Cattle Guy Overgrazing Property

[Flint knapper]

You live and you learn! The only thing you can really do is to either not lease to the guy in the future, and to state in the contract how many head of beef that will be allowed on the property for a given year!

[DuramaxDude]

All depends on type of vegetation, previous management, tree/brush cover, topography, etc.

^^^^ This and rain fall!! The old "this is an X number of head per acre county" is not always the best management decision to make.

[DuramaxDude]

If he’s regularly feeding hay then he’s overstocked. If he’s overstocked then he’s depleting the resource.

^^^^ Agreed

[DuramaxDude]

I had it in Wildlife before Ag and NRCS said 15-20 acres per head is right. The rancher agrees he is overgrazing, he has flat out said he thinks he has me since I didnt limit the head count in the lease. There isnt much grass on the place at all, mainly trees and scrub brush. Appreciate the comments.

Sounds like you have your answer there.

[Take em]

I will buy the property from you for $1 and terminate the cattle lease. Then you won’t have to worry about it and the cattle will be off my land. [emoji3]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Deerguy]

You can tell not many folks know much about good livestock management on here. 10 head on 100 acres most definitely is having an impact to the resource, no question about it at all unless he is running many pastures and has a very intensive rotational strategy in place. And, that is if there are 100 grazable acres (which there probably isn't). If he's doing what most do, he's either continuously grazing it (the absolute worst grazing strategy), or at best, he's divided the place in half and grazes one side to nothing and then moves them to the other side (second worse grazing strategy). Stocking rate is not near as important as stocked density and duration in a pasture, but even at low stocking rates, the 2 grazing strategies just mentioned are very bad when considering the effects to the habitat, plant species composition change, and the overall effects to wildlife. Carrying capacity means different things to different people, and as a result there are different 'carrying capacities' for a property. True carrying capacity, the number of animals a property can carry without impacting vegetation health or causing species composition change is substantially lower than most people think. That's why its exceedingly rare now to find native stands of big bluestem, little bluestem, switchgrass, indiangrass, sideoats grama, eastern gammagrass, etc. While 10 cows can 'survive' on 100 acres, they can't do it without having an impact, which is what the OP is talking about. And, if you have to feed in the winter, you are either overgrazing to the point that you must provide the additional nutrition or you enjoy wasting money, one of the two. The entire goal of successful grazing management is to not have to provide feed at any time. Bison never walked around looking for a sack of cubes. The purpose of feeding is to intentionally carry more animals than the land will support.

[doghouse]

You can tell not many folks know much about good livestock management on here. 10 head on 100 acres most definitely is having an impact to the resource, no question about it at all unless he is running many pastures and has a very intensive rotational strategy in place. And, that is if there are 100 grazable acres (which there probably isn't). If he's doing what most do, he's either continuously grazing it (the absolute worst grazing strategy), or at best, he's divided the place in half and grazes one side to nothing and then moves them to the other side (second worse grazing strategy). Stocking rate is not near as important as stocked density and duration in a pasture, but even at low stocking rates, the 2 grazing strategies just mentioned are very bad when considering the effects to the habitat, plant species composition change, and the overall effects to wildlife. Carrying capacity means different things to different people, and as a result there are different 'carrying capacities' for a property. True carrying capacity, the number of animals a property can carry without impacting vegetation health or causing species composition change is substantially lower than most people think. That's why its exceedingly rare now to find native stands of big bluestem, little bluestem, switchgrass, indiangrass, sideoats grama, eastern gammagrass, etc. While 10 cows can 'survive' on 100 acres, they can't do it without having an impact, which is what the OP is talking about. And, if you have to feed in the winter, you are either overgrazing to the point that you must provide the additional nutrition or you enjoy wasting money, one of the two. The entire goal of successful grazing management is to not have to provide feed at any time. Bison never walked around looking for a sack of cubes. The purpose of feeding is to intentionally carry more animals than the land will support.

This is true to a point. Nearly every cattleman in Mills county has to feed hay during the winter. City folks that have bought land and not needing income run the least amount of cattle to get the Ag exemption. They have dead grass during the winter for filler, but must give them some form of protein to survive. I've seen this for years.

[dclifton]

You can tell not many folks know much about good livestock management on here. 10 head on 100 acres most definitely is having an impact to the resource, no question about it at all unless he is running many pastures and has a very intensive rotational strategy in place. And, that is if there are 100 grazable acres (which there probably isn't). If he's doing what most do, he's either continuously grazing it (the absolute worst grazing strategy), or at best, he's divided the place in half and grazes one side to nothing and then moves them to the other side (second worse grazing strategy). Stocking rate is not near as important as stocked density and duration in a pasture, but even at low stocking rates, the 2 grazing strategies just mentioned are very bad when considering the effects to the habitat, plant species composition change, and the overall effects to wildlife. Carrying capacity means different things to different people, and as a result there are different 'carrying capacities' for a property. True carrying capacity, the number of animals a property can carry without impacting vegetation health or causing species composition change is substantially lower than most people think. That's why its exceedingly rare now to find native stands of big bluestem, little bluestem, switchgrass, indiangrass, sideoats grama, eastern gammagrass, etc. While 10 cows can 'survive' on 100 acres, they can't do it without having an impact, which is what the OP is talking about. And, if you have to feed in the winter, you are either overgrazing to the point that you must provide the additional nutrition or you enjoy wasting money, one of the two. The entire goal of successful grazing management is to not have to provide feed at any time. Bison never walked around looking for a sack of cubes. The purpose of feeding is to intentionally carry more animals than the land will support.

I agree with what your saying. It sounds great on paper. But very few would be in the cattle business any more if this was the case. Price of land and profit on cattle simply don’t pay the way anymore.

Our point is I’m sure they may be degrading his property now that we know how little is grazable. Which leads us to the point of the land doesn’t even seem worth the ranchers time.

Plus a lot of us over here in east texas want cattle to clean out brush etc.
that being said we primarily have costal and bahaia over here. So little different then most traditional native grasses.

LO squirrel you may want to consider going back to wildlife exemption. Since place doesn’t sound like it’s feasible to be grazed.

[dclifton]

This is true to a point. Nearly every cattleman in Mills county has to feed hay during the winter. City folks that have bought land and not needing income run the least amount of cattle to get the Ag exemption. They have dead grass during the winter for filler, but must give them some form of protein to survive. I've seen this for years.

Just about everyone I’ve ever talked to that’s actually in the cattle business and not just a hobby feed hay. I’m sure it’s the same for you to.

[tps7742]

I have noticed the farmers around here have been feeding hay for a few weeks in my area already.

[JeffK]

How much are you charging him per acre? If you want less cows out there, you should offer a lower lease amount. It wouldn’t be worth buying a bull to run on only 4 cow.

NRCS does not have to worry about breaking even.

[rut-ro]

I would not cut water off. Even though the are his cattle it’s your land and you could face liability for animal neglect if attorneys were to get involved. Sounds like this will be a lesson learned for future contracts.

[miket]

This is true to a point. Nearly every cattleman in Mills county has to feed hay during the winter. City folks that have bought land and not needing income run the least amount of cattle to get the Ag exemption. They have dead grass during the winter for filler, but must give them some form of protein to survive. I've seen this for years.

Im not a cattleman, but there is a difference between a bison surviving the winter and a cow you are trying to put weight on. Dead winter grass is not near as nutritious as hay.

In the end it seems just to be about the math. Should you have enough grass in the winter for them to survive? Sure seems so, should you feed hay to gain/maintain weight? Depending on hay cost, sure seems so.

[retrieverman]

Its 100 acres and right now its 9 heifers, and 1 bull, but he just sold off I think 8 calves. Its an older guy so I am compassionate to an extent, but I think that effects his thoughts on future leasing opportunities. I have documented correspondence, just looking for what levers I can pull. I thought the water was pretty reasonable (there is still a large tank) versus say taking my gates off for repairs.

Something here isn’t adding up. I have 15 head on 50 acres with grass to spare during the growing season. I’m feeding hay now, but I still have standing grass over 10 inches.

Shutting off water and draining ponds is a chicken sh*t move.

There’s much more to this story that’s not being told.

[Dusty Britches]

Does the contract state that the stocking rates must be kept at appropriate levels to prevent over or under use? If so, send him a ceast and desist order and eviction notice.

Also, for future information on land lease and grazing contracts, research this site: https://agrilife.org/texasaglaw/home/

Tiffany has a whole section and book on land leases that will help you a whole bunch in the future. She may be able to provide a list of land lease attorneys, too. They cannot recommend any specific one but they can provide a list.