- Author: Dan Macon
Looking back at more than 20 years of precipitation data I've collected since my family moved to Auburn, I can't say that we've ever had an “average” year – that is, we've never had exactly 32.68 inches of rain. Some years, like 2016-17, we measure quite a bit more than average (62.96 inches, to be exact); other years, like 2020-21, we measure less (just 19 inches). Since I started keeping track in 2003, we've had 12 years with less than our average, and 6 years with more than average (the balance – 3 years – have been close to what I would call "normal"). Since 2007, we've experienced several 2-4 year stretches of below average rainfall – including the memorable droughts of 2012-2015 and 2020-2022. Interestingly, though, the trendline on my data suggests that our “average” precipitation has increased slightly since I started keeping track in 2003.
But as anyone who manages livestock on our annual rangelands will tell you, the amount of rainfall we receive is only part of the story when it comes to grass growth – timing and temperature (both soil and air temperature) are key drivers in rangeland forage production. The last two years have provided a stark example!
Think back to mid-March 2022. After an exceptionally wet start to the water year (in October 2021, I measured more than 10 inches of rain), our rangeland forages got off to a great start – they'd germinated in late October and had grown through early December. But in January 2022, the faucet shut off – we received less than 2.5 inches from January 1 through March 31. By some accounts, it was the driest January-March on record. I recall checking soil moisture on the rangelands where our sheep were grazing in mid-March 2022, and finding that we had less than 25% moisture – more like May conditions in the root zone of our rangeland plants.
Despite these dry conditions, however, the UC Sierra Foothill Research and Education Center (SFREC) measured 1,412 pounds of forage per acre on March 1, 2022 (187% of “average” for the date). Rain returned in April 2022, and total forage production at SFREC ended up being 122% of the long term average (just over 3,800 pounds per acre).
In the autumn of 2022, our germinating rain came nearly a month later than the year before – which meant the rangeland forage didn't have much time to grow before the short days and cold temperatures of December forced it into dormancy. A wet and cold December was followed by a wetter (if somewhat warmer) January 2023. While February was slightly drier than “average,” March turned wet and cold again. As of this writing (March 29), we've measured exactly 28 inches of rain at our home place in Auburn since New Year's Day!
Even with all of this moisture, however, forage production at SFREC is lagging significantly behind last year. On March 1, SFREC measured just 619 pounds per acre (less than the long term average for that date of 750 pounds - and less than half of what we had a year ago at this time). As you might expect, soil temperatures followed the cooler air temperatures in late February; cold soils mean little or no forage growth.
Stated another way, we were in a precipitation drought on this date last year – and we had more forage than “average.” This year is shaping up to be one of the wetter years since I've worked in the foothills – and we're short on feed at the moment (a grass drought). With long days and warmer temperatures coming, I suspect the forage will explode in April, but for now, feed conditions in the foothills are tight!
So how do we manage through this kind of uncertainty? As ranchers, how can we set our stocking rates and production calendars given these wide swings in conditions? During our Working Rangelands Wednesdays webinar series last year, Dr. Leslie Roche (our Cooperative Extension Specialist in Rangeland Management) suggested that while the total amount and seasonable distribution of precipitation are the biggest drivers for annual forage production, specific timing is also critical. November and April precipitation are especially important, based on Dr. Roche's analysis. A statewide collaborative effort is ground-truthing remote sensing technology that will hopefully provide real-time forage production data without needing an army of range technicians clipping plots on a weekly basis.
All of this information will help ranchers make decisions about seasonal and annual adjustments to our stocking rates, but good management will always require careful planning and on-the-fly adjustment to the current year's conditions. While While my colleague Grace Woodmansee (Siskiyou County Livestock and Natural Resources Advisor) developed our Drought Decision Support Tool with drought in mind, I'm realizing there's value in putting together a 12-month forage plan regardless of the conditions! There's no such thing as an average year!
- Author: Dan Macon
I invite you to travel back in time with me - clear back to late October 2021! We'd measured more than 10 inches of rain in Auburn, and we could see the first green shoots of grass emerging through the dry forage. While November was slightly disappointing from a precipitation perspective, we measured more than 12 inches of rain in December - capped off by a crazy, wet, and cold storm just before the first of the year. I'm sure most of us were celebrating what looked like a great feed year when we rang in 2022. But then the spigot shut off - here in Auburn, we've measured just 1.77 inches of rain since January 1 - the driest start to the calendar year in the 20+ years I've kept records. Combining this lack of moisture with warmer-than-normal temperatures and unusual (at least for winter) dry north wind, we are squarely back in drought conditions. In many ways, we seem to be experiencing a more severe drought than last year, at least on our foothill annual rangelands.
Ranchers know that drought is more than just a lack of precipitation. Low rainfall years, provided the storms come at the right time, can produce above-average forage. This year, however, the warm temperatures have brought oaks and other vegetation out of dormancy earlier than normal - this early onset of the growing season in our oak woodlands has increasedevapotranspiration (or soil-water demand). The north winds haven't helped. Before we received an inch of rain on March 14-15, I checked soil moisture in Auburn - and found it to be less than 20% (more like May than March). The rain gave us a short boost, but by the end of last week, soil moisture was back around 25%.
Ourrangeland vegetation reflects these poor growing conditions. Our annual grasses andforbs, by definition, must produce seed every year. In dry conditions, this means that they reproduce and turn brown early and at a shorter stature. Where our sheep are grazing just west of Auburn, I've seen soft chess and annualryegrass headed out this week - a good 30 days early. In a good year, the soft chess will be as much as 18 inches tall; this year, it's done growing at 6 inches. Many of our importantbroadleaf forage plants are maturing equally early - I'm seeing vetch dying back on our shallower soils, and thefilaree is already in the late bloom stage, as well.
These are all red flags from a forage quantity perspective - shorter feed this spring means less residual feed to return to next fall. But early maturity also compresses our forage quality window. Many of us expect a 45-60 day period when we have high quality forage on our annual rangelands - and we set our production calendars accordingly. As these grasses and forbs mature, they decline in quality - providing less protein and energy to our grazing animals. They also become less palatable - in other words, they don't taste as good and they don't provide as much nutrition. The graph below demonstrates that crude protein levels in annual grasses drop below cow maintenance levels between the late flowering and maintenance stages (which we're approaching). If we're trying to put weight on animals, protein levels are deficient by the time we reach the early flowering stage. For more information, check out this ANR Publication (Annual Rangeland Forage Quality).
We're still hopeful that the significant snow pack we built up in December will mean we'll have adequate irrigation water here in the foothills - other regions in the state aren't so fortunate. Given the exceptionally dry conditions, however, I expect we'll need to make at least 2 irrigation rotations over our irrigated pastures to rebuild soil moisture and start growing forage. For us, this means we won't start regrowing irrigated pasture forage following our first graze periods until the end of May.
In light of these impacts, what are some of the strategies we should consider going forward? The basic premise of most drought management strategies is to increase our forage supply (by buying hay or other feed, irrigated early, or leasing new pasture) or reducing our forage demand (by selling livestock or weaning early). Check out our Drought Decision Making Tool for Ranchers for information on how to analyze the economics of these options! This page also includes a new bulletin on early weaning.
As far along as our annual rangeland vegetation is today, another rain won't do us much good - other than perhaps grow some summer annual weeds that may have some grazing value. Rain wouldgive our irrigated pastures a boost, however - at least here in the foothills. We'll see what April brings!
- Author: Dan Macon
With wildfire season in full swing in California and elsewhere in the West, many ranchers are increasingly concerned about the safety and well-being of their livestock. Many - if not most - commercial-scale producers in the Sierra foothills and higher elevations operate on multiple parcels with multiple landowners. Accessing livestock in an area under evacuation orders due to wildfire - or any other large-scale disaster, for that matter - can be problematic. Commercial-scale operations typically have more animals than can be evacuated in a single load, making sheltering-in-place the only viable option. But livestock that are sheltered-in-place need care - water, feed, medical attention, etc. - making access for ranchers critical.
Over the last 6 months, I've been working with a committee of ranchers from Placer, Nevada, and Yuba Counties, along with the Agricultural Commissioners from each county, to create a Disaster Livestock Access Pass Program. The geographic focus of this effort mirrors CalFire's administrative region - and reflects the on-the-ground reality that many ranching operations cross county boundaries. We've patterned our local program on similar efforts in Butte, Santa Barbara, and San Luis Obispo Counties. We hope to develop a similar program for Sutter County in the coming months.
For the purposes of this program, a commercial livestock operator is defined as an owner of livestock consisting of 50 head of livestock (including in utero, e.g., 25 bred cows), 100 poultry or rabbits, or 50 beehives or more that reside in Placer, Nevada, or Yuba County for at least a portion of the year, or a person who, through an agreement with that owner of livestock, has authority and is responsible to oversee the care and well-being of the owner's livestock.
To receive a Livestock Access Pass, qualified producers must complete an application survey and attend a 4-hour training session which will include information on fire behavior, the incident command system, and ranch-scale fire preparations. We will be holding training sessions in Auburn, Browns Valley, and Nevada City.
I've prepared a comprehensive Producer Information Packet, which is available on my website. If you'd like me to email you a packet, please contact me at dmacon@ucanr.edu.
- Author: Dan Macon
Short- and Long-term Stock Water Strategies
On a day that started with a long-overdue rainstorm here in Auburn, I received word that USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack had declared a drought disaster in 50 of California's 58 counties – including Placer, Nevada, Sutter, and Yuba. The announcement doesn't come as a huge surprise for anyone who's been grazing livestock on annual rangelands this winter, but the official designation does come with the possibility of emergency assistance through the Farm Service Agency (click here for a directory of local FSA offices).
While ranch drought management is fundamentally about creating flexibility to balance demand (that is, the number mouths we have grazing) with supply (the amount of grass we have available), my own experience suggests that drought presents a complicated set of problems. Our forage demand changes with our production calendar – the lactating ewes we're grazing today need more forage than they did back in November. And quantity isn't the only variable that concerns us – lactating ewes also need high quality forage from a nutritional standpoint. Drought can impact both.
Drought impacts, then, are more complicated that below-average rainfall, obviously. Rain and forage production are related, but on our annual rangelands, the timing of the rain is nearly as important as the quantity. We'll likely end up with an inch of rain out of the series of storms we've enjoyed this week – enough to keep our grass growing.
As I was moving sheep this morning, however, I checked the small seasonal creek that runs through several of our winter pastures. It hasn't flowed all winter, and this most recent shot of rain wasn't enough to get it started. Talking to ranchers throughout my four counties, I would say that the soil profile never really filled enough to get the creeks running – or the stock-ponds filling – anywhere in the foothills. Operations that saved dry feed for the fall couldn't access some of it for lack of stock water. Now that the grass is growing, some ranches still don't have enough stock water to use the forage.
With sheep, we're used to hauling drinking water – even on large scale operations. Most cattle producers don't have the equipment to move water to their livestock, however – the quantities required, and the remoteness of some operations, can make this difficult. I spoke to a water truck operator this morning who said he's starting to get calls from foothill ranchers about hauling stock water – a sure sign that conditions are extremely dry. This particular owner-operator can move 3,400 gallons at a time – and he charges $100 per hour plus the cost of the water (for example, a single load of water delivered to Lincoln would cost around $350).
How long would a load of water last? Obviously, stock water demand depends on air temperature, stage of production, and even hide color. Developing a water budget based on stage of production and air temperature can help provide a more accurate estimate of stock water demand for a specific group of cattle (see the chart below).
Cattle Wt |
40°F |
50°F |
60°F |
70°F |
80°F |
90°F |
LACTATING COWS |
||||||
900-1200 LBS |
11.4 g/day |
12.6 g/day |
14.5 g/day |
16.9 g/day |
17.9 g/day |
18.2 g/day |
DRY COWS |
||||||
1100 LBS |
6.0 g/day |
6.5 g/day |
7.4 g/day |
8.7 g/day |
9.1 g/day |
9.3 g/day |
MATURE BULLS |
||||||
1600+ LBS |
8.7 g/day |
9.4 g/day |
10.8 g/day |
12.6 g/day |
14.5 g/day |
20.6 g/day |
GROWING HEIFERS, STEERS, BULLS |
||||||
400 LBS |
4.0 g/day |
4.3 g/day |
5.0 g/day |
5.8 g/day |
6.7 g/day |
9.5 g/day |
600 LBS |
5.3 g/day |
5.8 g/day |
6.6 g/day |
7.8 g/day |
8.9 g/day |
12.7 g/day |
800 LBS |
7.3 g/day |
7.9 g/day |
9.1 g/day |
10.7 g/day |
12.3 g/day |
17.4 g/day |
Source: 1996 NRC Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle
Is hauling water worth the expense? If you've saved forage – or if you have spring forage that you can't use for lack of stock water, it's worth putting pencil to paper. Based on the costs outlined above, here's an estimate of the cost of hauling enough water for 100 pairs on springtime annual rangeland in the Lincoln area - it's not cheap!
Number of Cattle (cow-calf pairs) |
100 |
Water Demand/Animal Unit/Day |
17 gal |
Total Water Demand/Day |
1700 gal |
Total Water Demand/Month |
51,000 gal |
Water Truck Capacity |
3400 gal |
Loads of Water / Month |
15 |
Cost/Load |
$350 |
Cost/Month |
$5,250 |
Cost/AUM |
$53 |
Assumptions
- Water hauling charges are $100/hour plus the cost of the water
- The haul for this example is from Auburn to Lincoln, with water purchased in Wheatland
- Cattle are grazing springtime annual rangeland
- Average daily high temperatures are 70-80F
From a longer term perspective, developing alternative stock water supplies and storage systems is critical for drought flexibility. The Natural Resources Conservation Service can provide technical assistance and perhaps even cost-share funding to help pay for these types of projects (click here for a directory of local NRCS offices).
If you'd like help looking at stock water options this spring, contact me by email (dmacon@ucanr.edu) or call the office (530/889-7385) to set up an appointment!
- Author: Dan Macon
Here in Auburn (on December 17, 2020), we received 0.64" of rain overnight. After a late start to the rainy season (and to germination on our annual rangelands), any rain is welcome at this point. But last night's rain continues an interesting (and potentially troubling) trend - our storm total was about 60 percent of what forecasters predicted earlier in the week. Similarly, last weekend's storms delivered less moisture than predicted. Our seasonal total (since October 1) is just over 4 inches; our average seasonal total here in Auburn over the last 20 years is over 11.5 inches - in other words, we've received just 36 percent of our "normal" precipitation so far.
On the positive side of all of these numbers, we have received enough rain to keep the grass that germinated last month going for a month or more. For our small sheep operation, we'd established a key date of December 31 for implementing more drastic drought measures (like buying more hay or selling sheep). With 1.89 inches of rain this month, and with the forage we've saved due to our conservative stocking rate and diligent grazing planning, we should make it through lambing without much added expense.
But the pattern remains concerning. I've noticed over the last several years that precipitation forecasting has become more accurate. While the exact timing of storms remains difficult to predict with down-to-the-minute accuracy, forecasters have become more adept at predicting storm totals several days out. That this year's storms seem to be falling short of predictions suggests that forecasting remains an inexact science.
Obviously, rainfall on our annual rangelands does more than grow forage. Many operations rely on run-off to recharge seasonal creeks and refill stock ponds. Without stock water, some producers won't be able to use the forage they saved from last spring (or they'll need to haul water). In the medium-term, the lack of snowfall in the high country portends a challenging summer for those of us who rely on irrigated pasture. Fortunately, our local water districts entered the winter with adequate carry-over in their reservoirs, but a lower-than-average snow pack is definitely concerning!
So while while our operation has made it through the first critical date of our drought plans, we're not out of the woods yet. After lambing is over in late March, our next major decision point will be weaning. We usually wean the lambs in mid/late June - sometimes as late as early July. In order to save forage on our annual rangeland for next fall, we may wean and sell our lambs early, allowing us to graze dry ewes on irrigated pasture into midsummer (which reduces our forage demand). I suspect our next decision date will be sometime in mid/late April.
I won't reiterate how difficult 2020 has been on a variety of fronts - drought just seems like one more crisis on top of a crisis-dominated year. I would encourage you to check out the Rangeland Drought Information Hub on the UC Rangelands website, however. You'll find a variety of resources for responding to drought conditions. From my perspective, the best time to start planning for drought is while it's raining. The second best time to start planning for drought is now! If you'd like help developing a drought plan or considering specific decisions, contact me at dmacon@ucanr.edu.