permaculture

[Mark <mpludwig@facstaff.wisc.edu>]

At 07:40 AM 8/2/02 -0500, you wrote:
> Hi Mark,
>
> >>  I find this post, while interesting, peripheral to the current tension
> between those who would manage for grass and those who would manage for
> trees.  <<
>
> When one considers that grassland ecologists and ranchers often take
> historical accounts out of context (e.g. looking back only 100 years rather
> than say 200 years) in order to justify clearing the woods and torching the
> land I don't see how clearing up this historical misunderstanding is
> peripheral.

I guess I can agree that history is misused for many political purposes and 
leave it at that.

> >>  Obviously they both have value, but a strong case can be made  in
> grazing situations to keep trees very limited.  <<
>
> As well, a strong case can be made to use trees extensively in a grazing
> system.  There are farmers' trees, mostly legumes such as acacia, locust and
> mesquite, which offer a dappled shade and sugar rich seed pods throughout
> the summer.  This source of sugar and protein (via the seed pods) is
> essential for digestion late in the summer when most grasses are nothing but
> dried up cellulose and livestock need the extra sugar for fermentation in
> their ruminant gut.  The dappled shade allows grass production right up to
> the trunk of the tree.

I have yet to see the honey locust thing really work yet, though I think 
it's got potential.  My guess is were going to find turkeys or maybe a mix 
of large grazers to chew the pods and birds to pick through the manure for 
the seeds will utilize it best.  The seeds are so damn hard I think birds 
or mills will have to grind them.   Maybe in TX the fall grass is 
poor.  Not the case in the cooler upper midwest where the c3 grasses put on 
a push of fall growth and quality.  High summer tends to be our slump, c4 
grasses may fill that niche best.

> Thirty farmers' trees per acre is quite conventional in many countries where
> chemical fertilizers and round bailing aren't available.  This ratio of
> trees per acre is just enough to ensure a return of minerals, nitrogen and
> other essential nutrients and enzymes to the upper levels of the soil.

And it gets spread better than manure that is deposited in patches.  I 
really like the locust's and acacia's tiny leaves for this reason

> Wooded hill tops are also essential for shading livestock, and giving them a
> breezy place where the bighting insects are not so thick.  Shaded hill tops
> are also key birthing sites.

Very true.  Places like this are essential for livestock farms.

> >>  Trees tend to attract animals into the shade in the hot parts of the
> day, limiting their grazing time and concentrating manure, often killing the
> trees.  <<
>
> Sounds like this scenario would make a tree cutting aggie happy.  "We don't
> have to worry about kill'n them trees, 'cause the cattle'l do it for us."
> Oh right, but then the dead limbs will get caught in the throat of the
> bailer.  But I see that your point is that you would rather provide no shade
> for livestock in order to force them further out into their pastures.

bingo.  Most of the farm probably should be pretty open.  Waterlines really 
help with the heat issues, as does good genetic stock;  Jerseys and Zebu 
cross are excellent.

>  Why
> not use reverse psychology on the poor beasts and lure them to other parts
> of the paddock with other mottes of trees?  Ah, once again, though, we're
> managing the landscape in order to accommodate machinery and economics and
> it would be difficult to have to steer around a motte of trees.

Rows are OK.  As I have said to others, there sometimes is no good 
substitute for a large piece of roaring iron to get the job dome.

> >>  When we try to influence the way this land is treated the economics have
> to work.  <<
>
> Right, and in Texas, I would venture to say that many, many ranchers east
> and south of the central US plains and north of the coastal plains are
> mainly hobby ranchers allowing their livestock to lackadaisically graze (an
> Alan Savory term) primarily in order to obtain their 1-d-1 Ag tax exemption.
> Fortunately, the state has a new 1-d-1 Wildlife tax exemption that finally
> gives folks more options than hay and livestock production, so maybe we can
> start to get away from managing the land simply from an economics approach.
>
>
> Kirby Fry

I'd call it a toss up around here for what works better, well managed 
cattle grazing, burn happy prairie fetishists, gun toteing quality deer 
management Joe bobs or tree farmers.  They all have the place in my book.



Mark P. Ludwig
Poultry Research Lab
University of Wisconsin -Madison
608-262-1730 WK
608-846-7125 HM