EFFECTS OF DIFFERENT SYSTEMS OF GRAZING. 17 



reduced gains, while one above normal will produce normal cattle 

 gains and the vegetation will benefit by the lighter grazing. In other 

 words, it is better to regulate the intensity of grazing, so that during 

 good years the vegetation is benefited instead of attempting to con- 

 sume all the forage by increasing the number of cattle. This is more 

 likely to insure the maintenance of the pasture in a high state of pro- 

 duction. 



MEASURE OF EFFICIENCY OF A PASTURE OR SYSTEM OF 



GRAZING. 



From Table 2 it will be noted that the steers in the 30-acre pasture 

 have made the highest average total gain per acre. This does not 

 mean that this pasture is the best or that the most desirable grazing 

 system was used there. If the total gain per acre is to be accepted 

 as the sole measure of efficiency of a grazing system, then the 30-acre 

 unit is most efficient for the utilization of the native vegetation. 

 However, since the number of cattle has been increased in the rota- 

 tion pasture, the total gain per acre produced in that inclosure has 

 been the highest obtained. The rotation pasture has also produced a 

 total and individual gain per acre during the past two years greater 

 than the combined gains of the 50-acre and the 30-acre pastures. The 

 larger gain was produced on fewer acres with a lesser number of 

 cattle. These facts bring out the point that the high gain per acre 

 in the 30-acre pasture has not been obtained because the cattle have 

 done exceptionally well, but because they made 94 per cent of their 

 gain during the first 65 days of the season on a very limited acreage. 

 In doing this they produced the lowest gain per head, however, and 

 were moved to another pasture before the end of the grazing season. 



The fact that the steers on the 30-acre field were removed from 

 their pasture as soon as they showed a decided loss in weight has con- 

 tributed to their high gain per acre. It is obvious that if they had 

 been forced to remain on the pasture long enough the result could 

 easily have been made to equal no gain per acre. Had the cattle con- 

 tinued to lose at the average rate used as the index for their removal, 

 the}' would have lost the gains made in less time than they were put 

 on. _ However, it is clear that the rate of loss would have increased 

 during the time they would have been without feed. 



From Table 4, which shows the average daily gain per head for 

 the period the steers remained on the 30-acre pasture, it is clear that 

 all other pastures have produced a greater gain. This fact also indi- 

 cates that the gain per acre alone is not the most dependable index 

 as a measure of a pasture. The purpose of the experiment on this 

 pasture has been to abuse the vegetation by severe grazing and not 

 to produce a high or low gain per acre. This has been accomplished 

 in a very satisfactory manner to date. If the number of cattle had 

 been reduced in order to maintain them on the pasture the full season, 

 the grazing rate would have approached that of some of the other 

 pastures and the purpose would have been defeated. 



If a high individual gain per acre is desired regardless of other 

 factors, one must be content with a low gain per head during the 

 early part of the season. If. on the other hand, the maximum gain 

 per head is desired, an essential for the best beef market, the acreage 



47606—23 3 



