LazyWP said:
For me that is just grazing. I am sure for Soap, that includes what it takes to make it 12 months. All of his grazing, plus what it takes to put up hay to winter his cows.
Part of Soaps problem is all those lakes he has. He would be down to 15 acre per pair, without all of them.
You are right about the lakes, Lazy WP. They are not good for much of anything, and they are too akaline to even support fish. The lakes are even obstacles to "go around" every time we go to our north pastures. The state of Nebraska in its infinite wisdom does see fit to make us pay taxes on the lakes.
The thirty acres includes summer pasture, winter range, and hayground, and in other words, all the land it takes to support one cow and her calf for one year
Zilly said:
If you can get two rotations a year out of a pasture, does that change your acres per pair figure?
We do practice a "modified" rotational system, and it might "stretch" the grazing to a certain extent, but you still need the same amount of available grazing to run the same amount of cattle for a year (in the Nebraska Sandhills). To my notion, rotational grazing in our area is quite "over-rated," and on a year like this with very little rain, it has no merit whatsoever.