Tag: grazing animal manure

Posted on

Efficient Utilization of Equine Manure

Waste to Worth: Spreading science and solutions logoWaste to Worth home | More proceedings….

Abstract

South Carolina is home to an estimated 18,000 horse owners, many of which own or house less than ten horses on their property.  Owners of such small facilities regularly obtain assistance from the Clemson Extension service concerning soil fertility, forage options, and in some cases nutrient testing, but there is very little information available concerning efficient utilization of the manure produced from their facility. In many cases the manure and bedding removed from stalls is viewed as something to be disposed of rather than a possible nutrient source than can be utilized with proper management.  This presentation provides an overview of horse manure production and nutrient content for the small horse facility owner, and addresses the best management techniques to utilize produced manure, including the benefits of composting the manure before utilization.

Purpose

South Carolina is home to an estimated 18,000 horse owners, many of which own or house less than ten horses on their property.  Owners of such small facilities regularly obtain assistance from the Clemson Extension service concerning soil fertility, forage options, and in some cases nutrient testing, but there is very little information available concerning efficient utilization of the manure produced from their facility. In many cases the manure and bedding removed from stalls is viewed as something to be disposed of rather than a possible nutrient source than can be utilized with proper management.

What Did We Do?

Several County Extension agents offer multi-week Equine Management seminars covering a range of topics primarily for the horse owner with a small number of horses.  We added a segment on horse manure production and utilization, developing a presentation detailing the manure production amounts and nutrient content of typical horse manure, and best management strategies for utilizing that manure.

What Have We Learned?

This presentation has been provided to four Equine Management Seminars to date.  In each case the horse owners were surprised in the lack of immediate availability of nitrogen in the manure, and were glad to learn of methods that provide sustainable uses for their horse manure while also helping to minimize potential disease issues and other impacts.  They also mentioned that they now view the manure as a resource, not as “something to be dealt with.”

Future Plans

We plan to offer this training during future Equine Management seminars and as a single-event program.

Authors

W. Bryan Smith, M.S., Area Extension Agent – Agricultural Engineer, Clemson Cooperative Extension Service, wsmth@clemson.edu

John P. Chastain, Ph.D., Professor and Extension Agricultural Engineer, Clemson University
Gary L. Heusner, Ph.D., Professor and Extension Specialist, University of Georgia

Additional Information

The South Carolina Confined Animal Manure Manager website – http://www.clemson.edu/camm

The authors are solely responsible for the content of these proceedings. The technical information does not necessarily reflect the official position of the sponsoring agencies or institutions represented by planning committee members, and inclusion and distribution herein does not constitute an endorsement of views expressed by the same. Printed materials included herein are not refereed publications. Citations should appear as follows. EXAMPLE: Authors. 2013. Title of presentation. Waste to Worth: Spreading Science and Solutions. Denver, CO. April 1-5, 2013. URL of this page. Accessed on: today’s date.   

Posted on

Design, Hydrologic Performance, and Effluent Characteristics Of A Woodchip Heavy-Use Area With Subsurface Drainage For Wintering Beef Cattle

Waste to Worth: Spreading science and solutions logoWaste to Worth home | More proceedings….

Abstract

Benefits to cattle welfare and pasture condition from wintering or confining animals on woodchip heavy use areas have been reported elsewhere in the world, but no known installations of this Best Management Practice have occurred in the United States.  Furthermore, increasing environmental concern and regulatory scrutiny of winter feeding areas and other heavy use areas demand improved management of nutrient-laden runoff.  A pilot study was initiated to evaluate the environmental impact of such a woodchip heavy use area as a winter herd management method for a pasture-based beef operation in northern West Virginia.  A dosed vegetative treatment system was installed to treat drainage effluent.  Effluent volume was recorded and nutrient concentrations were monitored during three years of winter stocking.  Measured data and hydrologic performance of this system was used for a comparison to runoff and nutrient loadings from other types of open-lot systems.  While a degree of pollutant reduction and retention occurred during percolation through the woodchip media, low-cost control of effluent from such systems remains a challenge, as in similar open-lot situations.  Woodchip heavy use area and drainage system design specifications are also reported with adjusted design recommendations.  Results indicate what the potential for expanded application of these systems is and offer a baseline for continuing research of this relatively unexplored technology in the region and elsewhere.

Authors

Joshua  Faulkner, West Virginia University   jwfaulkner@mail.wvu.edu

John Miller, West Virginia University, Thomas Basden, West Virginia University

 

The authors are solely responsible for the content of these proceedings. The technical information does not necessarily reflect the official position of the sponsoring agencies or institutions represented by planning committee members, and inclusion and distribution herein does not constitute an endorsement of views expressed by the same. Printed materials included herein are not refereed publications. Citations should appear as follows. EXAMPLE: Authors. 2013. Title of presentation. Waste to Worth: Spreading Science and Solutions. Denver, CO. April 1-5, 2013. URL of this page. Accessed on: today’s date.

Posted on

Managing Creek Pastures for Improved Water Quality

Waste to Worth: Spreading science and solutions logoWaste to Worth home | More proceedings….

Abstract

Runoff of E. coli and other fecal indicator bacteria from grazing lands has been identified as a significant source of bacterial contamination in need of reductions to improve water quality. Improved management of creek pastures and implementation of on-farm best management practices to address these bacterial issues is critical to the success of watershed restoration efforts. To address this, the impacts of grazing management and providing alternative off-stream water in creek pastures were evaluated to assess their effectiveness for reducing E. coli loading.

Study results showed that there was no difference in runoff E. coli concentrations from ungrazed, properly grazed and heavily grazed pastures and no correlation between stocking rate and E. coli concentrations. It is suspected that the observed rapid decline in E. coli concentrations following rotation and significant contributions by wildlife resulted in this lack of correlation. However, rotational grazing, when timed appropriately, was found to be a very effective practice for reducing E. coli concentrations in runoff. As a result of these findings, it was recommended that, where feasible, creek pastures and other hydrologically connected pastures be grazed during periods when runoff is less likely and that upland sites be grazed during rainy seasons when runoff is more likely to occur.

The study also found that when alternative off-stream water was provided, cattle spent 43% less time in the creek. Despite this significant reduction in the amount of time cattle spent in the creek, the study was not able to document statistically significant E. coli loading reductions from providing alternative water. Nevertheless, providing off-stream water in creek pastures was highly recommended practice for improving water quality due to the reduction in the amount of time cattle spend in the creek documented by this study and the finding of other studies demonstrating reductions in sediment, nutrients and bacteria.

Authors

Kevin Wagner, Texas Water Resources Institute, Texas A&M University                klwagner@ag.tamu.edu

Terry Gentry, Ph.D., Texas A&M University, Soil and Crop Sciences Department; Larry Redmon, Ph.D., Texas A&M University, Soil and Crop Sciences Department; R. Daren Harmel, Ph.D., USDA-ARS, Grassland Soil and Water Research Laboratory; Jamie Foster, Ph.D., Texas A&M University, Soil and Crop Sciences Department; Robert Knight, Ph.D., Texas A&M University, Ecosystem Science and Management Department; C. Allan Jones, Texas A&M University, Spatial Sciences Laboratory

The authors are solely responsible for the content of these proceedings. The technical information does not necessarily reflect the official position of the sponsoring agencies or institutions represented by planning committee members, and inclusion and distribution herein does not constitute an endorsement of views expressed by the same. Printed materials included herein are not refereed publications. Citations should appear as follows. EXAMPLE: Authors. 2013. Title of presentation. Waste to Worth: Spreading Science and Solutions. Denver, CO. April 1-5, 2013. URL of this page. Accessed on: today’s date.

Posted on

Feeding Cattle Without the Feedlot

Waste to Worth: Spreading science and solutions logoWaste to Worth home | More proceedings….

Abstract

Typically cattle producers can have improved animal performance through controlled systems such as an open lot feedlot.  Open lots provide for improved control of diet, health, and monitoring of activity of the animals.  Feeding areas such as these also can have disadvantages such as solid manure accumulation,  surface water contamination when runoff water is uncontrolled, such systems are labor and machine intensive, and can contribute herd health issues because of high stocking densities, dust, or mud.  Forage based grazing can negate many of these issues and is arguably more sustainable and environmentally friendly.  However intensive grazing strategies must be employed to obtain comparable productivity.  Development of technology that allows for these benefits is needed.  Cross fencing and rotational grazing practices would benefit from more flexible and less labor intensive ways of controlling the grazing area.

Figure 1. Calves waiting for new windrows of oats.

A device has been developed by UNL Extension that adapts a center pivot irrigation system into a moveable fence by placing the fence on the center pivot structure. Livestock producers can move anywhere from several hundred to several thousand feet of fence by simply moving the center pivot (while not irrigating).  Swath grazing, forage grazing, or crop residue grazing can be accomplished more efficiently by only allowing minimal access to the forage.  Essentially moving the animals to the feed rather than bringing the feed to the animals.  Advancing a cross fence periodically not improves the grazing efficiency, but it encourages a natural spread of manure and gives the producer more control of remaining crop residue, a necessary requirement to maintain pasture status and avoid the Animal Feeding Operation designation.  The device was tested on working farms over a two year period and improved profitability and minimized environmental impact compared to the operator’s previous practices.

Can Intensive Forage Grazing Be Profitable?

The project started from a request for some alternatives to help reduce the cost of gain for feeder calves in 2010.  Eliminating the forage activities of baling / stacking, transporting, grinding, feeding and also the spreading of manure can significantly reduce labor and equipment expenses.    Keeping feeder calves in a grazing operation instead of concentrated feeding operation has the potential to minimize surface water contamination.  The health and welfare of the calf can be improved by having a lower stock density, larger area for exercise, and with crop residue a reduced impact of dusty or muddy conditions.  Forage based grazing is arguably more sustainable and environmentally friendly than concentrated feeding areas.  However intensive grazing strategies must be employed to obtain comparable productivity.  Development of technology that allows for these benefits is necessary.  Cross fencing and rotational grazing practices would benefit from more flexible and less labor intensive ways of controlling the grazing area.

Figure 2. Calves grazing standing oats.

What Did We Do?

The project was focused for fall / winter grazing opportunities for newly weaned spring born calves of the semi-arid region of western Nebraska.  A successful grazing operation of windrowed or standing forage will have to include a method of controlling daily forage intake through cross fencing( Figures 1 & 2).  This would reduce waste and give the producer a feedlot like control of dry matter intake so a desired daily gain could be achieved.  Current portable fencing has to be manually installed and moved which is labor intensive especially in frozen soils.  A new development in portable fencing was developed by UNL Biological Systems Engineering that a device attaches to a center pivot and properly suspends an electrified wire under tension.  This gives the producer a portable cross fence (1,300 ft) that can be moved by the center pivot’s control panel or wirelessly with a computer.

In the fall of 2011 and 2012, four grazing programs were developed to demonstrate this new cross fence.  Two were fall planted oats and two were grazed corn stalk residues.  The fall oats were grazed as a standing forage and also as a windrow.  The corn stalk residue was grazed in a manner to minimize the overgrazing of downed corn ears and reduce the protein supplement.

What Have We Learned?

The projects demonstrated that calves can be successfully maintained in theses grazing systems.   The management and the relocations of the cross fence was done easily done though the center pivot’s control panel (average time of 15 minutes).  The

Figure 3. Natural manure distribution.

forage quality of the windrowed oats maintained its quality throughout the 105 (fall 2011) and the 120 (fall 2012) day grazing period.  In 2011 the oat forage deteriorated only 17% in crude protein and 14% in total digestible nutrients.  In 2012 the oat forage deteriorated only 2% in crude protein and 3% in total digestible nutrients.  Cost savings in the fall oat grazing are reported at$7,268.85 total or $28.70 / ton grazed ($22.16 per head) for 105 days in the 2011 trial.  In the 2012 trial the savings were a total of $4,625.60 or $29.50 / ton ($25.70 per head) for a 120 day trial.  The cost savings for the corn stalk residue weren’t measured.  The project only demonstrated the control of grain intake in the calves or cow, which it accomplished.  The manure was naturally spread throughout the fields and the cattle health and welfare was maintained (Figure 3).

Future Plans

A future plan is being developed to continue to demonstrate the ability to control dietary intake of calves or cows on irrigated forages.  With a portable and mechanically moveable cross fence the conveniences of a concentrated feeding operation can be placed into a grazing operation in large scale.

Authors

Jason Gross, Engineering Tech, UNL Extension, jgross3@unl.edu

Additional Information

http://water.unl.edu/web/manure/small-afos

The authors are solely responsible for the content of these proceedings. The technical information does not necessarily reflect the official position of the sponsoring agencies or institutions represented by planning committee members, and inclusion and distribution herein does not constitute an endorsement of views expressed by the same. Printed materials included herein are not refereed publications. Citations should appear as follows. EXAMPLE: Authors. 2013. Title of presentation. Waste to Worth: Spreading Science and Solutions. Denver, CO. April 1-5, 2013. URL of this page. Accessed on: today’s date.

Posted on

Pasture Management on Horse Farms

Proper pasture management is important to holistic farm management. Grazing animals deposit manure on pastures and exercise areas. This manure ultimately will either be incorporated into the pasture soil or if the pasture is poorly vegetated it may be a runoff risk. So, the first principle of managing manure with grazing animals is to ensure productive pastures. Productive pastures will reduce the risks of manure runoff by providing ground cover that will prevent soil erosion. These pastures will also take up nutrients from manure and use them for crop growth. Less productive pastures will not do this. ( ABC’s of Pasture Grazing) ( Spanish Language Version)

What Makes a Pasture Productive?

What are some elements of productive pasture management? Proper soil health and fertility will ensure a good growth environment for pasture species, both forage and legume. Manure can help to improve and maintain soil fertility by providing needed nutrients, (N, P, and K) and organic matter. These nutrients will help promote growth of grasses and legumes while organic matter from manure will help to provide soil structure, protection against erosion and improve natural soil fertility. Choosing the appropriate grass and legume species will help optimize forage management and pasture growth. (see More Equine Pasture Management Materials)

Pasture rotation is also practiced in order to optimize plant growth and utilization by grazing vegetation at the proper heights and allowing for proper rest and regrowth. Activities such as brush hogging or clipping, dragging to break up manure clumps, fertilizing and over seeding are also necessary components of pasture forage management.

Lush, well-managed pastures such as the one above will take up more nutrients from manure, be more productive and permit a greater stocking density, and will present a lower risk of agricultural runoff polluting streams and water bodies. (Photo courtesy USDA NRCS)


Sacrifice Areas

Exercise or sacrifice areas are designated locations for feeding, watering, exercise and relaxation for times when pastures are not accessible due to lack of growth (winter or drought), flooding, etc. (see Exercise or Sacrifice Lots for Horses) Generally, these areas have little or no vegetation. It is important that manure not be spread in these areas. They are meant to be sacrificed for animal activities in order to protect the remaining pastures. Runoff from sacrifice areas should also be managed to reduce the risk of water pollution caused by sediment and nutrients from these areas.

Erosion

Erosion is a problem for several reasons. First, nutrients attach to soil particles. When they wash away, the Phosphorus causes algae blooms in freshwater. When that algae dies, oxygen in the water adheres to it, producing a lack of oxygen in the water for fish and other aquatic life. The sediment from erosion also covers nesting habitat for aquatic life and reduces visibility for desirable sport fish like walleye. Lastly, the runoff can contain bacteria from the manure that can be harmful to people downstream.

Erosion problems on small farms are often different than large farms. On large farms, most erosion may be sheet or rill erosion running off large fields. On smaller farms, erosion may more often be a gully where animals cross a stream. Or it could be poorly vegetated pastures that provide poor ground cover during precipitation. Fencing, watering and feeding sites, presence or absence of field buffers, and stream crossings can all influence erosion on a small livestock farm.

pasture

CC2.5 LPELC

This pasture management section provides information about proper pasture management in order to reduce water quality, manure runoff and soil erosion risks that may be associated with poor pastures. The following links provide more specific information:

More on Horse Manure Management

Author: Michael Westendorf, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey

Posted on

Research Summary: Improving Pasture and Hay-ground with Low-disturbance, Manure Slurry-enriched Seeding

Research Purpose

Many dairy producers in the Great Lakes Region have abandoned year-around confinement feeding and have adopted a form of managed grazing where cattle are on pasture during the growing season and housed during the winter months. Pasture land is often nutrient deficient because crop nutrients are removed in harvested hay early in the growing season when forage supply exceeds grazing demand. Thinning stands are often a problem on a grazing farm, particularly after a dry summer when over-grazing occurs.

The objective of this work was to develop and evaluate a process whereby forage Brassica, grass and legume seed was carried in nutrient rich manure slurry to seeding micro-sites in small grain stubble or established pasture and hay ground. This shallow mixing of the seed-laden slurry increased the species richness, yield and quality of hay and grassland, extended the grazing season, and provided a more complete, balanced feed for grazing stock.

Activities

Slurry seeding was done with a commercially available slurry tanker (3000 gal) equipped with a rear-mounted rolling-tine aerator (Aer-Way) and a SSD (sub-surface deposition) slurry distribution system. The rolling-tine aerator was ground-driven with 8-inch tines on a rotating shaft with 7½ inch spacing between each set of tines. The angle of the rotating shaft was adjustable in 2.5º increments from 0º to 10º degrees relative to the direction of travel. The 0º gang angle provided little soil disturbance while the 10º gang angle provided the most soil loosening.

Seed was mixed directly in the spreader tank and applied with the manure slurry.

Slurry-seeding involved mixing seed in the slurry tank and passing the seed-laden slurry through a rotating chopper/distributor and then through drop tubes to the fractured and loosened soil behind each set of rolling tines. Excess PTO pump capacity provides bypass flow for seed mixing and distribution. Slurry rate calibration is based on tractor engine RPM, travel speed, machine width, and slurry flow rate. A 150 PTO-hp tractor or larger was needed to draw the slurry tank and aeration tool.

Forage rape (Barkant, 6 lb/ac), forage turnip (Pasja, 6 lb/ac), brown mid-rib sorghum-sudan (Sudex, 30 lb/ac) and common oats (64 lb/ac) were sown in untilled wheat stubble on a Capac sandy loam soil on 8 August. Two seeding methods were used: 1) conservation tillage with two passes of a combination tillage tool (12 ft Kongskilde Triple-K, 3-inch tillage depth), and 2) slurry seeding with aeration tillage and seed-laden swine slurry (10 gang angle, 6,000 gal/ac). Fifty lb/ac N as urea was applied to the tilled-and-drilled plots before tillage and planting. No commercial N was applied to the slurry-seeded plots. The sudex and oats were harvested on 21 October and the rape and turnip on 27 October.

Orchard grass (12 lb/ac) and Medium Red Clover (10 lb/ac) were sown in an established brome grass sod using frost, no-till and slurry seeding methods. Frost seedings were done in March. On August 24, the brome grass in one-half of each plot was suppressed with Paraquat dichloride to reduce competition from the existing stand for sunlight and moisture. On August 31, seedings were no-till drilled (Great Plains drill) or slurry seeded (2.5 º gang angle) with 6,000 gal/ac swine manure. No commercial fertilizer was applied to the non-manured plots. Forage yield and quality were evaluated.

What We Have Learned

Slurry seeding late season forages after wheat

The weather was hot and dry in August. The tilled-and-drilled oat stand (43 plants/ft-sq) was significantly greater than the manure slurry-seeded oat stand (24 plants/ft-sq), but there was no difference between the till-and-drilled and slurry-seeded forage rape, forage turnip or sudex stands. Sudex did not establish well with either seeding method. Forage rape and forage turnip yielded greater than sorghum-sudan and oats, but there were no significant differences within a crop due to the seeding method.

Figure 1. Yield of late season grazing crops seeded with swine slurry in untilled wheat ground. Contributed to eXtension cc2.5

Slurry seeding forages in hay ground

Forage yield and quality parameters are under evaluation. Based on preliminary observations:

  • No-till and slurry seeding of red clover in a brome grass sod was more effective than frost seeding in increasing biomass yield and botanical diversity.
  • No-till and slurry seeding of orchard grass in brome grass sod increased botanical diversity but had little effect on biomass yield after the initial N boost. Frost seeding orchard grass had little effect on botanical diversity.
  • The use of a pre-plant burn-down tended to increase weed biomass.
  • The use of a pre-plant burn-down enhanced the inter-seeding of orchard grass, but it did not enhance the stand of red clover.

Forage dry matter yield, Cut 1 2007.

Why is This Important?

Manure slurry-enriched micro-site seeding is an innovative process that combines low disturbance aeration tillage, manure slurry application and the seeding of cover crops in one efficient operation. Manure nutrients collected throughout the winter can be used to meet the nutrient needs of hay and pasture crops but concerns regarding the effect of manure on pasture productivity limit its use. When applied to pasture and hay crop restoration this new process will increase botanical diversity, yield and quality, and provide a more complete, balanced feed for grazing stock. A more complete integration of pasture and manure nutrient management in grass-based systems offers an opportunity to expand the land base for manure application, minimize manure transport costs, improve on-farm nutrient recycling, and improve forage quality and farm profitability.

For More Information

Contact Tim Harrigan, harriga1@msu.edu or 517.353.0767. For more information refer to the following article: Harrigan, T.M., D.R. Mutch and S.S. Snapp. 2006. Slurry-Enriched Seeding of Biosuppressive Covers. Applied Engineering in Agriculture 22(6):827-834.

By Tim Harrigan and Rich Leep, Michigan State University

This report was prepared for the 2008 annual meeting of the regional research committee, S-1032 “Animal Manure and Waste Utilization, Treatment and Nuisance Avoidance for a Sustainable Agriculture”. This report is not peer-reviewed and the author has sole responsibility for the content.

Posted on

Pasture Management on Small Farms

Proper pasture management is important to holistic farm management. Grazing animals deposit manure on pastures and exercise areas. This manure ultimately will either be incorporated into the pasture soil or if the pasture is poorly vegetated it may be a runoff risk. So, the first principle of managing manure with grazing animals is to ensure productive pastures. Productive pastures will reduce the risks of manure runoff by providing ground cover that will prevent soil erosion. These pastures will also take up nutrients from manure and use them for crop growth. Less productive pastures will not do this. ( ABC’s of Pasture Grazing) ( Spanish Language Version)

What Makes a Pasture Productive?

What are some elements of productive pasture management? Proper soil health and fertility will ensure a good growth environment for pasture species, both forage and legume. Manure can help to improve and maintain soil fertility by providing needed nutrients, (N, P, and K) and organic matter. These nutrients will help promote growth of grasses and legumes while organic matter from manure will help to provide soil structure, protection against erosion and improve natural soil fertility. Choosing the appropriate grass and legume species will help optimize forage management and pasture growth.

Pasture rotation is also practiced in order to optimize plant growth and utilization by grazing vegetation at the proper heights and allowing for proper rest and regrowth. Activities such as brush hogging or clipping, dragging to break up manure clumps, fertilizing and over seeding are also necessary components of pasture forage management.

cows

CC2.5 LPELC


Sacrifice Areas

Exercise or sacrifice areas are designated locations for feeding, watering, exercise and relaxation for times when pastures are not accessible due to lack of growth (winter or drought), flooding, etc. Generally, these areas have little or no vegetation. It is important that manure not be spread in these areas. They are meant to be sacrificed for animal activities in order to protect the remaining pastures. Runoff from sacrifice areas should also be managed to reduce the risk of water pollution caused by sediment and nutrients from these areas.

Erosion

Erosion problems on small farms are often different than large farms. On large farms, most erosion may be sheet or rill erosion running off large fields. On smaller farms, erosion may more often be a gully where animals cross a stream. Or it could be poorly vegetated pastures that provide poor ground cover during precipitation. Fencing, watering and feeding sites, presence or absence of field buffers, and stream crossings can all influence erosion on a small livestock farm.

Water

Water is of concern whenever it is in short supply or contamination is suspected. Water serves to cool the animal and works as a solvent or buffer for chemical reactions in the body. When the weather is hot in the summer, an animals’ requirement for water will increase. Requirements vary with stress, weather conditions, heat, cold, disease, productive state, work, exercise, etc., as well as the water and salt content of the feed. Often the first sign that water consumption is inadequate is when animals stop eating. Water is essential to maintain adequate feed consumption.

Grazing animals on pasture need to be supplied with adequate water for drinking. Livestock on pasture will tend to congregate near or in riparian areas that have greater access to shade and water. These areas may also provide greater water quality risks from manure runoff, trampling and compaction, overgrazing, and mud accumulation than areas more distant to water. The management and design of these riparian areas is critical for maintaining a proper pasture grazing environment with adequate feed and water availability and promoting optimal environmental quality. A Guide to Managing Pasture Water provides some excellent guidelines for maintaining water quality in riparian settings.

pasture

CC2.5 LPELC

This pasture management section provides information about proper pasture management in order to improve water quality by reducing manure runoff and soil erosion risks that may be associated with poor pastures. The following links provide more specific information.

    1. Basic Soil fertility
    2. Selecting Forage Species
    3. How Forages Grow

Pasture Management

    1. Horse Pasture Management
    2. Sacrifice or Exercise Lots
    3. Rotational Grazing( Spanish Language Version)
    4. Weeds and Toxic Plants
    5. Controlling Farm Erosion
    6. Pasture Based Watering Systems
    7. Fencing, paddock design, etc.
    8. Equipment

Recommended Reading

Authored by Michael Westendorf, Rutgers the State University of New Jersey; Updated November 25, 2008

Proudly powered by WordPress