Walt Davis 2007
Published in The Stockman GrassFarmer
In the early 1970’s we were running Davis Ranch in southeastern Oklahoma as a high tech beef cattle, pecan and crop operation and were following all of the land grant college recommendations as to fertilization, weed and insect control. We routinely used 100-150 pounds of actual nitrogen on our cropland, almost that much on Bermuda grass pasture and were producing a lot of product. Production was high but so was the cost of production and all too often we found ourselves losing money on every pound we produced and trying to make up the difference by producing more pounds. This was the period when conventional wisdom was “get big or get out” and efficiency of scale and specialization were the buzzwords of the “agricultural experts”. In 1974 the cattle market broke, as it had about every nine years for over 100 years, and we found ourselves in serious financial trouble. After ten years of trying to “do it right”, we had the choice of changing the way we operated or going broke. A look through our books made it crystal clear where the money was going; fertilizer, machinery upkeep, chemicals, fuel and labor expenses were all much too high. We had taken a very simple business based on natural biology and changed it into an industrial monster with an insatiable appetite for expensive inputs. One of the largest of these expenses was nitrogen fertilizer. We decided to halt nitrogen use on pasture and instead use forage legumes to supply this need. This started what my wife termed “Your annual sacrifice to the clover gods”. This was not an inaccurate statement, as I knew very little about growing legumes and it would be several years before I learned enough to give the clovers a chance. The extension recommendations of the time still called for applying nitrogen fertilizer to new legume plantings even though research by Dr. Bill Knight and others had shown that as little as sixteen pounds of actual nitrogen could kill all of the rhizobia bacteria on an acre of sandy soil. By trial and error, over a period of years, we learned how to establish and keep a high percentage of legumes in our forage sward at a reasonable cost. We were intensifying our grazing management at the same time that we were introducing legumes and quickly learned that the two practices fit together like a hand in a glove. When we got enough paddocks to control exactly what our stock was eating at any point in time, it became much easier to maintain the legume mix and also to prevent bloat and maximize animal performance. The benefits of legumes in a complex pasture mixture go far beyond merely reducing cost.
Truly successful forage plans rely on the concept of complex forage swards maximizing days of quality graze over time. This is considerably different from the more common concept of judging pasture solely on the number of tons of forage produced per acre per year. The value of a pound of green forage at any point in time is directly proportional to the abundance of forage at that time. The extension literature is full of figures showing exactly what it costs to grow forage and how to reduce the cost of forage by applying nitrogen fertilizer to increase yields. These figures reflect the short-term cost of the forage but do not reflect the value of this forage in a grazing operation. If coastal Bermuda grass is nitrated in May or if fescue is nitrated in March, yields of forage will be greatly increased. In both cases, the increased production comes during the time period of peak production and aggravates an already severe problem of forage distribution over time. To be consistently profitable, grazing operations must maximize the percentage of the total ration that comes from grazing. No mechanical forage harvest system can come close to competing in cost to the grazing animal. In an on going grazing operation, a major goal should be to provide, in a graze able form, both the quantity and the quality of forage needed to supply the needs of the livestock present for as many days of the year as possible. To do this requires having green and growing forage for as much of the year as is feasible. Plants are classified as warm or cool season according to their growth habits but there are also differences by species and within species as to time of growth within a season. Complex mixtures of forage plants consisting of different species of warm and cool grasses as well as forbs and shrubs both legume and non-legume can capture more solar energy and provide more days of quality grazing than is possible with monocultures or with simple mixtures. The complex mixtures are also much more stable in their ability to deliver forage in the year-to-year time frame and are of tremendous value in reducing weed pressure.
Legumes are unique among plants in that they have the ability to form a symbiotic relationship with a class of bacteria known as rhizobia whereby the legume furnishes energy to the bacteria and in return the bacteria takes nitrogen from the air and converts it to a form that is useful to the plant. This occurs by the bacteria entering and colonizing a plant root where it draws nourishment from the plant while extracting nitrogen from the soil air surrounding the root hair. Species of rhizobia are specific as to the group of legumes with which they can form mutually beneficial relationships so it is very important that the correct inoculating material is used when planting various legumes. Nitrogen is directly available to the legume hosting the bacteria and becomes available to the plant community at large in a number of different ways. When legumes are consumed by grazing animals a portion of their nitrogen content is excreted by the animals in urine and to a lesser extent in manure. The percentage of this nitrogen that becomes useful to the plant community depends upon the condition of the soil surface upon which it falls and upon the amount of biological activity present in the soil. In covered soil well populated with all forms of soil life from bacteria and fungi up through earthworms and dung beetles much of the excreted nitrogen will be captured by some life form while in a bare lifeless soil most of the nitrogen will be lost to the atmosphere or to water runoff. Nitrogen also enters the nutrient cycle anytime that tissue from the legume dies and is broken down by decomposer organisms such as pill bugs, termites and fungi. There is also evidence that nitrogen can be transferred directly from legumes to other plants when the filaments of mycorrizial fungi connect the plants. The amount of nitrogen fixed by legumes varies tremendously depending upon a number of factors but in well managed pastures it can be more than enough to supply the nitrogen needs of all members of the soil-plant-animal complex. An advantage to this method of supplying nitrogen is that the nitrogen is released, as plants need it, slowly over time, being held either by living organisms or in organic matter. This prevents the bursts of nutritionally imbalanced growth seen with nitrogen fertilizers and also any significant amount of loss of nitrogen to either the atmosphere or the ground water.
Where they can grow and flourish, forage legumes can be of tremendous benefit to a grazing operation. Extension recommendations would make it seem that legumes can only be grown in areas of high rainfall on neutral to basic soils well supplied with calcium, phosphorus and potassium. It is true that these are the conditions most favorable for the growth of most legumes but good growth can often be made under less than perfect conditions, particularly if time controlled high stock density grazing is practiced. Try seeding some small plots before spending a lot of money on either seed or fertility. Look around and see what legumes are present on roadsides and other areas that have not been sprayed or fertilized and start with these species.
Characteristics of Forage Legumes
Alfalfa Medicago sativa | P | 2-9 | W | >20 | C | M | H | I | H | 7+ | H | H |
Alyce clover Alysicarpus vaginalis | A | 8-10 | W | >30 | S | M | M | I | L | 7- | L | M |
Arrowleaf clover Trifolium vesculosum | A | 7-9 | C | >25 | L | M | N | I | H | 7- | M | H |
Black medic Medicago lupulina | A | 2-10 | C | >15 | L | M | L | I | M | 7 | M | M |
Bur clover California Medicago hispida | A | 7-10 | C | >15 | C | M | H | I | M | 7 | M | L |
Bur clover spotted Medicago arabica | A | 7-9 | C | >25 | C | M | H | I | M | 7+ | M | L |
Button medic Medicago orbicularis | A | 7-8 | C | >20 | C | M | M | I | M | 7+ | M | M |
Caley pea Lathyrus hirsutus | A | 7-9 | C | >25 | L | M | L | I | M | 7 | M | H |
Clover Alsike Trifolium hybridum | P | 2-9 | C | >20 | C | W | H | I | H | 7+ | H | H |
Clover Ball Trifolium nigrescens | A | 7-10 | C | >25 | L | M | H | I | H | 7 | M | M |
Clover, Berseem T. alexandrinum | A | 7-10 | C | >25 | L | M | N | I | H | 7+ | H | H |
Clover Crimson T. incarnatum | A | 6-9 | C | >30 | S | M | M | I | M | 7- | M | M |
Clover White Trifolium repens | P | 3-10 | C | >30 | C | W | H | I | H | 7+ | H | H |
Clover Big Hop Trifolium campestre | A | 5-8 | C | >25 | L | M | L | I | L | 7- | L | L |
Clover Small Hop Trifolium dubium | A | 7-9 | C | >25 | S | M | L | I | L | 7- | L | L |
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
Compiled by Walt Davis 2004
1. Annual, Biannual, Perennial 7. Bloat potential High, Medium, Low, None
2. Adapted to growth zones 2..9 8. Native, Introduced
3. Warm season, Cool season 9. Potential for N fixation High, Medium, Low
4.Best growing season rain in inches 10. Preferred pH
5. Preferred soil Clay, Loam, Sand 11. Fertility requirement High, Medium, Low
6. Preferred soil Wet, Moist, Dry 12. Production potential High, Medium, Low
Characteristics of Forage Legumes
Clover, Persian T. resupinatum | A | 7-10 | C | >30 | C | W | H | I | H | 7 | H | M |
Clover, Red Trifolium pratense | B | 2-10 | C | >20 | C | M | M | I | H | 7 | H | H |
Clover, Rose Trifolium hirtum | A | 7-10 | C | >10 | L | M | M | I | M | 7 | M | M |
Clover, Strawberry Trifolium fragiferum | P | 3-10 | C | >20 | C | W | H | I | H | 7+ | H | H |
Clover, Subterranean T. subterraneum | A | 7-10 | C | >10 | L | D | M | I | M | 7 | M | M |
Clover, Zigzag Trifolium medium | P | 2-6 | C | >25 | L | M | M | I | H | 7 | M | M |
Clover, Rydberg Trifolium rydbergii | P | 2-5 | C | >15 | L | M | H | I | H | 7 | H | H |
Deervetch, Big Trefoil Lotus uliginosus | P | 7-10 | C | >30 | C | W | M | I | M | 7 | M | M |
Illinois Bundleflower Desmanthus illinosus | P | 3-9 | W | >15 | L | M | L | N | L | 7 | M | L |
Kudzu Paeraria thumbergiana | P | 7-9 | W | >30 | L | M | L | I | L | 7- | M | H |
Lespedeza, Common Lespedeza striata | A | 4-9 | W | >30 | L | M | L | I | L | 7- | M | M |
Lespedeza, Korean | A | 4-8 | W | >30 | L | M | L | I | L | 7- | M | M |
Lespedeza, Sericea Lespedeza cuneata | P | 5-9 | W | >15 | C | M | L | I | L | 7- | L | L |
Purple Prairie Clover Petalostemon purpurea | P | 4-8 | W | >20 | L | M | L | N | L | 7 | M | L |
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
1. Annual, Biannual, Perennial 7. Bloat potential High, Medium, Low, None
2. Adapted to growth zones 2..9 8. Native, Introduced
3. Warm season, Cool season 9. Potential for N fixation High, Medium, Low
4.Best growing season rain in inches 10. Preferred pH
5. Preferred soil Clay, Loam, Sand 11. Fertility requirement High, Medium, Low
6. Preferred soil Wet, Moist, Dry 12. Production potential High, Medium, Low
Characteristics of Forage Legumes
Sweetclover, Yellow Melilotus officinalis | B | 3-9 | C | >15 | L | M | H | I | H | 7+ | H | H |
Sweetclover White Melilotus alba | A | 3-9 | C | >15 | L | M | H | I | H | 7+ | H | H |
Trefoil Broad Birdfoot Lotus corniculatus | P | 2-6 | C | >25 | C | M | M | I | M | 7 | M | M |
Trefoil Narrow Lotus tenuis | P | 2-6 | C | >25 | C | M | M | I | M | 7 | M | M |
Vetch, Hairy Vicia villosa | A | 4-9 | C | >15 | L | M | L | I | M | 7 | M | M |
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
1. Annual, Biannual, Perennial 7. Bloat potential High, Medium, Low, None
2. Adapted to growth zones 2..9 8. Native, Introduced
3. Warm season, Cool season 9. Potential for N fixation High, Medium, Low
4.Best growing season rain in inches 10. Preferred pH
5. Preferred soil Clay, Loam, Sand 11. Fertility requirement High, Medium, Low
6. Preferred soil Wet, Moist, Dry 12. Production potential High, Medium, Low
Walt Davis 2004