Missouri Forage and Grassland Council 2000 Annual Meeting October 30-31, 2000 Lake Ozark Holiday Inn, Lake Ozark, Missouri

The first action after leasing the Coffey ranch was establishing a three-part goal. The quality of life goals centered on using the ranch as a learning opportunity for the people involved with the ranch operation and as a demonstration to neighbors near and far. The ranch’s three-part goal fits within the goals of the Noble Foundation (NF) to reach people through field days, tours, and publications of lessons learned from research and demonstration projects. The ranch resources fit production goals of livestock and wildlife. Timber harvesting and mining are carried out on a very limited scale.

Landscape goals were established to increase the number of desirable plant species and plant diversity that would increase livestock carrying capacity and wildlife habitat. Historically, the Coffey ranch had been overgrazed as a result of continuous grazing for many years prior to the Noble foundation leasing the property. Some areas that had not been grazed on the backside of the ranch and were far away from water points had a severe problem of brush encroachment. Other areas of the ranch were planted to annual crops at one time. These areas were allowed to “go back” to native species, predominantly low-seral herbaceous plants. Sheet and gully erosion was a problem in these “go back” fields.

The HRM management philosophy is to make decisions by analyzing information through an HRM model. The end result is to establish ecological, economic and social soundness in ranch management. The resources of people, finances and a landbase are set in motion by a three-part goal. This was tough for us from an HRM prospective in that the NF is a nonprofit institution. We appropriated dollars from an annual NF operating budget, not dollars generated from the ranch. This allowed us to create water points and to establish fences, which not have been possible earlier on from an annual cash flow from the ranch. This, however, let us use the biological management tools as out lined in the model (fire, rest, grazing animal impact, and herd effect) to learn about them and demonstrate their usefulness as management tools. Our first ten years on the Coffey ranch is not about using the model in total ranch management, but is about using the biological management tools to make changes in plant succession toward our landscape goals.

Initially, the ranch was divided into 18 main pastures. Further subdivisions have been made over the years so that some pastures now have multiple sub-pastures or paddocks. This allows the use of grazing as a management tool based on time control, stock density, and proper plant rest periods. Recently, we began to seed some desirable native plants in to specific paddocks.

We monitored the application of management tools and related them to changes in productivity as measured by grazing days per paddock and the stocking rate/carrying capacity of livestock and wildlife on the ranch. The changes have been dramatic. We have collected various biological data since the beginning of the lease. The impact of management on a few activities on the Coffey Ranch during the first 10 years of operation by the Noble Foundation follows in these brief summaries.

The mid-seral group rapidly increased and outnumbered the low-seral group by the end of the third year. It was after the fourth year that the high-seral group began an upward trend. Twenty-six different species were recorded the first year of monitoring. Currently, more than 90 species are being recorded, verifying a dramatic increase in plant diversity since 1988. Every year we took photographs on the same date at the same location in each transect. Ragweed was the dominant plant of the low-seral species component in 1987 (Figure 2). Figure 3 shows the same area in 1996 dominated by mid-seral species.

Seed hot spots
The number of high-seral species measured in the five transacts was 5 percent at the beginning in 1987. A lot of area on the ranch and particularly "go back" field areas were void of any high-seral grass species. Species that were recorded were mostly forbs. This raised the question, is the natural soil seed bank void of these species? To answer this question, fifteen seed hot spots were established at random in several paddocks on the ranch. Seeds of big bluestem, little bluestem, switchgrass, Eastern gammagrass, sideoats gramma and johnsongrass were planted in 50-foot diameter areas.

Figures 4 and 5 show before planting the seed hot spot and afterwards, the plants of high-seral species that established from the spot. We got a similar response in all fifteen hot spots. This told us that, yes; the natural seed bank was void of high-seral species. By planting seed in some areas, this could accelerate the rate of succession to a higher level.

After seeing the results from the seed hot spots, then the question is, is there enough difference in production to warrant the cost of the seed? This led to planting P12 to the above seed mix in 1992.

Paddock 2, a test of Stock Density (SD)
Paddock 2 was divided in 1988 into three levels of stock density (SD) and replicated three times, making a total of nine paddocks. SD is measured by the number of head per acre or pounds of live weight per acre in a paddock at a given point in time. We used pounds of live weight per acre because the herd involved both cows and their calves. The three levels of SD were 5,000, 10,000 and 20,000 pounds per acre. Why these three levels? We wanted to look at higher levels and its influence on plant succession and hoped to find an optimum level for the ranch. The remaining paddocks ranged from less than 5,000 pounds (P6) down to less than 400 pounds per acre (P15).

We found that all three treatments provided better grazing distribution across a paddock. A higher level of SD is a good way to impact low-seral plants that you don’t want in the landscape. Grazing pressure easily influences shallow rooted plants. There is a short window of time in early spring when low-seral plants are most palatable to cattle. It is at this time, when grazing can be abusive, that pressure should be placed on plants that otherwise under low stock density do not get grazed.

We did not find any differences between the 5,000 pounds, 10,000 pounds and 20,000 pounds on changes in plant composition. Plant composition changed from low- seral to mid-seral plants in all three treatments. A higher level of SD will increase the harvest efficiency of plants. The number of animal days per acre was in favor of the higher level of SD.

Figure 6 is an aerial photograph that shows a fence line contrast between a high level of SD (A), a non-grazed strip (B), and a paddock grazed at a lower SD (C). In the A area, plants are predominately mid seral where as in the B and C area, plants are low seral.

As a result of the higher SD in Paddock 2, other larger paddocks on the ranch were subdivided to increase SD to the 8,000- to 10,000-pound level. Increasing SD does increase the need for monitoring cattle and the amount of labor to move them more often.

Total Animal Unit Days (AUDs) of Grazing
Total AUDs of grazing has been the standard we use to measure forage harvested on the Coffey Ranch. An AUD is the amount of forage that a 1,000-pound cow will consume in a day. One AUD usually equals about 30 pounds of dry forage. Grazing and feeding records have been taken for each paddock since the initiation of this study. These records are summarized for native range and bermudagrass, as well as lanes and traps.

Figure 7 illustrates the total AUDs of grazing for each year. The total AUDs are charted as AUDs from (1) native range, (2) bermudagrass paddocks, traps, and lanes, and (3) actual bermudagrass hay production. As Figure 7 demonstrates, total AUDs have increased over time. The most noticeable increase is from the native range paddocks. In the initial year, 1988, approximately 10,500 AUDs were harvested on the native range. The last full year of data, 1996, shows that more than 35,500 AUDs were accumulated on the same area. This is a threefold increase in the amount of forage grazed by livestock. We attribute this improvement to increased forage production as a result of changes in plant composition through better grazing management.

Although the herbaceous plant community has yet to reach the desired high-seral state, there has been a dramatic increase in vegetative production. The primary grazing management tool administered was the implementation of the HRM-type rotational grazing method. By developing a series of paddocks and controlling grazing and rest periods, the herbaceous plant communities have begun shifting to more productive, desirable species.

Paddock 12
Paddock 12 was formed in 1992 by separating it from Pasture 11. P11 formed a large grazing paddock with about 42 grazeable acres, and P12 became a paddock with about 18 grazeable acres. In 1992, P12 was broadcast-seeded with a mixture of high-seral plants, including big bluestem, little bluestem, indiangrass, sideoats gramma, switchgrass, johnsongrass, and Eastern gamagrass. We found in previous demonstrations that the area was void of seed of high-seral plants. In 1995, a noticeable number of high-seral plants emerged in P12. Those were mostly Eastern gamagrass with some johnsongrass and switchgrass. We also observed a few plants of big bluestem, little bluestem, indiangrass, and sideoats grama.

In 1991 after it was fenced separately, P12 responded immediately to the higher stock density. In 1997, P12 accumulated 92 AUDs per acre of grazing, primarily due to the establishment of Eastern gamagrass. A photo of P12 (Figure 9) was taken in the spring of 1997 to illustrate the proliferation of Eastern gamagrass.

We estimate that cattle consume half of the dry matter produced in a given paddock. In 1988, P12 produced about 660 pounds dry matter per acre. In 1997, P12 accumulated about 5,000 pounds of dry matter per acre.

Stocking Rates
The initial stocking rate was developed from a resource inventory performed in 1987 and was established at 110 animal units (AUs). The stocking rate increased to more than 250 AUs in 1994 (Figure 10). As the stocking rate increased, the cow herd increased, but not as rapidly. Stocker cattle were used during the growing seasons through 1994 to utilize forage in several pastures in controlled grazing studies. We quit using stocker cattle in 1995. Only the cow herd (including replacement females and herd bulls) has been maintained on the ranch since.