Influence of Multi-species Grazing on Continuous CRP Stephen Van Vleet, Ph.D Washington State University Whitman County Extension Agriculture and Natural Resources

CRP in Whitman County Acres Accepted 198,577.00 Annual Payments $12,389,030.00 Total County Cropland 1,020,157.70 No general CRP or CSP signup for 2007 or 2008

Managed Haying and Grazing Provisions Nesting season April 1 – June 1 **Changed 9/2006: April 1- August 1 Must start with FSA and file a request for grazing 25% payment reduction NRCS grazing plan Incidental grazing – contour buffers and filter strips Changes 9/2005: Only allowed 1 out of every 4 years Grazing period for Whitman County November 1 – February 28 Recent changes 9/2006: Only allowed 1 out of every 10 years

Managing Grass Each year approximately 30% of grasses root system is replaced It is necessary for grass to replace its roots to remain healthy and productive It is necessary for grass to replace its above-ground biomass to remain healthy and productive Avoid overgrazing, provide enough rest for grasses to recover Manage grass not livestock

Grazing and Weed Control Many weeds we face are good sheep and cattle feed Canada Thistle, Leafy Spurge, Downy Brome, Medusa Head, Rush Skeletonweed, Dalmation Toadflax, Lupine, common Mallow, common Tansy, Whitetop Some weeds are not Bull Thistle, Nightshade, Poison Hemlock Some weeds do not like to be trampled Fiddleneck, Rattail fescue

CRP Grazing Study Research site set up on June 20, 2005 Pasture 1=1.12 acres, pasture 2=0.65 acres, pasture 3=1.72 acres, pasture 4(2006)=1.28 acres Primary vegetation: fiddleneck, Canada thistle, downy brome, tumble mustard, cattail, reed canary grass, mullein, catchweed bedstraw, lambsquarter 2005: 6 yearling steers and 6 ewes put in pasture 2 (P2) on June 23 Cattle and sheep removed from trial August 19 2006: 6 yearling steers and 6 ewes put in pasture 2 on June 12 increased to 8 steers on June 16 Cattle and sheep removed from trial on August 30

CRP Grazing Study Permanent sampling areas (rebar rods) were established in each pasture Changes in vegetation were recorded at each sampling point Temperatures were also evaluated (20 foot sections) in cattails and in open areas of a continuous flowing spring

2005 Rotation Pasture 3 Pasture 2 Pasture 1 Pasture 4 Aug. 10 Aug. 5 July 19 July 5 June 23 Aug. 19

2006 Rotation Pasture 3 Pasture 2 Pasture 1 Pasture 4 July 20 July 14 June 29 July 30 June 19 July 31 Aug. 10 Aug. 14 Aug. 25 Aug. 20 Aug. 23 June 12 Aug. 30

2007 Rotation Pasture 3 Pasture 2 Pasture 1 Pasture 4 July 4 July 13 June 30 June 20 June 12 May 30 May 24 & 25

June 23, 2005 12 11 Pasture 1 Pasture 2 10 9 8

July 04, 2005 13 12 11 Pasture 1 Pasture 2 10 9 8

June 10, 2006 13 12 11 Pasture 2 Pasture 1 10 9 8

June 27, 2006 13 10 Pasture 2 9 8 Pasture 1

June 30,2005 Plot 8 Sept. 22,2005 Plot 8 Sept. 11,2006 Plot 8 June 20,2006 Plot 8

After 1st grazing rotation 100% Grass, Height = 33 cm June1, 2007 Plot 8 May 24, 2007 Plot 8 After 1st grazing rotation

July 19, 2005 Plot 26 Sep. 22, 2005 Plot 26 July 14, 2006 Plot 26 Sep.11, 2006 Plot 26

After 1st grazing rotation 20% Grass, Height = 23 cm June 17, 2007 Plot 26 May 24, 2007 Plot 26 After 1st grazing rotation

Change in the percent cover of weeds and grass from 2005 to 2006 Pastures Weeds Grass 1 47% decrease 47% increase 2 35% decrease 35% increase 3 18% decrease 18% increase

20’ Cattail Sampling Area 66°F 64°F 20’ Open Sampling Area 64°F 64°F 64°F Average 2°F decrease after grazing in 2005 and 2006

Yearling Steer Weight Gain Data Days lbs/day 2005 6 steers 57 1.75 2006 8 steers 74 1.55 Individual weight gains were taken in 2005 and ranged from 1.35 to 2.26. Weights in 2006 were taken on all eight steers combined. There was a weak performing steer in 2005 and in 2006 which influenced the weight gain averages. Sheep remained at their maintenance weights because they did not lamb.

Grazing CRP Advantages Disadvantages Vegetation management Water availability Weed control Constant animal rotation Limit weed seed production Poor feed quality? Increase grass prod. Decrease H2O temperature Increase OM--carbon storing Wildlife benefit Natural reseeding--hoof action Increase water infiltration

Continued Work-Initiatives 1) Separate haying from grazing within the CRP guidelines. 2) Use rotational grazing as a management tool. The typical cost share of $5.00 per acre for maintenance (weed control) and $6.00 per acre for mowing could be used to encourage livestock managers to perform managed grazing on CRP lands (i.e., temporary fencing, water tanks). 3) CRP contract holders: If managed grazing were to be allowed on CRP lands, the livestock producer would enter into an agreement to manage the land and continue to keep the land in grass for the same number of years as the CRP contract, following expiration of the CRP contract. Example: Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Under contract--CRP payments No contract, no payment managed grazing remain in sod and continue mgmt 4) Allow managed grazing on CRP lands 1 out of every 2 years

Questions ? svanvleet@wsu.edu (509)397-6290