Washington County Fairgrounds Sales Facility Friday, December 1, 2017 Pasture Management for Success
Conference Highlights
Soil Health Pasture Management from Start to Finish Interpreting Soil Sample Results Interpreting Forage Sample Results
The members of Texas A&M AgriLife will provide equal opportunities in programs and activities, education, and employment to all persons regardless of race, color, sex, religion, national origin, age, disability, genetic information, veteran status, sexual orientation, or gender identity and will strive to achieve full and equal employment opportunity throughout Texas A&M AgriLife. The Texas A&M University System, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the County Commissioners Courts of Texas Cooperating. Individuals with disabilities who require an auxiliary aid, service or accommodation in order to participate in this meeting are encouraged to contact the County Extension Office at (979) 277-6212 prior to the meeting to determine how reasonable accommodations can be made.
WASHINGTON COUNTY OFFICE
Pasture Management for Success December 1, 2017
Washington County Fairgrounds Sales Facility - Brenham, Texas Registration 1:00pm Program 1:30pm – 5:00pm
1:30 – Welcome and Introductions Kara Matheney, County Extension Agent Ag/NR Washington County
1:30pm – 3:00pm Soil Samples – Who, What, When, Where, Why, and Now What! Managing Soil Health, Nutrients, and Moisture Dr. Jake Mowrer, Assistant Professor and Extension Specialist Soil Nutrient and Water Resource Management
Break – 3:00 - 3:15
3:15pm – 5:00pm Forage Samples for Everyone Pasture Management for Success – Manage for What You WANT Dr. Vanessa Corriher-Olson, Associate Professor and Extension Specialist Forages
Wrap-Up/Evaluations/CEU Certificates Kara Matheney, County Extension Agent Ag/NR Washington County
Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service 1305 East Blue Bell Road | Suite 104 | Brenham, Texas 77833 Tel. 979.277.6212 | Fax. 979.277.6223 | Washington.agriLife.org
The members of Texas A&M AgriLife will provide equal opportunities in programs and activities, education, and employment to all persons regardless of race, color, sex, religion, national origin, age, disability, genetic information, veteran status, sexual orientation, or gender identity and will strive to achieve full and equal employment opportunity throughout Texas A&M AgriLife. The Texas A&M University System, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the County Commissioners Courts of Texas Cooperating. Individuals with disabilities who require an auxiliary aid, service or accommodation in order to participate in this meeting are encouraged to contact the County Extension Office at (979) 277-6212 prior to the meeting to determine how reasonable accommodations can be made.
Soil Samples – Who, What, When, Where, Why, and Now What!
Managing Soil Health, Nutrients, and Moisture
Dr. Jake Mowrer
Assistant Professor and Extension Specialist Soil Nutrient and Water Resource Management
11/30/2017
Title Outline
Pasture Soil Management Outline
Section I. Soil fertility
Section II. Soil sampling and testing Jake Mowrer, PhD Assistant Professor & Extension Specialist Section III. Winter crops for grazing Soil Nutrient & Water Resource Management Texas A&M Agrilife Extension, College Station, TX and hay (soil health?)
Section IV. Soil nutrients & fertilizers
Section I. Soil Fertility Section I. Soil Fertility
Four Principal Components of Soil (Ideal proportions) Minerals Air (gases)
Water (liquids)
Organic material
Section I. Soil Fertility Section I. Soil Fertility
Soil Fertility Soil fertility is a function of: • Amount of nutrients Soil physical properties • Balance or ratio of nutrients -texture -structure • Ability to release nutrients - bulk density (either already present or - water holding capacity applied as fertilizer) Soil chemical properties • What are you trying to - cation exchange capacity (CEC) -pH grow? - buffer capacity
1 11/30/2017
Section I. Soil Fertility Section I. Soil Fertility
Soil fertility is a function of: How can we evaluate soil fertility? The soil test Nutrients Key to nutrient management - Primary Macros (N, P, K) - Secondary Macros (Ca, Mg, S) - Micros (B, Cl, Cu, Fe, Mn, Zn) The soil test is a chemical extraction that provides an index Soil biology to estimate the ability of a soil to provide nutrients for - Micro-organisms (bacteria, fungi) - Macro-organisms (worms, subterranean insects) plant growth. It can identify the degree of deficiency or - Organic matter sufficiency of a nutrient.
Section I. Soil Fertility Section II. Soil Sampling & Testing Soil Testing Benefits How can we evaluate soil fertility? 1. Crops Respond If Soil Nutrients Low 2. Avoid Waste and Environmental Contamination The soil test Key to nutrient management
Ideally - this extractant should mimic the plant root exudate to best estimate the availability of nutrients at the soil root interface.
A&M uses Mehlich III soil extractant
Section II. Soil Sampling & Testing Section II. Soil Sampling & Testing Nutrient Contamination of Water
Nitrogen and Phosphorus: ‐ Needed by all plants for optimum growth and production. ‐ Runoff into creeks, streams, lakes can cause excessive plant growth (eutrophication).
2 11/30/2017
Section II. Soil Sampling & Testing Section II. Soil Sampling & Testing
Soil Testing Benefits Soil Sampling 3. Phosphate is a non‐renewable resource
• 190 million tons of phosphate • Soil tests are only as rock mined every year. (350 yrs) accurate as the • 80% of world reserves in samples on which Western Sahara & Morocco. they are based. • China has 10 % • U.S. has 10%. (25 yrs) • Samples must be • representative of the 30‐50% use efficiency in crops area to be cropped.
Section II. Soil Sampling & Testing Section II. Soil Sampling & Testing
Taking Soil Samples Composite 12 to 15 subsamples for each management area
• 6 “ composite sample = normal recommendation • 4” for sod; 12‐24” for pH, salinity, residual nutrients
Section II. Soil Sampling & Testing Section II. Soil Sampling & Testing Avoid Unusual Areas http://soiltesting.tamu.edu/
• Feeding areas • Drainages • Roads/terraces
3 11/30/2017
Section II. Soil Sampling & Testing Section II. Soil Sampling & Testing How Often To Soil Test When To Soil Test?
Annually Acid soils (<6.0) • For intensively management fields (large inputs of • Late fall fertilizer or soil amendments). • Apply limestone and allow 90-120 days for reaction • Significant hay removal (multiple cuttings). to occur.
Every 2 - 3 years Alkaline soils (>7.0) • Less intensively managed fields (light grazing), no hay • 3 to 4 weeks before green-up. removal. • Allow time to obtain results and shop for best • Rotational grazing systems with good initial nutrient fertilizer. conditions.
Section III. Soil Nutrients Section III. Soil Nutrients
Managing soil fertility? Managing soil fertility? Toolbox includes Toolbox includes
• Fertilizers Fertilizers • Limestone • Rotation Apply fertilizers to supply • Cover Cropping and replace essential nutrients in the soil for plant • Tillage growth
Section III. Soil Nutrients Section III. Soil Nutrients
Essential Elements for Plant Growth Law of the Minimum
Boron Iron Potassium Growth is controlled Calcium Magnesium Sulfur not by the total Carbon Manganese Zinc amount of nutrients Chlorine Molybdenum available, but by the Cobalt* Nitrogen scarcest Copper Oxygen Structural Elements (most limiting) Hydrogen Phosphorus Primary Macros Secondary Macros single nutrient Justus von Liebig 1803-1873 Micronutrients
4 11/30/2017
Section III. Soil Nutrients Section III. Soil Nutrients Single Greatest Regret Liebig’s Barrel Never taught at Texas Level of most A&M University limiting factor (Founded in 1871) • Productivity shortfall • Lost opportunity
Justus von Liebig 1803-1873 • Money
Section III. Soil Nutrients Section III. Soil Nutrients
Forage and Hay Quality Four Environmental Drivers of Forage Quality • Crude protein positively related Affects leaf stem rations (digestibility) • Cell wall components (ADF, NDF) Modifications to development and composition negatively related 1. Temperature (cool season ~ 68°F; warm season ~ 88°F) 2. Water deficit (some stress is beneficial) 3. Solar radiation 4. Soil nutrient availability (only one we can control)
Section III. Soil Nutrients Section III. Soil Nutrients
Atmospheric Nitrogen Primary Nutrients The Nitrogen Cycle Atmospheric Fixation Industrial Protein Nitrogen Fixation
Phosphorus Biological Nitrate Reduction Fixation Plant & Animal Wastes Denitrification
Potassium Ammonium Nitrite Nitrate Leaching Loss
5 11/30/2017
Section III. Soil Nutrients Section III. Soil Nutrients Effect of Nitrogen Rate on Bermudagrass Yield and Quality
Sufficient Deficient Annual N Yield Crude Protein (lbs/Acre) (Tons/Acre) (%) 14 12 CP 02.78.010 8 Y 100 4.4 9.1 6 200 5.9 10.5 4 Nitrogen Deficiency Symptoms 400 8.6 11.7 2 • Slow growth/stunted plants 0 • Yellow-green color (chlorosis) 0 100 200 300 400
Section III. Soil Nutrients Section III. Soil Nutrients Phosphorus Excess Nitrogen Characteristics and Functions Available Forms - Reduced root growth. Primary orthophosphate (H2PO4 ) Secondary orthophosphate (HPO 2-) 4 Excess water use. Movement in Soil: Reduced cold tolerance Very immobile; Will not leach or volatilize Tends to accumulate/build up in soils. Thatch accumulation. Functions in Plant: ENERGY STORAGE (ATP/ADP) Disease and insect susceptibility. Stimulates early growth & root formation Hastens maturity and promotes seed, vegetable, and Nitrate accumulation floral production
Section III. Soil Nutrients Section III. Soil Nutrients Phosphorus Characteristics and Functions
6 11/30/2017
Section III. Soil Nutrients Section III. Soil Nutrients Potassium Characteristics and Functions
Available Forms: Potassium ion (K+)
Movement in Soil: Does not leach/volatilize
Functions in Plant: Increases water use efficiency Increases disease resistance Improves cold hardiness
Section III. Soil Nutrients Section III. Soil Nutrients Potassium Potassium
Section IV. Fertilizers Section IV. Fertilizers Secondary Plant Nutrients Essential Micronutrients
Zn Fe Cu Mn B Cl Mo Calcium (Ca) Cell elongation & stability Needed in very small amounts Magnesium (Mg) Chlorophyll & enzymes Most micronutrients come from Sulfur (S) Proteins & enzymes decomposition of O.M. Increase in soil pH decreases micronutrient availability (Except Mo and Cl)
7 11/30/2017
Section IV. Fertilizers Section IV. Fertilizers Method and Timing of Comparing Products Fertilizer Application
Cost per pound of nutrient: $/ton lbs/ton
Example: Urea (46‐0‐0) $458/ton = $0.50 / lbs N 920 lbs/ton
UAN (32‐0‐0) $397/ton = $0.62 / lbs N 640 lbs/ton Broadcast & incorporate (best when possible ‐ new estab.) Surface broadcast
Section IV. Fertilizers Section IV. Fertilizers
What are Fertilizer Recommendations based on? What are Fertilizer Recommendations based on?
Primary Macro Nutrients % of dry matter Secondary Macro Nutrients % of dry matter NPK Ca Mg S Coastal Bermudagrass 2.2 ‐ 4 0.25 ‐ 0.6 1.8 ‐ 3.3 Coastal Bermudagrass 0.25 ‐ 0.5 0.13 ‐ 0.3 0.18 ‐ 0.5 Bahia 1.5 ‐ 2.8 0.21 ‐ 0.4 1.26 ‐ 1.8 Bahia 0.5 ‐ 1.5 0.3 ‐ 0.45 0.18 ‐ 0.40 Sudangrass 2 ‐ 3.5 0.2 ‐ 0.35 1.9 ‐ 3.5 Sudangrass 1 ‐ 1.35 0.22 ‐ 0.45 0.23 ‐ 0.3 Alfalfa 4.5 ‐ 50.26 ‐ 0.7 2 ‐ 3.5 Alfalfa 1.8 ‐ 30.3 ‐ 1.0 0.26 ‐ 0.5 Red Clover 3 ‐ 4.5 0.28 ‐ 0.60 1.8 ‐ 3.00 Red Clover 2 ‐ 2.6 0.21 ‐ 0.6 0.26 ‐ 0.30 Wheat, Oats 4‐50.2 ‐ 0.5 2.5 ‐ 5 Wheat 0.2 ‐ 10.14 ‐ 10.15 ‐ 0.65
Section IV. Fertilizers Section IV. Fertilizers
What are Fertilizer Recommendations based on? What are Fertilizer Recommendations based on? • Correlation Micro Nutrients parts per million Determination of a critical value, upon which an increase in soil test Mn Zn B value does not achieve a higher Coastal Bermudagrass 25 ‐ 300 20 ‐ 50 6‐30 set relative yield percent. Bahia 56 ‐ 105 22 ‐ 31 9‐19 Sudangrass 46 ‐ 65 23 ‐ 35 15 ‐ 23 • Calibration Alfalfa 31 ‐ 100 21 ‐ 70 30 ‐ 80 Calculated value based on rate Red Clover 30 ‐ 120 18 ‐ 80 30 ‐ 80 studies of how much additional fertilizer nutrient is required to Wheat 20 ‐ 150 18 ‐ 70 1.5 ‐ 4 achieve a set relative yield percent.
8 11/30/2017
Section IV. Fertilizers Section IV. Fertilizers
Soil Test Report based on ‘Critical Level’ Soil Test Report
Fertilizer Recommendation • Which nutrients? • Optimum rate to apply.
Soil Chemical Condition • Soil acidity ‐ pH • Salinity
Section IV. Fertilizers Section IV. Fertilizers
Soil Health Soil Health Encourages • Is Soil Fertility the same? • Buildup of soil organic matter • Soil Quality? Less tillage + cover crops • Health = absence of • Improved soil structure disease Living roots year round • Really talking about the • Better infiltration of rainwater biological component • Increased density & diversity of biology
9 11/30/2017
Section III. Cool Season Forage Crops Section III. Cool Season Forage Crops
Cool Season Forages Rotation: Rule # 1: Plan Ahead Planting winter crops as a management • Identify seed supply in August or September to ensure tool to improve hay planting in September to October fields and build soil functionality • Decide what you are looking to get out of a cool season forage (is this soil health?) • When will you need the forage to be available
Section III. Cool Season Forage Crops Section III. Cool Season Forage Crops
Cool Season Forages Cool Season Forages - Scenarios
Rule # 2: Match your species with your soil Small Grains and climate • Wheat, oat, rye or ryegrass sod-seeding (over-seeding) • Some species need well drained soils (alfalfa), or prefer • High-quality feed (protein) acidic soils (ryegrass) • Reduce hay costs • Some species don’t tolerate cold (oats) • Utilize land, rainfall, and nutrients in soil more efficiently • Some species need cold to vernalize (winter wheat)
Section III. Cool Season Forage Crops Section III. Cool Season Forage Crops
Cool Season Forages - Scenarios Cool Season Forages - Scenarios
Small Grains Small Grains
• Hard to make good seed/soil • Need fertilizers but boost contact annual productivity • Low fall moisture can lead to • For every 1000 lbs forage poor establishment 30-40 lbs N • Triticale and rye do well in 7-10 lbs P O drier regions 2 5 30-35 lbs K O • Ryegrass great for high rainfall 2 areas
10 11/30/2017
Section III. Cool Season Forage Crops Section III. Cool Season Forage Crops
Cool Season Forages - Scenarios Cool Season Forages - Scenarios
Small Grains Small Grains
• Planting • Grazing 6-8 weeks before 1st killing Wait 2 months frost 6” of top growth 120-150 lbs (drilled) / acre • Termination for wheat & rye May to reduce competition 80-120 lbs for barley & oats with bermudagrass
Section III. Cool Season Forage Crops Section III. Cool Season Forage Crops
Cool Season Forages - Scenarios Cool Season Forages - Scenarios
Legumes Legumes
• Legumes over-seeded in warm • Higher level of management season forages needed
• Higher nutrition value than • Even more soil specific than most grasses grasses and small grains
• Nitrogen fixation • Perennials can act like annuals - need to recover hard seed
Section III. Cool Season Forage Crops Section III. Cool Season Forage Crops
Cool Season Forages Cool Season Forages
Legumes Legumes
• Can give 100 lbs / acre N back • Winter feeding reduced by 4-6 to warm season grass ($55) weeks through earlier grazing
• Livestock performance often • Provide weed control by better (high digestibility) shading and out competing other species (IPM) • Extend the grazing season
11 11/30/2017
Section III. Cool Season Forage Crops Section IV. Fertilizers
Cool Season Forages Links you can use:
Overall Benefits All the latest and greatest http://www.agrilifebookstore.org/ Agrilife Extension Publications 1. Improved pasture and livestock productivity Texas A&M Agrilife Extension http://publications.tamu.edu/ 2. Legumes reduce nitrogen fertilizer costs Service Soil, Water, and Forage Testing Laboratory 3. Active roots year round keep nutrients from being lost through leaching or soil http://soiltesting.tamu.edu/ reactions (tie‐up)
4. Competition reduces weed pressure and herbicide inputs Root Notes Blog https://rootnotes.tamu.edu/
and on Twitter https://twitter.com/Root_Notes
Jake Mowrer Assistant Professor and Extension Specialist
Email: [email protected]
Phone: 979‐845‐5366
Office: 348A Heep Center
12
Forage Samples for Everyone
Pasture Management for Success – Manage for What You WANT
Dr. Vanessa Corriher-Olson
Associate Professor and Extension Specialist Forages Eastern Texas Forage Calendar
Available at the AgriLife Bookstore for $12.50!
www.agrilifebookstore.org SCS-2002-09
Forages NITROGEN FERTILIZER: What Should I Use Larry A. Redmon Associate Professor and Extension Forage Specialist, Overton, Texas
Nitrogen (N) is typically the most costly fertilizer input used ammonium sulfate, although it is generally the most expen- in grass production. Although a sound fertility plan that sive form of N due to its low analysis for N, if sulfur is considers optional methods of providing N to the forage required based on soil test recommendation, it may be a system should be the norm, producers often wait until N sound investment for the pasture fertility program. fertilizer prices escalate before examining alternatives. One aspect of considerable interest in East Texas is the use Fertilizer should generally be purchased based on the price of broiler litter instead of inorganic fertilizer. Information per pound of nutrient. Table 1 indicates the differences in contained in Tables 2 through 4 indicates the various fertilizer N cost for different types of N fertilizer. Although certain nutrients contained in broiler litter. The range indicates the sources of N fertilizer, when priced by the ton, may be variability of the litter, but provides information that can help more appealing than others, consider the analysis and the producers estimate the level of nutrients being applied per actual cost per pound of N. Many times higher-priced ton of litter. fertilizer on a per-ton basis is actually a better purchase. For example, urea that is $5 more expensive per ton than Broiler litter can be a good source of nutrients for several
ammonium nitrate actually has a lower cost per pound of N reasons. Besides providing the primary nutrients N-P2O5-
when compared with ammonium nitrate. In the case of K2O, there also are appreciable amounts of Ca, Mg, Cu,
Table 1. Nitrogen content and cost per pound of nitrogen of Table 2. Nutrient composition of litter from 147 broiler houses various nitrogen-containing fertilizers. sampled in Alabama, 1977 - 19871. Fertilizer Fertilizer N Content Fertilizer N Cost Average Nutrient Source Analysis (lbs/ton) Cost1 ($/ton) ($/ton) Average Analysis Content Dry-Weight Basis Range As-Is Basis2 Anhydrous (%) (%) (lbs/ton) Ammonia 82-0-0 1640 360 0.21 Moisture 19.7 15.0 - 39.0 --- Urea 46-0-0 920 283 0.31 Nitrogen (N) 3.9 2.1 - 6.0 62 Ammonium Phosphate (P O ) 3.7 1.4 - 8.9 59 nitrate 34-0-0 680 233 0.34 2 5 Potassium (K2O) 2.5 0.8 - 6.2 40 Urea-ammonium Calcium (Ca) 2.2 0.8 - 6.1 35 nitrate 32-0-0 640 180 0.28 Magnesium (Mg) 0.5 0.2 - 2.1 8 Ammonium sulfate 21-0-0-24 420 185 0.442 Sulfur (S) 0.4 0.01 - 0.8 6 1 Fertilizer prices current for spring 2001 in East Texas. 1 Ball et. al., 1998. 2 If sulfur is required, credit the per-ton price of ammonium sulfate with $52.80, 2 Average as-is or wet-weight values assume a moisture content of 19.7% reducing the per-pound cost of N to $0.32. Table 3. Total elemental concentrations for various manures from Texas and literature.1
Total Elemental Concentrations N P K Ca Mg Na Zn Fe Cu Mn S Animal % Mg/kg
Dairy2 1.35 0.54 1.37 3.69 0.60 0.24 129 4430 36 195 3778 Beef3 1.36 0.53 1.54 1.43 0.49 0.67 91 2582 18 251 5026 Poultry4 3.15 2.41 2.61 2.98 0.61 0.76 602 2668 465 579 7661 Biosolids5 5.00 1.53 0.52 2.87 0.26 0.22 1340 2278 473 357 ---
1 Feagley and Dollar, 2002. 2 Texas data – 161 sample average, except for N (n = 160) and S and B (53 mg/kg), 13 sample average. 3 Texas data – 29 sample average, except for Cu, Mn, S, and B (40 mg/kg), 6 sample average; 23 of the 29 samples from Mathis et al., 1973. 4 Texas data – 30 sample average, except for S (8); B (79 mg/kg), 8 samples; Ca, 29 samples; and As (13 mg/kg), 6 samples. 5 Texas data – 49 sample average, except for Ca, Mg, N, Fe, and Mn have 3 samples and metals listed here have 48 samples; metals listed in mg/kg – As = 5.58; Cd = 2.85; Cr = 26.6; Pb = 48; Hg = 1.30 (46 sample average); Mo = 12.6; Ni = 18.0; Se = 5.95. and B (Table 3) brought into the pasture in the broiler litter. perennial forage grasses, such as bermudagrass, take up Yearly applications of litter may also raise soil pH over these nutrients in a ratio that more closely approximates time. This can be critical for the production of certain forage 4:1:4 (N-P2O5-K2O). Therefore, over time, P will accu- species and serves to reduce overall input costs associated mulate at the site simply because more P is being applied with limestone application. Also provided by the litter is than can be used by the forage grass. This effect can be organic matter that helps to improve soil tilth and nutrient offset if only enough litter is applied to meet the P require- and moisture holding capability. Although some producers ment each year for the soil and the remaining N and K are are interested in organic agriculture, those using broiler litter applied as inorganic fertilizers. An alternative is to apply should realize that like all organic sources of fertilizer the litter at the required N rate every four years and use nutrients, organic materials must undergo a transformation supplemental inorganic N and K2O, if needed during the from the organic state to the inorganic state before nutrients other three years of the rotation. Note that if the litter is will be available for plant uptake. Thus, organic fertilizer applied at the N rate yearly, P soil buildup has been linked nutrients actually are transformed to inorganic fertilizer to P runoff and surface water quality issues such as eutrophi- nutrients by soil microbes in a process known as cation. mineralization. This transformation period can be prolonged by environmental factors such as extreme heat, cold, or When comparing the cost of broiler litter versus inorganic drought. Other factors such as low soil pH can also impede fertilizer several aspects must be considered. First is the mineralization. There is, therefore, some lag time in broiler cost of the litter. If the distance to the broiler houses is not litter application and when the nutrients will actually be too great, litter can be a good buy when only the cost of available. Because of this lag time in nutrient availability, the N is considered. Even if the distance and thus the freight producers may wish to apply broiler litter at least one month charge is greater, broiler litter may still be a good buy when prior to forage green-up. Users of broiler litter should also other nutrients are considered. Examine the following ex- realize that approximately 10-15% of the N is not available ample where it is assumed there are 60 lbs of N per ton of in the application year, but will be available the following litter and a 20% loss due to volatilization: year. Most of the P and K, however, are available the first year. There may be an approximate 20-25% loss of N Litter cost = $25/ton contained in the broiler litter as ammonia gas. If, however, 60 lbs N/ac - 20% = 48 lbs N/ton available the litter is incorporated into the soil, or if the litter if rained $25/48 lbs N/ton = $0.52/lb N on within a few days, much lower amounts of N will be lost to the atmosphere. Is $0.52/lb of N a good buy? It is not when compared to other N sources and prices contained in Table 1. If the
Data contained in Tables 2 and 3 indicate the primary prob- value of P2O5 and K2O are considered, however, the price lem associated with exclusive use of broiler litter as a nutri- for N drops significantly. Consider the following example ent source for pasture forages. The approximately 1:1:1 where some values for P2O5 ($0.24/lb, 60 lbs/ton of litter)
(N-P2O5-K2O) ratio illustrated in Table 2 shows that more and K2O ($0.15/lb, 40 lbs/ton of litter) are used in the
P2O5 will be added as will N and K2O. Warm-season equation. Table 4. Nutrient concentration of broiler litter and amount Is the N a good buy at $0.08/lb? You bet! But there are contained per ton1. still some aspects to consider. For example, 60 lbs of P2O5 Concentration Nutrient per ton is enough for approximately 4 tons of bermudagrass hay Nutrient (%) (lbs) production. Unless you plan to harvest more than 4 tons
1992 1993 1992 1993 of hay, you cannot value the additional P2O5 that is applied beyond the 1 ton considered in the above example except N 3.57 2.08 71.4 41.6 P O (P) 5.75 3.77 115 (50) 75.4 (33) for its value in increasing soil test phosphorus levels. Thus, 2 5 for the second ton of litter applied, only the K O should be K2O 3.83 3.13 76.6 62.6 2 Ca 2.80 1.58 56.0 31.6 credited, which makes the cost of a pound of N in the Mg 0.68 0.49 13.6 9.8 second ton approximately $0.40/lb. Averaged across two Na 0.88 0.65 17.6 13.0 tons of broiler litter, N would cost approximately $0.24/lb, Concentration Nutrient per ton still a bargain in today’s fertilizer market. Even if the liming (ppm) (lbs) value and organic matter content are not considered, broiler 1992 1993 1992 1993 litter can be a competitive source of fertilizer nutrients.
Zn 560 485 1.13 0.98 To help reduce fertilizer input costs, some consideration Fe 2013 1634 4.03 3.28 should be given to using forage legumes such as clover and Cu 739 302 1.48 0.6 Mn 627 446 1.25 0.9 vetch in the pasture system as a source for N. Where adapted, clovers and vetch can provide up to 100 lbs or 1 Evers, 1998. more of N per acre per year. Besides lengthening the grazing season and enhancing the nutritive value of the forage base, Litter cost = $25/ton the N input from forage legumes can reduce fertilizer costs. 60 lbs N/ac – 20% = 48 lbs N/ton litter available Finally, when purchasing N fertilizer, thought should be given 60 lbs P2O5 x $0.24 = $14.40 value/ton of litter for P to the rate at which the applied N will decrease soil pH. 40 K2O x $0.15 = $6.00 value/ton of litter for K $25/ton litter cost – ($14.40 + $6.00) = $4.60 All ammonium-containing fertilizers release hydrogen ions remaining cost of litter after the values for P & K into the soil solution as part of the conversion by soil are subtracted $4.60/48 lbs available N/ton = microbes of ammonium to nitrate. Some N fertilizers, $0.08/lb N however, have a higher acidifying potential than others (Fig. 1).
None
Ammonium nitrate
Ammonium sulfate
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Soil pH
Figure 1. Effect on soil pH of different N fertilizer sources after three years. TAMU-Overton From the data contained in Figure 1, it is apparent References ammonium sulfate has a much higher acidifying effect on soil pH. In fact, among soil scientists, there is general Ball, D.M., C.S. Hoveland, and G.D. Lacefield. 1998. agreement that ammonium sulfate has three times the Southern Forages, 2nd ed. Potash & Phosphate Institute acidifying effect on soil pH compared with ammonium and the Foundation for Agronomic Research. Norcross, nitrate, urea, or urea ammonium nitrate solution. Therefore, GA. the increased level of limestone (e.g., limestone required more often) that may be required for the pasture system Evers, G. W. 1998. Comparison of broiler poultry litter may affect the source of N fertilizer used. and commercial fertilizer for Coastal bermudagrass production in the Southeastern US. J. Sustainable Ag. Purchasing N fertilizer can be similar to purchasing a new 12:55-77. automobile. While there are many makes and models around, they all provide transportation. Some automobiles, Feagley, Sam. 2002. Animal manures and biosolids. In however, can provide transportation at better cost than S. Feagley and M. Dollar (eds.) Nutrient Management others. Nitrogen fertilizer is no different. They all provide Certification 2002. an essential plant nutrient for growth. Some N sources, however, may provide a little better value.
Produced by Soil and Crop Sciences Communications, The Texas A&M University System For additional information, see our website at http://soilcrop.tamu.edu
The information given herein is for educational purposes only. Reference to commercial products or trade names is made with the understanding that no discrimination is intended and no endorsement by Texas Cooperative Extension is implied.
Educational programs conducted by Texas Cooperative Extension are open to all people without regard to race, color, sex, disability, religion, age, or national origin.
Issued in furtherance of Cooperative Extension Work in Agriculture and Home Economics, Acts of Congress of May 8, 1914, as amended, and June 30, 1914, in cooperation with the United States Department of Agriculture. Chester P. Fehlis, Deputy Director, Texas Agricultural Extension Service, The Texas A&M University System. SCS-2003-08
Forages Developing & Using A Forage System Larry A. Redmon*
n order to hold production costs at a manageable adopt alternative production enterprises such as winter level, the nutrient requirements of most kinds and stocker programs, and an increased potential for profit Iclasses of livestock should be met with pasture to the from the production system. greatest extent possible. No single forage species will meet the nutrient requirements of all grazing livestock at What kind of forage system might be all times of the year. Therefore, livestock producers used for late winter-calving beef cows? should develop forage systems that optimize livestock For this example, assume a production enterprise with a performance at the lowest cost. late winter-calving cowherd in East Texas. The forage system could begin with a bermudagrass base. What is a forage system? Bermudagrass is well adapted to the sandy, acid soils that A forage system is a planned forage program designed dominate the East Texas region and are common to and implemented by the manager that seeks to use a upper Coastal Plain soils across much of the southeastern mixture of both warm- and cool-season forage species to U.S. Annual precipitation levels in East Texas average meet the nutrient requirements of grazing animals on a over 40 inches. With adequate fertilization, year-round basis. The climate and soils at the production bermudagrass can produce high levels of dry matter of site, the kind and class of livestock, the manager’s adequate nutritive value that allow good stocking rates aversion to risk, and the overall goals of the production combined with good animal performance. Appropriate system will determine the choice of species. cross-fencing allows for implementation of a flexible grazing system consisting of multiple paddocks. This What are the advantages of a flexibility, which is critical in developing any forage forage system? system, allows certain pastures to be deferred from In a forage system, careful consideration is given to grazing. Thus, certain pastures can be designated for growing various adapted forage species based on their accumulation (or stockpiling) of bermudagrass growth for ability to provide forage of adequate nutritive value at the grazing during fall and early winter. In other designated time the grazing animals have specific nutrient require- pastures, annual ryegrass could be overseeded into the ments. This matching of animal nutrient demand and bermudagrass. Therefore, in this example, which uses forage nutrient supply reduces input costs while maintain- only bermudagrass and ryegrass (a warm-season peren- ing or improving animal performance. Some advantages nial and a cool-season annual, respectively), a forage of an appropriate forage system include reduced depen- system could be devised as follows: dence on supplemental feeds and herbicides, the ability to 1) May through October: Graze growing bermuda- *Associate Professor and Extension Forage Specialist, Texas Co- grass pastures. During periods of excess forage operative Extension, The Texas A&M University System, Overton, growth, consider the following options: TX a. Harvest excess forage mechanically. The above scenario illustrates the use of two forage i. Allow another producer to purchase and species to provide pasture on a year-round basis during harvest excess forage as hay. years that adequate precipitation is received. During ii. Harvest excess forage as hay for your years that adequate moisture is not received, cattle own use. producers will have to rely on hay to meet animal re- b. Use stocker calves to harvest excess forage. quirements. Although this is a more costly alternative, during dry years there are generally no other acceptable i. Purchase stocker calves. options. Figure 1 provides an illustration of a forage ii. Contract graze stocker calves. system of the type described above. 2) Early to mid-September: Have bermudagrass pastures designated for stockpiling grazed short, rotate cattle to other pastures, fertilize with 60- Figure 1. Theoretical 120 acre East Texas ranch forage 75 lbs. N/acre. Allow forage to accumulate system involving two species. Stocking rate is estimated at 3 acres per animal unit. Bermudagrass is illustrated being growth for later grazing. used during both the growing season and the dormant 3) Mid- to late October: Have pastures designated season as a standing hay crop. Ryegrass is used during to be planted to ryegrass grazed short. Rotate late winter and spring. Each block represents one acre. cattle to other pastures. Lightly disk the pasture and broadcast 25-30 lbs. ryegrass seed. Follow the broadcast operation with a light dragging operation. Allow ryegrass to accumulate growth for grazing beginning in February. 4) Apply 50 lbs. of N/acre to ryegrass about February 1 and again on about March 15. Allocate ¾ to 1 acre per cow and allow continu- ous grazing until the ryegrass is completely utilized. 5) When other bermudagrass pastures are grazed to a final residue height for the season, initiate grazing in the stockpiled bermudagrass pastures. This will usually occur in November. Use an electric wire to allocate 1-2 days worth of forage Stockpiled bermudagrass at a time. Allow animals to consume the top 2/3 of the forage. Advance the electric wire to Bermudagrass grazed until mid-October, allocate more forage. This allocation procedure then overseeded with ryegrass reduces waste of standing forage in much the same way a hay ring reduces hay waste. Bermudagrass grazed until frost 6) When stockpiled forage is completely grazed, con- sider the following options: a. If annual ryegrass is ready to graze (6-8 What about a different example inches tall, usually mid- to late February), initiate continuous grazing of ryegrass pas- involving fall-calving beef cows? tures. With this second example, continue to assume land b. If annual ryegrass is not ready to graze, con- ownership in East Texas, but on an operation that has a sider the following options: fall-calving cow herd. With fall-calving cows, nutritional i. Feed hay until ryegrass is ready. requirements during the fall are increased due to lacta- ii. Consider planting a small amount of tion. Since overseeded annual ryegrass primarily pro- small grain pasture to transition cattle duces forage during late winter and spring, an additional from stockpiled bermudagrass to forage species may be necessary to provide adequate ryegrass. forage high in nutritive value earlier in the fall-winter iii. If applicable, consider utilizing a small season. The inclusion of the small grain rye in combina- amount of cool-season perennial grass pasture to transition cattle from stock- tion with the ryegrass will provide earlier and usually piled bermudagrass to ryegrass. more total forage than ryegrass alone. Rye also is well adapted to the sandy soils in East Texas. Therefore, the Depending on whether the production system involves forage system would be as follows: late winter or fall calving cow herds, the forage systems described above can result in lower winter feeding costs 1) May through October: Graze growing bermuda- with adequate to good animal performance compared grass pastures. During periods of excess forage with traditional hay only or hay + supplement strategies. growth, consider the following options: a. Harvest excess forage mechanically. What about using a legume in the i. Allow another producer to purchase and forage system? harvest excess forage as hay. To this point only grass species have been considered as ii. Harvest excess forage as hay for your a component to the forage system. Many producers, own use. however, have learned that inclusion of an adapted b. Use stocker calves to harvest excess forage. forage legume can provide an additional benefit that i. Purchase stocker calves. grasses cannot: the contribution of nitrogen to the system ii. Contract graze stocker calves. that can reduce, or in some instances, eliminate the need 2) Early to mid-September: Have bermudagrass for nitrogen fertilizer. In East Texas, adapted clovers pastures that are designated for stockpiling (such as crimson, arrowleaf, white, or ball clover) or grazed short, rotate cattle to other pastures, hairy vetch may provide 100 lbs. N/acre per year to the fertilize with 60-75 lbs. N/acre. Allow forage to forage system. Also, given the fact that various legumes accumulate growth for later grazing. Not as have different distributions of growth, they provide much forage will be required as for the late another way that a producer can influence the quantity winter calving cow due to rye pasture availability. and nutritive value of pasture forage available at different 3) Mid- to late October: Have pastures that are times. Using clover to provide nitrogen to the forage designated to be planted to rye-ryegrass grazed system has a higher degree of risk associated with it than short, rotate cattle to other pastures. Lightly disk simply purchasing fertilizer. Stocking rates may also be the pasture and drill 100 lbs. of rye seed and somewhat reduced (20-25% at Overton). The overall broadcast 25-30 lbs. of ryegrass seed per acre. cost of production, however, can be dramatically re- Follow planting with a light dragging operation. duced, thus making the use of forage legumes an eco- 4) Late October to mid-November: Fertilize winter nomically viable choice when determining what species pasture with 50 lbs. of N/acre. should be included in the forage system. 5) When other bermudagrass pastures are grazed to a final residue height for the season and What about another example involving stockpiled bermudagrass is utilized, initiate grazing of winter pasture. This will usually be rangeland cow-calf production? late December to early January. Allow cows to Much of Texas west of the IH-35 corridor is dominated limit graze the winter pasture about two hours by rangelands. Beef production in these areas depends per day. Provide creep access and allow calves primarily on native forages. Many of these production unlimited use of the winter pasture. Cows spend systems, however, could benefit from the addition of a the rest of the time on dormant bermudagrass. small grain and/or ryegrass pasture for winter grazing. Some hay may be fed as needed. Using this Many times there are abandoned crop fields that could grazing procedure, one acre of forage will be established to winter pasture. Limited grazing of provide grazing for three cow-calf pairs. these pastures could serve to reduce the need for crude 6) Apply an additional 50 lbs. N/acre to winter protein and/or energy supplementation while improving pasture on about December 15. animal performance. Generally, rangelands should be 7) On February 1 and March 15, make additional grazed and not used for hay production. Therefore, the 50-lbs. N/acre applications to winter pasture. addition of a small field of bermudagrass or Old World An additional 50 lbs. of N/acre may be applied bluestem for hay production could benefit the rangeland on May 1. This will enable ryegrass to remain beef producer. An adapted introduced warm-season vegetative longer and provide the initial N perennial grass could provide all of the hay required for fertilization for the bermudagrass. the enterprise from a smaller production unit, thus minimizing the overall negative impact to the rangeland. One example of how introduced forages may be benefi- reduced animal performance. Hay feeding should be cial in rangeland cow-calf production comes from the considered a tactical solution to a short-term problem USDA Southern Plains Experimental Range near Wood- such as drought or ice and/or snow cover days. Supple- ward, OK. Typical stocking rates for cow-calf produc- mentation should only be used under specific guidelines tion at that location are approximately 20 acres per involving heifer development, backgrounding stocking animal unit year (AUY). With the use of only 1.5 acres cattle, or when forage is in short supply. Development of introduced forage (double cropped to warm-season and utilization of a forage system should be a priority and cool-season annual forage grasses), the rangeland goal for all livestock producers. requirement was reduced to only 12 acres per AUY (Sims, 1993). Not only was the land requirement References reduced per cow, but net return per acre was almost Sims, Phillip L. 1993. Cow weights and reproduction doubled! (Gillen and Sims, 1998). A little bit of intro- on native rangeland and native rangeland-comple- duced forage can go a long way in rangeland cow-calf mentary forage systems. J. Anim. Sci. 71:1704- production systems when appropriate sites are available. 1711.
Summary Gillen, R.L. and P.L. Sims. 1998. Complementary Grazing animals should receive most, if not all, of their forage systems for the Southern Plains. IRM Pro- nutrition from forages that are standing in the field. Any ducer Education Seminars, NCBA Annual Meeting, deviation from this strategy can result in reduced profit Denver, CO. potential due to the generally higher cost of hay or
Produced by Soil & Crop Sciences Communications, The Texas A&M University System Additional publications can be found on the web at: http://soilcrop.tamu.edu http://tcebookstore.org
The information given herein is for educational purposes only. Reference to commercial products or trade names is made with the understanding that no discrimination is intended and no endorsement by Texas Cooperative Extension and Texas A&M University is implied.
Educational programs of Texas Cooperative Extension are open to all people without regard to race, color, sex, disability, religion, age, or national origin. Issued in furtherance of Cooperative Extension Work in Agriculture and Home Economics, Acts of Congress of May 8, 1914, as amended, and June 30, 1914, in cooperation with the United States Department of Agriculture. Chester P. Fehlis, Director, Texas Cooperative Extension, The Texas A&M University System. SCS‐2009‐11
BERMUDAGRASS VARIETIES, HYBRIDS AND BLENDS FOR TEXAS
Vanessa A. Corriher and Larry A. Redmon Extension Forage Specialists Overton and College Station, TX
Bermudagrass (Cynodon dactylon) is native to southeast Africa. The earliest mention of bermudagrass comes from the diary of Thomas Spalding, owner of Sapeloe Island, Georgia and a prominent antebellum agriculturalist. Found in his diary was the following entry: “Bermudagrass was brought to Savannah in 1751 by Governor Henry Ellis.” He went on to say that “If ever this becomes a grazing country it must be through the instrumentality of this grass.” Writers as early as 1807 referred to bermudagrass as one of the most important grasses in the South at the time. Thus, bermudagrass has been a part of southern agriculture for at least 250 years. Hybrid bermudagrass with improved productive capability and nutritive value has played an important role in livestock production across the southern US for nearly 60 years with the introduction of ‘Coastal’ in 1943. Bermudagrass is a warm-season perennial grass that spreads by rhizomes (underground stems) and/or stolons (horizontal aboveground stems). The grass tolerates a wide range of soil types and soil pH values, thus it is adapted to most of the southern US. Limited cold tolerance in early common and hybrid cultivars of bermudagrass led to the release of several cold-tolerant varieties. These cold tolerant varieties are useful for the warm- and cool-season transition areas of the US, including Oklahoma, Arkansas, Missouri, and Tennessee. Although capable of high production, bermudagrass must be well-fertilized to reach maximum production capability (Table 1 and 2). Given adequate moisture, nitrogen (N) is usually the most limiting factor to forage production, but appropriate levels of phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) are critical to yield and persistence. Adequate pH (5.8-6.5) is also important in maintaining a vigorous stand of bermudagrass.
Table 1. Coastal bermudagrass dry matter (DM) yield as affected by fertilizer and broiler litter application rate.1 Application rate DM 1992 DM 1993 (lbs/ac) (lbs/ac) (lbs/ac)
N-P205-K20 (lbs/ac)
0-0-0 4780 4050 100-33-67 7140 6450 200-67-134 8680 8290 400-134-268 9640 10460
Poultry litter (tons/ac)
2 SPR + 2 SUM2 7580 6930 4 SPR 8320 7450 4 SPR + 4 SUM 8850 7840 8 SPR 9810 9270 1 Evers, 1998 2 SPR is late spring and SUM is mid-summer. Table 2. Warm-season perennial grass yields from 1997 through 2001. 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Average Entry ------lb dry matter/ac------
Tifton 85 bermuda1 5044 a2 8064 a 12915 a 12032 a 15680 a 10747 a CD 90160 bermuda 2737 b 3550 d 9696 bc 10347 b 13395 a-c 7945 b Texas Tough bermuda 2480 bc 5262 b 11749 ab 7956 e-g 10993 cd 7688 b Ranchero Frio bermuda 1943 cd 2912 de 8984 c 9991 bc 12428 b-d 7251 bc Terra Verde bermuda 2085 cd 4885 bc 9054 c 8318 d-f 11748 b-d 7218 bc Coastal bermuda1 1611 d 3739 cd 8507 cd 9440 b-d 11549 b-d 6969 bc Cheyenne bermuda 2408 bc 3430 de 6640 d-f 8928 c-e 13431 ab 6967 bc KF CD 194 bermuda 1914 cd 3664 cd 7407 c-e 7525 fg 10075 de 6117 c Pensacola bahia 583 e 2167 e 4771 f 6809 gh 7682 ef 4402 d Tifton 9 bahia 767 e 2203 e 5470 ef 5967 h 7398 f 4361 d Common bermuda3 383 7445 fg 11352 b-d 6393 Giant bermuda3 836 7356 fg 6643 f 4945 Wrangler bermuda3 188 6744 gh 7550 f 4827 Kikuyugrass3 0 7620 e-g 5539 f 4386 1Bermudagrass varieties established from sprigs. 2Entries planted in 1999. All other entries planted in 1997.
Inadequate levels of N not only limit bermudagrass dry matter production, but also reduce crude protein levels. Less than optimum bermudagrass growth can also allows weed infestation, which reduces carrying capacity and increases input costs. Bermudagrass is highly responsive to N fertilization, but regardless of N input low levels of K can lead to reduced yields, poor stands and winter-kill. Phosphorus is important for many plant growth functions, including root growth and development. Careful attention to soil fertility, beginning with an annual soil test to determine the soil nutrient status is necessary to ensure maximum bermudagrass growth, disease resistance, and cold tolerance. Besides providing good nutrition for cows during the growing season, bermudagrass is used extensively in hay production for winter feeding. Although this practice is generally an expensive way to winter cattle, it is a popular practice across most of the South. Other uses of bermudagrass for winter feeding may help reduce costs. These uses include standing or “stockpiled” bermudagrass for fall and early winter grazing or overseeding bermudagrass swards with cool-season annual forages such as small grains, ryegrass, clovers or medics to provide late winter and spring grazing. The combined use of stockpiled bermudagrass and overseeded ryegrass can reduce winter feeding costs by up to $100 per cow through the winter. Warm-season perennial grasses such as bermudagrass generally have lower nutritive value compared to warm-season annuals or cool-season forages. However, good fertility practice (Table 3) and careful attention to stage of maturity at harvest (Table 4) can provide forage of good to excellent nutritive value.
Table 3. Coastal bermudagrass crude protein (CP) content as affected by fertilizer and broiler litter application rate.1 ------CP------(% DM) ------1992------1993------Application rate June July Aug Sept Oct May June July Aug Sept (lbs/ac) 11 9 6 8 7 7 17 19 23 22
N-P205-K20 (lbs/ac)
0-0-0 11.2 9.4 9.8 10.0 8.9 11.5 9.4 6.6 8.9 8.1 100-33-67 13.2 10.1 13.1 11.8 9.0 19.8 8.5 9.3 9.5 9.3 200-67-134 14.2 11.2 15.0 14.6 11.5 20.3 9.8 11.7 10.0 10.3 400-134-268 16.8 13.1 16.9 16.4 14.3 21.8 14.3 12.8 11.1 12.9
Poultry litter (tons/ac)
2 SPR + 2 SUM2 13.0 10.4 13.0 11.9 9.4 13.7 10.4 7.8 10.1 10.0 4 SPR 13.4 10.5 10.2 10.7 8.8 18.1 10.0 7.0 9.8 10.3 4 SPR + 4 SUM 13.8 11.3 15.5 14.2 9.6 17.0 11.7 10.1 10.9 11.8 8 SPR 15.9 13.8 13.1 12.5 10.1 22.3 14.3 9.5 9.5 10.6 1 Evers, 1998 2 SPR is late spring and SUM is mid-summer.
Table 4. Effect of clipping frequency on yield and nutritive value of ‘Coastal’ bermudagrass hay.1 Clipping DM Leaf Crude Lignin Interval Yield (%) Protein (%) (wk) (tons/ac) (%) 1 6.3 --- 21.4 … 2 7.8 87.6 20.8 9.4 3 8.6 81.3 18.8 9.6 4 9.7 74.8 17.0 10.3 6 12.6 57.7 13.8 11.2 8 12.5 51.4 12.2 12.0 1 Burton and Hanna, 1995
Bermudagrass has many uses other than pasture and hay, such as lawns, general-purpose turf, and erosion control. The following are descriptions of the various cultivars and collections of bermudagrass grown in East Texas:
SEEDED BERMUDAGRASSES
Seeded varieties can be used on small acreages that are not economical to sprig and on steep slopes and cut-over timberland where good seedbed preparation necessary for sprigging is not feasible. Most seeded bermudagrass on the market are blends that contain 2 to 4 lines and frequently contain Giant (NK 37) and common. Components of some of the blends on the market are reported in Table 5. A comparison of DM yield of several seeded varieties at Overton, TX are reported in Table 6. The percentage of each line in the blend may vary from year to year depending on seed availability and cost.
CHEYENNE Cheyenne is a cross between a bermudagrass from an old turf site in the Pacific Northwest and another plant from former Yugoslavia. Jacklin Seed Company and Pennington Seed developed and released this cultivar in 1989. It was originally released as a turfgrass but was promoted as a pasture variety by the mid-90’s. Like common bermudagrass, Cheyenne establishes quickly. Cheyenne produced the least dry matter yield of the seeded bermudagrasses in a 5-year evaluation trial at Overton (Table 2).
COMMON A highly variable variety in appearance and that responds favorably to good management in East Texas. Common may be found growing under almost every conceivable condition throughout the bermudagrass-growing region. It can be considered a forage grass, a turf grass or a noxious weed. Because of the long experience with common, it is often used as a standard for evaluating new material. Common dry matter yields are generally about 1/3 lower than Coastal with the forage nutritive value and forage quality being about the same. It is generally more winter hardy than the hybrids.
GUYMON Guymon is a synthetic cultivar developed from parental lines found in Yugoslavia and growing near Guymon, Oklahoma. The Oklahoma Ag Experiment Station and USDA-ARS released Guymon in 1982. Guymon is very winter hardy and has large stems. It has great winter tolerance, which allows it to be successfully grown in the northern portion of the bermudagrass growing region. Guymon dry matter yield is less than Midland or Hardie in Oklahoma and less than common bermudagrass in Texas.
GIANT (NK-37) NK-37 is a diploid strain of common bermudagrass that was increased by the Northrup Seed Company. Compared to common bermudagrass, NK-37 grows more upright with fewer tendencies to form a sod, has longer leaves, finer stems, fewer rhizomes and stolons, and has no pubescence. NK-37 begins growth later in the spring than common bermudagrass and it is not as cold tolerant as common. In severe winters, damage may be high. However, loss appears associated with disease damage and low fertility rather than a direct result of low temperatures. NK-37 is susceptible to leaf spot disease and dry matter yield declines in two to three years due to cold weather and diseases. The plantings will typically become a common bermudagrass stand. NK-37 does well in lower humidity climates.
WRANGLER Wrangler was released by Johnston Seed Company from a germplasm developed by Oklahoma State University. It has good cold hardiness and has good cover during the establishment season. Forage yields of Wrangler are potentially higher than yields of Guymon.
The following are descriptions of commercial blends of hulled and unhulled seed:
PASTO RICO Pasto Rico Brand is a seed blend marketed by Northrup, King and Company. It is a blend of Giant (NK-37) and common bermudagrass that contains both hulled and unhulled seed.
RANCHERO FRIO Ranchero Frio is a mixture of Giant (NK-37) bermudagrass and Cheyenne. Over the course of three years, Ranchero Frio has placed near the bottom in the seeded bermudagrass evaluation trial. Ranchero Frio has averaged 4613 lbs dry matter/ac over a 3-year trial (Table 2).
SUNGRAZER Sungrazer is a mixture of KF 194 and Wrangler. It is blended and sold by MBS Seed, Ltd. of Denton, TX.
SUNGRAZER PLUS Sungrazer Plus is a mixture of Giant, KF 194, and CD 90160 bermudagrass. It is blended and sold by MBS Seed, Ltd. of Denton, TX.
TEXAS TOUGH Texas Tough is a mixture of seeded bermudagrass that is blended and sold by East Texas Seed Company of Tyler, TX. The blend consists of 1/3 Giant and 2/3 common bermudagrass, one-half of which is hulled and the other one-half unhulled. At Overton, a 5-year variety evaluation trial has indicated Texas Tough to be the most productive of the seeded varieties in the trial, averaging 7,496 lbs DM/ac over the 5-year period (Table 2).
TEXAS TOUGH + Texas Tough Plus is a mixture of Common, Giant, Majestic seeded bermudagrasses that is blended and sold by East Texas Seed Company of Tyler, TX. Texas Tough + can be utilized for grazing or hay production.
TIERRA VERDE Tierra Verde, like Texas Tough, is a mixture of Giant and common bermudagrass. The Tierra Verde blend is 50% hulled and unhulled Giant and 50% hulled and unhulled common. Data obtained from a 5-year variety evaluation trial at Overton indicates Tierra Verde has averaged 6,967 lbs DM/ac, which placed it third among the seeded varieties (Table 2).
Table 5. Blends of seeded bermudagrasses. Trade name Components Pasto Rico Common, Giant Pasture Supreme Common, Giant Primero CD 90160, Mirage, Giant, Panama Ranchero Frio Cheyenne, Cheyenne 2, Mohawk, Giant Sungrazer KF 194, Wrangler Sungrazer 777 KF 194, Jackpot, CD 90160 Sungrazer Plus KF 194, CD 90160, Giant Texas Tough Common, Giant Texas Tough Plus Common, Giant, Majestic Tierra Verde Common, Giant Vaquero CD 90160, Mirage, Pyramid
Table 6. Three-year yields of several seeded and hybrid bermudagrass lines at Overton, Texas. 2002 2003 2004 Average Variety Yield (lb dry matter/acre) Coastal 6383 11,618 14,966 10,989 Tifton 85 8878 13,810 13,716 12,135 Common† 7557 10,624 12,908 10,363 Giant† 5675 9,062 10,230 8,322 Cheyenne† 6370 10,438 13,183 9,997 Wrangler† 4966 10,123 9,713 8,267 Seed lines 3532-9691 5119-15,619 7962-16,121 6879-13,402 †Seeded.
Table 7. Comparison of seeded bermudagrass varieties at TAMU-Overton Center.1 Variety 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 AVG Grass Weeds DM (lbs/ac) Texas 2480 523 5262 11749 6997 10993 7496 Tough Ranchero 1943 291 2912 8984 9116 12428 7077 Frio Tierra 2085 159 4885 9054 7065 11748 6967 Verde Cheyenne 2408 268 3430 6640 8159 13431 6814 Common 6666 11352 9009 Wrangler 6239 7550 6895 Giant 6591 6443 6617 1 Evers, 2001.
HYBRID BERMUDAGRASSES
Bermudagrass hybrids are essentially sterile. They may produce seed heads but produce little viable seed. Therefore, they must be propagated vegetatively (sprigs and/or green tops). Properly managed hybrids generally provide increased dry matter yield (Table 7), better forage nutritive value, greater drought tolerance, and/or greater cold tolerance than with common bermudagrass or many of the other seeded varieties.
ALICIA Alicia was developed by Cecil Greer of Edna, TX. It was reportedly selected from bermudagrass collected in Africa in 1955 and released in 1967. Franchise growers sold cuttings of aboveground material (tops) for the establishing of Alicia. It spreads primarily by stolons and has fewer rhizomes than Coastal. However, it spreads and becomes established more rapidly than Coastal. It is usually propagated by cuttings rather than by sprigs. Under moderate to heavy grazing and fairly severe winters it's recovery in the spring has been slow. Forage production is generally considered to be approximately equal in yield compared with Coastal; however, the forage nutritive value of Alicia is lower. Alicia is not as winter- hardy as Coastal and is more susceptible to rust and other diseases.
BRAZOS Brazos is a hybrid between materials of African origin and was released in 1982 by the Texas Ag Experiment Station, USDA-ARS, USDA-SCS, and the Louisiana Ag Experiment Station. Compared with Coastal, Brazos has wider leaves, thicker stems and rhizomes. It creates a more open sod than Coastal does. It has constantly been two to four percentage points higher than Coastal in digestibility. Brazos produces dry matter yields equal to Coastal on heavy soils, but up to 20% less on sandy soils. It establishes slower than Coastal, but is equal to or superior to Coastal in stand density persistence under grazing and winter hardiness. This cultivar is best used as a grazing due to the larger stems requiring more drying time.
CALLIE Callie was selected as an aberrant plant in an old plot of bermudagrass plant introductions at Mississippi State University in 1966 from a plant introduced from Africa and released in 1974. Callie is a robust grass with large stolons, wide leaves and a tall growth habit that establishes rapidly the first year. It produces dry matter yields equivalent to Coastal and provides good animal gains. Callie produces a ground cover consisting of an open type sod; therefore, spring recovery may be slower than Coastal. Callie is not as cold tolerant as Coastal and is extremely susceptible to rust, which reduces forage yield and nutritive value.
COASTAL A hybrid between Tift bermudagrass, a vigorous growing bermudagrass found in an old field near Tifton, Georgia, and an introduction from South Africa. Coastal is a result of an extensive breeding program by Glen Burton, USDA-ARS, Georgia Coastal Plains Experiment Station at Tifton, GA, and was released as a cultivar in 1943. Coastal is a highly productive bermudagrass producing both rhizomes and stolons and is adapted to a wide range of climatic conditions. It has exceptional longevity, readily responds to fertility and irrigation, and possesses better drought tolerance than common. Coastal is also tolerant of heavy grazing pressure or frequent and close defoliation. Coastal is the most widely planted bermudagrass in the southern US and Texas.
COASTCROSS-1 Coastcross-1 was developed by crossing Coastal and a plant introduction from Kenya, Africa and released by the USDA and Georgia Coastal Plains Experiment Station in 1967 from the breeding program of Dr. Glen Burton. Coastcross-1 produces more stolons than Coastal and has few small rhizomes that create an open sod that makes it more susceptible to invasion by weedy species. Coastcross-1 grows taller and has broader, softer leaves than Coastal. It is highly resistant foliage diseases. Coastcross-1 produces about the same dry matter yield as Coastal, but is 11-12% higher in digestibility. Although Coastcross-1 produces more fall growth, it does not have the winter tolerance of Coastal. Its lack of cold tolerance limits it to the more southern bermudagrass growing region.
GRAZER The Louisiana Ag Experiment Station and the USDA-ARS released Grazer bermudagrass in 1985 after it had been previously released from Tifton, GA as Tifton 72-84. This cultivar is a cross between a bermudagrass found growing in the Alps of northern Italy and an introduction from Kenya, Africa. It is used for pasture and/or moderate production of hay that is high in forage nutritive value. Grazer produces a few rhizomes but is highly stoloniferous. The dry matter yield is less than that of Coastal, but the forage nutritive value is higher through the summer months. Therefore, the average daily gain and gain per acre are comparable to or higher than those obtained from Coastal. The drought, disease and cold tolerance is equal to Coastal. Grazer establishes faster than Coastal and forms a dense sod.
HARDIE Hardie is an infertile hybrid derived from plants native to Turkey and Afghanistan that was released by the Oklahoma Ag Experiment Station in 1974. Hardie is established by planting sprigs. It is cold hardy and has larger rhizomes and longer, broader leaves than Midland bermudagrass, yields somewhat more dry matter than Midland, and produces greater gain per acre due to increased digestibility. Hardie is less disease tolerant than Midland or Coastal and dry matter yields are less than Coastal in Texas and Louisiana. It is generally grown north of Texas.
JIGGS A Mr. Riggs selected the bermudagrass that would be known as Jiggs from a field in East Texas. Sprigs and tops are available and being planted by a few producers. Jiggs establishes rapidly from sprigs or tops and has produced dry matter yields equal to Coastal and Tifton 85. Anecdotal evidence suggests that Jiggs demonstrates its greatest advantage on sites that are tight and poorly drained. This variety, however, has problems with rust and may not be as cold tolerant as Coastal.
LA GRANGE A collection made by the Extension County Agricultural Agent near LaGrange, Texas. LaGrange is similar in growth characteristics and digestibility to Coastal.
LANCASTER Max W. Lancaster of Rienz, Mississippi released Lancaster bermudagrass in 1985. The cold hardiness, dry matter yield, and forage nutritive value are supposedly equal to Coastal, but there is very little data on this variety.
LULING A deep green, broad-leafed bermudagrass with short, dense growth obtained from the Luling Foundation at Luling, Texas. Forage production is similar to that of common but significantly less than Coastal.
MIDLAND Midland is a hybrid between Coastal and a winter hardy variety from Indiana released cooperatively by the Oklahoma Ag Experiment Station and USDA-ARS at Tifton, GA in 1953. Midland is leafier, darker green, and tends to produce a more open sod than Coastal. It is very cold tolerant and is grown north of regions where Coastal will not persist. It has about the same forage nutritive value as Coastal however yields are usually lower where winterkill is not a factor. It is established primarily using sprigs.
NAISER W. J. Naiser collected the grass from the Colorado River bottom near El Campo, Texas. Naiser is a very short, coarse plant with a compact growth habit that produces a rather dense ground cover. Naiser has consistently produced less forage than Coastal but has maintained a slightly higher digestibility. Because of its dense ground cover characteristic, the grass has some interest for use in stabilizing waterways.
ROCKDALE SERIES C. W. Lewis of Rockdale, Texas made the original collection of this grass from a droughty site near Albuquerque, New Mexico. Rockdale-1 is a fine-leaved, dense-growing bermudagrass of medium height. Forage dry matter yields have been about like common but of slightly higher digestibility. Rockdale-2 is a selection out of the original collection. It was produced from one of the two growth types present in Rockdale-2. Neither collection offers any promise, as both produce less dry matter than Coastal. Rockdale-1 is slightly superior to Coastal in IVDMD, but the decreased dry matter production more than offsets that slight advantage.
RUSSELL Russell appeared in a field that was originally planted to Callie in Russell County, Alabama. It is believed to be either a mutation of Callie or a natural hybrid between Callie and an ecotype of common bermudagrass. Russell was jointly released by Auburn University and Louisiana State University in 1994. Russell has higher yields, more rapid spread and greater winter hardiness than Coastal. However, forage quality appears to be equivalent to Coastal. Russell produces both rhizomes and stolons creating a dense sod that is tolerant to grazing and is effective in preventing erosion.
SCHEFFIELD A. L. Scheffield found this selection of bermudagrass growing in a field previously planted to African Stargrass in Tyler County near Woodville, Texas. Scheffield is an intermediate-textured plant tending to produce a somewhat denser stand of grass than Coastal. Forage production has been quite similar to that of Coastal; however, digestibility has been less than that of Coastal.
TIFTON 44 Dr. G. W. Burton released Tifton 44 in 1978 at the Georgia Coastal Plains Experiment Station as a cross between of Coastal and a winter-hardy plant surviving in Berlin, Germany for 15 years. Tifton 44 dry matter yield and disease resistance is similar to Coastal, but Tifton 44 has a slightly higher forage nutritive value and a greater cold tolerance than Coastal. The higher nutritive value of Tifton 44 has resulted in 15 to 20 percent higher average daily gains for cattle grazing during summer. Tifton 44 generally greens up a week to ten days earlier in the spring and remains green a week to ten days longer in the fall. Tifton 44 is slow to establish, taking as much as three years to establish. Therefore, it needs to be planted in soils that are relatively free of common bermudagrass and other weedy species. Tifton 44 is utilized more in North and Northeast Texas because of its cold tolerance.
TIFTON 78 The Georgia Coastal Plains Experiment Station and USDA-ARS released Tifton 78 in 1984. Tifton 78 is a hybrid cross between Tifton 44 and Callie bermudagrass. It can be established either from top cuttings or sprigs, but the use of tops for establishment increases susceptibility to winterkill. Tifton 78 is similar to Callie except that it is slightly more winter hardy and is resistant to rust. Compared to Coastal, Tifton 78 is taller, spreads more rapidly, establishes easier, is higher yielding and more digestible. The higher digestibility allows for improved animal gains. Tifton 78 plantings at the Overton Experiment Station were killed by hard freezes two years in a row, while Coastal planting were not harmed. Tifton 78 appears to be adapted only to the most southern areas of the state.
TIFTON 85 Tifton 85 was developed and released by the USDA-ARS in cooperation with the University of Georgia Coastal Plain Experiment Station, Tifton, GA in 1993. Tifton 85 is a hybrid between a plant introduction from South Africa and Tifton 68. Tifton 85 has large stems, long stolons and large rhizomes (though fewer than Coastal and Tifton 44). Tifton 85 is established by either planting sprigs or tops. In a 3-year trial in GA, Tifton 85 produced 26% more dry matter and was 11% more digestible than Coastal. Animal gains are approximately 10% better than Coastal due to the higher digestibility. At Overton, Tifton 85 has greened up earlier and remained green longer than Coastal. Tifton 85 is not highly winter hardy.
WHEELOCK SERIES Several collections identified and obtained near Wheelock, Texas. Wheelock-1 and 3 were inferior to Coastal and did not show any real promise as potential new cultivars. Whealock-2 is a more vigorous-growing bermudagrass, intermediate in height between Coastal and common but is somewhat denser than Coastal. Forage dry matter yield and digestibility are similar to Coastal.
WORLD FEEDER World Feeder bermudagrass was offered for sale in 1991 by Louis Gordon, president of Bethany- based Agricultural Enterprises Corporation at Bethany, Oklahoma. World Feeder bermudagrass has rhizomes and stolons and grows rapidly. It also has good winter hardiness. Data from both Oklahoma State University and Texas A&M University indicate World Feeder is less productive than most of the commonly used hybrid bermudagrasses, similar in forage nutritive value, and very expensive to establish.
ZIMMERLY SELECT Zimmerly Select is an introduction from Northern Rhodesia, Africa from the USDA Plant Introduction Program in 1955. Zimmerly Select produces both stolons and rhizomes. Forage production has been below that obtained from Coastal. Digestibility also tends to be slightly lower than Coastal during the growing season.
AFRICAN STARGRASS African Stargrass (Cynodon nlemfluensis) was introduced to the US around 1955 from introductions brought from Africa. It is the same genus as bermudagrass but a different species. African Stargrass has few, if any rhizomes, and has a coarser leaf than Coastal. It is a very vigorous and aggressive grass with little cold tolerance. It is grown in South Texas under irrigation and in many parts of northern Mexico.
Produced by the Department of Soil and Crop Sciences
For further information go to: www.soilcrop.tamu.edu
The information given herein is for educational purposes only. Reference to commercial products or trade names is made with the understanding that no discrimination is intended and no endorsement by the Texas AgriLife Extension Service is implied.
Educational programs of the Texas AgriLife Extension Service are open to all people without regard to race, color, sex, disability, religion, age, or national origin.
Issued in furtherance of Cooperative Extension Work in Agriculture and Home Economics, Acts of Congress of May 8, 1914, as amended, and June 30, 1914, in cooperation with the United States Department of Agriculture, Edward G. Smith, Director, Texas AgriLife Extension Service, Texas A&M System.
E-614 06/12
Hay Purchases: Grasses Not Adapted to Texas Vanessa Corriher*
Drought often causes hay shortages which Several cool-season perennial forages that are not prompt Texas producers to buy hay from other states well adapted to Texas but are widely used in other to support their livestock. These cool-season grasses regions of the United States include the following: can offer more nutritive value than warm-season Kentucky bluegrass (Poa pratensis L.) is used perennial forages such as bermudagrass (Cynodon primarily for pasture because it is relatively short and dactylon L.) or bahiagrass (Paspalum notatum much of its production is close to the soil surface. Flueggé). Feeding success with these forages may However, it can be harvested for hay. Its crude protein tempt us to establish these species for pasture and/or (CP) levels commonly range from 15 and 20 percent. hay production here. Kentucky bluegrass does not tolerate drought However, some cool-season perennial forages used or high temperatures and prefers mean monthly in other parts of the United States are not well adapted temperatures below 75°F. The production season is to Texas conditions. Forage species are adapted to primarily in the spring and fall, when the weather is specific soil types, rainfall, temperatures, and other cool and soil moisture is available. environmental conditions. Cool-season perennial Orchardgrass (Dactylis glomerata L.) is more grasses are adapted to northern, midwestern, and sensitive to drought and poor drainage than is tall eastern regions of the United States, which have colder fescue. The production season, in areas suited for this winters and milder summers than Texas. grass, is March to July. All forages, whether warm-season or cool-season, Crude protein levels vary from 6 to 10 percent, decline in nutritive value as they mature through depending on when it is harvested. It is commonly the growing season. Have the forage analyzed to part of a forage mixture that contains other cool- determine the nutritive value of hay you purchase or season grasses and legumes, such as alfalfa, red produce. clover, lespedeza, and white clover. If you buy hay from unknown sources or Orchardgrass grows in grasslands throughout locations, you may introduce weeds onto your the adjoining 48 states, except Florida, Louisiana, property. Scout your pastures early every growing and Texas. In Alabama, Georgia, North and season to determine whether weed infestations South Carolina and Virginia, it is present only in warrant herbicide application. mountainous regions. Because temperatures above 80 to 85°F greatly reduce its growth, orchardgrass is *Assistant Professor and Extension Forage Specialist, The Texas A&M University System not a forage option for Texas. Reed canarygrass (Phalaris arundinacea L.) is damage the livestock that graze infected pastures or distributed across the northern United States and consume hay cut from infected stands. southern Canada along creek banks, pond margins, Cattle that consume infected tall fescue may drainage ways, and roadside ditches. It can be used suffer lower conception rates, decreased weight gain, for pasture, silage, or hay. Although reed canarygrass decreased milk production, constricted blood flow, has high nutritive value (10 to 20 percent CP) at slightly elevated body temperatures, heat intolerance, immature stages; its animal performance can be excessive nervousness, and failure to shed winter inconsistent. This inconsistency may be partly coats in the spring. because high alkaloid concentrations make the grass The toxins can also affect horses, most bitter and somewhat unpalatable. New low-alkaloid prominently in mares which have reproductive varieties are available. Reed canarygrass is not a problems during the last trimester of pregnancy. forage option for Texas. The fungus enables the tall fescue plant to resist Smooth bromegrass (Bromus inermis L.) is pests, tolerate drought, and survive grazing. MaxQ or grown throughout the northern half of the United Texoma MaxQ II are endophyte-free cultivars. These States and into Canada. Disease problems render and nontoxic endophyte cultivars are available and it poorly adapted south of 40°N latitude in North are safe for livestock. South of the Missouri River, America. Smooth bromegrass produces 80 percent of endophyte-infected cultivars persist better than those its forage before June, and if harvested before the seed that are disease free. Assume that tall fescue it is head develops, crude protein levels can exceed 12 infected unless you know otherwise. percent. It is often used in mixed stands with legumes Timothy (Phleum pretense L.) is primarily used such as alfalfa or clover. Smooth bromegrass has no for hay production. This grass grows well in the cool, alkaloid or other quality problems. humid regions in the northeastern United States. It Tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea Schreb.) is is grown from Missouri to the Atlantic coast and into used for grazing and hay production. The western southern Canada. boundary includes eastern Nebraska, Kansas, and Kentucky is considered the southern edge of Oklahoma; it grows well all the way to the Atlantic the Timothy production area. Crude protein levels coast. The western and southern limits for this grass between 7 and 17 percent are common, depending on are determined principally by availability of moisture. stage of maturity. Prolonged heat, sporadic drought, and soil with low water-holding capacity limit tall fescue persistence. This grass can perform well in the clay For more information soils of the blacklands and bottomlands of East Texas. E-272, Hay Production in Texas Most tall fescue pastures are Kentucky 31 and are E-148, Sampling Hay Bales and Pastures for Forage infected with the fungus Neotyphodium coenophialux. Analysis This fungus (endophyte) grows inside the plant, is Both are available at Texas AgriLife Bookstore at transmitted in the seed, and produces toxins that http://agrilifebookstore.tamu.edu.
Produced by Texas A&M AgriLife Communications Extension publications can be found on the Web at AgriLifeBookstore.org
Visit the Texas AgriLife Extension Service at AgriLifeExtension.tamu.edu
Educational programs of the Texas AgriLife Extension Service are open to all people without regard to race, color, sex, disability, religion, age, or national origin. Issued in furtherance of Cooperative Extension Work in Agriculture and Home Economics, Acts of Congress of May 8, 1914, as amended, and June 30, 1914, in cooperation with the United States Department of Agriculture. Edward G. Smith, Director, Texas AgriLife Extension Service, The Texas A&M System. New SCS-2016-18
Forage Establishment Fundamentals
Vanessa Corriher-Olson and Larry Redmon Forage Specialist – Overton and State Extension Forage Specialist – College Station
Sound forage establishment and management practices are critical to realizing a profit in hay and/or forage-based livestock production. In many instances, the existing forage base may be adequate for a given enterprise, and fine-tuning management is all that is required. In some cases, however, a different forage species may be desired to augment existing forage resources. Both new landowners and people with extensive forage and ranching experience may encounter situations regarding unfamiliar forages. It is critical for managers to understand there are fundamental differences in managing introduced and rangeland forages. In the eastern part of the state where precipitation levels are higher, introduced species dominate forage-based livestock production systems. West of the IH35 corridor from Denton to San Antonio and then west of IH37 from San Antonio to Corpus Christi, however, you will notice fewer introduced species are used. The main reason is primarily due to the lack of moisture, although temperature has a contributing effect. Native plant communities, known as rangelands, dominate these more arid regions. While the management of introduced forages demands appropriate grazing management, fertilizer inputs, and more frequent use of herbicides; good grazing management and prescribed fire alone generally represent the management strategies for rangelands. The information contained in this publication is designed to improve the potential for success of forage production and management in Texas for both introduced species and rangelands. Where management strategies are different, they will be noted in the text.
Adaptation Not all forage species grow well on every type of soil or in all parts of the state. The person in charge of establishment should determine whether or not the forage species under consideration is adapted to the site. Of primary importance is the location in the state. Some forage species may have higher moisture requirements or may have less cold tolerance than others. In Texas, there is a moisture gradient in the state; that is, there is less precipitation received as you travel from east to west. In fact, areas of southeast Texas may receive 60” or more of precipitation on an annual basis, central Texas may receive 30 to 35”, and the panhandle and trans-Pecos regions only 10-18”. To understand how moisture availability can affect your choice of forage species, let’s use white clover as an example. White clover has less drought tolerance than bermudagrass or Old World bluestem. If the ranch location was in west central or west Texas, white clover could be a poor species choice doomed to failure without intensive inputs, such as irrigation. Even if used in the appropriate part of the state, however, site selection plays a critical role in forage species success. In east Texas, where there is adequate rainfall, white clover may not persist if planted on a droughty, upland sandy site simply because there may not be enough available moisture. Thus, while planted in the right part of the state, a poor choice of soil type or location on the ranch could result in failure of certain forages. Unfortunately, much of the information regarding the suitability of forages for one soil type or another comes from anecdotal evidence and not research trials. Many times anecdotal accounts are informative, but producers should enlist the aid of agricultural professionals to ensure a good match between forage species and site. Local county agricultural Extension agents and the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) can provide informed insights into which forages are best adapted to local conditions. A few helpful tips should be mentioned at this juncture. First, producers can learn a great deal about the productive capability of their property by obtaining and studying the Standard Soil Survey for their county, if one is available. A site specific soils map of your property can be found by accessing the Web Soil Survey (http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov). These surveys are available free of charge from local NRCS offices or from their web site. Using aerial photos in the survey, a producer can locate their property and determine what soil types are found on their ranch. Detailed information regarding each of the soil types is contained in the surveys and will give a good indication of the soil texture, water holding capacity, depth of soil, inherent fertility, best use of the site, etc. The Standard Soil Survey can provide important first information regarding the types of species that may or may not be successfully grown on the site. Identify those areas that may prove to be potential problem sites. Certain areas that are prone to flooding, for example, may not be good areas for a hay meadow or for a winter pasture. Wet areas could prevent hay harvest at the appropriate time and weed pressure may be greater due to a continued influx of weed seed from areas upstream. Likewise, waterlogged areas are not good areas for cattle to spend the winter. If planting in a low site that is prone to periodic flooding, or has poor drainage, choose a species that is tolerant of saturated soils. Species such as white, berseem, or Persian clover are legumes species that do well under more poorly drained conditions, as may ‘Jiggs’ bermudagrass. In northeast Texas, tall fescue tolerates periodic flooding better than many species. Be alert to the site on which you intend to establish forages and plant accordingly.
Species A plan to use a mixture of both warm-season and cool-season forages is usually required to best match nutrient availability with livestock nutrient demand and to minimize winter feeding costs. Most livestock producers in Texas heavily depend on hay for winter-feeding programs. Hay is generally the most expensive method to winter livestock because of the costs involved in harvesting, baling, storing, and hauling hay (somewhere between $60-$70 per 1000-lb round bale of bermudagrass). Livestock are much more efficient at harvesting forage compared to hay harvesting equipment. Therefore, the goal of the livestock producer should be to have animals grazing forage of acceptable nutritive value as many months of the year as possible. Hay should only be used in tactical situations such as drought, snow or ice cover days, etc. As soon as the situation creating the need for hay is over, hay feeding should end and animals should return to grazing. In Texas, producers have the luxury of using warm-season grass species such as bermudagrass, bahiagrass, dallisgrass, Old World bluestem, weeping lovegrass, and rangeland species. These same producers can also utilize small grains or annual ryegrass to provide livestock good nutrition for much of the winter. Increased attention is also being placed on cool-season perennial grasses in various parts of the state. Texas producers also enjoy the opportunity to use forage legumes such as alfalfa, clover, medics, sweet clover, annual lespedeza, various field peas, and hairy vetch. Legumes grow in a symbiotic relationship with host-specific bacteria that have the unique ability to capture atmospheric nitrogen and convert it into a plant available form. Thus, legumes do not require nitrogen fertilizer and can share some of the fixed nitrogen with other non-nitrogen-fixing species such as grasses. This nitrogen input can reduce the level of nitrogen fertilizer required in the pasture. Forage legumes are usually of good to excellent nutritive value and can improve the seasonal distribution and nutritive value of grass forage systems. If you are not presently using forage legumes in your pasture program, you may wish to consider the addition of these plants into certain fields. For more information, please see SCS-2001- 13, Biological Nitrogen Fixation, SCS-2001-16, Planting Winter Annual Legumes, and E-309, Cool- Season Forage Legume Management Guide.
Timing Prepared Seed Bed Although warm-season forages are generally planted in the late winter to early spring and cool- season forages in late summer to early fall, the window of opportunity for planting can actually be extremely short. Therefore, the need for good planning and preparation beforehand is critical. Seedbed preparation usually requires the most time and generally depends on a certain level of moisture to adequately work the soil. Sometimes, the seedbed is ready to be worked, but a breakdown of the tractor or tillage equipment could delay the process. Some producers have gotten to the point of planting seed, but found out, much to their dismay, that the seed they wanted was not available or cost more than they were willing to spend. Therefore, producers anticipating forage establishment should plan well in advance. The secret is to be aware of potential problems that might prevent planting at the right time and deal with those issues beforehand. The following checklist will help to ensure that all is ready when the opportunity to plant presents itself.
q Obtain soil sample from site. q Decide on forage species based on system requirements and selecting adapted forages. q Inquire as to availability of seed and seed cost. If a legume is to be established, make sure inoculant is available or request pre-inoculated seed. q Locate equipment that will be required for establishment well in advance. q Select the appropriate site for forage establishment based on forage species needs and adaptability. q Begin seedbed preparation in anticipation of planting. Remember it may take several trips across the field to prepare the final seedbed. Allow adequate time to account for possible delays due to weather, equipment failure, etc. q Incorporate P, K, and lime as required (based on soil test recommendations) into seedbed while working the ground. q Plant good quality seed at the proper rate to the proper depth. If planting a legume, make sure seed is properly inoculated with the appropriate Rhizobium bacteria. Plant into a moist seedbed if possible. q Topdress with nitrogen following germination of grass seedlings. q Be alert for pests such as insects or weeds that may require pesticide application.
Overseeding cool season forages into warm season perennial sod The general recommendation is to overseed cool-season annual forages from 4 to 6 weeks before the average first killing frost. Correct timing for cool-season annual forage establishment cannot be over-emphasized. If planted too early, warm temperatures and the competitive nature of the warm- season perennial grass sod can result in stand failure; if seeded late, cool temperatures retard autumn yield. Overseeding cool-season forages on a warm-season perennial grass sod has been an attractive option for cow-calf producers in Texas. Overseeding, cool-season forages on warm-season grass sods (Bermudagrass, Bahiagrass, dallisgrass, etc.) provide firm footing for livestock during wet conditions and helps optimize the use of warm-season perennial grass pastures. Grazing of winter forages overseeded on grass sods starts usually two to three months later than that planted in a well-prepared seedbed.
q The warm-season grasses should be grazed short or removed as hay before overseeding. q Another practice to reduce the warm-season grass competition and provide earlier grazing is a light disking about 1 to 2 inches deep on sandy soils. q Planting cool-season forages with a drill is usually better than broadcasting. More of the seed is placed at the proper depth. q When broadcasted, the seeding rates should be increased 25 to 30% to compensate for fewer seed becoming established plants. q Small grains should be planted from 1to 1.5 inches deep. q Ryegrass and clovers should be planted approximately 1/8 to ¼ inch deep. q When using a drill, small grains and ryegrass should be placed in different seed boxes, if possible, to allow placing the seed at appropriate depths. q If small grains are broadcasted on a disked sod, the area should be lightly disked again to cover the seed with approximately 1 to 1.5 inches of soil. q Ryegrass and most of the small-seeded clovers can be broadcasted on the soil surface followed by some type of drag to increase the contact between seed and soil. q Rolling a disked seedbed after planting is a recommended practice because it increases the seed-soil contact and moisture retention in the soil, resulting in better seedling establishment.
Fertility Several specific nutrients are required for adequate growth of forage plants. The availability of these nutrients, or the soil fertility status, varies from site to site because of differences in precipitation, parent materials of the various soils, and past cropping history. A soil test is the only reliable way to know what fertilizer is required for your field. Think of the soil test as the dipstick for your soil. You would not normally add oil to a crankcase without checking the dipstick to determine a) if you need oil and b) how much to add. The soil test minimizes applying fertilizer not needed, and helps you apply the nutrients you do need in the appropriate amounts. Balanced fertilizers such as 12-12-12 do not address the fertility requirements of any Texas soil or crop. If a soil test is not used to determine fertility requirements, either too much or too little fertilizer will be applied to the pasture. Either way, the producer is not optimizing forage production or inputs. Nitrogen fertilizer provides forage growth and additional crude protein and is the most limiting factor to forage growth, with the exception of moisture. Nitrogen should be applied based on the yield goal of forage grasses. In other words, only apply the level of nitrogen that will produce the quantity of grass that you need for your production system. A simple analogy would be putting only enough gasoline in the tank to get to a certain destination and back. You don’t need much more than that, and for sure don’t want to have less than what is required. For more information on nitrogen fertilizer see SCS-2002-09, Nitrogen Fertilizer: What Should I Use? Phosphorus and potassium are additional nutrients required by plants in relatively large quantities. Legumes are especially sensitive to deficiencies in these nutrients, particularly phosphorus. If phosphorus and/or potassium are deficient, the expected response of grasses to nitrogen fertilizer will not be realized and legume growth will be reduced. Back to the automobile analogy, you can fill the fuel tank, but if there are only three wheels on the vehicle, you won’t go very far. Therefore, it is important to maintain P and K at sufficient levels. Again, a soil test is the only way to know what the soil nutrient status for these important elements is. Finally, many of our east Texas soils require lime to bring the soil pH to approximately 6.0. This soil pH is required for the best growth of forage grasses, and 6.5 to 7.0 is optimum for legume production. Lime should be evaluated based on its Effective Calcium Carbonate Equivalent, or ECCE, value. The higher the number, the better the lime and the more quickly the lime will have a neutralizing effect on the soil acidity. Many times a less expensive lime material is attractive when compared to a better, but more expensive lime source. Consider the following calculations for a 1-ton ECCE lime application recommendation:
Lime #1 ECCE value of 65 @ $40/ton applied 1 ton required/.65 (ECCE value) = 1.54 tons x $25/ton = $61.60/acre Lime #2 ECCE value of 98 @ $55/ton applied 1 ton required/.98 (ECCE value) = 1.02 tons x $55/ton = $56.10/acre
Not only is the lime material with the higher ECCE number a better value but also will react with the soil quicker. Be sure and shop for the best lime value. For additional information on soil acidity see SCS-2001-06, Soil Acidity and Liming and SCS-2001-05, Managing Soil Acidity.
Seedbed Preparation There is no substitute for good seed-soil contact and this usually means preparing a proper seedbed. Specialized equipment may be required to prepare fine seedbeds for forage species such as alfalfa, while annual ryegrass can be established with little or no seedbed preparation. Most species fall in between these two extremes and, in many cases; common equipment found on many farms will usually suffice.
Seed Seed cost is a small portion of the overall establishment cost of a pasture. Therefore, do not attempt to save money by purchasing “cheap” seed of unknown quality. Purchase the highest quality seed with as little weed contamination as possible. Also bear in mind that legume seed may need to be inoculated if not already pre-inoculated. Check with your seed dealer regarding the appropriate inoculant for the legume you plan to establish. Additionally pay close attention to the seed tag on the bag. Important information regarding the amount of pure (seed you are interested in), live (percentage of seed that will germinate) seed (PLS). If the seed is not 100% PLS, adjustments will be necessary to ensure the correct amount of seed is planted. For example, if the PLS is only 80% and the recommended seeding is 10 lbs./acre, you would divide 10 lbs. seed/acre by 0.8 to arrive at the new seeding rate for your bag of seed, which is 12.5 lbs. seed/acre in this example.
Equipment A drill is an excellent method of establishing grass pastures or legumes; however, seed can also be broadcast using a fertilizer spreader. Don’t feel that you have to purchase equipment. There is usually equipment that can be rented or borrowed that will allow you to get your forage established. Pay attention to recommended planting depth. Planting depth can have a negative impact on germination if seed is not planted at appropriate depth. Plan ahead, however, to make sure that the equipment will be available and in good working condition when you need it.
Pest Management After establishment, weed or insect damage can be so severe as to eliminate the stand. Be alert and apply pesticides as needed according to label directions. Local county extension agents or IPM agents can help provide information on treatment thresholds and options. Careful scouting of newly planted pastures should be employed. For more information see SCS-2013-04, Weed Control for Newly Sprigged Bermudagrass and ESC-024, Weed Control in Pastures and Forages.
Early Grazing Management Allow forage to attain 6” to 8” in height before grazing. A simple test to determine if the forage is well established is to attempt to pull up several plants by hand. If you are unable to uproot the plant, livestock will probably be unable to uproot the plant. Realize that with small seeded grasses and legumes; you may not have any fall grazing the first year of establishment.
Produced by the Department of Soil and Crop Sciences
soilcrop.tamu.edu
The information given herein is for education purposes only. Reference to commercial products or trade names is made with the understanding that no discrimination is intended and no endorsement by the Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service is implied.
The Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service provides equal access in its programs, activities, education and employment, without regard to race, color, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, genetic information, veteran status, sexual orientation or gender identity.
The Texas A&M University System, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the County Commissioners Courts of Texas Cooperating ERM-033 5/17
What to Plant in Pastures
andowners replant a pasture for many reasons such as Megan K. Clayton1, A. Mac Young1, invasive plants, drought impacts, wildlife concerns, or Larry A. Redmon1, and Forrest S. Smith2 Lchanges in the ranch operation. Choosing the right pas- ture plants involves important considerations. What are your goals? Always begin management decisions by establishing goals for the property. A written plan helps you optimize the time, effort, and money spent on ranch operations. Goals define where you ultimately want to be; objectives serve as guidelines to achieve those goals. Objectives should be measurable and revisited at the end of every year or season. For example, you may want to in- crease calving rates by 5 percent or to harvest deer to meet a predetermined sex ratio. Before planting a pasture, determine if the land will be managed solely for livestock pro- duction or does Figure 2. Wildlife species, such as white-tailed deer benefit from a diversity of wildlife contribute plants in the pasture. Source: David Hewitt to your profit or recreational inter- from predators or shade from the sun (Fig. 2). ests? On most Texas properties, landowners base management Many land- decisions such as planting or brush management on a combi- owners now nation of livestock and wildlife priorities. However, there is a manage for both difference between maximizing a livestock operation (main- Figure 1. Cattle grazing Tifton 85 bermudagrass. livestock and Source: Larry Redmon taining the highest carrying capacity possible for the most wildlife on the profit) and using cattle as a tool to manage habitat for a partic- same piece of property. Cattle may thrive on pastures of thick, ular wildlife species. Your goals may even vary by pasture or introduced forage grasses (Fig. 1). Wildlife do best where a di- section of the ranch. versity of native plants, including broadleaf forbs (herbaceous What are you willing to sacrifice? plants other than grass) and brush, provide not only food for While there are pros and cons to every management deci- various wildlife species, but also diverse cover for protection sion, it helps to recognize what you are willing to tolerate. 1Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service, 2South Texas Natives–Caesar Kleberg Introduced grasses, such as buffelgrass and Tifton 85 ber- Wildlife Research Institute, Texas A&M University–Kingsville mudagrass, often establish quicker, may be less expensive to Figure 3. Buffelgrass is a common South Texas forage planted solely for cattle grazing. Source: Pete Flores establish, and have the potential to grow more forage per acre than most native plant species (Fig. 3). Planting these grasses could translate into grazing more livestock on the acreage with less delay Figure 5. Stages of a bermudagrass planting from early June through late August. Source: Larry Redmon after planting. However, these introduced species need more inputs, such as fertilizer, irrigation, or weed any, input costs associated with fertilizer and herbicide. control to do well. Also, they typically grow as a monoculture, The diversity of plants that grow in a native seeding can or pasture with one dominant grass species, which is far less provide both livestock grazing and wildlife habitat, although desirable for wildlife management. you must delay livestock grazing for a couple of years to Planting native grasses in a mix, even with some forbs, in- establish the native plants. Also, to balance both wildlife and creases the success livestock needs and to maintain stands of native plants, stock- of establishing the ing rates are more conservative and managed more carefully stand and provides in response to rainfall. the diverse plant When brush or weeds (forbs and legumes) are allowed species necessary to grow in a pasture, profits for cattle enterprises may suffer for wildlife habi- because of the need for a lower stocking rate. Many managers tat. For instance, consider planting either native or introduced forages with the Northern bob- mind-set that maximum financial return on livestock is only whites need pas- possible with an introduced forage grass. tures that are open But is that the case? Let’s look at a hypothetical 250-acre Figure 4. Northern bobwhites. Source: Pixabay enough at ground pasture in Live Oak County, Texas. Assume this pasture level for the birds has been overgrazed or farmed and the owner would like to to forage for the seeds the native plants produce or the insects manage it for livestock or round-bale hay production. We’ll they harbor (Fig. 4). consider three different enterprises: 1) owner grazing the Northern bobwhites also need bunchgrasses to use as land with their cattle, 2) leasing the grazing rights to another nesting sites as well as some portion of brush for loafing and producer, or 3) haying the field. Also, consider three different escape cover. Pastures with sod-forming, introduced grasses, plant covers: 1) a mix of native grasses and forbs, 2) buffel- such as bermudagrass or bahiagrass, lack almost all the habi- grass, or 3) Tifton 85 bermudagrass. tat needs Northern bobwhites require. Assume the field preparation for planting is the same— Choose seeds adapted for your area and plant them spray with glyphosate, disk the land multiple times, and according to recommendations. Often, native seed cost is con- follow up with another round of glyphosate application to siderably higher than introduced species because of a limited remove any volunteer plants. Estimate preparation costs at supply of native seed, but once established, there are fewer, if $63.40 per acre (Table 1). Good field preparation is crucial for
2 getting successful plant establishment (Fig. 5). thick stands of buffelgrass can shade out weed seedlings; how- To make a cost comparison of our plant cover types for ever, herbicide application will likely be necessary every few establishment, assume some average prices for a 22-seed years (Table 1). mix of native plants broadcasted and packed, buffelgrass at Buffelgrass is well adapted to South Texas, rarely requires 4 pounds of pure live seed per acre broadcasted and packed, fertilization, and may be a cheaper introduced grass option and Tifton 85 bermudagrass sprigs planted with a recom- to maintain (Table 1— $97.78/acre/10 years). However, a mended 30-day post-planting weed spray (Table 1). Packing dense stand of buffelgrass is not good habitat for most wildlife the seed may be done with equipment such as a culti-packer, species, so it may not be suitable for ranch goals, especially if seed drill, harrows, or tire after planting. there is profit resulting from wildlife leases (Fig. 7). What can you maintain? Tifton 85 bermudagrass requires more maintenance because it performs best with reduced weed competition and After the initial planting, what maintenance can you fertilizer application (Fig. 8). Spraying weeds every year on expect for these different plant cover types? A newly planted grazed Tifton 85 pastures is typical, but hay fields need her- grass stand in South Texas will eventually have brush seed- bicide treatments twice a year to maintain good production lings pop up. Aggressively spot spraying these new recruits (Table 1). They also need fertilizer—250 pounds of nitrogen each year with a simple stem spray method reduces their (N), 125 pounds of phosphorus (P), and 60 pounds of potassi- cover in the pasture and decreases control cost later (Table 1). um (K) per acre per year—for establishment and to maximize Broadleaf weeds are not typically sprayed in native fields be- yield. For the grazing scenario, we assume only 50 pounds of cause the herbicides are not selective enough to leave valuable N per acre per year since cattle return a portion of the nutri- forbs for wildlife. ents back into the soil, cutting fertilizer costs in half (Table 1). Native fields are not fertilized because the low potential Finally, insects can consume a lot of forage very quickly, increase in grass growth does not justify the expense (Fig. 6). and of the forage options presented here, bermudagrass is Also, fertilization can favor certain plants species and limit most susceptible to insects such as fall armyworm or bermu- long-term plant diversity. As a result, we estimated establish- dagrass stem maggot (Fig. 9). Assume the need to spray Tifton ment costs for natives higher than introduced grass species, 85 bermudagrass for insects every 3 years (Table 1), estimat- but the maintenance cost ($33.78/acre/10 years) is less than a ing that Tifton 85 bermudagrass maintained for livestock third of any other two scenarios (Table 1). grazing will cost about $516.54 per acre, and Tifton 85 for Buffelgrass pastures will have similar brush control costs hay production will cost about $978 per acre over a 10-year but typically produce higher yields when you also control period. weeds. Weed spraying may not be necessary every year, as
Table 1. Comparison of costs for field preparation, establishment, and maintenance of different plant cover types Maintenance Field Establishment costs preparation costs (for 10 years per (per acre) (per acre) acre) Native plants $63.401 $1072 $33.785 Buffelgrass $63.401 $88.703 $97.78⁶ Tifton 85 bermudagrass for grazing $63.401 $1514 $516.547 Tifton 85 bermudagrass for haying $63.401 $1514 $9788
1$27.40/acre for two glyphosate applications + $36/acre for disking three times 2$82/acre for a 22-seed mix of natives + $25/acre to broadcast and pack the seed 3$63.70/acre for 4 pounds of pure live buffelgrass seed + $25/acre to broadcast and pack the seed 4$135/acre for sprigged Tifton 85 bermudagrass + $16/acre for 2,4-D weed spray at 30 days post-planting 5$7.5/acre for brush control (including $12/hour labor charge) for first 2 years, $3.75/acre for the next 2 years, $1.88/acre for the remaining 6 years 6$16/acre for weed spraying (including a $7/acre application fee) with 2,4-D every 3 years + $7.5/acre for brush control (includ- ing $12/hour labor charge) for first 2 years, $3.75/acre for next 2 years, $1.88/acre for remaining 6 years 7$16/acre for weed spraying (including a $7/acre application fee) with 2,4-D annually + $3.75/acre for brush control (including $12/hour labor charge) for first 2 years, $1.88/acre for remaining eight years + $62 for fertilizer for first year, $26/acre for remain- ing 9 years + $9.50/acre for insect spraying every 3 years 8$32/acre for weed spraying (including a $14/acre application fee) with 2,4-D + $62/acre for fertilizer + $9.50/acre for insect spraying every 3 years
3 Figure 6. A diverse native plant pasture. Source: South Texas Natives Project
What can you expect for production? It is probably not surprising that grasses introduced for livestock forages can typically produce more forage (dry forage per acre) than a native plant mix. How would you Figure 8. Bermudagrass field. Source: Pete Flores estimate the potential increase in livestock stocking rate with the added cost of cattle ownership and depreciation? Annu- ing the plants to seed out fully adds valuable seed back into al cow variable cost is usually around $550 to $600 per cow, the soil for germination later. Native plants cannot withstand including costs such as vaccinations, supplementation when the grazing intensity that introduced species can, nor can they needed, pregnancy testing, and some labor costs for those be grazed as soon after establishment as introduced forages. intense cattle working days (Table 2). Table 2 reflects typical So, deferring grazing for 2 years is recommended for natives, practices and associated costs for a South Texas cattle opera- whereas buffelgrass or Tifton 85 can be grazed or hayed a year tion, assuming full ownership of the land. after planting (Table 3). When restoring the pasture, plants typically establish best Use only 25 percent of the total forage produced on a when deferred from grazing or haying for some time. Allow- native pasture for livestock, accounting for insects, tram- pling, and stubble, which should be left standing. This stub- ble maintains healthy plant root systems, provides cover for wildlife, helps water infiltrate into the soil instead of running off, prevents soil erosion, and provides many other important ecosystem benefits. In our example, the native field yield- ed 3,000 pounds of forage per acre. Introduced grasses can safely be grazed more intensely than natives, so we estimate a 50-percent use of buffelgrass (of 4,500 total pounds per acre) and 65-percent use of Tifton 85 (of 5,000 total pounds per acre).
Figure 7. Cattle grazing buffelgrass. Source: Pete Figure 9. Fall armyworm. Source: Clemson University-USDA Flores Cooperative Extension Slide Series, Bugwood.org
4 Table 2: 2016 General assumptions of 250-acre example pasture in Live Oak County, Texas Selected parameter Assumptions Selected parameter Assumptions Off-farm income Not included Heifer weaning weights 475 lbs Family living expense Not included Steer prices $1.74 lb Land 250 acres Heifer prices $1.62/lb Ownership tenure 100% Cull cow prices $.85/lb Royalty income Not included Cull bull prices $1.02/lb Hunting income (natives only) $15/acre Bred cow prices $1,550/head Assets and debts Not included Replacement bull price/head $3,000 Land tillage, planting, and spraying Custom rates Hay prices $100/ton Grazing lease rate $150/a.u./year Bulk range cube prices $.15/lb Cow herd replacement Bred cows Pregnancy testing $7.50/cow Veterinary medicine and supplies $34.34/cow BSE testing $42.50/bull Salt/mineral blocks/year $23.60/cow Clostridial vaccination $1.16/calf Hay fed/cow/year 1.5 tons Castration and growth implants $1.97/calf Protein cubes fed/cow/year 200 lbs Deworming injection (calf/cow) $1.81/$3.96 Calving rate 90% Reproductive vaccines $3.12/cow Cow culling rate/year 10% Extra day labor/calf practice $2/calf Steer weaning weights 525 lbs
The production value for grazing is based on a 90-percent weather fluctuations. calf crop and, in the grazing-lease scenarios, a rate of $150 per How can the scenarios in Figure 10 show such negative head per year (Table 4). In the hayed Tifton 85 scenario, as- results? For one, plant establishment costs are too expensive sume yields of 9,000 pounds per acre per year and hay valued such that net returns from cattle, either owned or by leasing at $100 per ton. Will I ever make back my $40,000.00 investment? Smaller-acreage cattle produc- $30,000.00 ers often find it difficult to make a profit unless they have a specialty or niche market item or few enter- $20,000.00 prise costs. This situation is reflect- ed in our hypothetical ranch when $10,000.00 using the Farm Assistance Risk Management Model for analysis. Assuming 100-percent land own- $- ership and several other standard variables (Table 2), the producer $(10,000.00) will not realize a profit during the 10-year period following the pas- ture scenarios for livestock grazing $(20,000.00) or leases (Fig. 10). The annual net farm income over 10 years reflects $(30,000.00) usual operating in- and out-flows as well as adjustments for vari- ables such as cattle depreciation $(40,000.00) over time, livestock markets, and Figure 10. Annual net farm income (10-year average) by plant cover type and practice for a 250-acre example pasture in Live Oak County, Texas
5 Table 3: Specific year-end cattle stocking rate (# of head) on a 250-acre example pasture in Live Oak County, Texas Year Plant cover Practice Start 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Native Owner-grazed 12 0 8 12 Native Leased for grazing 12 0 8 12 Buffelgrass Owner-grazed 12 0 50 Buffelgrass Leased for grazing 12 0 50 Tifton 85 Owner-grazed 12 0 72 Tifton 85 Leased for grazing 12 0 72 Tifton 85 Owner-hayed 12 0 the land, cannot recoup the costs expended in a 10-year hori- yielding a nice profit one year, but potentially losing money zon. Native land included a yearly $15-per-acre profit for a the next. Unfortunately, there is no easy option to ensure hunting lease, a typical amount paid for hunting rights in the profitability, especially on smaller acreages. Figuring in a large region used for our model. Even this added income stream, investment such as replanting is difficult when the profit -mar often thought to offset necessary stocking rate reductions and gin is already quite small. high establishment costs for natives, does not offer a profitable Although the negative net farm income (which includes scenario. changes due to depreciation and cattle purchases) for grazing Livestock carrying capacity limits the 250 acres from practices in this analysis looks less than optimistic (Table 4), providing profit within the first 10 years, no matter the choice it is an important example of why you must consider the goals of forage base. While introduced pastures can support much for the property to make a sound management decision. It higher carrying capacities for cattle, the annual expenses in- also sheds light on the fallacy of many widely held perceptions curred for maintaining forage and cattle are simply too high. in agriculture. In the past, introduced grasses often did in- At a first glance of the scenario results, the hay business crease profitability, a reason ranchers overwhelmingly selected appears to be a great solution! Based on our calculations, and planted them. However, in those periods, input, establish- haying your property is a potentially profitable enterprise. ment, and maintenance costs were much lower. Today, that is However, there is a saying, “When you have hay, everyone has not the case; yet, in many circles, the mind-set that introduced hay,” meaning that unless you have a place to store hay during forages are more profitable than natives prevails. high production years to sell during drought years, you will What is the future use of the land? likely be competing with many other producers who also had Although we base many decisions on what benefits a good year, effectively driving down hay prices. Thus, other our operation now, choosing the plant type warrants some cost factors we did not include that could affect hay profitabil- consideration of what will happen to the land in the future. ity may not be fully detailed in our analysis. If you plan to pass the family ranch down to your children or More often than not, hay is a boom-or-bust enterprise, grandchildren, will their land-use goals be the same as yours?
Table 4: 10-year average financial indicators for a 250-acre example pasture in south Texas 10-Year Averages Total cash Total cash Net farm Net farm receipts costs income income/acre Plant Cover Practice ($1000) ($1000) ($1000) Native Owner-grazed 9.56 18.01 -8.15 -32.6 Native Leased for grazing 5.07 12.11 -7.04 -28.16 Buffelgrass Owner-grazed 30.48 42.78 -10.73 -42.92 Buffelgrass Leased for grazing 6.75 13.00 -6.25 -25.00 Tifton 85 Owner-grazed 43.75 74.72 -28.75 -115 Tifton 85 Leased for grazing 9.73 31.59 -21.86 -87.44 Tifton 85 Owner-hayed 116.55 87.04 29.50 118.00
6 If you intend to improve and then sell your land, what would 5. Contact local USDA offices to seek potential assis- be more desirable to a buyer? tance programs that may reduce landowner invest- Currently, people purchasing land usually place more ment. With available cost-share programs, many of emphasis on wildlife habitat and recreational hunting than the practices discussed here may yield a more profit- on cattle production. Once you have established many of able scenario. the introduced grasses, they may be hard to eradicate. If For more information you later choose to plant natives for their additional wildlife The following resources are available at the Texas A&M benefit, you may find that the introduced species continue AgriLife Extension Service Bookstore: to out-compete the natives. Remember, there are agriculture Clayton, M. K., F. S. Smith, K. A. Pawelek, and A. D. Falk. property tax valuations available for both agricultural prac- 2014. Reseeding Natives in South Texas: Top 10 tices and wildlife management. Check with your local tax Mistakes to Avoid. Texas A&M AgriLife Extension appraiser for information specific to your county. Publication ERM-003. This analysis shows that the expense of pasture planting Clayton, M. K., F. S. Smith, K. A. Pawelek, and A. D. Falk. of any kind, either native or introduced, is a negative income 2014. Reseeding Natives in South Texas: Site generator with livestock production, and risky for hay pro- Preparation. Texas A&M AgriLife Extension duction. Even with lower maintenance costs, native pastures Publication ERM-004. with sustainable stocking rates have no particular advantage Clayton, M. K., F. S. Smith, K. A. Pawelek, and A. D. Falk. from a profitability standpoint with livestock grazing as the 2014. Reseeding Natives in South Texas: Planting main source of income. Introduced grass pastures, with to- Techniques and Equipment. Texas A&M AgriLife day’s input and livestock costs, fare no better. Extension Publication ERM-005. Although this appears to be dismal news for those in the Clayton, M. K., F. S. Smith, K. A. Pawelek, and A. D. Falk. agriculture business looking to improve their land holdings, 2014. Reseeding Natives in South Texas: Selecting the knowledge is power. Understanding the risks will help you Seed Mix. Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Publication make informed decisions before making a financial and time ERM-006. commitment. Clayton, M. K., F. S. Smith, K. A. Pawelek, and A. D. Falk. Before deciding to replant: 2014. Reseeding Natives in South Texas: 1. Identify clearly your goals for the property. Write Post-Planting Management. Texas A&M AgriLife down your goals and objectives. Periodically evaluate Extension Publication ERM-007. your progress, or lack of, based on measuring the Clayton, M. K., F. S. Smith, K. A. Pawelek, and A. D. Falk. objectives and keeping good records. 2014. Reseeding Natives in South Texas: Targeting 2. Determine what the land should look like to meet Noxious Plant Species. Texas A&M AgriLife your goals. What type of plants will do best? Extension Publication ERM-008. 3. Gain knowledge on what management practices may Clayton, M., M. Young, R. Lyons, and S. Klose. 2013. be available for improving the existing forage base, Controlling Brush with Herbicides to Increase Ranch other than starting from scratch with a replanting. Profits. Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Publication Options may include grazing deferment, chemical, E-629. mechanical, or prescribed fire techniques. McGinty, A., C. W. Hanselka. How Much Forage Do You 4. If reseeding is still the best option to maintain the Have? Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Publication integrity of the land and the operation, increase rec- EB-1646. reational opportunities, or to increase the real estate Klose, S. L. and Outlaw, J. L. August 2005. “Financial and value if sold, consult professionals for assistance with Risk Management Assistance: Decision Support for seed selection specific to your ecoregion and soil type Agriculture.” Journal of Agricultural and Applied to increase the chance of success. Economics, 37 (2), 415–423.
Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service AgriLifeExtension.tamu.edu
More Extension publications can be found at AgriLifeBookstore.org
Texas A&M AgriLife Extension provides equal opportunities in its programs and employment to all persons, regardless of race, color, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, genetic information, veteran status, sexual orientation, or gender identity. The Texas A&M University System, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the County Commissioners Courts of Texas Cooperating. New 7 Still need CEUs? Mark you calendar: JANUARY 26, 2018 Texas Watershed Stewardship Program Washington County Fairgrounds Sales Facility Brenham, Texas
FEBRUARY 8, 2018 Spring Ag Conference Washington County Fairgrounds Sales Facility Brenham, Texas
FEBRUARY - NOVEMBER 2018 3rd Friday of Each Month Multi-County New Landowner Series Austin, Colorado, Fayette, and Washington Counties
Kara Matheney For more information and to RSVP Washington County Extension Agent Washington County Extension Office Agriculture & NR (979) 277-6212; washington.agrilife.org
Follow the Washington County Extension Office on social media!
Scan the QR codes with your smartphone!
The members of Texas A&M AgriLife will provide equal opportunities in programs and activities, education, and employment to all persons regardless of race, color, sex, religion, national origin, age, disability, genetic information, veteran status, sexual orientation, or gender identity and will strive to achieve full and equal employment opportunity throughout Texas A&M AgriLife. The Texas A&M University System, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the County Commissioners Courts of Texas Cooperating. Individuals with disabilities who require an auxiliary aid, service or accommodation in order to participate in this meeting are encouraged to contact the County Extension Office at (979) 277-6212 prior to the meeting to determine how reasonable accommodations can be made.