Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T13:29:16.012Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The role and contributions of animals in alternative agricultural systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 October 2009

Frank H. Baker  and
Ned S. Raun
Frank H. Baker
Affiliation:
Senior Associate, Winrock International, Route 3, Morrilton, AR 72110.
Ned S. Raun
Affiliation:
Regional Representative - Washington, Winrock International, 1611 North Kent Street, Suite 600, Arlington, VA 22209.
Get access

Abstract

Livestock are important components of agricultural systems. In the U.S., one-half of total agricultural receipts come from the sale of livestock. They are the harvestors of range plants, forages, and crop residues; they level out the effects of the seasonally and variability of rainfall; they cushion disruptions in the trade and marketing of feed grains; they counteract declining soil fertility and soil erosion; and they contribute to the efficient year-round use of farm labor. Unfortunately, farmers are often not inclined to adopt alternative animal agriculture systems despite the advantages they may offer. Constraints that may be encountered include possibilities of reduced short-term profits, difficulties in adapting available technology to alternative farming systems, difficulties in shifting from specialized crop or livestock farms to crop/livestock farms, and the increased needs for labor and management. Some actions needed in the U.S. to improve livestock production in alternative farming systems are: the establishment of government policies to promote the shift of marginal lands to soil and water conserving crops and the incorporation of pastures and forages in crop rotations; research to improve the utilization by ruminants of ligno-cellulosic feeds (pastures, forages, crop residues); and programs to improve range and forest management and to lead to the development of systems that optimize the use of forages for the production of nutritionally desirable lean beef.

Keywords

conventional farmingfertilizershigh inputlivestockruminantsrotationspasture
Type
Articles
Information
American Journal of Alternative Agriculture , Volume 4 , Issue 3-4 , December 1989 , pp. 121 - 127
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Acker, D. 1986. The role and value of animal agriculture. Proc. Sympos. Food Animal Res., Lexington, Kentucky, November 2–4.Google Scholar
2.Baker, F. H., and Byington, E. K.. 1986. Enhancing production of ruminant species through multispecies grazing systems. Professional Animal Scientist 2:9–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Box, T. W. 1981. Potential of arid and semiarid rangelands for ruminant animal production. In Child, R. D. and Byington, E. K. (eds.). Potential of the World's Forages for Ruminant Animal Production, 2nd Edition. Winrock International, Morrilton, Arkansas, pp. 81–92.Google Scholar
4.Byington, E. K., and Child, R. D.. 1981. Forages from the world's forested land for ruminant animal production. In Child, R. D. and Byington, E. K. (eds.). Potential of the World's Forages for Ruminant Animal Production, 2nd Edition. Winrock International, Morrilton, Arkansas, pp. 93–107.Google Scholar
5.Byington, E. K., and Hart, R. D.. 1984. The nature and extent of grazing lands in the United States. In Baker, F. H. and Miller, M. E. (eds.). Beef Cattle Science Handbook. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado, p. 99.Google Scholar
6.Cook, C. W. 1985. Biological efficiency from rangelands through management strategies. In Baker, F. H. and Jones, R. K. (eds.). Multispecies Grazing. Winrock International, Morrilton, Arkansas, pp. 54–64.Google Scholar
7.Getz, W. R. 1985. Livestock in Development. Proc. Second Annual Institute on Livestock in Development sponsored by Heifer Project International, New Windsor, MD.Google Scholar
8.Hardin, C. M. 1978. What is the optimum product balance for U.S? Plant and Animal Products in the U.S. food system. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
9.Harwood, R. R. 1982. Application of organic principles to small farms. Research for Small Farms. Miscellaneous Publication No. 1422. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
10.Harwood, R. R. 1984. A regenerative approach to agriculture in the year 2000. Presented at the Mid-Atlantic Regional Meeting of the American Chemical Society. April 6, White Haven, Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
11.Heichel, G. H. 1976. Agricultural production and energy resources. Am. Sci. 64:64–72.Google Scholar
12.Jacobs, Linda. 1986. Environmentally Sound Small-Scale Livestock Projects: Guidelines for Planning. Coordination in Development, Inc.; Heifer Project International; Volunteers in Technical Assistance; and Winrock International.Google Scholar
13.Olsen, F. W., and Hansen, R. M.. 1977. Food relations of wild free-roaming horses to livestock and big game on Red Desert of Wyoming. J. Range Management 30:17–20.Google Scholar
14.Oltjen, R. R. et al. , 1980. Animal nutrition and digestive physiology. In Pond, W. G., Merkel, R. A., McGilliard, L. D., and Rhodes, J. (eds.). Animal Agriculture Research to Meet Human Needs in the 21st Century. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado, pp. 69–91.Google Scholar
15.Office of Technology Assessment. 1985. A Special Report for the 1985 Farm Bill. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
16.Paarlberg, D. 1969. In Hardin, C. M. (ed.). Overcoming World Hunger. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.Google Scholar
17.Raun, N. S. 1981. Livestock as a buffer against climate. In Food and Climate Review 1980–81. A Publication of the Food and Climate Forum. Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies, Boulder, Colorado, pp. 59–65.Google Scholar
18.Raun, N. S., Hart, R. D., De Boer, J., Fitzhugh, H. A., and Young, K.. 1982. Livestock Program Priorities and Strategy, U.S. Agency for International Development. Position paper by Winrock International.Google Scholar
19.Roberts, Edd. 1944. Soil conservation district cooperators at work. Proc. Save-the-Soil Clinic, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.Google Scholar
20.Schaller, N. 1988. Alternative agriculture gains attention. Agricultural Outlook, April. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
21.Stanford Research Institute. 1976. An evaluation of the use of agricultural residues as an energy feedstock. U.S. Department of Commerce, National Technical Information Service, Vol. 1–8. SRI, Menlo Park, California.Google Scholar
22.Sutton, A. L., Nelson, D. W., and Jones, D. D.. 1985. Utilization of animal manure as fertilizer. University of Minnesota Extension Bulletin AG-FO-2613.Google Scholar
23.Taylor, C. A. Jr., 1985. Multispecies grazing research overview. In Baker, Frank H. and Jones, R. Katherine (eds.). Multispecies Grazing. Winrock International, Morrilton, Arkansas.Google Scholar
24.Umberger, S. H., McKinnon, B. R., and Eller, A. L.. 1984. Adding sheep to cattle for increased profits. Virginia Coop. Ext. Ser. Pub. Virginia Coop. Ext. Service, Blacksburg, Virginia.Google Scholar
25.U.S. Bureau of the Census. 1983. Census of Agriculture. AC82-A-51. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
26.USDA. 1987. 1987 Fact Book of Agriculture. Mis. Pub. 1063. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
27.USDA. August 1988. Agricultural Outlook.Google Scholar
28.Vetter, R. L., and Boehlje, M.. 1978. Alternative feed resources for animal production. Plant and Animal Products in the U.S. Food System. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
29.Wedin, W. F. 1980. Feed production. In Pond, W. G., Merkel, R. A., McGilliard, L. D., and Rhodes, J. (eds.). Animal Agriculture Research to Meet Human Needs in the 21st Century. Westview Press, Boulder, Colorado, pp. 153–191.Google Scholar