GRAZING ON RANGE LANDS

W. R. Chapline

THE MAXIMUM production of our meat, wool, and other animal products calls for the use of the various types and parts of range best fitted for the different kinds and classes of livestock. The level and rolling grasslands, for example, can grow high-quality forage especially well adapted for production of high-grade calves and for growing out yearling steers. Such lands, too, are used in the production of feeder lambs. The higher mountain ranges with their cool summers and heavy growth of palatable grasses and range "weeds" are especially valuable for producing high-quality grass-fat lambs. Browse ranges of low value for cattle or sheep are often adapted to Angora goats. Ranges that produce an abundance of mast are sometimes used for grazing hogs. Many and and semiarid mesa and valley lands, which often support a relatively scant cover of grasses, weeds, and browse, have proved to be well adapted to winter grazing by sheep. Also, if adequate water is available, they may be satisfactorily grazed yearlong or seasonally by cattle.

The belief, once widely held, that different kinds of livestock could not or would not graze in common has been disproved. Of course, on heavily utilized ranges or where more than one kind is allowed to concentrate on favored areas, there is definite conflict. When the forage best adapted to each kind is properly grazed, common use often furnishes maximum returns.

The best season to use most ranges is when the greatest grazing value can be obtained from the forage or the area can be used efficiently to save on cost of production. Thus, on high mountain ranges the green succulent growth is especially valuable in summer, but snow precludes winter grazing. In contrast, the semidesert valleys and mesas at the lower elevations, which have 4ittle snow, produce their forage in spring or summer, and often would be suitable for yearlong grazing, but are especially valuable in winter when other ranges are snow-covered and when hay and other high-cost feeds would be required. Where the native grasses cure rather well and climatic conditions are not too severe, ranges can be grazed throughout the year. The highly productive grama ranges of the Great Plains and Southwest which produce their forage in a short spring or summer period have long been so used.

In every case it is advisable to adjust seasonal use so as to avoid damage to the resource. In many parts of the West the spring-fall ranges of the foothills are key units in the yearlong livestock operation since they furnish fresh green growth about the time lambs and calves are dropped. However, it is essential that grazing be delayed until the soil is sufficiently dry and firm to withstand trampling. Likewise, the plants should have made sufficient growth before grazing starts so as not to impair their vigor. On one central Oregon range, grazed too early for a number of years, the forage value was not only seriously depleted but the palatable forage plants developed much more slowly than those properly grazed in the spring. The vigorous spring range in good condition could be grazed 6 weeks earlier than the depleted range. This means much to stockmen who have difficulty holding their animals on hay and other feeds after some green grass starts. Moreover, it reduces cost of feeding and amount of feed required.

Research and experience have shown that removing steers, dry cows, and other marketable cattle from the range in late summer or early fall, about the time when they have attained maximum weight for the season, is the best practice. Often such animals are held for a month or even more beyond such time. When this is done, not only is part of the summer's gain lost, because the forage is not sufficiently nutritious to maintain weight, but the forage these animals eat is not available for the breeding herd or other cattle to be held over.

In simplest terms, grazing capacity means grazing the number of animals which the range unit will support for the period of grazing without impairing the vigor of the forage plants. It should assure abundant forage available for the livestock for the full grazing period. It not only permits vigorous production by the more palatable forage plants each year but also leaves sufficient stubble to give adequate protection for new growth.

Stocking at conservative grazing capacity provides maximum sustained profitable production of livestock over the years and adds stability to the industry. Numerous examples could be cited of the better results obtained from such stocking in contrast with either too heavy or too light stocking. For example, in a 12-year cooperative study, range pastures at the U. S. Range Livestock Experiment Station in eastern Montana, which were stocked approximately at grazing capacity, produced a calf crop 7 percent greater and calf weight per cow 43 pounds greater, on the average, than comparable range pastures stocked 25 percent heavier over the years. The cows on the overstocked ranges required practically double the expense for supplemental hay feeding as those on ranges properly stocked. Ranges stocked about 25 percent below grazing capacity produced a slightly greater calf weight per cow and required less supplemental feeding, but these advantages were not Sufficient to offset the greater land costs.

Similarly, in cooperative studies at the Central Plains Experimental Range in Colorado, yearling Herefords gained an average of 252 pounds in 1946 on short-grass range stocked at 40 head per section for a 6-month season, approximately grazing capacity. But on comparable range, overstocked at 60 head per section, the average gain was only 174 pounds. The better developed animals on the properly grazed land sold for $1.25 more per hundredweight. Comparable profit in 1946 amounted to $1,807 per section for the range stocked at grazing capacity and $1,345 for the overgrazed, even though the latter produced slightly more beef. For the 7 years, 1940 to 1946, inclusive, the difference in favor of the moderate stocking was $43.13 per section annually. The heavy stocking has resulted in cumulative soil and forage deterioration during the 7 years of the study.

Two bands of ewes wintered in the salt desert shrub type of western Utah were placed on range grazed conservatively and heavily in alternate years. Each year the ewes grazing conservatively produced fully a pound more wool per head and were 12 to 20 pounds heavier at the close of winter than those grazed on adjacent heavily stocked range. Death loss from malnutrition was practically eliminated under proper grazing, whereas 3 to 5 percent losses were experienced year after year under heavy stocking. Lamb crops were 8 to 13 percent higher and financial returns were $1.00 to $1.50 per ewe higher on conservatively stocked range.

Even grazing a little heavier than proper reduces the forage crop and results in undesirable change in the plant cover and forage. As long as favorable rainfall occurs the loss in vigor and fewer and shorter stems and leaves of the palatable species and the breaking up of grass tufts resulting from such overgrazing may not be noticed. Heavy overgrazing very often causes rapid deterioration, especially when drought years occur, requiring many years for recovery. Such cumulative undermining of the range forage base has caused feed and financial difficulties for many stockmen during drought and depression periods.

The more palatable forage species are the key to proper grazing. When they have been grazed as fully as they can stand, the range as a whole must be considered properly grazed. There may be considerable herbage of relatively low value or unpalatable species left on the ground which might appear to be usable. An attempt to obtain greater utilization of this low value herbage, however, results in overgrazing the more palatable species.

Similarly, topography is an important factor in determining proper utilization of range units. Precipitation is less efficient in the production of forage and soil is more easily disturbed on slopes than on more level areas, particularly those which accumulate water from slopes above. Accordingly, it is not desirable to graze the vegetation on slopes as closely as on moderately level country. However, livestock naturally prefer to graze on the level or rolling country and on meadow areas that produce lush palatable forage. When such areas are properly utilized the range as a whole is fully grazed even though there may appear to be unused forage on the slopes.

Drought is the greatest hazard of the range livestock industry. Such drought years as 1934, which affected much of the western range country, or 1936 in the Plains bring home forcefully to stockmen the serious influence of inadequate precipitation in reduced forage production and in livestock losses incident thereto. Drought is unpredictable and occurs with irregular frequency. In the and valleys of southern New Mexico, for example, three or four consecutive drought years may occur in each period of 8 or 10 years. Drought is almost as frequent in the semiarid range areas in other parts of the Southwest, in the Intermountain region, and in the Southern Great Plains. In less and areas, however, such as the northern portion of the range territory and the high mountains, droughts do not occur so frequently. But even in these areas drought sometimes disrupts livestock production and causes financial losses. Accordingly, ranch and range management plans should recognize the drought factor and provide for emergency adjustments to minimize effects of drought.

Range plants are adapted to contend rather well with low precipitation during drought. Adaptations include reduction in size or breaking up of grass tufts, production of fewer and shorter stems and leaves, the curling or folding of leaves to reduce transpiration, and even dropping of leaves by shrubs if moisture becomes too scant. It will be clearly evident why in drought years much less forage is produced. In severe droughts a considerable part of the stand may die out.

Although there is still much to learn about climatic relationships and the range resource, research results and practical experience clearly indicate certain broad principles, practices, and basic considerations that should govern ways to minimize the effects of drought in continued use of range lands for livestock production.

1. The outstanding requisite in guarding against the penalties of drought is conservative stocking year in and year out. Too often a few good years with increasing forage production encourage unwise increases in livestock numbers. The result, when drought brings short forage production, is overgrazing and heavy losses through death and sacrifice sales. Because there are more years below than above average in forage production, it is important to stock ranges on the conservative side as drought insurance. Under such use in good years some forage may be carried over ungrazed on the range but the resulting good cover of vegetation and improved vigor of the palatable plants help to sustain maximum production consistent with the current rainfall.

2. Another safeguard is to retain a reserve supply of forage by fencing off a portion of the range for use only during the critical period of each year. This assures ungrazed forage at that time and, if forage becomes short on the main body of the range before the reserve supply would normally be used, it helps to define advisable adjustments in the numbers of livestock.

3. A reserve of hay or other supplemental feed also provides good drought insurance. During drought the cost of harvested feeds and pasturage increases greatly and it is not sound business to wait until drought prevails before building up reserves.

4. When drought comes, the prompt marketing of steers, calves, and cull cows will minimize losses and save available forage for the closely culled breeding herd.