practice is to take photographs at several set locations on the ranch three or four times each year. When these photographs are compared for several consecutive years, the rancher will be able to see trends in provender production over time.

How Do I Determine the Correct Stocking Rate?

Stocking rate decisions should always protect threshold residue levels. A rancher wanting to get out 750 pounds per acre of threshold residue must subtract this quantity from the total forage supply to determine the forage available for consumption. For example, if the total forage supply is 1,200 pounds per acre, but 450 pounds per acre is bachelor for consumption ( 1,200-750 = 450). At a moderate stocking rate, only one-half the amount available for consumption (225 pounds per acre) tin can be used by livestock. This equals 12.8 animal unit days of grazing per acre (225 divided past 17.64 pounds per 24-hour interval) before grazing must be stopped until regrowth occurs. Stocking rate decisions no longer have to be made on the footing of gut feeling, hope or luck. When stocking rates and grazing times are determined by this fodder supply/forage residue approach, there is time for the rancher to predict potential fodder shortfalls, determine the bear upon of the decision on finances and other ranch resource, and make any necessary adjustments before the fodder resources is harmed or financial problems occur. Through adequate planning and periodic evaluation of range weather, provender utilization can exist controlled so that curt- and long-term ranch goals are achieved.

References

Briske, D. D. and R. One thousand. Heitschmidt. 1991. An ecological perspective. In Heitschmidt, R. Thou. and J. W. Stuth (eds.). Grazing Management – an ecologial perspective. Timber Printing, Inc. Portland, Oregon. pp. 11-26.

Conner, J. R. 1991. Social and economic influences on grazing management. In Heitschmidt, R. Thousand. and J.W. Stuth (eds.). Grazing Management -an ecological perspective. Timber Printing, Inc. Portland, Oregon. pp. 191-199.

Forage and Grazing Terminology Committee. 1991. Terminology for grazing lands and grazing animals. Pocahontas Press, Inc. Blacksburg, Virginia.

Hanson, D. and J. W. Stuth. 1988. Disturbance and nutritional stability of a thornshrub customs. Unpublished data.

Kothmann, Thousand. G. and R. T. Hinnant. 1990. Forecasting carrying capacity: an arroyo to drought management. In Texas Agricultural Experiment Station Grazing Direction Field Twenty-four hours. TAES Technical Report No. xc-1. College Station, Texas, pp. 22-25.

McGinty, Key to A. and L. D. White. 1991. Range condition: sustained ranch productivity. L-5024, Texas Agricultural Extension Service. Higher Station, Texas.

Pinchak, West. E., Southward. Yard. Canon, R. K. Heitschmidt and L. Dowher. 1990. Effect of long-term, yr-long s. grazing at moderate and heavy rates of stocking on diet selection and forage intake dynamics. Journal of Range Management, 43(four). pp. 304-309.

Pressland, A. J. and T. W. 1000. Graham. 1989. Approaches to the restoration of rangelands – the Queensland experience. Australian Rangeland Journal, 11(2). pp. 101-109.

Range Term Glossary Committee. 1974. A glossary of terms used in range direction, 2nd edition. Gild for Range Management. Denver, Colorado.

White. 50. D. and C. Richardson. 1989. How much provender exercise you have? B-1646, Texas Agricultural Extension Service. College Station, Texas.

View more Farming and Ranching information »

Do you have a question -or- need to contact an expert?

Contact Your County Part

Source: https://agrilifeextension.tamu.edu/library/ranching/stocking-rate-decisions/

Posted by: millerwifyin76.blogspot.com

Share this post