| |
|
| |
| |
| |
The Project Grass Grazing Program 26 Years in Existence | |
| |
| Project Grass started back in 1980 as a pilot program in 14
counties in Southwestern Pennsylvania. Thanks to South West Project Grass'
grazing program successes of that pilot program, an expansion committee
was formed in 2001, and four other Project Grass Chapters now exist across
our state of Pennsylvania. Together, all the Project Grass Chapters are celebrating the Project Grass grazing program's 26 years in existence. This program's productivity goes directly to the farm producer on the grass root level, from cost share of fencing, solar pumps, designing grazing plans, and helping with other best management practices to our Pennsylvania Farmers. Congratulations to all who participate in this program, and Hats off to South West Project Grass and the Founding Fathers for making the path for others easy to imitate and follow. What an amazing job you are all doing! History of Project Grass 1980 to Present on Page 3, bottom. CONTACT US AT: PAProjectGrass@webtv.net, 137 Burke Dr, Freeport, PA 16229-1750 (724) 295-4928 |
Do You Know Where Your Food Comes From??? | |
| |
|
Here is Your Chance to Know for
Sure. |
| |
|
| |
Project Grass Helps Farmers Become Successful Grazers. | |
| |
|
Watershed Protection Projects
|
Welcome!!! New Jersey Project Grass State Steering Committee - Formed December 30, 2005 | |
| |
New Jersey State Steering Committee Chair Matt Pearson, Co-Chair Ken Hoffman, Secretary/Treasurer Tara Bowser Things do not just happen ~ People make them happen.
Happy 25th Project Grass |
| |
| |
|
TEAMS WANTED $13,500 has been given out in Scholarship Tuition in the past 3 years. Click on Link below for Registration Form and Contact people |
|
| |
|
| |
PA Project Grass 2005 State-wide Grazing Conference, 145 in Attendance, 95 Producers, 50 Agencies | |
| |
|
| |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
| The object of this Pennsylvania State Program shall be to enhance Pennsylvania agriculture through better utilization of grasslands; to improve the economic position of Pennsylvania farmers, particularly, farmers working small farms; and to increase the amount of livestock and energy efficiency production in the Commonwealth; to increase and develop improved marketing capabilities for grazing and livestock; to achieve better utilization of land and water resources for improved environmental quality; provide rotational grazing education, public relations, and publicity, for youth, market, civic, and social interests; and to advance the welfare of the Pennsylvania Farming Community state-wide, following guide lines stated in the November 19, 2002 Strategic Planning. |
Pa Project Grass State Steering Committee By-Laws, Officers and Working Committees | |
|
| |
THE PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT GRASS 5 CHAPTERS | |
| |
Click on Link to Chapter's Web Page: http://community.webtv.net/Burkes20/PAProjectGrass5>PENNSYLVANIA
PROJECT GRASS CHAPTERS |
The 2001 South West Project Grass Expansion Committee | |
| |
A Special Thank You to the SW Project Grass Expansion Committee who traveled all over the State of Pennsylvania in 2001 and 2002, to help Four Project Grass Chapters, and The Pennsylvania Project Grass State Steering Committee to be formed and established. |
The Recipe of Project Grass By Candace Burke, Project Grass State Chair & PR | |
| |
|
People keep asking me what is Project Grass??? And how
does it work??? After being involved with Project Grass for 20 years the simplest way I can explain Project Grass is by comparing the grazing program to mixing ingredients in feed, or cement, or a cake. Each ingredient added to the recipe is valuable and has a special task, and its sole purpose is to make the finished product work. Ingredients: *Get Agency Partners that are on the same page as your group. (This is where you all go out and find, and make working friends). You will find that Agencies are like you, trying to do the right thing, and the great thing about grazing is as soon as those animals are taken out of the barn - grazing will fit into many different conservation programs that can piggyback with your rotational grazing plans to help protect our environment. *Have Field Days, Farm Tours, your group needs to be Pied Pipers, to get people to come and join along. *Work to form five Producer driven Chapters across your state with Bylaws, and ask different agencies to be advisors. Remember your quarterly meetings are supposed to be educational training sessions for producers and agencies alike. *Beg, Plead for five energetic Grazing Coordinators who will do grazing plans, hold Chapter's educational outreach meetings four times a year, organize field days, pasture walks, and are willing to find and write grants. *Form a State Steering Committee who will do Public Relations to help form partnerships, put educational material together, write newsletters, or magazines, build a website, help put an annual state conference together each year, do legislative work, build a youth program, find and write grants, and press releases. Remember you have a good product to sell here, and the best way is by advertising and informing producers, agencies, people in towns and cities, and legislators about what good you are doing. Your State Steering Committee is the hub of the your wheel. Have a strategic plan - A well thought out plan on what you want to accomplish with your program, (and remember to stay realistic) the main goal here is to get education, technical assistance, and cost share down to the grass root level, to help County Conservation Districts implement Grazing Plans to Producers. You may find the same people across your state are the ones who keep doing the work, "So what," as long as your goals are achieved, and the work gets done, this is to be a "Get things done program." And this is not to be a "what is in it for me group" either, - but what can be done for the collective. The best ingredients are, Confidence, Patience, and Determination that the program will work, and remember it will not happen over night!§ Good Luck and Happy Grazing! For more Information, Please contact: PaProjectGrass@webtv.net, Ph# (724)-295-4928, 137 Burke Dr, Freeport, PA 16229 |
Knowing What is in Your Pasture By Dr Marvin Hall, Grazing Research and Education Center, Penn State | |
| |
| If you wouldn't expect the breed of animal to the right to
be a great milker, then maybe you shouldn't expect the species of grass in
your pasture to do something it was not selected to do! People have been
selecting species of plants and animals for their ability to do certain
things or thrive under certain conditions for thousands of years. While
the distinction between different breeds of cattle and what they can and
can't do is common. Fewer people realize that different pasture species
have distinct differences in what they can and can't do! What's in your pasture? Differences in legume species are relatively distinct while grasses present more of a challenge to accurately identify. Here is a simplistic key to help you identify a few of the more common grasses grown in Pennsylvania. Perennial Grass Identification for Pennsylvania. Begin in upper left hand corner of chart and determine if the plant being identified that plant characteristic. If yes, then you've identified the species. If no, then go to the next characteristic. Now that you know what plant species are? in your pasture you can check out their adaptability and production characteristics. If the adaptability of the species doesn't match the limitations of the soil it is growing in, then somethingwill need to change (alters soil limitations or change plant species) to optimize forage production. Plant Characteristic Grass Species Flat Stem Yes Orchardgrass No United Leaf Sheath Yes Smooth Brome grass No Corm (bulb) at base of stems Yes Timothy No Thick Veins in Leaf Yes Tall Fescue No Waxy Leaf Yes Ryegrass No Wide Leaf Yes Reed Canary grass No Prominent Auricles Yes Quack grass Characteristics of perennial forage species in Pennsylvania. Seedling Tolerance to soil limitations Persis- Tolerance to Relative Yield Grass Vigor Droughty Wet Low pH† tence Frequent harvest Maturity‡ ton/acre Kentucky bluegrass M§ L M M H H Early 1-3 Orchardgrass H M M M M H Early-medium 3-5 Perennial ryegrass H L M M L H Early-medium 1-4 Reed canary grass L H H H H H Medium-late 3-5 Smooth brome grass H H M M H L Medium-late 3-5 Switch grass L H M H M M Late 2-5 Tall fescue H M M H M H Medium-late 3-5 Timothy M L L M H L Late 2-4 Alfalfa M H L L H H Early 3-5 Birds foot trefoil L M H H M L Late 3-4 Red clover H L M M L H Medium-late 3-5 White clovers M L H M H H Early-medium 1-3 † pH of 6.0. ‡ Maturity characteristic refers to relative time of flower or seed head appearance in the spring. This will depend not only on species but also variety. § L = low, M = moderate, H = high |
THE SOIL SURVEY PROGRAM By John Hudak NRCS Assistant State Soil Scientist | |
| |
|
**Two Dug Soil Pit Demonstrations.** John Hudak PA State Assistant Soil Scientist NRCS, Harrisburg PA, showed a dug soil pit that was in a high cattle traffic area. The high traffic dug soil pit showed poor root system and poor earth worm activity. The soil structure becomes very compacted said Hudak, and because of this compaction water has a hard time to penetrate the soil. When applying 1 inch of water to this compacted soil it took 33 minutes for the water to penetrate. Second application of 2 inches of water took 1 hour and 25 minutes to penetrate the soil. Hudak also said the more tillage the harder on the soil structure. Alex Dado Northwestern PA Soil Scientist NRCS demonstrated the second dug soil pit which was in a grazing paddock and was not compacted. Ideally good soil should be 50% porous ½ water ½ air, 45% mineral, 5% organic, Dado said. This soil shows a good root system, and good earth worm activity. Dado said that when he applied 1 inch water to the soil, the water penetrated with in 48 seconds. The second application of 2 inches of water penetrated the soil within 2 minutes, compare to Hudak's compacted soil pit that took 1 inch of water 33 minutes to penetrate, and 2 inches of water - 1 hour and 25 minutes. The best way to prevent soil compaction is to stop it before it starts, Hudak and Dado said. ***The National Cooperative Soil Survey Program has been providing soil information for the past 100 years. Soil information is critical for sound land use management and NRCS is the lead federal agency responsible for mapping soils on private lands and providing Soil Survey reports for these areas. Soil Surveys were historically conducted on a countywide basis and provide maps and data on the properties of soils in addition to the potentials and limitations of each soil for a variety of uses. Soil Surveys are available for all of Pennsylvania's sixty seven counties in hard copy format. Most of the state's Soil Surveys were published in the 60s, 70s, or 80s and are bound in a book format with the soil descriptions in the front, interpretive tables in the middle and maps in the back. Instructions on how to use the Soil Survey are located in the front of the book. To obtain a copy of one of the Soil Survey books, contact the local NRCS Field Office for the area of interest. A number of Soil Surveys within Pennsylvania are in the process of being updated to meet the needs of current users. These updates are usually based on Major Land Resource Areas. These regions and areas are generally multi-county and represent nearly homogeneous areas of soil, climate, land use, water resources, elevation, topography and potential natural vegetation. In recent years there has been a significant demand for digital soils data for use in Geographic Information Systems and related computer programs including those used by NRCS personnel and cooperating agencies. To meet this demand there is an initiative currently underway which will provide digital soils data for the entire state. For more information on digital soil surveys in Pennsylvania visit: http://www.pa.nrcs.usda.gov/.§ |
| |
| |
| In today's world, agriculture and farm operators are
subject to continual regulation and legislation. These decisions can be
made on opinion or gut feelings instead of the best information possible.
In response, "I believe that we need the facts about our industry in order to define, promote and sometimes to defend agriculture." -> This is the mission of USDA's National Agricultural Statistics Service; to provide "meaningful, accurate and timely statistics in service to U.S. agriculture." The Census of Agriculture is the most complete source of these agricultural facts at the state, county and even zip code level across the entire Nation. The Ag Census measures crop, livestock and poultry production as well as farm income & expenses, characteristics of agricultural operators, etc. Charts show just a very few highlights of the 2002 Ag Census for Pennsylvania. Since the census is only conducted every five years, our annual program of agricultural statistics provides yearly measures of the major commodities in each state with county statistics for a few of these major commodities. Over 40 percent of farm operators consider a non-farm job as their primary occupation. The largest of farms with over $500,000 gross sales make up only 2.5 percent of the farms but they produce over 48 percent of the sales on nearly 10 percent of the acres. However, the smallest of farms, under $10,000 gross sales, are nearly 61 percent of the farms but they produce less than 2 percent of the sales statewide. Some say, "Why count these small operations; they aren't commercial farms." But they control over one-third of the land in farms across Pennsylvania. Surprising to some, there were only 172 non family corporate farms in Pennsylvania. The majority of operations are still family operated. Some family farms have incorporated for tax and legal purposes. How do statistics help farmers?" There are many cases of individual farmers making good use of NASS statistics. For example, one farmer used our dairy cash receipts to show the economic impact of milk in his county. This information kept the roads plowed to bulk tanks in the county. Farmers have used NASS data to show county officials that their assumptions about land values were wrong. A buyer was looking to buy pumpkins but they were looking in the wrong part of the state! Farmers use NASS statistics in their business plans to help lenders see the viability of their proposal. In fact, many of the people that you deal with probably make use of NASS statistics to support you and agriculture in general. This includes Extension, suppliers, lenders, crop insurance agents, Farm Service Agency, and commodity and grower associations such as Farm Bureau, Farmers Union and Grange. All these statistics as well as the Ag Census are available at: http://www.nass.usda.gov/ Picture: Agriculture Counts Marc Tosiano & ARMS III Training Workshop |
TEN QUESTIONS ABOUT PASTURES AND BIODIVERSITY ~ Matt A. Sanderson, Research Agronomist Sarah C. Goslee, Landscape Ecologist USDA-ARS Pasture Systems and Watershed Management Research Unit University Park, PA | |
| |
| Traditionally, pasture management has emphasized balancing
the quantity and quality of forage for livestock production purposes.
Thus, producers have often planted single species or simple grass-legume
mixtures in their pastures. Today producers face new challenges in pasture
management, including sustainability, reduced inputs of fertilizers and
pesticides, and soil protection. Some suggest that increased biodiversity
may be one tool to aid producers in meeting these new challenges. This
fact sheet addresses some common questions regarding biodiversity in
pastures. 1. What is biodiversity? In its broadest sense, biodiversity refers to all of the biological material including the genetic material, species, and ecosystems that make up the natural world. The earth's biodiversity includes about 1.75 million described species of microbes, insects, plants, and animals. 2. How is biodiversity relevant to pastures? Pastures can be very diverse ecosystems. Our research in the northeastern USA showed that pastures contain about 30 plant species on average along with hundreds of insect species. European pasture research revealed hundreds of insects, along with dozens of plants, birds, and other species that play different roles in things like nutrient cycles and food webs. 3. Can pastures be managed for increased biodiversity? Some management practices affect pasture biodiversity indirectly. For example, using rotational grazing and managing pastures to leave more stubble and forage residue can influence beneficial insect and soil microbe populations and benefit some wildlife species. The most direct way you can affect pasture biodiversity is to plant and manage many different forage species in pastures. 4. How can biodiversity affect pasture production? The limited amount of research in this area suggests that increasing plant species diversity in pastures can increase forage yield, reduce weeds in pastures, and enhance nutrient cycling. Some view diversity as a sort of insurance policy where different species contribute in their own time or can take the place of species that fail from stress or mismanagement. Much of this research has been done in small plots—very little applied research on plant diversity has been done at the pasture or farm scale. One key piece of information we lack is how complex mixtures of forages might influence animal production (e.g., milk or meat production) on pastures. Ž Ž 5. How many forage species should I plant in my pastures and which forage species should I choose? There is no universal forage mixture or number of forage species that applies to all farms. The specific set of forages will depend on your goals, management, soil resources, weather, and many other factors. As a start, most producers should consider using grass-legume mixtures to reduce the cost and use of nitrogen fertilizer and improve the nutritive value of the pasture forage. If you are a beginning grazer, it may be best to stick with simple mixtures until your grazing management skills increase. 6. What about using so-called pasture mixtures from my local seed dealer? Some seed companies package mixtures of forages for specific uses, such as "intensive grazing mixes." If you want to use a commercial pasture mix, you should closely examine the forage species or varieties, and amount of each in the mixture to be sure that they fit your goals and management. The producer should try to match the relative palatability of each forage species in the mixture and its time to maturity to reduce selective grazing by livestock. Seed companies may change the components of mixtures from year to year, which makes performance comparisons difficult. It also means that the "intensive grazing" mixture a farmer bought one year ago is probably not the same mix available this year. 7. Why not target species and mixtures for specific uses and specific areas on my farm? Instead of taking a "shotgun" approach to planting mixtures (i.e., mixing in a little of a lot of forage species and planting it all together) some recommend targeting certain forages or combinations of forages for different parts of the farm and different uses. For example, most research shows that plant diversity is lowest on highly fertile sites because of dominance by a few highly productive species. Therefore, on a fertile, highly productive soil, it may make more sense to plant a simple mix of one grass and one legume (or perhaps just the grass) to take advantage of the site's productivity. On other areas of the farm that are less productive or have other limitations (droughty, poor drainage, etc.) a different mix or set of forage may work best. This is the idea behind using cool-season and warm-season forages in separate pastures for different times of the year. 8. What about grazing management for mixtures; which forage species should I focus on? This is where a thorough knowledge of the soil and landscape of your farm along with a careful consideration of forage choice is important. For example, if a mixture of bluegrass, white clover, orchardgrass, and alfalfa were established and the producer managed the grazing to fit the bluegrass or white clover (i.e., relatively short grazing height and frequent grazing) the orchardgrass and alfalfa would not survive very long and vice versa. 9. How can I manage selective grazing by livestock in complex mixtures? Selective grazing of "tasty" forages in complex mixtures may result in unstable mixtures and the loss of these tasty species from the pasture. Selective grazing can be reduced by using rotational grazing with relatively high stocking densities and short grazing periods. Another way to manage selective grazing is to move waterers, feed troughs, or shade areas to different pastures or parts of pastures to redistribute grazing animals. Or, you might use different classes or species of livestock in a leader-follower grazing method to take advantage of differences in grazing animal preferences. Using separate pastures of different forage species or species combinations (as in question 7 above) can help to avoid this as well. 10. Are there new forage species available for use in diversifying pastures? A few new forage species have become available in recent years for use in temperate pastures. Forage chicory has become popular in the last 10 years. Our research in the northeastern USA has shown that chicory produces large amounts of high quality forage; however, it is short-lived (3-4 years) and managing the growth of flower stalks (bolting) is difficult. A few years ago "grazing plantain" (a down-under cousin of the familiar buckhorn plantain in pastures) was touted in parts of the USA. Our research showed that it was not a good forage plant. Kura clover is a new legume with considerable potential for temperate pastures. Research in Wisconsin has shown that it is long-lived and drought-resistant, but it is very difficult to establish. Within forage species there are a number of new varieties available and producers should consult local advisors for local information on the performance and adaptation of individual varieties. Further Information: There are several sources of information on forage and pasture management that are useful in considering forages and forage mixtures including: www.forages.oregonstate.edu/ The Forage Information System maintained by David Hannaway at Oregon State University. Contains a wealth of information on forage and pasture management. http://www.umaine.edu/grazingguide/ Mainly for the northeastern USA. http://www.forages.org/ and www.forages.psu.edu/selection_tool/index.html Web-based forage species selection tools for New York and Penn |
| |
| |
| Sure, it costs more and it may be more difficult to obtain,
but consumers want locally raised meat. The results of a summer survey,
Consumer Motivations for Purchasing Local Meats, indicate that over 60% of
Pennsylvania consumers who regularly purchase meat directly from a local
farmer make an extra effort to do so. The survey, which was
commissioned by Ben Franklin Technology Center of Pennsylvania and
conducted by the Pennsylvania Association for Sustainable Agriculture,
revealed that over 85% of these consumers pay more for local
meat. So what motivates consumers to drive further and spend more for local meat? Health...that is, concern for personal health. "An overwhelming majority of people cited health as their primary reason for buying local meat," said Amy Trauger, a doctoral student at Pennsylvania State University and the principle investigator for the study. "It's surprising because we're told that Americans just want cheap food that tastes good." But these consumers aren't your average Americans. Over 60% of the respondents reported household incomes of over $50,000, which is higher than Pennsylvania's average of $40,106 (US Census Bureau 2000). These consumers are also college educated and over two times more likely to have children in their household. "In many cases, families came to the market together as a social event. It's more fun to go to a farmers' market to buy food than at a grocery store," said Trauger. Sixty percent of those surveyed said that one of the most important reasons for purchasing directly from a local farmer was to support the local economy. "These results confirm that consumers are beginning to understand the connection between how they spend their food dollars and the viability of their local farm communities," said Heather House, Director of Educational Outreach at PASA. House believes people's concern for health extends to the entire food system, ranging from the health of local economies to the environment in which the animals are raised. For example, over 60% cited 'factory farming practices' as a reason NOT to purchase regular meat from a grocery store. A Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation (CAFO) or 'factory farm' is defined by federal and state statute as a facility that contains 1,000 animal units. Many consumers believe that, in addition to the possibility of having a negative impact on the environment, these farms may not be producing a healthy product. "We're witnessing growth in demand for locally raised meats, and other products for that matter, that directly corresponds to consumers becoming more educated about the nature of food production. It's not just what you eat anymore, it's about how it was produced and by whom," said House. Trauger presented the results of this study at the annual PASA conference in February. Brian Snyder, Executive Director of PASA, said, "This year, the PASA conference asserted the attitude of 'reclaiming health', as opposed to 'preventing disease,' as a process that begins every morning on farms all across the country." For more information about purchasing local food or the annual PASA Farming for the Future conference, visit http://www.pasafarming.org/ or call 814-349-9856. Pennsylvania Association for Sustainable Agriculture 114 W. Main St., PO Box 419, Millheim, PA, 16854 http://www.pasafarming.org/ Phone-814-349-9856 Fax-814-349-9856 |
| |
| |
| On many farms rotational grazing has been seen as a method
for maximizing livestock production. It is a system that uses appropriate
timed grazing of smaller pasture areas to allow forage plants to recover
from grazing and reach optimum levels of production. Here are some tips
for starting a rotational grazing system. 1. Gather information. Talk to experienced farmers and visit as many farms as you can. Read magazines like Graze and The Stockman Grass Farmer (ask your local conservation district about these publications). Collect relevant information and start to develop your ideas and goals for your operation. 2. Visit your local conservation district, NRCS, and/or Penn State Cooperative Extension Office. Talk with them about your ideas and ask them to help you develop a grazing plan for your operation. A grazing plan will be developed to match the goals of your operation and available resources in order to estimate pastures sizes, calculate total acreage, provide material estimates (fences, water system, etc.), and gives recommendations for developing a rotational grazing system on your farm. 3. Take soil samples. You need to establish some baseline fertility levels on your farm. Soil kits are available at your local Penn State Cooperative Extension Office and other private businesses. Pasture samples should only be taken at a depth of 3 inches. Take cores from 15 to 20 spots randomly avoiding problem areas, fence rows, nutrient hot spots and old dead furrows. Sample similar soils together. Sample areas that have had similar treatment together. One sample can represent up to 20 acres if the soils and treatments have been the same. Place them in a clean container and mix the cores together. Spread out the comprehensive sample and allow to dry. Remove roots and stones. Fill the soil test mailing container to the proper level. Complete the information sheet. The results are based on this information so be as accurate as you can. Once you have the results, apply what is needed. If the results call for more than 3 tons of lime per acre, use a split application. 4. Install the perimeter fence around the area you wish to graze. Remember your whole farm could be grazed at some point. Crop residues are good for extending the grazing season. Woods may or may not be included inside the exterior fence. Have a forester evaluate your woodlot. Most woodlots are more valuable managed for timber rather than pasture. The exterior fence should be a fence that is capable of keeping your livestock on the farm, even if the fence does not have power in it. Most farmers use high tensile fence with electric. Install insulators on every strand and ground the strands you do not want hot. This gives you flexibility in your system. Cut out switches are also useful. The bottom wires usually become covered in vegetation. If the wires are connected to cut out switches they can be turned off until the vegetation can be removed thus restoring power back into the fence. The number of strands depends on the type of animal. Post spacing depends on the terrain and the number of wires. Some farmers use woven wire for goats and sheep. Horse owners usually shy away from high tensile fence. High tensile fence is hard for horses to see and can cause fatal injuries when the horses hit and become entangled in the fence. Perimeter fences installed 16 feet from the edge of property lines and wooded areas may be easier to maintain and allow access around the system for inspection. Contact your local conservation district or NRCS office for fence specifications. 5. Install your water system. Water systems are either gravity feed systems, pressurized systems or a combination of the two. Drinking out of a pond or stream seems to be a thing of the past. Several water quality issues and animal health issues arise when livestock drink surface water. Ponds and streams can be used for watering, but stabilized areas should be installed and water quality issues should be reviewed. The most common type of water system is a spring development. Flow from a spring is collected into a pipe system that leads to a trough. The trough is usually concrete but it could be plastic or a tire trough. The trough is usually overflowed to a suitable outlet. Sometimes the pipe collection system goes to a reservoir then to the trough. In this situation the trough generally uses a float valve to control water flow and the reservoir is overflowed to a suitable outlet. This gives some storage capacity if the water recharge rate is slow. The other type of water system is a pressurized system. This usually involves a pump and a pressure tank. Water is pumped out to a hydrant where a trough is installed with a float valve. Sometimes water is pumped to a reservoir on top of a hill using a pressurized system and then gravity is used to distribute the water back down the hill to troughs. There are other alternatives used to develop a water system like solar pumps, windmills, ram pumps, nose pumps, and sling pumps. Check with your local conservation district, NRCS, and/or extension office about these pump systems and the permitting process. 6. Install the interior fence. There are two types of interior fence, permanent interior fence and temporary interior fence. Permanent interior fence that uses larger driven posts and tensioned wire costs more, has less maintenance and allows less flexibility. Temporary interior fence that uses easily pulled posts and lighter wire is cheaper, has more maintenance and has more flexibility. Flexibility is important in a grazing system, because every year is different and animal numbers fluctuate. Flexibility allows you to react to these changes. The best systems usually have a combination of temporary and permanent interior fence. 7. Start grazing. Monitor your system. Note good items and bad items. Your system will need changes and modifications. Some changes can be made right away and some may take time. Use the pasture sward you currently have. The management of the existing pastures is going to change therefore the existing pasture sward will change. Graze a couple of years and evaluate the pastures. If they need work consider frost seeding, or inter-seeding with a no-till drill. Tillage should be a last resort. Continue to educate yourself about grazing. Attend pasture walks, field days, seek assistance from nutrition consultants and visit with other farmers who graze. Pasture sticks and grazing notebooks are available through the local conservation districts and NRCS through Project Grass. Project Grass meetings are held quarterly in SW PG Somerset, Phone # 814-445-6876,- NW PG Clarion County, Phone # 814-226-8160, ext 125, - SC PG Fulton County, Phone # 717- 495-3812, ext. 109, - NE PG Towanda, Ph# 570-265-5288, - SE PG, Ph# 215-541-7930 with grazers. You are welcome to attend. Contact your local conservation district office for more information. |
DEFINING GRASS GENETICS, By Laurel Hoffman NRCS Natural Resourse Specialist, Armstong County | |
| |
| If you want a tender, juicy steak then you have to finish
the steer on grain. If I turn my crop ground into pasture, then what will I have to feed my cows in the winter? I hear, time and time again, these kinds of comments that scoff at the idea of a total forage diet for cattle. Yet historically (pre-1950s) cattle were reared, raised, and finished on grass. All food animals (including sheep, goats, and chickens) thrived on a diet of forages. Calves were born with the proper anatomy and physiology to perform on pasture. It wasn't until the early 1930s that grain started to receive more attention as a supplemental feed source for animals. Later, as the feedlot industry gained momentum, cattle producers adapted their breeding programs to supply animals for the "grain-fed" market. What influence did the feedlot industry have on animal genetics and what is grass genetics? This article will attempt to answer both questions. With the advent of hybrid corn in the late 1800's, this plant could now be grown on less fertile soils and thus more and more acres were planted. By the late 1930s, farmers across the delta areas of the U.S. were planting corn as a cash crop. They also began feeding it to their dairy cows for higher milk production and to their beef animals for fattening. Early feedlot systems were owned and operated by local farmers who were feeding their own cattle to supply a year round fat finished market. The grazing type of cattle of those days only required 60 to 80 days of grain to fatten. After compensatory gain was reached, those animals would start putting on back fat very quickly. Animals by twelve months of age would often carry .25 inches, which is what you want today in a grass fed animal. Somewhere between 14 and 18 months, these cattle could accumulate .35-.50 inches of back fat, reaching a 4 to 5 yield grade. Today, cattle that have .40 inches of back fat get discounted at the sale barn. As time passed, producers became more knowledgeable about mixing rations and feed management. Those more interested in penning up cattle and bringing the plentiful grain to them soon learned that narrow, taller, later maturing animals with little or no back fat performed better in that environment. The larger framed, bigger boned animal would have faster rates of gain over a longer period than the shorter, wider, more balanced animal that fattened too quickly. Transitioning to animals that could stay on grain for 120 days was a big plus for the farmer who marketed grain. During the later part of the twentieth century, chemical companies developed bovine synthetic growth hormones (ear implants) that stimulated more growth while suppressing the deposit of fat. The results were that cattle could stay in the feedlots even longer and produce larger carcasses. The feedlot philosophy of producing beef gained full steam by the 1940s. In 1948, a large group of cattle (30,000 head) were gathered together in Dodge City Kansas to be transported by rail to feedlots in the Chicago area. From that point on, the idea of feeding grain to both beef and dairy has steadily gained in popularity. Production agriculture was up and running. Order buyers were paying more money for larger, taller, later maturing calves, so naturally the commercial beef producers kept the bigger cows in their breeding herds and used taller, later maturing bulls to produce their yearly calf crop. The grass genetics that produced smaller framed, wider animals quickly lost favor and faded from the landscape. The slaughter companies quickly established markets and delivery systems. A bulk of these markets was dominated by a price structure created by the rapid growing fast food movement demanding grind (burger). This fast food industry used its purchasing power to dictate price margins. Cattle and corn as well as other farm products (food) were now being traded as commodities and prices were regulated without considering the farmer and his cost of production. It even came to the point where the cattlemen/farmer was told to cut operating expenses. He was forced to settle for low profit margins if he wanted to remain a player and stay in agriculture. These are the same markets (no regard for producer profit) and price structures that handicap and even destroy today's family farms. Cattle producers in America willingly changed their breeding programs in order to supply the genetics for the feedlot industry. In the early 1950s, the cattle industry determined it necessary to import Continental and European animals. The intent was to crossbreed these animals with American cattle. Wanted were the taller, longer, later maturing cattle that would have hybrid vigor. They brought the most money at the stockyard. Growth became primary and meat quality became a non-issue. The constant out crossing thus continually diluted the prepotent gene pools that had effectively utilized grass. Animals were now heterozygous in their genetic make-up and lost was consistency and quality control. Even today, it is uncertain of how many pure blood strains of seed stock exist. Grass genetics is rugged genetics. A majority of early American cattle were of the dual-purpose style or body type. They were valued for both their meat and milk production. However, history does record the existence of many outstanding line bred herds of beef and dairy that filled the pastures in this country until around the mid 1960s. Pictures from old herd books and encyclopedias portray those animals as having nearly the same physical structure or phenotype, yet still maintaining individual breed characteristics. Our forefathers selected for that style of animal because of their efficient conversion of forages into the meat and milk they needed to fed their families. These animals were built for functionality and longevity and they rarely got sick. Until economic pressure and circumstances turned livestock and grain into commodities there was little change in cattle genetics. There was no reason to change a system that worked. The type of animal that produces pounds of beef in the feedlot was described earlier. So what does an animal with the correct grass genetics look like? There are two specific physical features that an animal must have for proper grass utilization. The two features that are present in many species of animals (cattle, sheep, horses, buffalo, and even swine) and characterize them as different and designed for that purpose are wide shoulders and a deep chest. These two traits are required for both the male and female if the animal is to grow, maintain, and reproduce on a diet of grass. Wide shoulders and a deep chest provide ample room for the proper development and function of the heart and lungs. Oxygen and blood flow are never restricted. The respiratory and cardiovascular systems can work to full capacity – critical for efficiency. Wide shoulders and a deep chest make up the balanced body that will have better muscle structure, more consistency in intramuscular fat, and higher reproduction. The balanced body of a female should have a frame score of 3-4 and the male should have a frame score of 4-5. Wider stature animals are generally more docile, have more muscle mass and will be lower maintenance because of the fact they easily maintain body condition. Cattle with the proper genetics to be sustainable on grass will have thicker hides that enable them to adapt to temperature changes and other weather conditions. An oily sheen on the hair coat is a natural insect repellent. A wide face and muzzle is needed to ingest larger bites of grass. Large nostrils and a convex shaped head are important components to an efficient respiratory system. A deep flank indicates fertility and the ability to finish on grass. For an animal to get his daily-required dry matter intake from pasture, it must be able to traverse the terrain and move with ease. Therefore strong, sound structured legs that are placed at the four corners of the body are crucial. Hooves are to be free of malformations (long or curved toes) and disease. The digestive system and endocrine (pituitary, thyroid, adrenal, pancreas glands plus the testes and ovaries) system have to working correctly and in unison if the animal is to develop to its potential. The ruminant was designed to digest forages, not large amounts of concentrated energy seeds (grain). When the digestive system is disrupted negative reactions occur in many ways including reproduction, growth, and immune response. To create a grass-based herd, there must be grass genetics in the breeding stock. Select animals that have the characteristics described above. It's not rocket science and there's no expensive equipment needed. You can develop your visual skills and select animals just like our forefathers did. Observe the animal from a distance and notice the top line, bottom line and overall balance. You want animals that have a lot of body mass. You want to see more body then you see space between the belly and the ground. Avoid long legged animals. The top line should be horizontal with no dips or breaks. Does he/she stand with front legs wide apart, indicating wide shoulders? Observe and evaluate the animal at close range. Notice the head, hair, bone structure, body height and width, leg placement and feet. You can evaluate and effectively judge animals by the time they reach 10 months of age. A word of caution – when you are selecting animals for a grass based operation. Make sure the animals you choose from have been fed a diet of fresh grass and/or stored forages. You'll want to think twice about any animals that have been fed grain on anything more than a seldom occasion. You must be certain that the health and condition of the animals you consider are the result of a grass diet. Cattle with grass genetics can go to the feedlot system and function and gain as well as grain type genetic cattle. However because of its efficient feed conversion, the grass genetics animal upon completing the compensatory gain at around 60-80 days is ready for slaughter. At this point back fat begins to accumulate and feed is turned into fat not red meat. The grain genetic animal that fits the bill for the feedlot system which continually gains muscle mass for 120+ days cannot go to pastures and do well. The majority of them will not maintain body condition, stay healthy, reproduce on a regular schedule, produce milk, or finish on a total grass operation. In summary, grass genetics is not a specific cattle breed parse but it is a specific body type. Wide shoulders and a deep chest are paramount for the purpose of utilizing your grass. Now if your intention is to produce grain fed beef, then the taller, narrower, later maturing animal will produce the pounds of meat by staying on corn for longer periods. This is the plus for the feedlot industry. As a side note - purity of genetics regardless of species of animal or feeding system is vitally important to create animals that are predictable and viable for the intended purpose. Limited, well planned crossbreeding has its benefits. But with continued dilution of genetic lines, you loose control. Properly built, pure, paternal gene pools will produce just as many pounds as crossbreeding. If you can manage your ground for crop production and harvest with machinery, you can manage your ground for grass production and harvest with cattle. Economics will be in your favor and you will be providing a quality, healthful product for you family and friends in concert with nature. § |
| |
| |
| By Kathy J. Soder, Animal Scientist and Sarah C. Goslee, Landscape Ecologist USDA-ARS Pasture Systems and Watershed Management Research Unit Can grazing and riparian areas be combined into a sustainable system? It is a delicate situation on a delicate area. Early recommendations for riparian areas responded to overgrazed and degraded stream banks by completely excluding livestock. More recent evidence shows that livestock, grass, and streams can co-exist in a long-term, sustainable ecosystem. What is a riparian area? It is a transitional zone between water and upland areas, usually adjacent to a stream, pond, spring, etc. Because of above-average soil moisture, riparian areas are usually more productive than the upland. This moisture also usually results in plant communities that are different from and frequently more diverse than upland plant communities. Although they typically constitute a small proportion of the landscape, riparian areas perform many critical functions, including absorbing and slowing down rainfall runoff, recharging the aquifer, filtering sedimentation, building stream banks, and providing food and shelter for wildlife and a habitat for many other organisms. Riparian areas are particularly sensitive to overgrazing. Removal of vegetation and trampling, especially in wet soils, can lead to soil compaction, increased erosion, and unstable stream banks. These in turn can lead to high levels of sediment in streams, and to warmer water temperatures, which reduce the value of the stream as fish and wildlife habitat. If cattle are allowed into the stream, or spend a lot of time near the stream, direct deposition and near-stream runoff of manure can lead to high nutrient levels and bacterial contamination in the stream As long as grazing is carefully managed, healthy riparian areas can tolerate moderate use. In general, riparian areas respond to changes in grazing management more rapidly than upland areas. At the same time, severe disturbances can cause serious damage to riparian areas and slow down the natural recovery process. There fore, if a decision is made to graze a riparian area, a high level of management is required to maintain thehealth of the riparian area. Guidelines for Grazing Riparian areas Use a moderate stocking rate that lies between the rate that achieves the highest individual gain and the rate that achieves the maximum per acre animal gain. Leave adequate residue- this will vary with the type of vegetation, number and intensity of flood cycles, grazing system, and season of grazing, but will typically be higher than in our typical cool-season grass grazing systems. Allow sufficient time for re-growth prior to the winter season for plant maintenance and soil protection. In general, and if nutrient management regulations allow, only one short grazing pass is recommended per season. If more than one grazing pass is employed, allow adequate recovery time between grazing passes to allow plants to recover and to maintain plant roots and vigor. This rest period will also allow soil to recover from compaction. Short grazing periods (3 days or less) will minimize the potential for grazing re-growth before plants recover fully. As grazing pressure increases, the amount of rest required increases, and compaction and runoff issues increase. The longer the grazing period, the longer the rest period required. The greater the green plant material remaining after grazing, the less rest required. If nesting birds or other wildlife are of concern, delay grazing until the young animals have left the nest. Ž Long-term rest (one or more growing seasons) may be employed in problem areas where riparian health is at risk. Also, years with above-average precipitation offer an opportunity to rest one or more riparian areas for a full season. Complete exclusion of animals from riparian areas is usually not necessary, except in environmentally sensitive areas, where the riparian area is already degraded, or where nutrient management regulations are tight. Keeping the livestock out of the stream itself as much as possible, or using bank stabilizers and lined crossing points, can cut down on sedimentation and reduce stream bank erosion. Controlling how long and when the animals graze the riparian area is a powerful grazing management tool. Such control often determines the success of a riparian area grazing plan. To encourage greater use of uplands and less use of riparian areas, the following practices may be considered: Develop water sources, shade/shelter, and supplement/mineral feeding areas in uplands away from streams to attract livestock away from riparian areas. Switching paddocks- livestock may prefer the riparian area in one paddock more than in another. Turn animals into a paddock well away from the riparian area. Fencing may be considered. Herd livestock away from riparian areas. As an aside, Red Canyon Ranch in WY, which is owned by The Nature Conservancy, implemented herders on horseback to keep cattle away from riparian areas. They determined that the herders were more cost-effective than the millions of dollars it would have cost to fence out (and maintain fence on) the entire riparian area over several thousand acres. Additionally, the riparian areas benefited from some grazing in increased biodiversity and decreased erosion. The herders began to notice that some animals preferred riparian areas, while other animals preferred the upland areas. They identified and culled cattle (and their offspring) that preferred to spend the bulk of their time in the riparian areas, and found that, over time, the herders spent less and less time chasing cattle out of the riparian areas. Although this idea may not be completely applicable to our Eastern conditions, it is interesting to note the behavioral changes in the animals as they were selected for their grazing patterns in regards to riparian areas. Ralph Lentz, a Minnesota farmer, received a SARE grant to study the effects of different types of grazing management on riparian areas on his farm. He divided a riparian area (that had previously been managed with exclusion fencing and no grazing for several decades prior to the study) into three sections: A) riparian area is grazed in the normal rotation (2-3 day grazing period with a 1-month rest between grazings), B) grazed once every 2-3 years, or C) wildlife area with complete livestock exclusion. They found that plant diversity increased with controlled grazing (A and B) and with grazing plan B, a number of indigenous plants returned. In the wildlife area (C), trees such as box elder, willow and aspen took over and shaded out the grasses and forbs, which eventually disappeared. Heavy rains caused soil erosion in area C. In fifteen years time, the area that completely excluded grazing (C) changed to a wide, shallow stream with an average depth of 4", and the stream banks became steep and unstable, while the other areas (A and B) developed productive bio diverse plant communities that stabilized the stream banks, decreased erosion, and provided wildlife habitat. Research at Oregon State University found that by providing off-stream water in the upland area, cattle tended to spend their non-grazing (resting) time further away from the riparian area than cattle who had no other access to water (350-400 ft. vs. 150-200 ft). This had a significant impact on the health and stability of the riparian area from the stand point of trampling, soil compaction, and erosion of the area. It is important to note that any specific type of management will not be appropriate for every situation- not all streams or riparian areas may respond in the same manner. Therefore it is imperative that management decisions be made on a case-by-case basis based on soil types, landscape, climate, location, type of plants present, nutrient management regulations, etc. Use of the riparian area by livestock must also be considered when developing a nutrient management plans where allowed. In summary, livestock, grass, and streams can co-exist as a sustainable ecosystem with proper grazing management. Complete livestock exclusion is not necessary in all cases, and grazing may actually be beneficial in maintaining the stability and biodiversity of the riparian areas to promote soil and water health, as well as animal health and production, and wildlife habitat. References/Resources http://www.aginfonet.com/aglibrary/content/grazing_pasture_technology/riparian/ http://www.attra.org/attra-pub/managedgraze.html http://agebb.missouri.edu/mfgc/2000mtg/riparian.htm http://oregonstate.edu/dept/ncs/newsarch/2001/Jan01/grazing.htm http://www.dasc.vt.edu/faculty/jones/Streams2.htm |
Grazers Around Our State
Grazing Tips from the Welch Family Farm in Wayne County: Kris Ribble Project Grass Northeast Chapter Coordinator NRCS Grazing Specialist | |
| |
| Harold and Lewis Welch along with their families were
gracious enough to allow Project Grass Northeast producers along with
Conservation District and Natural Resources Conservation Service staff to
take a look at what is working for them on their farm. Harold and Lewis have been grazing diary cattle for many years now and they have experimented with many new ideas that help to improve their grazing dairy. The herd at the Welch farm relies heavily on rotational grazing as a method for forage harvest and manure spreading approximately 6 months each year. Any excess forage is preserved for winter time feeding. Grass and legume pastures fit the Welch's Wayne county operation very well. We asked Harold and Lewis to show us what they are doing to try to extend their grazing season and this is what they showed us. Over the course of the day at the Welch farm the group took a look at a no-till seeding of spring oats into an existing sod. Harold told us that the this pasture needed to be renovated and he was going to harvest oats and put them up as a stored forage then come back in August and reseed the pasture. Harold also showed us fall planted triticale uses in the grazing system. Harold has found that annual crops such as small grains and sorghum-sudan grass fit well in a rotational grazing system. The annual crops help to control weeds, provide forages in times when cool season pastures are not producing, and aid in the renovation of pastures. Plans are to seed some sorghum-sudangrass for grazing during the "summer slump" when cool season grasses are nearly dormant. One of our last stops on the pasture walk, and probably on of the most exciting stops, was a site where Harold had been spray irrigating the liquid portion of his manure on hay and pasture fields. The side by side comparison of fields that had received irrigation vs. those that had not was quite impressive. Those fields where manure affluent was applied were dark green and lush as opposed to the fields where no application of affluent had been made. The irrigation unit pictured above is a simple unit of New Zealand design that Harold purchased several years ago. The spray irrigation unit is driven by a 2" water line which is charged using two gas powered trash pumps pumping in series. The unit allows the Welch's to irrigate at the rate of approximately ¾ inches per acre. The unit is moved around the farm using the family ATV. Over the course of the year this unit sees a significant amount of use. It allows nutrients to be applied early in the year to get a jump on the spring pasture growth as well as being able to irrigate pasture or hay acres in times of drought. Another interesting note related to the spray irrigation unit and pasture management. Harold told us that April day that he has not purchased commercial nitrogen in nearly 8 years. The manure and legumes provide the pastures and forage acres with the necessary nutrients to sustain the farm. Finally as the day came to a close Charlie Miller from Lackawanna County Conservation District and Bob Wagner from the Natural Resources Conservation Service spoke to the group about the importance of pasture fertility and soil health. Charlie impressed upon the group the importance of pH and Calcium in our soils and the roles they play in quality pasture. Bob showed the group a simple indicator of soil quality in a pasture or in a crop field. He simply dug a 1 ft. x 1 ft. x 1ft. hole and counted the earthworms in that volume of soil. Bob explained how earthworms are a good indicator good soil quality. ? |
Project Grass Solar Water Pump Project
South West Project
Grass Chapter,
Jerome and Bob Carl Clearfield Township, Cambria
County
By Lou Kopczyk,
Cambria County AG. Conservation
Technician
South West Project Grass Chapter,
Jerome and Bob Carl Clearfield Township, Cambria County
The Carl family raises beef, swine, and crops on several farms in Clearfield
Township, Cambria County. For disease prevention purposes, feeder cattle,
purchased from livestock auctions and local farms, are transported to one farm
that is isolated from the others. After a quarantine period, the cattle are
moved from this farm. Usually, fifteen head of cattle are kept on this farm at
one time. An existing spring development provided water for the cattle in one
part of the pasture, but this water source was not dependable in dry years.
This undependability led the Carls to investigate participation in
the Project Grass Solar Water Pump Project. Because the existing spring did not
provide an adequate amount of water, the Carls had a well drilled in the fall of
2004 as part of the solar water pump installation. This well provides a
dependable water source and was located to allow better distribution of water
through the pasture. Solar panels were erected adjacent to the well. A
frost-free hydrant was installed near the panels and well. A trough is placed in
the pasture when animals are moved to this farm. When the cattle are moved to
another farm, the entire system can be drained for frost
protection.
Having two water sources promotes better animal
distribution across the pasture area. The Carls are participating in a project
with the Cambria County Conservation District to install additional fencing on
this farm in the spring of 2005, which will allow for increased grazing
management of this area. The water systems, plus the additional fencing, will
result in improved grazing management and better nutrient management on this
farm.
Funding for this project was provided by the Carl family and
Project Grass, which received an Energy Harvest Grant through the PA Department
of Environmental Protection. §
Spurgeon Shilling Seasonal Dairy Farm | |
| |
| By Jessica Schaub Nutrient Mgt. Specialist (Armstrong
County Conservation District) Spurgeon Shilling is a seasonal dairy farmer in Armstrong County, Pennsylvania. Spurgeon has 3 children to his wife Lisa of ten years; James is 8, Olivia is 6, and Adriauna is 4. On an average year he milks 60 cows from April through December while grazing 35 paddocks. The animals are never confined. The cows have access to shelter part of the time, so are considered to be grazed 80% of the time. Through the Agricultural Management Assistance Program (AMA) in August of 2001, Spurgeon installed 22,665 feet of fencing, 7,784 feet of pipeline, for gravity flow dispersal to 10 watering troughs with freeze-proof hydrants. Spurgeon worked with the Natural Resource Conservation Service to develop 102 acres into a prescribed grazing system. Spurgeon has also installed best management practices on his own without any cost-share funding. Some of these practices include: approximately 3,000 feet of fencing; 750 feet of subsurface drainage; nine watering troughs; and an approved Nutrient Management Plan. Spurgeon received the Rotational Grazing Award from the Armstrong County Conservation District in 2002. In 2003, Spurgeon Shilling received a Project Grass Grant. The cost-share program was set up on a 75% (grant funds), 25% (Landowner money) cost-share basis. This grant helped Spurgeon to install 380 feet of access road, 485 feet of grassed waterway, 117 feet of 12" underground outlet, and 1 structure for water control. The installed best management practices alleviated the concentrated water flow runoff from his fields, which had previously eroded his access road. Spurgeon is currently a director on the Armstrong Conservation District Board. He is still actively working with the Conservation District and the Natural Resource Conservation Service to install best management practices on his farm. His future goals include building a milking parlor on his farm and obtaining certification to produce organic milk. § |
| |
| |
|
Andrea Janson Farm The Andrea Janson Farm is located in Fayette County, Uniontown, Pa. Andrea currently farms approximately which was originally rented crop ground. After a visit from USDA NRCS and the Fayette County Conservation District, attending grazing group meetings, visiting several existing grazing operations, Andrea knew that rotational grazing was for her. She immediately converted approximately 25 acres into pasture and used step in posts and light gauge wire to construct paddocks and she also uses temporary troughs as a watering source. She is currently managing 20 head of cow/calf pairs and steers with plans to expand to 40 head of cow/calf and eventually graze horses. Andrea has since applied for and received cost share from the Fayette County Non Point Source and Rotational Grazing Program where she will install stream bank fencing and a crossing, permanent boundary fence, crossing fencing, and water lines. Andrea also attends the Fayette County Grazing Group meetings regularly and is willing to contribute whenever needed. § The Fayette County Conservation District (FCCD), USDA/NRCS, and cooperation with countywide livestock producers, have formed a grazing network aptly named the Fayette County Grazing Group. The group consists of local livestock producers that have taken an interest in learning more about rotational grazing systems and grassland conservation. Chris Rerko with the FCCD and Laura Michael with the NRCS, help introduce topics and material to the group for discussion and learning. However, an informal open forum is encouraged more so than formal lectures, and producers are always welcome to bring new ideas and information to share as well. The group addresses issues from plant identification, to grass-based economics, to animal health and nutrition. Meetings are held approximately every six weeks in the fall and winter months. The FCCD and NRCS strive to provide an outstanding educational program for Fayette County grazers with grazing topics presented through Microsoft PowerPoint, peer discussions, a library of grazing information, pasture walks and field days, as well as grazing manuals, grazing references, Stockman Grass Farmer subscriptions, and other types of material. Funding for these resources is obtained by the FCCD through grants. The FCCD has since applied for and received funding for the first issue of The Fayette County Grazier Newsletter, which is a newsletter based on the goals and objectives of the experienced graizer or those taking the step into rotational grazing. Since the grazing group was started, we have out grown our meeting room capacity and continue to add new graziers to our mailing list. The Fayette County Grazing Group was formed on the same principles as Project Grass, to promote rotational grazing, and the environmental and economical benefits that come with it. The Fayette County Conservation District and USDA/NRCS in Fayette County, would like to thank J.B. Harrold and the Southwest Project Grass Chapter in assisting us in developing the Fayette County Grazing Group. Forming this group has proven to be a valuable asset to Fayette county livestock producers. The group can share new ideas and principles that compliment rotational grazing, and allow the exchange of ideas in a relaxed setting. For more information on the Fayette County Grazing Group you may contact me at 724-438-4497 or chrisrerko@yahoo.com. ~Happy Grazing~ § |
| |
| |
|
The Glenn and Matt Moyer Farm. By Jeff Muir Bedford Chesapeake Bay technician Today many farmers request assistance to install Best Management Practices. How do you help the farmers that are not eligible for financial assistance? How do we work with these farmers concerned about their neighbors and the environment? |
| |
| The next best tool to offer is "EDUCATION". Glenn Moyer grew-up on the family farm in Snider County and in 1982 moved to Somerset County. Mr. Moyer had a 40-cow herd and grew his own crops. Feeling a financial burden and heavy labor cost, he decided it was time to try a different technique or "get out" of farming. He visited his local conservation office where they explored various options. In 1986 he felt confident with the information the district provided including lower labor expenses, high quality soil loss reduction, and less tractor time by allowing the animals to do the work. He was convinced it was time to try rotational grazing while growing additional supplemental feed and has continued the practices to this day. In 2002, Glenn purchased a 326-acre farm in Bedford County. The farm consisted of 110 tillable acres while a majority of the fields had a high soil runoff potential. He envisioned a farm with green vegetated pastures and as limited labor cost as possible. In the Spring of 2004, he began his operation and rented the Vermeer No-Till Drill provided by The Bedford Conservation District's Equipment Program to plant his pastures. Presently the farm is a partnership between Glenn and his son Matt Moyer. They are milking 244 cows and plan to expand the herd to 300 cows in the spring of 2005. There is only forage grass grown on the farm and cut for hay, however surplus supplement feed is imported from their Somerset County farm. They have more than 2 miles of cattle walkway constructed from slate and topped with dust located on the farm. Their pastures are divided into 15-20 paddocks. The animals are kept in the paddock a maximum of three days, but have access to fresh grass every 12 hours. Mr. Moyer manages a New Zealand style operation; his milking season runs from March to early January. His herd will be completely dry for about six weeks between January and February with the calving due dates in March. This seasonal milking schedule helps reduce labor cost, farm facilities and utilities. Glenn also implements a practice known as out wintering. By allowing his herd access to the pastures all year, he can reduce his cost for feeding, housing, and manure handling. Glenn believes that there was as much work and labor in raising a 40-cow herd with conventional farming methods as there is today with his 244-cow herd and implementing rotational grazing. After visiting the farm you would realize Glenn's most important piece of equipment: "KNOWLEDGE". |
| |
| Observing his pastures you would notice there are no brown
patches or poor pasture stands created from improper management. Mr. Moyer
paid for the grazing system all out-of-pocket. He was confident with all
his background experience that he could successfully operate his farm with
profitable gains. Mr. Moyer acknowledges that it is the farmer's
management responsibility to keep areas producing and well vegetated.
In closing, when a farmer isn't eligible for cost share money or doesn't want to fulfill all components that are required, don't give up working with them. Continue encouraging the farmer; keep him informed of all possible alternatives. Even if he is willing to do a fraction of what is required, that is a positive step in the direction of our goal to help conserve and protect our environmental resources. If you would like more information on Glenn Moyer's New Zealand style operation or on the financial analysis on the Cove Mountain Farm he rented between 1998 and 2002 in Franklin County, visit the web and follow the Grazing Economics link located at http://www.grassfarmer.com/ § |
| |
|
|
|