#141, In Practice, Jan/Feb 2012

healthy land. sustainable future.

J ANUARY / F EBRUARY 201 2

NUMBER 1 41

WW W.HO LISTICMANAGEMENT .O RG

INSIDE THIS ISSUE

The Benefits of Holistic Management— Ordinary People Living Extraordinary Lives

BIOLOGICAL MONITORING

by Don Campbell

E

ach person who has taken Holistic Management has benefited in a variety of ways. Since we are all unique, the benefits have been as diverse as the people involved. It would be great to have people share their individual stories. I want to share mine. My hope is that it will encourage you to think about your story. What kind of an impact has Holistic Management had on your life? Could you increase the benefits by applying the principles more diligently? Are there things you might do to spread Holistic Management so others could enjoy the benefits?

Double Your Grass I was about 40 years old when I was introduced to Holistic Management. I was relatively young, quite set in my ways and, in my mind, quite successful as a rancher and a person. I was drawn to Holistic Management by the idea of “doubling your grass on a set land base.” What ambitious rancher wouldn’t be attracted by that? The presentation and ideas made sense to me. I immediately went home and began managing my grass better. I concentrated on the grass for 4 or 5 years. Then I began to realize that there was a people and a financial portion to Holistic Management that were equally important to the land management. Over time I paid more attention to finances and people.

That’s when things really came together for me.

The first big change came when we were faced with a lot more summer grass and no increase in winter feed. Buying hay was not an option I was open to at that time. My solution was to sell my cow herd and run grass yearlings. I dispersed my herd of about 350 Red Angus Simmental cross cows and stocked the ranch with 1,300 yearlings. I want to pay tribute to my dad. Even though he was retired he was still vitally interested in the ranch. His retirement depended on the ranch being successful.

I told him about my plans. His comment was: “Do what you think is best; I trust your judgment.”

What a powerful message of encouragement and support to me. I often wonder if I have been able to give my children the same degree of support. Where are you at with regards to these types of issues?

Biological Monitoring is a critical feedback loop for anyone managing land, particularly those with livestock. Learn about the different styles of biological monitoring in our Land & Livestock section beginning on page 11.

FEATURE STORIES DATA MINE: The Grazing Optimization Hypothesis FRANK ARAGONA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

The Holistic Management Soft-Systems Circle CLIFF MONTAGNE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Livestock, Landscapes, and Livelihoods— The Contribution of Global Grazing Lands to Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation CONSTANCE NEELY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

LAND and LIVESTOCK Whirlwind Community Farm Perennial Grasses versus Alfalfa

Paradigms and Profits

OWEN HABLUTZEL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

I have had some huge paradigm shifts. One of these concerned ownership of cattle. My dad had bought our ranch in 1948. From then until the mid 1980s we owned all the cattle on the ranch.

That was our paradigm, and we never seriously thought about it. Running grass yearlings required over a million dollar loan. The result was a $50,000 interest charge each year. Holistic Management helped me shift my paradigm from I need to own the cattle to I need to harvest the grass and be profitable. Some serious financial planning allowed me to buy 200 cows debt free and custom graze the balance of the ranch. The result was a bank loan of zero, a lot less risk, and a business that still showed a profit. I went from having a $50,000 interest bill to collecting $10,000 from the bank in interest. All of this was possible because of a paradigm shift and some serious financial planning.

I believe it is impossible to make this kind of positive change without shifting your paradigms.

I learned that if you want to make small changes, change how you do things. When you want to make major changes, change how you see things.

TONY MCQUAIL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Thoughts on Biological Monitoring

CONTINUED ON PAGE 2

Biological Monitoring Offers More Tools TROY BISHOPP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Holistic Management in Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14

NEWS and NETWORK From the Board Chair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15 Reader’s Forum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15 Development Corner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16 Grapevine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17 Certified Educators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19 Book Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20 Marketplace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21

healthy land. sustainable future.

Holistic Management International exists to educate people to manage land for a sustainable future.

STAFF Peter Holter . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chief Executive Officer Tracy Favre. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chief Operating Officer Kelly King . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chief Financial Officer Ann Adams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Managing Editor, IN PRACTICE and

Director of Education Sandy Langelier . . . . . . . . Director, Communications

and Outreach Frank Aragona . . . . . . . . . . Director, Research and

Development Matt Parrack . . . . . . . . . . . . Director, Development Tom Levine. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Senior Development Advisor Peggy Maddox . . . . . . . . . . Director, Kids on the

Land Program Donna Torrez . . . . . . . . . . . Manager: Administration

& Executive Support Peggy Cole . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Project Manager, Texas Mary Girsch-Bock . . . . . Grants Manager Brady Gibbons . . . . . . . . . . Field Advisor Valerie Grubbs . . . . . . . . . Controller Carrie Nelson . . . . . . . . . . . Education Associate

BOARD OF DIRECTORS Sallie Calhoun, Chair Ben Bartlett, Past Chair Clint Josey, Vice-Chair Jim Shelton, Secretary Ron Chapman, Treasurer Gail Hammack Wayne Knight Judi Earl Zizi Fritz Jim Parker Christopher Peck Kelly Sidoryk

HOLISTIC MANAGEMENT IN PRACTICE (ISSN: 1098-8157) is published six times a year by: Holistic Management International 5941 Jefferson St. NE, Suite B Albuquerque, NM 87109 505/842-5252, fax: 505/843-7900; email: hmi@holisticmanagement.org.; website: www.holisticmanagement.org

The Benefits of Holistic Management The second paradigm shift regarded winter feed. We had always made our own feed. Our land is rough, haying is slow and expensive. Again Holistic Management allowed me to shift my paradigm from I need to hay to I need to have access to hay. I quit haying in 1985. Today I run more cattle to harvest the wealth which is in the grass. The extra income allows us to buy our winter feed. Not haying has freed up an enormous amount of time to devote to better grass management and quality of life.

A third major shift was to move our calving from March 20th to May 10th. This has allowed us to match the nutritional requirements of our cattle with our grass growth. It has also saved a huge amount of labor. I believe that calving in tune with nature is a key step to building a profitable business. I might point out that this shift didn’t happen all at once. We moved calving to April 1st, April 10th, April 20th, May 1st, and finally May 10th. You can see that this took several years. We now feel we are calving at the best time for us to reach our goals. These dates are not set in stone.

We are open to moving our calving date yet again if that appeared to be a wise decision.

There have been many other paradigm shifts.

In fact there have been so many that I think I am much more open minded today than at any time in my past. When an idea comes up I am willing to consider it before accepting or rejecting it. Some other shifts have been: • Our business is a tool to give us the quality of life we desire. Since our business is only a tool it is OK for our children to use the tool differently to give them what they desire.

• Cows can do just fine licking snow.

• We need to focus on profit not production.

Holistic financial planning has also had a huge impact on me. The idea of paying yourself first really appealed to me. The gross profit analysis helped us compare enterprises and figure out what would work best. The idea of forward planning a year ahead really helped us to feel confident and that we are in charge of our business. The biggest benefit we received from holistic financial planning was the increased confidence we have in our ability to plan and replan until we get a plan that meets our needs. We are confident that we will always be OK financially because of our ability to think and plan. That level of confidence goes a long way to reducing stress and worry in our lives.

Building People Skills COPYRIGHT © 2012

2

IN PRACTICE

That gives you some idea of the benefits we have received from grazing and financial planning.

January / February 2012

continued from page one What about the people side of Holistic Management? There is no doubt in my mind that our largest benefit has been from the people side of Holistic Management. It is also the most difficult to write about. Right from the start we met people who challenged and encouraged us to do better. I am truly blessed with a huge network of friends and mentors. Most of my success has come from the wonderful people I have had the privilege to be associated with. In fact if you are reading this and we know each other it is very likely that I have learned from you. You are part of my success and I sincerely thank you.

It’s difficult to write about personal growth and success without sounding too flowery. However, since I believe success on the people side is absolutely essential I will share some personal things. I trust you will not misjudge my comments.

Over time I paid more attention to finances and people. That’s when things really came together for me.

Holistic Management has helped me become a lifelong learner. I have learned that there is always a choice and that I have the power to choose. I have learned that I am responsible. Blaming is a waste of time. Happiness is a choice. I have been empowered to create the future I desire. I can truly say that I am living my dream. Do I have upsets, frustrations and down times? Yes, I do, but they don’t last very long and I always am confident that I can change things. As I grow older I am more aware of my own faults and shortcomings. I realize that the only thing I need to do to have a better life is to be a better person. The choice is up to me. I am working on this but progress is slow.

Many of you will know that I journal daily. I keep track of how many consecutive good days I have had. Today is 24,466 consecutive good days for me. If you did the math you would realize I was born on May 11, 1944. As strange as it may sound I don’t believe I have ever had a bad day and I don’t plan to have one as long as I live.

I had a failed intergenerational transfer with my two brothers in 1972. I am convinced that if we had known about Holistic Management at that

time the results would have been different. I have had a most successful intergenerational transfer from Bev and me to Scott, Jenna, Mark, and Bluesette. This would not have happened without Holistic Management. We wouldn’t have had the financial or people skills to make it all work.

I enjoy the fruits of that transfer daily. Working with people that I love, doing the work I like, having the time to consult and spread Holistic Management. I can’t imagine my life being any better.

The result was a bank loan of zero, a lot less risk, and a business that still showed a profit. I went from having a $50,000 interest bill to collecting $10,000 from the bank in interest.

I want to pay tribute to the two management clubs I belong to. The Devon Club was started in 1989. It continues to meet today. Each person in that club has been a huge help and support to me. The Hat club was centered in Meadow Lake.

It is not functioning now, but for about 10 years it was a great source of friendship and encouragement. Without these clubs we would not be where we are today.

Let me summarize all these thoughts. Yes, doubling our grass was important, planning for a profit was important, but the thing that made it all work was getting our people on the same page.

I believe Holistic Management works because it deals with people, land, and finances. Success and sustainability requires balance and achievement in all three areas. Anything else is doomed to failure at some point.

By helping me define my dream (holistic goal) and giving me the tools (grazing and financial planning) to achieve it, Holistic Management has helped me live a truly wonderful life. I consider myself to be a very ordinary person living an extraordinary life. I believe Holistic Management can help you in a similar manner.

Don Campbell is a Holistic Management Certified Educator from Meadow Lake, Saskatchewan, Canada. He can be reached at: doncampbell@sasktel.net.

The Grazing Optimization Hypothesis

by Frank Aragona

T

his installment of the Data Mine continues our series on the African Serengeti.

In the past two articles we have seen how grazers in unmanaged grasslands affect and interact with ecosystem space, nutrient cycles, and forage utilization. We have also examined the utilization patterns of multi-species mega-herds.

This article is an analysis of the grazing optimization hypothesis. Some researchers and theorists have argued that grazing, on the whole, has a negative influence on plant biomass as a result of repeated defoliation. Advocates of the grazing optimization hypothesis have argued for the opposite. S.J. McNaughton is one of the most prolific and well respected proponents of this hypothesis and so I reference two key articles listed at the end of the article.

The implications of this research is that if people are making a living from grazing animals, they can do so in such a way as to maintain the ecological benefits that the land provides.

The Rules of the Game McNaughton summarizes the principle tenet of the grazing optimization hypothesis as: “Providing there is an intervening period of growth, removal of vegetative tissues to a certain proportion of their initial level is rarely translated into a commensurate proportional reduction in the final yield of those or other plant tissues.”

In other words, plants evolved under heavy grazing pressure and they’ve developed strategies to thrive even at heavy levels of grazing. If you understand the limits of those strategies (compensatory response) then as a producer you can graze without damaging ecosystem services those plants provide. Moreover, if you didn’t graze those plants, you might not get as much productivity from the landscape you manage.

Productivity Variables Much of McNaughton’s data was used to evaluate the factors that measurably affect ecosystem productivity. Naturally, productivity had a strong relationship to annual precipitation. As he notes, “Productivity of control plots was linearly related to annual rainfall….this relationship explained [approximately] 48% of the variance; inclusion of hilltop and lowland stands from the regional sites reduce the correlation substantially (r = .416) and there were three evident outlier stands at high rainfalls.”

McNaughton also presents evidence consistent with his hypothesis that grazing can increase grassland productivity: “The stimulation of aboveground productivity due to grazing was maximum at intermediate grazing intensities… for midslope and flatland grasslands…”

The following figure, taken directly from “Ecology of Grazing”, illustrates nicely the ability of grazing animals in the Serengeti to maximize productivity at intermediate grazing intensities (taking 50%) as a suggested rule of thumb to maximize plant productivity and not causing undue stress of plants. (See figure on right.)

Plant Compensatory Responses According to McNaughton and others, plant compensatory responses to defoliation

CONTINUED ON PAGE 4

Number 141

IN PRACTICE 3

Data Mine

continued from page three effect on the yields of seed, “if it occurred during

coupled with grazing intensity are the principle mechanisms driving grazing optimization which explains how grazing can increase productivity.

McNaughton writes: “Due to the partial ability of grazing to override the rainfall dependence of plant productivity, [annual primary productivity] was controlled more by mean annual grazing intensity than by annual rainfall [and]…grazers tended to override rather than merely amplify patterns of intrinsic vegetation productivity.”

Compensatory growth in response to grazing was also measured and “…on average, only [approximately] 60% of the forage consumed by herbivores was replaced by compensatory plant growth within the same year.” Again, this means that plants can increase productivity based on plant strategies to that grazing. This does not necessarily mean the plant is healthier.

Some of McNaughton’s data also includes research from outside the Serengeti to support this concept of compensatory growth. Here are some excerpts from the research literature that support his claims that “…a 50% defoliation at the 2nd-4th leaf stage [in radishes] resulted in only an 8% reduction in final leaf area and that a 100% defoliation at this stage resulted in only a 42% reduction in final leaf area.”

He also notes, “In an experiment in which cattle were stocked on Cynodon spp. [Bermuda grass] at 7.5, 10, and 15 animals per hectare [3, 4, and 6 animals per acre] over a two year period, maximum yield of both forage and animal biomass occurred at the intermediate animal density.” Again, the focus of this theory is that when an animals take only half the plant, this can increase the overall productivity of the plant.

Plant responses to grazing are certainly species specific, as some species have developed stronger compensatory mechanisms in the face of constant evolutionary pressure. This is particularly true for many grassland species, although insects have been important defoliators for millions of years.

Grazing Timing Additionally, plant responses may depend “on plant developmental stage at the time of defoliation.” Research on the effect of the Colorado potato beetle on tuber yields demonstrates this fact as “…tuber yield is unaffected when defoliation occurs between the fourth and sixth week of growth. Prior to and after this, there are escape windows in time, and even defoliation levels approaching 100% have little effect of final yield.”

Likewise, the defoliation of soybean had less 4

IN PRACTICE

vegetative stages of growth than if it occurred during seed filling…Removal of half the foliage during vegetative stages reduced yield only about 10%, and 100% defoliation resulted in a yield reduction of less than 40%.”

How Plant Productivity is Achieved According to McNaughton, the mechanisms responsible for plant compensatory growth as a response to grazing are manifold: • Cytokinins (plant hormones) promote cell division and the activation of meristems (where new cells are formed), promoting tillering in grasses as a response to grazing • Prevention of shading of leaves lower in the canopy can extend the lifetime of productive tissue • Increased root-shoot ratio can improve plant’s ability to utilize water • Reduction of the transpiration surface (leaf surface) conserves soil moisture and extends the growing season • Reduced competition between reproductive tissues (smaller plant) leads to larger seed size and nutrient content • Hormones present in animal saliva may promote plant growth • Associations between herbivores and mycorrhizae improve plant nutrient uptake • By maintaining an open canopy, conserving soil moisture, and recycling nutrients that would become immobilized in aged/old plant tissues, grazing may alleviate the intensity of both intraplant and interplant competition.

An Interdependent Relationship Yet plant compensatory growth responses to grazing induced defoliation do not necessarily indicate symbiosis or mutualism, rather “… compensatory growth of the grasslands did not compensate completely for removal by herbivores, and the grasses have evolved levels of silicification, an antiherbivore defense, more pronounced than have been recorded in any other ecosystem. Thus it is improper to conclude that grazing is strictly advantageous to the plants. Highly interactive organisms can be interdependent, as are a parasite with a reduced virulence and a host with increased resistance, without being mutualistic.”

January / February 2012

In nature, grazing is a self-limiting phenomenon driven by successional dynamics and changes in the species composition of the plant community so that we see “the invasion of heavily grazed grasslands by other species that are more grazing tolerant or avoidant (due to low palatability) than previous species, commonly referred to as a consequence of ‘overgrazing,’ indicates that there are limits to which a flora can tolerate defoliation and other grazing effects. That consequence of grazing represents a natural negative feedback at the community level that will tend to restore a moderate level of grazing in the system.” In other words, nature bats last.

Limits to Growth Land managers observe similar changes when land deterioration and species composition change as a result of poor management decisions, which often force destocking. So while grazing at optimum levels can in fact increase overall productivity, ecosystem constraints will limit grazing in both managed and unmanaged grasslands.

McNaughton makes clear that grazing does not necessarily increase plant health, rather that plants can compensate for grazing. As he notes: “I do not contend that herbivory [grazing] maximizes plant fitness, but that plants have the capacity to compensate for herbivory and may, at low levels of herbivory, overcompensate for damage so that fitness may be increased.”

In fact, the grazing optimization hypothesis has been tested by numerous scientists around the world, particularly in managed ecosystems.

In the next installment of the Data Mine, we’ll look at a synthesis paper that applied a metaanalysis approach to test the hypothesis of grazing optimization.

References Compensatory plant growth as a response to hervibory. McNaughton, S.J. 1983.

Oikos 40: 329-336 Ecology of a Grazing Ecosystem: The Serengeti, McNaughton, S.J. Ecological Monographs, 55(3) 1985, pp. 259-294

Are you doing on farm research you’d like to share with the HMI Network? Do you have a research question you’d like us to write about in the Data Mine?

Contact Frank Aragona at 505/842-5252 or, faragona@holisticmanagement.org.

The Holistic Management Soft-Systems Circle

by Cliff Montagne

I

have found that the Holistic Management process requires effort to learn and then practice which can be a challenge for people to actually change behavior. The linear model as articulated in Holistic Management presents all the details, but can be overwhelming at first. And yet we know that effective practice must always consider the basic fundamentals to be successful. As part of our work with Mongolian herders we developed a way to start using the process immediately in an intuitive, simple, manner. It presents the Holistic Management process in the form of a circle with four parts. We can all remember a circle in four parts so this graphic helps engage people and let’s them quickly be able to use the process effectively.

The circle concept (see Figure 1 below) is derived from the work of learning psychologist David Kolb who describes experiential learning, or learning styles, within four quadrants of a circle as also noted in this graphic. A person diverges out into the world of the situation to perceive it with as many disciplines and viewpoints as possible. Then this broad view is assimilated into potential solutions expressed as theories, hypotheses, models or potential solutions. Then by testing the theories, models, and hypotheses, learners and problem solvers can converge on workable solutions to be accommodated to the situation by planning and action. A common application of Kolb’s work is the Myers-Briggs Personality Type Indicator (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MyersBriggs_Type_Indicator).

Kathleen Wilson and Goerge Morren introduce systems thinking as a systematic approach to problem solving based on considering the objectives, parts, inputs, and processes of a situation to achieve specific outcomes. Hard systems are mechanical systems which can be quantified to make accurate predictions. Hard systems are described and studied by reductionist science, and often do not consider broader scale effects on longer time scales. A tricycle is an example of a hard system. If the only variable is the pressure the rider puts on the pedals, it is easy

to predict the outcome. Adding a rider’s desire to travel and subsequent decision making converts this to a soft system with infinitely more variability and less predictability. A holistic approach is necessary in which the rider will consider many variables as she or he learns and adjusts in a feedback loop. The learner or problem solver in a soft system situation needs a holistic approach to be effective. Holistic Management is a soft systems learning and problem solving process.

Figure 2 shows the four quadrants of the Kolb circle with the learning style steps in capital letters: DIVERGE, ASSIMILATE, CONVERGE, and ACCOMMODATE. Each quadrant also has appropriate parts of the Holistic Management® Model as a systems process in which the learner or problem solver 1) diverges out to learn about the whole situation by defining a Whole Under Management, 2) assimilates as much information and as many paradigms as possible by listing Tools (similar to hypotheses), 3) converges on sustainable solutions by using the Testing Guidelines to assess the Tools, and 4) accommodates the appropriate Tools to the situation by planning and action following the Management Guidelines and Planning Procedures. This circle has two additional parts: the Holistic Goal at the center and the Feedback Loop at the top where one will always be reminded

to use it. The Whole under Management includes the Ecosystem Processes.

I title Figure 2 (below) as the Holistic Management Soft-Systems Circle. A discussion or analysis of the situation can start with any of the components. For example, one can detect ‘red flags’, like excessive soil erosion, by monitoring the Ecosystem Processes. This indicator may then lead to an evaluation of the values of the decision makers and the need for a Holistic Goal. Or, many times discussion will tend to center on use of particular Tools, and this may lead to asking questions such as: What are we trying to manage for? What is the root cause of the problem? Are there appropriate plans? One can visualize holding the Holistic Management-Soft Systems Circle like a rubber ball and feeling for the roughest part to consider next. This leads to consideration of the whole ball, but with the assurance of progress by starting with the roughest part.

As a facilitator, one can start with the concept of a circle in four parts; then add the inner Holistic Goal circle and the Feedback Loop. In a meeting room, the facilitator may use multiple charts, black boards, or whiteboards to record a discussion, placing the words of a discussant in the appropriate place within the Holistic Management Soft Systems Circle. Sitting in a discussion circle out in a field, one can use five or six clipboards to again, organize items of discussion into a systematic and systemic process. The participants soon get the idea as they see the facilitator slot their talking point into the overall scheme of the circle.

We have found this tool to be very helpful in creating a process for natural resource discussions and a way to capture the thinking of a group and move it forward in a systematic, productive, and participatory way so that implementation is smoother.

Cliff Montagne teaches in the Department of Land Resources and Environmental Science at Montana State University in Bozeman, Montana. He can be reached at: montagne@montana.edu.

References Kolb, David A. Experiential learning.

1984 Prentice-Hall.

Wilson, K. and Morren, G. E. B., Jr. 1990. Systems approaches for improvement in agriculture and resource management. Macmillan, New York.

Figure 1: Kolb Learning Style Circle

Figure 2: The Holistic Management Soft Systems Circle Number 141

IN PRACTICE 5

Livestock, Landscapes, and Livelihoods—

Climate Change Mitigation Options

The Contribution of Global Grazing Lands to Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation

by Constance Neely

M

any of the earth’s population depend on the drylands and grasslands of the world for their livelihood. In fact, 50% of the world’s livestock is supported by rangelands. But 25% of the earth’s landmass (9 billion acres) is affected by desertification and in Africa 1/2 of the continent suffers from desertification. This land degradation comes at the cost of $42 billion USD of income that is lost every year. One billion people depend on livestock and the majority of the world’s poorest depend on livestock for at least a portion of their livelihood. Moreover, livestock is the fastest growing agricultural sector with some countries having 50% or greater of the GDP coming from this sector.

Grassland Grade Card Not only is there loss of production with grasslands, we see that there is also a loss of the grasslands to other land uses. For example, large portions grassland ecoregions around in North and South America have been converted from grasslands to croplands. (See Table 1 below). Asia and Africa still have retained approximately 75% of their grasslands albeit degraded. Research shows that 20-35% of global grasslands are degraded with some numbers as high as 70%.

Bad Rap for Cattle Important studies like “Livestock’s Long Shadow” have brought the potential negative effect that livestock have on the environment to global attention. As such, cattle have gotten a bad rap for emissions since they are said to be responsible for 80% of agriculture’s 13.5% responsibility of global emissions. This 80% is based on 34% from deforestation, 26% from enteric fermentation, and 25% from manure. There is little argument that cattle are the least efficient grazers, but the demand for this meat in the developing world and an increasing population

suggests that this demand will likely increase.

With so many people dependent on livestock for their livelihood security, taking livestock out of the food equation is not an answer.

Agricultural CO2 Sources But as global climate change affects temperatures and subsequent growing degree days, there is an expected shift from marginal crop production land to land more appropriate to livestock keeping particularly in Africa (with greater need for keeping them in a way to improve land). While there are mixed opinions as to the effect of burning crop/grasslands in terms of plant regeneration possibilities, biomass burning from savannas is estimated contribution of 42% of gross CO2 along with other gas emissions. And, issues of loss of soil quality and microbial activity, and their subsequent influence on nutrient and water cycles are rarely discussed as additional negative factors. Likewise, grazing-induced desertification in drylands has been estimated to emit as much as 100 million tons of CO2/year.

Table 1: Conversion of Grassland Ecoregions

6

IN PRACTICE

January / February 2012

However, various research argues that we can mitigate, at least in large part, the negative effect livestock can have on the landscape by increasing productivity and reducing emissions through improved genetics, animal health, and feed quality. Many solutions require high level of technologies. There are arguments that a shift from ruminants to monogastrics will be key to reducing emissions from livestock. A number of proposed solutions do not take into account the role of improved land management for feed quality and the importance of pastoralists in being the stewards to those solution. Planned grazing to enhance land productivity and improved ecosystem functions could certainly be an effective tool to mitigate the greenhouse gases while improving adaptive capacity.

Who Pays?

The socio-economic impact of global climate change is not an equal opportunity affair. Some suffer more than others from multiple challenges including food security, poverty, and environmental conflicts. There are a number of issues that keep us from moving forward on a more global focus on improved grazing land health. For example, transit routes are shrinking for pastoralists as lands are becoming more privatized in sub-Saharan Africa. As pastoralists are marginalized they lose their capacity to move animals and there is a tendency to promote sedentary agriculture.

Furthermore, there are issues around land tenure.

Taking a look at three maps of the grasslands carbon in Africa (see maps next page), we see, in broad terms, the soil carbon gap, the grasslands degradation and the global livestock density all pretty well line up in the same regions. Moreover, these same areas are where the drought risk hot spots are as well as the areas of environmental conflicts.

CONTINUED ON PAGE 7

Table 2: Options to Reduce Emissions – Grazing Land Management

What is the Cost?

If we look at the investment:benefit ratio of mitigation measures we see that improved grazing land management has the second highest technical potential for mitigating emissions.

With planned grazing you can promote carbon sequestration through deep rooted perennial species and full ground cover while also addressing a host of other issues related to the ecosystem processes. Given that drylands store approximately 46% of the global carbon share, and the carbon gap that has been created by degradation, the ability to improve these soils holds great potential.

Collaboration Key We need to make sure that our networks are talking to each other. Groups such as the World Initiative on Sustainable Pastoralism has been instrumental in coalescing pastoralists issues and bringing them to global attention. In Kenya, the Livestock Working Groups focuses on everyone in the meat value chain discussing issues— researchers, pastoralists, government, slaughterhouse/meat processing. They have also promoted community driven pastoralist field schools that teach about natural resources management, animal production, markets and even policy. Holistic planned grazing is a key area of training.

Another example of networking is the Grassland Carbon Working Group which began with work by HMI and USDA bringing together all of the interested parties in advancing work to on grasslands carbon to the benefit of land users.

Focus on Livelihoods While we got excited about carbon credits and went running off in that direction, the take home message is really about improving people’s livelihoods so we need to keep food security and poverty alleviation as the main aim. “Climate Smart Development” is a means to doing that.

Livestock are and will continue to be an irreplaceable source of livelihoods for the poor, and pastoralism remains perhaps the most rational strategy for marginal areas. The associated co-benefits (increased soil organic matter, productivity, water capture and retention, and biological diversity) provide vital adaptation strategies. In this way grasslands fit into all the global agendas (environmental, social, and economic). We can manage for all of this, but we have to get agriculture clearly on the climate change negotiation agenda. It’s the backbone of the economy, food security, and livelihood. And, we must keep working to uplift the value of pastoralists and the The Kenya Livestock Working Group Value Chain Pastoralist land they manage regardless of Field School in Kajiado, Kenya

Grasslands carbon gap line up with drought and environmental conflict hot spots showing the connection between lost carbon, drought, and conflict. the outcomes of global conventions and conferences. So the question remains, “Will climate change be the ultimate incentive to do what we have meant to be doing all along?”

Let’s hope so.

Constance Neely is a Holistic Management Certified Educator who divides her time between Nairobi, Kenya working for the World Agroforestry Centre and Rome, Italy where she consults for the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nation (FAO).

She can be reached at: clneely@earthlink.net.

This article is an excerpt from her presentation at the Quivira Coalition Conference on carbon in November 2010.

Number 141

IN PRACTICE 7

& Whirlwind Community Farm Perennial Grasses versus Alfalfa

by Owen Hablutzel

W

hirlwind Community Farm encompasses 240 acres (96 ha) of desert in southwest New Mexico, a scant three miles from the Mexican border. It was purchased in 2006 by author and teacher Sankara Saranam. The intention was for this property to serve as a location to establish a community of like-minded people interested in pursuing pranayama yoga and a sustainable lifestyle in this rapidly changing world. This article will detail how using Holistic Management helped these new agrarians make an important decision about their land that will shape their livelihoods and land health far into the future.

In the years since the initial 2006 purchase the community land holdings in the area have grown. Among these, a 200-acre (80-ha) property nearby, called Deepwater, was selected to host the main hall and gardens for the community. At this time the original Whirlwind property began to be conceived of as a site for agricultural production capable of contributing to the financial livelihoods and ecological health of the community.

In early 2008, a property consultation took place involving Mr. Saranam, regenerative agriculture consultant Darren Doherty, and myself. The Holistic Management framework was recommended to Mr. Saranam as a direction to explore while planning further for the unfolding community.

By 2009 Mr. Saranam, his family, and others with interest in the emerging community had studied enough about Holistic Management to know that they wanted to learn a lot more. They hoped to begin putting the framework into practice as soon as possible.

Attempting to form a community for sustainable living in a relatively remote area, beginning with practically no existing infrastructure, adds many layers of complexity atop the already potentially difficult project of successful whole farm planning in a brittle environment (brittleness in this area is around 8). Given the context of these conditions, the use the Holistic Management framework—with its decision testing, planning procedures and anchoring holistic goal—would be a crucial help for developing members shared vision, for making better decisions together, and for progressively moving the whole project forward deliberately while minimizing potential false-steps.

Improving Land In our early sessions together we gathered those presently living in the community along with others planning to move there at a later date. This group, the Whirlwind Community as such, began by defining for themselves their whole under management, their statement of purpose and their holistic goal.

8

Land & Livestock

January / February 2012

A couple of key issues for the Whirlwind community are involved in the decision case example described here. To begin, the need to improve all ecosystem processes on the Whirlwind property are regarded by members as paramount. In particular, the water and mineral cycle (soils) are in great need of further rejuvenation in order to support the conversion of sunlight, water, and soil resources into viable products that can generate return.

A return is needed specifically due to the current debt load on the community. These two issues are related. Improving the ecosystem processes is made both more possible and more urgently necessary as a result of a previous decision to install a drip system on over 160 acres of the Whirlwind property. Design and installation of this irrigation enables reliable production in an erratic rainfall environment. This makes profit far more possible and reliable.

At the same time, although the Natural Resource Conservation Services (NRCS) is sharing the cost of the drip system, the purchase and installation required the Whirlwind Community to take on a significant debt load. In order to maintain and operate this system, additional monies and infrastructure expense will be required. This may include drilling and installation of additional bore-wells, purchase, maintenance and operation of pumps, a compost tea brewer, and perhaps other compost-making equipment.

The recommendation from the NRCS has been to put the entire acreage to alfalfa and then sell alfalfa hay to cover the debt expense.

Holistic Financial Planning The primary concern of the decision makers in this case was immediately to achieve the most return and highest profit from the drip-irrigation investment as possible, while remaining true to their holistic goal. Beyond this financial concern, and more fundamentally in light of their holistic goal, the objective is to greatly increase the health of the land and soils at Whirlwind as the source of long-term sustainability.

While the NRCS recommendation was to put the Whirlwind property into alfalfa, the community members explored other options including establishing treebelts throughout the property with grazing and perhaps some cropping between. Another proposed option was putting Whirlwind to mixed perennial grasses. These could be hayed, or grazed directly, or even used to produce perennial seeds. There had been additional suggestions to crop peppers, melons, or onions.

The decision-makers elected to choose the mixed perennial grass as an alternative to the alfalfa option to test toward their holistic goal. Here’s how it tested out: 1. Cause and Effect Test The problem is?

Prior land abuse is a root cause of the present state of poor (if improving) soils. The drip system and well-bore--themselves a consequence of an earlier decision, based on the desire for a reliable income from this land even with its’ low and erratic rainfall environment, are the root cause of the debt.

Does this action address the root cause of the problem?

It appears both options, alfalfa and grass, would address the poor soil state resulting from prior land treatment, though more research towards the longterm sustainability of each needs to be considered.

■ Both options could possibly or possibly not PASS—more research 2. Weak Link Test a. Social: Have we considered and addressed any confusion, anger, or opposition this action could create with people whose support we need in the near or distant future?

Some potential for opposition: • alfalfa not a native • alfalfa is a high water use plant • high electricity cost / use to irrigate • alfalfa monoculture is low biodiversity and therefore prone to problems of monoculture (ease of disease, target-rich-environment for pests, etc) • electricity use also adds to pollution of mercury and possibly sulfuric acid in air • alfalfa stand has limited life span 3, maybe 5-7 years • these extra costs may not sit well with our funding sources • grass option does not have most of these concerns ■ Alfalfa NOT PASS—Grass PASS b. Biological: Does this action address the weakest point in the life cycle of this organism?

■ Result is Not Applicable c. Financial: Does this action strengthen the weakest link in the chain of production?

Right now, resource conversion is our weakest link in the production chain. We need to be converting our sun, soil, and water resources into grass and biodiversity resources. In this case, both options will at least begin converting the sunlight, water, soil resources.

■ Both PASS 3. Energy-Money, Source and Use Test Is the energy and money to be used in this action derived from the most appropriate source in terms of our holistic goal? And, will the way in which the energy and money is used lead towards our holistic goal?

Alfalfa?

Energy Source? Electricity, polluting – NO $ Source? External loan, debt – NO Energy Use? Grows roots, improves soil – PASS $ Use? Generates financial profit and ecological improvement – PASS TEST: Alfalfa SOURCE USE

ENERGY NO PASS

MONEY NO PASS

Mixed Grass test results are the same as Alfalfa, for the same reasons.

TEST: Mixed Grass SOURCE USE

ENERGY NO PASS

MONEY NO PASS

4. Sustainability Test If we take this action, will it lead towards or away from the future resource base described in our holistic goal?

Alfalfa monoculture is not sustainable. The alternative of mixed grass, may be sustainable, but we will need more research.

■ Alfalfa—NOT PASS. Mixed Grass—MAY PASS 5. Marginal Reaction Test Which action provides the greatest return, in terms of our holistic goal, for the time and money spent?

Alfalfa vs. Mixed Grass • With alfalfa there is a risk of losing crop to flooding.

With grass adapted to flooding it may even do better • Alfalfa uses far more electricity and water and acid (for cleaning drip system) than Grass • Mixed grasses will build soil more rapidly, with more diversity and more soil cover than monoculture alfalfa • Grass cover would protect drip system better if ever grazed (more flexibility) • Grass can go longer without water if wells are not functioning for some reason (less risk) • Grass can also pay the debt (profit, we need a Gross Profit Analysis to figure relative margins) • Grass option is native, a polyculture, less pollution, and longer lived than alfalfa • Using grass opens possibility of using it for grazing (enterprise stacking) • Mixed grasses nicer aesthetically, to walk on, etc… (better quality of life) • Also, peak oil preference will be for grass since electricity and transport to market will cost more (less input costs) • Grass is far more flexible for possible future life and use ■ Grass PASS and Alfalfa NOT PASS 6. Gross Profit Analysis (GPA) Test Which enterprises contribute most to covering the overheads of the business?

Back-of-napkin version: Income Annual Volume Annual Income Potential

ALFALFA $150 / Ton 10 Tons / Acre $15,000 / Acre

MIXED GRASS $300 / Ton 10 Tons / Acre $15,000 / Acre

Note that this version shows the Mixed Grass option to be potentially twice as profitable, prior to consideration of expenses.

• Alfalfa inputs are far more expensive (more water, electricity, fertilizer, and sulfuric acid, etc.)

• Local market requires more grass hay and has plenty of alfalfa supply already. This suggests grass can be sold both more readily and with a more premium price in the area • This means less marketing costs, far less wear and tear, less water, less electricity, less acid, less fertilizer inputs for grass ■ Grass PASS

■ Source NOT PASS, and Use PASS for Both

CONTINUED ON PAGE 10

Number 141

Land & Livestock

9

The initial back-of-napkin gross profit analysis did not suggest a financial

Whirlwind Community Farm

continued from page nine gap nearly as wide as this more detailed one. The gap that has emerged is a

Subsequently, a more thoroughly researched gross profit analysis was performed by the decision-makers. This compared the enterprises further, to get an improved sense of detail regarding financial aspects of the decision.

The data collected was also useful in developing a business plan for the mixed grass enterprise. Annual production per acre estimates were purposefully somewhat conservative.

GROSS PROFIT ANALYSIS FACTORS

ALFALFA

MIXED GRASS

Seed Cost

$12,100

$11,200

Seed Delivery

$700

$700

Seed Drilling

$2,000

$2,000

Water (electric)

$2,800 / month

$2,200 / month

Cut / Bale / Distribute

$50 / acre – cutting

$45 / acre – cutting

Value

$6 / small bale

$15 / small bale

Value 2

$50 / large bale

$105 / large bale

Value 3

$18,000 / year – seeds

$40,000 / year – seeds

Volume

2 tons / acre / year

2 tons / acre / year

Duration

5 years

Indefinite

Grazing

Not Feasible

Feasible

Grazing Volume

0

50 cows

Value 4

0

60 tons beef

Loss Risk 1 – Flooding Loss Risk 2 – Pump Down for over a week Loan

$32,000 / year

$8,000 / year

$5,000 / year

$0

$3,500 / month

$3,500 / month

Labor

$3,000 / month

$3,000 / month

Materials

$500 / month

$500 / month

GROSS PROFIT ANALYSIS: Mixed Grass

Annual Income

Annual Income $67,200

Annual Expenses

$504,000

Annual Expenses

Custom Cut, Bale, Distribute

$7,000

Seed (delivered and drilled)

$12,800

Compost Tea

$7,000

Irrigation Total Expenses

2 tons/acre and $1,800/ton

$28,000 $54,8000

Gross Profit Gross Profit / Acre

$12,400 $89

Custom Cut, Bale, Distribute Seed (delivered and drilled) Compost Tea

$6300 $11,900 $7,000

Irrigation

$22,000

Total Expenses

$47,200

Gross Profit Gross Profit / Acre

$456,800 $3,263

The use of a Keyline plow has helped to jumpstart the ecosystem processes at Whirlwind with a shift from virtually 100% bare ground to 80% covered ground.

10

Land & Livestock

7. Society and Culture Test Considering all the questions and our holistic goal, how do we feel about this action now?

■ Alfalfa NOT PASS and Mixed Grass PASS

Additional Benefits

GROSS PROFIT ANALYSIS: Alfalfa 2 tons/acre and $240/ton

surprise and very substantial. There remain many other financial and risk related aspects that are not directly accounted for in the gross profit analysis which only serve to confirm this difference further. After completing the gross profit analysis Mr. Saranam observed: The gross profit analysis shows that while in the short-term alfalfa is a feasible cash crop, in the long term the versatility of grass outweighs the shortterm benefits offered by a monoculture of alfalfa. The loss to flooding is particularly of interest as the farm is located in a flood zone, where up to 35% of the arable, irrigated area can be inundated with water at over 6 inches for several days. This kind of flooding easily kills alfalfa, while grass can withstand it. It is hoped that the soil structure will allow for greater rain harvesting and water penetration.

■ Grass PASS and Alfalfa NOT PASS

January / February 2012

As a result of the testing, the decision was made to implement the mixed grass plan. One reason for this outcome was found in doing the research.

While exploring the potentials in the local market for hay, it was discovered that alfalfa was chronically in oversupply, and therefore drew a relatively low price. At the same time, the local experience with grass hay involved a usual shortage and a local demand that exceeds the available supply. Given this condition a good price was to be had for grass, as well as a ready and undersupplied local market niche.

It is also the case that the greater diversity offered by the mixed grass allows for a greater diversity of possible uses. For example, were seeds to be harvested this could be done from several species rather than a single species.

The diversity also creates different options and potentials to add value to the grass resource, through grazing for example. In short, this improved flexibility and nimbleness is of significant value in a changing world, especially in a brittle environment.

In addition to these points, fundamental to the decision was the perception that the grass system will be significantly better for a sustained improvement of all ecosystem processes. In water cycle terms the grass will use less aquifer water, meaning less salt, less anaerobic conditions, and more soil life creating more water storage capacity in the soils. The mineral cycle will benefit much more from mixed grass due to more carbon and organic matter in the soil, a much more diverse range of plant rooting strategies and depths, creating more diverse niches for a more diverse soil biology, as well as distributing and accessing minerals and nutrients to and from a much greater variety of sections in the soil profile.

Monitoring the health of the ecosystem processes and how the land is trending is a top priority. Baseline monitoring transects are being established for that purpose.

The energy flow will be significantly increased also due to the increased diversity and variety of plants, filling as well as creating a wider range of available niches, all more adapted to the local conditions. The community dynamics will certainly be far more complex and diverse, and therefore more stable and resilient to changing conditions through time.

While the financial differences expressed by the Gross Profit Analysis made a decision in terms of finances alone an obvious one, many further dynamics beyond the financial numbers were considered. In the end the decision for grass was taken because it bore the best overall relation to all aspects of the Whirlwind community holistic goal.

Monitoring the Decision Whirlwind Community has chosen three areas to monitor in order to ensure this decision takes them towards their holistic goal. These are land health, financial soundness, and social effects.

In order to ensure that all four ecosystem processes at Whirlwind are moving in the desired direction, Whirlwind Community will create a series of monitoring sites on the Whirlwind property. Each year a qualitative biological monitoring of these areas will be performed. In addition, soil tests will be done (using the Soil Food Web labs) as needed and in conjunction with the compost tea program, to monitor variables such as soil carbon, organic matter, and others.

To monitor the financial soundness of the decision to use mixed grasses on Whirlwind, the expenses and income from this enterprise will be recorded and closely tracked during the year. In the process of annual holistic financial planning the overall financial performance will also be assessed.

Measuring whether this decision is helping Whirlwind Community achieve its human and quality of life goals will be done through tracking both the amount of time and labor that goes into the grass enterprise each day (as a proportion of total work), as well as the amount of vacation time for members each year.

The ways in which their dedication to learning and practicing Holistic Management has affected the Whirlwind community can be seen through this decision. The initial plan—to follow the NRCS agency recommendation for an alfalfa-only approach—was in part due to a feeling that, because they were people just starting out in the agricultural realm, the most prudent thing to do would be to follow the advice of the established agency experts.

Both the Whirlwind and Deepwater properties had found significant successes by earlier using approaches and consultation based on the nonconventional frameworks of Keyline and Permaculture. The Whirlwind restoration from near bare ground to 80% plant cover had even been one of the criteria on which the NRCS agreed to proceed with a cost share for the drip irrigation system. But whether or not to proceed contrary to their more conventional advice in this new higher stakes enterprise for Whirlwind was not a simple question.

Once this group began their learning and use of the Holistic Management® framework in earnest the situation really began to shift.

Learning these practices was changing their actions. Going through these processes ensured that decisions were considered more carefully and systematically, that all angles were considered, and that research and learning occurred in needed areas at needed times. The whole process helped to generate more knowledge within the group about more of the options that might be available, and of the relative trade-offs between different approaches.

For the Whirlwind community the end result of this decision has been a far greater confidence in both their future as a community and their capacity to effectively engage with the many challenges that are sure to arise along the way.

Thoughts on Biological Monitoring

by Tony McQuail Why do we monitor?

To figure out where we are and where we are going.

What additionally do we monitor for with Holistic Management?

To see if we are making progress toward our holistic goal.

Why do we do biological monitor?

To check if we are moving toward the future landscape described in our holistic goal.

What do we monitor?

What are indicators of healthy ecosystem processes?

• Water cycle • Mineral cycle • Community Dynamics • Energy Flow Is there an indicator that encompasses them all?

Soil Surface—is it covered or bare?

How do we monitor?

The Full Enchilada: • 100 foot transect—marked out so you can find it each year.

If possible place permanent markers to define the end points of the transect.

• Darts thrown randomly at 1' intervals: 100 darts = 100 points.

• Information recorded for 100 points: Dart struck soil surface, plant spacing from dart to plant nearest the dart. Plant species within a 6-inch radius of the dart, age composition. Record any insects or other organism signs within the circle.

• Repeat monitoring annually at the same time each year.

• Take photos of the transect—looking down at the ground surface and across it—preferably using the same land mark in the distance so annual progress/change will be apparent. Put a piece of paper with the date and the specific transect point that will appear in a corner of the photo.

• Data and photos kept filed so that they can be found and reviewed to see how soil coverage, plant species and landscape change over time.

• A reduced survey can be done using markers (6" to a foot rebar) driven in flush with the ground at 5 points along the transect, (say at 10, 30, 50, 70 and 90 feet) and then a foot square area around them monitored and recorded annually (use a square frame a foot on a side). The transect can start a measured distance from a marked fenceline post (marked with a plastic cattle tag or some similar bright and durable item) so that it is easy to find the fixed points marked by the rebar.

• The Taco Chip: Annual photos taken at the same time of year and same place each year—down at the ground and across the CONTINUED ON PAGE 13

Owen Hablutzel is a Holistic Management Certified Educator who can be reached at 310/567-6862 or go2owen@gmail.com.

Number 141

Land & Livestock

11

Biological Monitoring Offers More Tools

by Troy Bishopp

B

iological monitoring, or what I like to call “reading the land,” is an easy and practical method for studying key land health indicators and helping you move toward the goals for your operation, be it a pasture, row-crop or other land management system. When done annually, biological monitoring is much like any soil or forage test in that it provides data to help you make decisions in ration balancing, fertility placement and financial investments. As grazing consultant Jim Gerrish frequently quips, “You can’t manage what you don’t measure.”

Biological monitoring as a hands-on application was brought to the forefront in 2006 when Holistic Management International published the Holistic Management Handbook, authored by Jody Butterfield, Allan Savory, and Sam Bingham. With many charts and grazing planning forms, the handbook is designed for people who actually manage land and livestock, along with the agency professionals who help farmers create the landscapes they want.

While I custom-graze beef stocker cattle, it was in my work as an agency person that got me involved with other agency professionals in this ground covering (rather than groundbreaking) process for my farm in 2008.

I’ve been doing it once a year ever since.

Biological monitoring is essentially an effort aimed at getting you down on your hands and knees to take a really close look at what’s happening at the soil’s surface. You are measuring, recording and ultimately monitoring a wide variety of factors indicating biological activity and plant species composition. You are making an effort to see and document the effects your

Table 1: Troy Bishopp Biological Monitoring % around dart point 2008-2011

12

2008

2009

2010

2011

FIELD 123 Bare soil Litter 1 Litter 2 Plant

20% 30% 20% 30%

7% 20% 20% 53%

4% 48% 12% 36%

4% 32% 16% 48%

Capping Broken Surface Covered Surface

10% 15% 75%

7% 0 93%

0 4% 96%

0 4% 96%

Earthworms 80% Insects 20% Animals (hoof action) 0 Manure w/3’ 0 Manure w/6’ 0

100% 86% 40% 53% 0

96% 24% 32% 56% 0

100% 40% 36% 56% 40%

Grass Legume Forbs and/or weeds Sedge Moss

60% 35% 5%

40% 53% 7%

44% 24% 32%

48% 36% 16%

Seedling Young Mature Decadent Resprout

35% 20% 30% 0 15%

0 53% 40% 7% 0

0 36% 52% 12% 0

36% 44% 16% 4% 0

Land & Livestock

January / February 2012

Anything that gets you down on hands and knees can aid your pasture management program.

management practices are having on the land.

You do this by taking random readings across your fields. At our original agency training session at my place in 2008, we tossed fancy darts with colored streamers back over our shoulders to pick our spots. You can use a Frisbee, a weighted 16-penny nail or your farm cap. Just toss, go to the spot, get down on your knees, part the grass, and start recording what you see.

Did the dart hit a plant, litter or bare ground? Is there evidence of earthworms, insects, or erosion? What kinds, ages and conditions of plant species are within the six-inch radius? Our group added a category measuring manure: is there a pat within either three or six feet of the dart? To better address conditions in the Northeast U.S., we added signs of hoof action and whether legumes are present, and separated earthworm castings from the general insect category because farmers love seeing red wigglers. We also added a moss category: is moss capping the soil surface within a six-inch circle around the dart? Finally, are there any interesting tidbits you want to note, such as dung beetle counts or a mystery plant?

You can do as much or as little as you like, although it’s obviously a case of the more throws of the dart (or the nail, or whatever), the more accurate the picture. In our initial agency Holistic Management training session, we threw a dart every 25 feet over a five-acre paddock. For easy percentages, we try for at least 25 samples to evaluate.

Monitoring the exact same spot every year would be best, but I’m not that scientific—I just do the same five-acre fields each year. The annual monitoring can be done anytime during the growing season. I generally do my dart-throwing in September, and normally the plants are eight to 16 inches tall when I’m doing it (which aids in identifying the plants). Weather conditions certainly affect the findings, and it is important to make specific notes about the weather right along with other important factors such as recovery periods, fertilizer applications and stocking rates. Since you’re only doing it once a year, it’s important to be as detailed as possible. Take some pictures, and be sure to write everything down.

It is really interesting and valuable to do this in a group setting, as different people process the information differently. There will be disagreements over species and whether or not something qualifies as ground cover. However, these “training” sessions can be important in helping develop the subjective “monitoring eye” that will help you make consistent interpretations down the road.

Most important, the exercise forces you to get down on your knees to really see the soil surface environment. All of the farmers I have worked with on this data collection say it has been invaluable in forcing them to look down instead of across. One confident farmer brought us to a one-year old stand that looked like beautiful, dairy-quality pasture—at least from the barn.

But when we got down on our knees, we found there was 30% bare ground because the stand lacked the plant diversity needed to fill the voids. It was an eye-opener for all of us to see how much lost solar- and water-capturing

opportunity was being lost.

It has been very interesting to see what’s been happening on my farm over the past four seasons. You can see the numbers in the accompanying table: earthworm numbers have increased, the percentage of bare soil has declined, plant and litter cover have increased, and the composition of my plant species has broadened. In my case, these results were achieved by taller grazing, trampling litter, longer rest periods and higher stock densities. (This fall I will be doing a whole-farm soil test to measure how this correlates to fertility and organic matter levels, and compare that with numbers from 2008.)

I have also been monitoring two fields on Nathan Weaver’s farm with his strategies of spreading chicken litter, compost and rock phosphate, clipping pastures with machinery and horses, outwintering and over-seeding while maintaining 20- to 40-day recovery periods to harvest lush, 10-inch swards.

Since implementing these tools in 2009, Nathan has seen a big decline in bare ground and major changes in plant composition.

In general, the results of these two, small-scale monitoring efforts indicate that we are both trending toward what we want for our land with the different goals, strategies and tools at our disposal. In the research arena this information may not be quantitative enough because we only do it annually on one field, and the information is very subjective.

However, the results can be very valuable to the individual farmer/grazier — especially if they are combined with soil tests, per-acre production figures, and costs for plant fertilizers, animal health and any number of other measures. There is more and more information coming out about the economic value of the things we’re measuring through biological monitoring, so it is important to understand where we’re going here.

For instance, John King, a Holistic Management educator from Christchurch, New Zealand (www.succession.co.nz), has employed data from David Whitehead’s book Nutrient Elements in Grassland to compare the biological value found in the soil with market values of commercial fertilizer.

King estimated that one million worms per acre represent $594 worth of value in terms of nutrients available for exchange. Fungi, actinomycetes and bacteria contribute $284/ton, cattle manure is worth $126/ton, and plant roots (living and dying) add $55/ton in value. King said, “As farmers begin measuring biological agriculture with greater professionalism, there should be a deeper connection between biological and financial capital.”

Biological monitoring provides a general, practical measurement of the biological trends resulting from your management practices, thus telling you whether you’re moving your farm in the right direction. Such understanding helps you make better long-term decisions. Reading your land is a valuable skill akin to growing quality forages, turning wrenches, judging grass-finished cattle or artfully managing a pasture system. This is where all the true profit begins.

To access the biological monitoring chart we’re using in the Northeast, go to www.cnyrcd.org/planned-grazing-participants/. Holistic Management Handbook is available for purchase from Holistic Management International at 505/842-5252.

Troy Bishopp custom grazes beef stockers near in Deansboro, New York, and is the project leader for a NE-SARE professional development grazing training project. He also works for the Upper Susquehanna Coalition and Madison County, NY, SWCD. His website: www.thegrasswhisperer.com This article appeared in the October 2011 issue of Graze, a magazine for people interested in managed pastures and family-scale livestock agriculture. For a free sample copy, call 608-455-3311; e-mail graze@grazeonline.com; or go to www.grazeonline.com.

Thoughts on Biological Monitoring continued from page eleven landscape to the same landmark. Photos kept in a file so that they can be found and reviewed to see how soil coverage and landscape change over time.

What else might we monitor for Biological Monitoring?

Wildlife sightings, bird sightings, nesting bird census, insect varieties, water quality, soil tests (organic matter) ADA’s, bales or tons of hay harvested, head of cattle supported (need to be careful here if buying in feed—are we counting the acres the feed came off of—or if we are bringing in off farm fertility in the form of commercial fertilizers or off farm manures)

Who should do the monitoring?

The decision makers (family monitoring picnic), local birding club, High School Environmental club, coop student, employee. If you are not using the same people year to year, you need to think of how to train them or develop a clear procedure so you get consistent data.

When should the monitoring be done?

Ideally at the same time of year so the information is comparable year to year. Also, at a time when there IS biological activity AND the farm or ranch workload is not at its heaviest so that the monitoring will actually get done. Make some notes about the season and the weather prior to the monitoring. If possible do it at the same time of day.

Where should the monitoring be done?

It should be done at a location representative of the land in the whole under management that will show whether change is occurring that is moving the landscape toward or away from the future landscape described in the holistic goal.

When should we start Biological Monitoring?

NOW—this year—or if late in the season—pick a time for next growing season AND MARK IT ON NEXT YEARS CALENDER—AND WHEN DONE MARK IT ON THE FOLLOWING YEARS CALENDER. It may be a good idea to plan it for a holiday weekend when the family can do it as an outing and you will be reminded that this is the time you’ve planned to do biological monitoring.

How much should we do?

It is better to do two photos a year for 20 years than an incredible transect study with all the bells and whistles one year and then never get back to it again. It is better to do 5 dart sites regularly and record the number of broad leafed and narrow leafed plants within the circle than not do any because you don’t yet know how to identify the individual legumes and grasses and you are too busy to acquire that knowledge. Better to do something you can sustain than doing nothing.

Tony McQuail is a Holistic Management Certified Educator who farms near Lucknow, Ontario, Canada. He can be reached at mcqufarm@hurontel.on.ca.

Number 141

Land & Livestock

13

Holistic Management In Action Neil Dennis • Wawota, Saskatchewan, Canada

N

eil Dennis has been experimenting with high stock density for many years and has noticed some interest phenomena over the year. Neil’s stock density is approximately 800 head/acre or 500,000 pounds per acre. He has experimented with bale grazing to increase organic matter and has fed as much as 8.5 tons/acre for a “deep massage.” The cost for this treatment at $60/ton for first cut brome/alfalfa is $510/acre. Neil says it takes about 18 minutes to set up a ¼ mile of fence to get that stock density. He finds he doesn’t have problems with bloat because the animals are not so selective with high stock density and will get a more balanced diet. He’s also found that he has a 20-30% improved utilization with higher stock density. He started out with 1-2% organic matter but has built it to 5-6% organic matter in the areas where he does his “deep massage.”

Winter bale grazing improves soil health by increasing litter and natural nutrients through manure and urine—the results are noticeable within the first growing season and further stimulation with the 500,000 pounds/acre on a yearly basis continues that improvement.

By “deep massage” Neil believes he kick starts the mineral cycle. It was a slow spring in southeast Saskatchewan and the grass would not have kept up with the 600 head of cattle he needed to feed. Solution? Supplement feed until the grass was ahead of the cattle. Neil gave them the usual ½ acre paddock and the cattle grazed it off. Neil rolled out several bales allowing room between the feed ‘strips’ and the cattle ate the strips. Neil rolled out more feed into the area previously not covered. Once the spring growth started and Neil could rely on the grass, he stopped the feeding of the bales or “deep massage”.

dark layer of topsoil on the right side photo extends further down to 23 inches.

This side has 50-60% more root mass.

Left: 80-100 days recovery at 200,000-500,000 pounds per acre. He gets 30-50 ADA with an 8-10" pre-graze height Right: The “deep massage” includes the additional feeding, 100-123 days recovery. He ended up getting 123 ADA with 40 new species in two years. He rolled out bales and grazed stockpiled grass, then rolled bales to fill spaces between where he had grazed and then rolled bales to fill in spaces again.

The animals didn’t leave much behind but what they don’t eat they tramp in.

Cost: Benefit Analysis If an animal day is 60 cents (assuming Neil’s hay prices) then his $510 investment per acre would take approximately 10 years to pay itself back based on improved production based on an improvement of an average of 40 ADA to 123 ADA. Additional benefits like reduced mineral costs would shorten that return.

To better see the contrast in the amount of root mass that results in these two types of treatment, look at the contrast in soil between two holes Neil dug.

The one on the right side has had the “deep massage.” Note the depth of the

Blain Hjertaas • Redvers, Saskatchewan, Canada arly spring grazing in Saskatchewan, we harvested 104 ADA (approximately 3000 lbs per acre) with a stock density of 166,000lbs/acre. Graze to trample ratio is 50/50 meaning we trampled 3,000 lbs per acre to litter which is now biological capital. The last time this area was grazed was early last spring late May so almost a year’s recovery.

E

One issue Neil has noticed is how fence lines result in less root mass. As you can see from the photo, the ground closer to the fence has significantly less root mass because there is less animal impact there. Moreover, the litter on the ground is non-existent by the fence compared to the six inches of litter after winter bale grazing, Neil has in other areas of his paddocks.

Neil believes that for litter to be truly effective it needs to be tramped down into the soil surface so it can be utilized by soil micro-organisms. You want a certain amount above ground for insulation to prevent the ground from becoming too hot or too cold and to offer enough resistance in the winter to catch and hold snow. Neil has taken many soil temps and because his ground stays warmer longer in the fall and is warming up earlier in the spring than his neighbors he believes he is working towards a healthy litter cover.

Over the last 3 years Neil has seen a marked decrease in the amount of mineral the custom graze cattle require. When they first come in they usually take the conventionally recommended amount of mineral. Once they have been at Neil’s for a month, that amount has dropped by over 80%! Neil’s explanation—the mineral cycle of his land has improved to the point the cattle are obtaining most of their mineral needs from the forage they are grazing.

To contact Neil: sunnybrae@rfnow.com.

Do you have a picture that demonstrates the results of your Holistic Management practice? Send your photos and text to: Holistic Management in Action, 5941 Jefferson St. NE, Ste. B, Albuquerque, NM 87109 or email to: anna@holisticmanagement.org

14

Land & Livestock

January / February 2012

From the Board Chair

by Sallie Calhoun

L

ast November in Albuquerque, the HMI Board and staff met for our annual meeting. I had just come from two days at the Quivira Coalition meeting, also in Albuquerque, with its new agrarians theme and was inspired by the path these young people are taking. I was excited to see what the 2012 plan for HMI looked like, and hopeful that there might be some common ground.

Over the past year both Board and staff at HMI have worked hard to bring clarity and focus to the HMI vision in order to create a more sustainable and impactful organization. In March we revised our holistic goal and agreed that “We educate people to manage land for a more sustainable future.” The question that faced us next was who we educate, how, and what is the impact of that education? How will we monitor our success?

In order to answer “the question,” staff asked what programs could be financially sustainable, replicable, scalable, have high impact, and be within our ability to deliver? Based on our experience over the past year, two of the programs that stand out are the Beginning Women Farmers program and the Gen Next program. We have had

good success with the Beginning Women Farmers program in the Northeast, including getting a lot of feedback that the training has changed farmers’ behavior. Over 165 women expressed interest in a similar program in Texas after a series of introductory one-day seminars, and there are several colleges interested in the Gen Next program. It would be wonderful if Holistic Management training could help our new agrarians to be more successful in reaching their goals. In both of these programs we are working with groups who are both learning and building communities which is a key to future success.

We have realized over the last year that whatever programs we decide meet our criteria, the organization has to be able to deliver quality programs that have an impact. This has led to a review of the curriculum and a plan for improving the existing materials and programs and their delivery, along with adding new learning opportunities. This process will include developing processes to monitor how successful our programs are at affecting behavior, which is the real measure of success.

A major change that was effective at this most recent board meeting was the conversion of International Directors into regular Directors.

For the last few years, we have had International Directors from outside of the United States, who

The Next Drop of Rain— Putting Out the Welcome Mat

by Jack Varian

I

have spent a lot of time over the years pondering, especially since Holistic Management gave me permission to ponder back in 1991, how I might get a drop of rain that falls on our V6 Ranch to be more than just a tourist passing through. I want this rain drop to find upon landing that this ranch really has the welcome mat out.

This raindrop, let’s call him Squirt, was heard to say, “I didn’t even get my feet muddy when I landed, because there was a nice mat of grass that gave me a soft landing. But, I can’t say the same for some of my friends that landed on a big flat rock. It was awful! You could just hear them and see their broken bodies running off that rock.

But, a good percentage of us landed on grass and other had their fall broken by trees and brush and other living things. So I’m glad luck sent me here!”

This then is the start of a raindrop’s life on our ranch. We call Squirt’s journey a journey in Varian Time where we follow Mother Natures’ lead, which is to slow down water. For us slowing down water has become a way of life. It’s exactly what HMI teaches us to do, because when you use the Holistic Management framework you do slow down water.

But let’s get back now to Squirt’s journey. We left Squirt on a grassy meadow, and he has now starting to look below the soil surface. The

did not vote and only attended one meeting each year. They were usually recommended by local Holistic Management groups. As of now, all Directors are regular Directors, and all will be expected to attend the two face-to-face board meetings each year, as well as any phone conferences. Our Directors from Canada, Australia, and South Africa are great additions to the Board, and bring new experiences and perspectives, along with a great deal of experience with Holistic Management. I am certain that more fully engaging these amazing people will lead to a more sustainable organization. As a result of this change, Directors from around the world can be recruited and cultivated just like U.S. Directors always have been, for their expertise and perspective, rather than as representatives of a geographic group.

I came home both exhausted and exhilarated after the Quivira Coalition conference and the HMI Board meeting. I believe that there is a great deal of interest in Holistic Management as a framework for better managing land-based enterprises. Working with young people getting into agriculture, along with our established practitioners, is going to be a lot of fun and make a big difference in the world. We have only begun to imagine the possibilities, but we are moving rapidly toward making them real.

easiest way down was a gopher hole, or maybe an earthworm tunnel or root tunnel or a flocculated soil full of organic matter. Or is Squirt’s trip quite the opposite? Does he land on bare ground, getting his feet muddy and can’t get below the soil surface because the surface was capped with algae and lichens and then the sun showed up and finished him off turning him to water vapor and sent him back to the heavens to try again?

But let’s say that Squirt gets a “do over.” He didn’t get locked in a polar ice cap or get stuck on some soil particle as hydroscopic water, but lands in Camelot, or a place that’s very similar like here in Parkfield, California. Anyway, Squirt gets a do over and this time he finds out just how important he is to life and death for our planet! But rather than worry globally about our plight, I think we need to work locally defining our relationship to Squirt. Our quality of life and our bill paying ability are all dependent on Squirt’s speedometer reading while he is here.

Our stewardship will determine whether the critters that live here will or won’t have to worry about becoming homeless, and my grandchildren will or won’t get their chance to become stewards of this land. I firmly believe it all depends on the welcome mat we have out. Some examples of a welcome mat are our water bars on our ranch roads, creek banks that are protected with natural barriers, and manmade things. But mostly growing things are the welcome mat, and more of them constantly make it harder to find bare soil. Good water, mineral, and energy cycles help the land become more complex. By being passionate about our work we will become EGBOK (stands for Everything’s Going to Be OK). Oh, and remember, time is the coin of life. Let’s spend it wisely.

Number 141

IN PRACTICE 15

DEVELOPMENT CORNER Beginning Women Farmers Northeast

H

MI, along with our partners, successfully completed another year of teaching whole farm planning to a group of 90 beginning women farmers from Connecticut, New Hampshire, New York, Vermont, Massachusetts, and Maine. This grant was funded by USDA/NIFA Beginning Farmer and Rancher Program. With the help of organizations such as Community Involved in Supporting Agriculture, Small and Beginning Farmers of New Hampshire, Women in Agriculture NetworkMaine, Connecticut Northeast Organic Farming Association, Central New York Resource Conservation & Development, and University of Vermont, and a host of talented whole farm facilitators and mentors, 60 workshops were completed throughout 2011. Year three of the program has begun and we are already planning for the Beginning Women Conference to be held in March.

Evaluation of this year’s program was multifaceted including a retrospective survey to determine actual behavior change and the results YEAR TWO KNOWLEDGE CHANGE Course

% Change in Knowledge

Soil Fertility Leadership & Communication Whole Farm Goal Time Management Financial Planning On-farm Decision Making Planned Grazing Marketing Business Planning Land Planning

100 100

achieved from those changes. This was in addition to the evaluation done to measure knowledge change, intended behavior change, and feedback on ways to improve the courses. We have also collected feedback from the mentors, facilitators, and local coordinators to continue to improve the program. Key outcomes have been that local coordinators are providing more direction for mentor support of participants and these coordinators are also providing greater continuity and support between classes to their participants to build a strong supportive network within each program. This effort has resulted several more Holistic Management support groups getting developed in these states to support ongoing learning.

We also continue to refine the curriculum to improve knowledge and behavior change by simplifying language and concepts and focusing on key learnings for each class. Likewise, we have revised agendas to allow for more experiential activity that focuses on peer-to-peer learning for improved retention of key concepts and providing first steps in changed behavior. This includes creating time so participants can work on their own farm plans as well as learn from examples of farm plans. This focus on discovery learning and giving participants problem solving tools will bridge the gap of content learned in the course and real world application of this concepts in the field.

Beginning Women Farmer training takes place out on local farms as well as in the classroom for more experiential learning.

97 97 95 85 56 50 37 33

BEGINNING WOMEN FARMER YEAR TWO OUTCOMES Class

Changed Behavior

Business Planning Time Management Land Planning

Revise or write business plan Create systems to prioritize time allocations Situate farm layout and/or infrastructure differently Implement a system approach to improve plant and soil health through grazing Expand or introduce new markets Monitor for improved soil health

Planned Grazing Marketing Soil Fertility

% of Response 100% 94% 85% 84% 73% 51%

Beginning Women Farmers Texas

T

his fall, HMI hosted a series of one-day seminars in Texas to promote Holistic Management practices and the development of our Beginning Farmers & Ranchers: Women in Texas program. Over 295 women attended the seminars in Austin, Edinburg, Dallas, and Lubbock. We, along with our partners from the Sustainable Food Center, are encouraged and inspired by so many strong women that are either currently involved in, or planning a sustainable agriculture operations. 97% of the attendees rated the seminars positively and 163 expressed a strong interest in participating in our program. We couldn’t be happier. HMI is currently seeking funders for the program to meet the demand for more training.

Sustainable Food Center’s Andrew Smiley addresses almost a hundred Texas women in Agriculture at the Austin area seminar.

Future Farms Update

T

he Rappahannock County, Virginia Future Farms Program concluded the Holistic Management classes for year one of the program with two days of Land Planning, taught by Certified Educator Seth Wilner in September.

Wrapping up quarterly sessions on goal setting and decision-making, grazing planning and biological monitoring, financial planning, and land planning, HMI staff Tracy Favre, Peggy Cole and Peggy Sechrist are working with HMI Communications Director Sandy Langelier to create a presentation for the people of Rappahannock County.

This “rapp-up” will be in the form of an evening reception honoring the local beauty and food and the local people who participated in the program and improved their farms’ triple bottom line this year. Each participant will give a short description of their operation and the changes CONTINUED ON PAGE 18

16 IN PRACTICE

January / February 2012

T he news from holistic management international

HMI Board Changes

W

ith our annual Board of Directors’ Meeting we have a change in our Board make up as Board member terms end and officers are elected. New Board officers are: Sallie Calhoun, Chair; Ben Bartlett, Past Chair; Clint Josey, Vice Chair; Ron Chapman, Secretary; and Jim Shelton, Treasurer.

We would like to thank Lee Dueringer, John Hackley, Jim McMullan and Ian Mitchell-Innes for their service to and support of HMI over the years. We also are excited to introduce our new Directors, Wayne Knight and ZiZi Fritz.

Wayne is a fourthgeneration farmer on his family’s property near Mokopane in Limpopo Province, South Africa.

Wayne has had a long history with Holistic Management when his parents were some of Allan Savory and Stan Parson’s early clients in the 1970s. Wayne graduated with a Bachelor of Science in Agricultural Economics from Natal University.

Following a working tour in the USA in 1994 he returned to the family property to encourage intensifying the practice of Holistic Management under the mentorship of Dick Richardson. Wayne had a wonderful 14 year working relationship with his father, who has now retired. Wayne completed his Certified Educator training in 2006. He now manages the family property and leases neighboring farms on which he practices holistic planned grazing. He has also presented Holistic Management training Aside from his passion for Holistic Management, Wayne has been a member of Round Table, served on his local town’s Chamber of Business Executive Committee, and chaired or participated in a number of rural groupings concerned with local land owner issues. Wayne is a hunting guide, a keen fisherman and part time painter. Wayne is married to Hilary and has three beautiful young children.

Cézanne C. “Zizi” Fritz is a native New Mexican. Her family came to Albuquerque in the

people, programs & projects

late 1870s by way of covered wagon and settled in the city to start a furniture and crockery store and “undertaker” business. In 1988, Zizi had been a fifthgeneration family manager in funeral service when the firm sold Strong-Thorne Mortuary.

Zizi’s professional career spans many years with an international funeral service organization where she managed 14 local funeral homes and cemeteries in New Mexico and Texas. She has been privileged to have worked in the public accounting sector and assisted with the start-up of a trust company. She served as the Executive Director of an assisted living retirement community in Lubbock, Texas and most recently served as the Vice President and Executive Director of the Presbyterian Healthcare Foundation since 2003.

This last year, education about global affairs became a focus and travel took her to 48 countries around the world. Community service and leadership have always been a part of Zizi’s other life having served and led numerous boards over the years. Welcome Zizi and Wayne!

Staff Changes HMI is also excited to announce the addition of two new Development staff, Matt Parrack and Peggy Sechrist.

Matt Parrack has worked as a leader of business development within the complex health care Information Technology industry for over ten years. Driven by a vision to help small physicians’ practices, Matt designed programs that grew their business despite the challenges associated with navigating complex federal regulations, payer rules, decreasing reimbursements and increasing costs of operations. Matt has experience building a direct sales program for a mid-size company and while

leading the company’s revenue generating operations increased the company’s sales revenue each year.

In his most recent role as Director of Business Development at Nuesoft Technologies, Matt has been responsible for identifying new opportunities that drive product distribution, operational improvements, and that continue to enhance the products and services. He negotiated multiple contracts that were vital to increasing revenue and improving market position. Matt has taken on many roles including national oversight of direct and indirect sales of a physician product line. He has worked closely with various strategic business partners, marketing departments, product development groups, and support operations to ensure the satisfaction of the existing customers, as well as identifying opportunities for growth and ongoing development. Matt graduated from Saint Joseph’s University in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and received his MBA from Robinson College of Business at Georgia State University in Atlanta, Georgia. Matt will be our new Development Director.

Also working on Development for HMI is Peggy Sechrist.

Peggy is a student, teacher, and practitioner of Holistic Management for nearly 25 years and resides in the Hill Country of Texas near Fredericksburg. Peggy and her husband, Richard, were the first ranchers in Texas to create a certified organic, grass-fed beef operation in 1995. She has collaborated for many years with numerous agricultural and wildlife agencies including Texas A&M University, Texas Parks and Wildlife, Texas Wildlife Association, Texas Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Services, Southern Agriculture Working Group, and the United States Department of Agriculture/Sustainable Agriculture Research & Education program. Currently, Peggy and Richard operate a local food co-op structured like a Community Supported Agriculture operation and serve membership groups in Fredericksburg, Kerrville, Comfort, and Boerne.

Following her interest in the challenges of human behavior, Peggy has received training in Non-Violent Communication and is a court approved mediator for the Texas Court System.

Her passion is to facilitate holistic planning with families, organizations and communities to create the reality they desire built around quality of life values and one instilled with resilience and sustainability. Welcome, Matt and Peggy!

CONTINUED ON PAGE 18

Number 141

IN PRACTICE 17

Development Corner

continued from page seventeen maintain healthy land, that in turn produces

made due to this training. This producer panel will then be open for questions.

Participants in the Future Farms Program in Rappahannock, Virginia discuss various land planning options at Cliff Miller’s farm to reinforce the land planning concepts they are learning.

husband, Temple, have created an oasis at the 69 Ranch headquarters. Through the years, they have given back to the community in many ways and this KOL day was just a continuation of that commitment. “ KOL is unique among environmental programs because it is designed to teach children about their place where they live, using the property of local land stewards, and since children have an innate need to be in nature and nature needs a new generation who are reconnected to the land to take us to a more sustainable future, we hope to see the program continue to evolve as it adapts to meet new environments. Since its inception in 2003, over 2400 students have been participating in the program.

healthy food.

So if you like healthy land and healthy food, please consider a generous gift to HMI today. For your convenience, you can also give online by visiting our website at www.holisticmanagement.org.

Once again, we thank you for your support, and wish all of you a successful, sustainable 2012!

Grapevine continued from page seventeen

HMI at Conferences

Kids on the Land

O

n September 20th, Katherine Dickson and her family gave 4th graders from Roscoe, Highland and Blackwell, Texas the opportunity to participate in the Kids on the Land (KOL) program at the 69 Ranch near Maryneal. Peggy Maddox, Director of Kids of the Land program for HMI, developed the program which provides a day of hands-on activities to help students reconnect to the land where they live.

The program at the 69 Ranch was called NCI—Nolan County Investigation. Students began the day by creating a timeline of historical events of Nolan County and the Rolling Plains ecoregion. The timeline took the students from 10,000 years ago to the present. The rest of the day was spent in different activities that included learning about native plants on the walking trail along the head waters of Sweetwater Creek; making wildflower seed balls after learning how nature disperses seeds; creating Native American talking sticks; and doing the work of a naturalist by creating nature journals. The day ended with songs led by Charlie Davis.

Volunteers had gathered the day before at the 69 Ranch to plan for the day. Volunteers included Mandi Ligon and Jaime Tankersly from Natural Resources Conservation Services, Burr Williams of Sibley Nature Center in Midland, Sandy Light, Regina McVey, Susan Dent and Kathy Hoskins of Maryneal, Dalton and Gretchen Maddox of Colorado City, Karen McGinnis from San Angelo, Charlie and Susie Davis from Mulberry Canyon, and Dr. Paul Martin from Seguin. Special participants from Dallas were Kathy Dickson’s daughter and grandson, Maria and Anthony Parigi, friends Mimi and Meg Wilson, and Susan Delagarza.

Peggy Maddox notes: “Kathy and her late 18 IN PRACTICE

Kathy Dickson’s 69 Ranch was the site of another successful Kids on the Land program.

Charlie Davis led a sing along with the children from Roscoe, Highland and Blackwell, Texas.

Annual Appeal Reminder

O

ur 2011 Annual Appeal is now in the mail, and once again, we are counting on the support of the Holistic Management International community. This year, it’s more important than ever to support our mission to educate people to manage land for a sustainable future. Studies have shown that ranch and farm land continues to disappear at an alarming rate; so much that USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack recently called for an additional 100,000 farmers in order to sustain food production in the U.S. Your support will help us maintain and grow the programs that are designed to educate and support agricultural professionals in order to

January / February 2012

In October HMI attended the National Future Farmers of America Conference in Indianapolis, Indiana.

HMI staff, Brady Gibbons and Peggy Maddox, talked with many students and agricultural teachers interested in Holistic Management. Over 50,000 students, parents, and agricultural teachers attended this conference.

HMI was a key sponsor of the Quivira Coalition Conference in Albuquerque, New Mexico in November. The focus of this conference was “New Agrarians” and featured many young farmers from around the country including those apprenticing at holistically-managed sites such as George Whitten and Julie Sullivan’s San Juan Ranch in Saguache, Colorado and Dennis Moroney’s 47 Ranch in McNeal, Arizona.

Outstanding Leadership Award HMI Certified Educator and Mesquite Grove Branch manager, Guy Glosson, won the Quivira Coalition’s 2011 Outstanding Leadership in the Radical Center Award for Ranching. Guy has ranched in Snyder Texas for over 20 years and teaches low-stress livestock handling clinics around the world. Congratulations, Guy!

UNITED STATES

Certified Educators

Jeff Goebel 5105 Guadalupe Trail NW Albuquerque, NM 87107 • 541/610-7084 goebel@aboutlistening.com

The following Certified Educators listed have been trained to teach and coach individuals in Holistic Management. On a yearly basis, Certified Educators renew their agreement to be affiliated with HMI. This agreement requires their commitment to practice Holistic Management in their own lives and to seek out opportunities for staying current with the latest developments in Holistic Management.

For more information about or application forms for the HMI’s Certified Educator Training Programs, contact Ann Adams or visit our website at: www.holisticmanagement.org.

◆ These educators provide Holistic Management instruction on behalf of the institutions they represent.

These associate educators provide * educational services to their communities and peer groups.

UNITED STATES ARIZONA

* Tim McGaffic P.O. Box 1903, Cave Creek, AZ 85331 808/936-5749 • tim@timmcgaffic.com

* Larry Dyer 1113 Klondike Ave, Petoskey, MI 49770 231/347-7162 (h) • 231/881-2784 (c) ldyer3913@gmail.com

NEW YORK Erica Frenay 454 Old 76 Road, Brooktondale, NY 14817 607/539-3246 • efrenay22@gmail.com Phillip Metzger 120 Thompson Creek Rd., Norwich, NY 13815 607/316-4182 • pmetzger17@gmail.com NORTH DAKOTA Wayne Berry 1611 11th Ave. West, Williston, ND 58801 701/572-9183 • wberry@wil.midco.net Joshua Dukart 2539 Clover Place, Bismarck, ND 58503 701/870-1184 • Joshua_dukart@yahoo.com

Peggy Maddox P.O. Box 694, Ozona, TX 76943-0694 325/392-2292 • westgift@hughes.net Peggy Sechrist 106 Thunderbird Ranch Road, Fredericksburg, TX 78624 (C)830/456-5587 • peggysechrist@gmail.com WASHINGTON Sandra Matheson 228 E. Smith Rd., Bellingham, WA 98226 360/398-7866 • mathesonsm@frontier.com ◆ Don Nelson Department of Animal Sciences 116 Clark Hall, Washington State University Pullman, WA 99164-6310 509/335-2922 • nelsond@wsu.edu Doug Warnock PO Box 48, Prescott, WA 99348 509/629-1671 (c) • 509/849-2264 (h) dwarnock@columbianet.com

PENNSYLVANIA CALIFORNIA Owen Hablutzel 4235 W. 63rd St., Los Angeles, CA 90043 310/567-6862 • go2owen@gmail.com Richard King 1675 Adobe Rd., Petaluma, CA 94954 707/769-1490• 707/794-8692(w) richard.king@ca.usda.gov * Christopher Peck 1330 Gumview Road, Windsor, CA 95492 707/758-0171 Christopher@naturalinvesting.com ◆ Rob Rutherford CA Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 805/756-1475 • rrutherf@calpoly.edu COLORADO Cindy Dvergsten 17702 County Rd. 23, Dolores, CO 81323 970/882-4222 hminfo@wholenewconcepts.com * Katie Belle Miller 22755 E. Garrett, Calhan, CO 80808 970/310-0852 heritagebellefarms@gmail.com GEORGIA Constance Neely 1421 Rockinwood Dr., Athens, GA 30606 706/540-2878 • clneely@earthlink.net

MONTANA Roland Kroos 4926 Itana Circle, Bozeman, MT 59715 406/522-3862 kroosing@msn.com * Cliff Montagne P.O. Box 173120, Montana State University Department of Land Resources & Environmental Science, Bozeman, MT 59717 406/994-5079 • montagne@montana.edu

NEW HAMPSHIRE ◆ Seth Wilner

24 Main Street, Newport, NH 03773 603/863-4497 (h) • 603/863-9200 (w) seth.wilner@unh.edu NEW MEXICO

MICHIGAN

* Ben Bartlett N4632 ET Road, Traunik, MI 49891 906/439-5210 (h) • 906/439-5880 (w) bartle18@msu.edu

TEXAS Guy Glosson 6717 Hwy. 380, Snyder, TX 79549 806/237-2554 • glosson@caprock-spur.com

Larry Johnson, 608/455-1685 W886 State Rd. 92, Brooklyn, WI 53521 LarryStillPointFarm@gmail.com * Laura Paine Wisconsin DATCP N893 Kranz Rd., Columbus, WI 53925 608/224-5120 (w) • 920/623-4407 (h) laura.paine@datcp.state.wi.us

NEBRASKA

* Mae Rose Petrehn 86904 Delmar Ave., Newport, NE 68759 913/707-7723 treadearthintometaphor@gmail.com Paul Swanson 5155 West 12th St., Hastings, NE 68901 402/463-8507 swanson@inebraska.com Ralph Tate 1109 Timber Dr., Papillion, NE 68046 402/932-3405 Tater2d2@cox.net

MAINE Vivianne Holmes 239 E Buckfield Road Buckfield, ME 04220-4209 207/336-2484 • vholmes@umext.maine.edu * Tobey Williamson 52 Center Street, Portland, ME 04101 c: 207-332-9941 • tobey@bartongingold.com

WISCONSIN Jim Weaver 428 Copp Hollow Road, Wellsboro, PA 16901 570/724-4955 • jaweaver@epix.net

◆ Ann Adams

Holistic Management International 1010 Tijeras NW, Albuquerque, NM 87102 505/842-5252 anna@holisticmanagement.org Kelly Boney 4865 Quay Road L, San Jon, NM 88434 575/268-1162 kboney@plateautel.net Kirk Gadzia P.O. Box 1100, Bernalillo, NM 87004 505/867-4685, (f) 505/867-9952 kirk@rmsgadzia.com

INTERNATIONAL AUSTRALIA Judi Earl “Glen Orton” 3843 Warialda Rd., Coolatai NSW 2402 judiearl@auzzie.net 61-2- 0409-151-969 George Gundry Willeroo, Tarago, NSW 2580 61-2-4844-6223 • g.gundry@bigpond.com Graeme Hand 150 Caroona Lane, Branxholme, VIC 3302 61-3-5578-6272 (h) 61-4-1853-2130 (c) graeme.hand@bigpond.com Dick Richardson Frogmore Boorowa NSW 2586 61-0-263853217 (w) 61-0-263856224 (h) 61-0-429069001 (c) dick@hanaminno.com.au Brian Wehlburg Pine Scrub Creek, Kindee, NSW, 2446 61-2-6587-4353 brian@insideoutsidemgt.com.au CANADA Don Campbell Box 817 Meadow Lake, SK S9X 1Y6 306/236-6088 doncampbell@sasktel.net

Linda & Ralph Corcoran Box 36, Langbank, SK S0G 2X0 306/532-4778 rlcorcoran@sasktel.net

* Allison Guichon

Box 10, Quilchena, BC V0E 2R0 250/378-4535 allison@guichonranch.ca Blain Hjertaas Box 760, Redvers, Saskatchewan SOC 2HO 306/452-3882 bhjer@sasktel.net Brian Luce RR #4, Ponoka, AB T4J 1R4 403/783-6518 lucends@cciwireless.ca Tony McQuail 86016 Creek Line, RR#1, Lucknow, ON N0G 2H0 519/528-2493 mcqufarm@hurontel.on.ca Len Pigott Box 222, Dysart, SK, SOH 1HO 306/432-4583 JLPigott@sasktel.net Kelly Sidoryk P.O. Box 374, Lloydminster, AB S9V 0Y4 780/875-9806 (h) 780/875-4418 (c) sidorykk@yahoo.ca

Number 141

IN PRACTICE 19

INTERNATIONAL

Holistic Goal Setting and Facilitation Services

KENYA Richard Hatfield P.O. Box 10091-00100, Nairobi 254-0723-506-331; rhatfield@obufield.com Christine C. Jost International Livestock Research Institute Box 30709, Nairobi 00100 254-20-422-3000; 254-736-715-417 (c) c.jost@cgiar.org * Belinda Low P.O. Box 15109, Langata, Nairobi 254-727-288-039; belinda@grevyszebratrust.org

Are you ready to make the most out of your resources?

Do you need help dealing with critical human resource issues?

Has change taken you by surprise?

MEXICO

HMI provides skilled, objective facilitators to help you achieve your goals!

BENEFITS OF HOLISTIC MANAGEMENT FACILITATION INCLUDE:

To learn more, call HMI at

• Elicits key motivators and values 505/842-5252 or from the group for more effective email Tracy at tfavre@ group decision making holisticmanagement.org.

• Improves communication • Improves conflict resolution • Creates a safe environment to have crucial conversations including generational transfer • Creates common ground from which to make management decisions and plans

H

Ivan A. Aguirre Ibarra P.O. Box 304, Hermosillo, Sonora 83000 52-1-662-281-0990 (from U.S.) 51-1-662-281-0901 Rancho_inmaculada@yahoo.com.mx NAMIBIA Usiel Kandjii P.O. Box 23319, Windhoek 264-61-205-2324 • kandjiiu@gmail.com Colin Nott P.O. Box 11977, Windhoek 264/61-225085 (h) 264/81-2418778 canott@iafrica.com.na Wiebke Volkmann P.O. Box 9285, Windhoek 264-61-225183 or 264-81-127-0081 wiebke@mweb.com.na

NEW ZEALAND

* John King

P.O. Box 12011 Beckenham, Christchurch 8242 64-276-737-885 succession@clear.net.nz SOUTH AFRICA

Jozua Lambrechts P.O. Box 5070 Helderberg, Somerset West Western Cape 7135 27-83-310-1940 • 27-21-851-2430 (w) jozua@websurf.co.za Wayne Knight Solar Addicts PO Box 537, Mokopane, 0600 South Africa 27-0-15-491-5286 theknights@mweb.com.za Ian Mitchell-Innes P.O. Box 52 Elandslaagte 2900 27-36-421-1747 blanerne@mweb.co.za UNITED KINGDOM

* Philip Bubb 32 Dart Close, St. Ives, Cambridge, PE27 3JB 44-1480-496-2925 (h) +44 7837 405483 (w) philipbubb@onetel.com

Because the focus of the book is on natural aving dabbled in raising both meat chickens poultry raising, Ussery spends a considerable amount and layers, I’ve read my fair share of chicken

by Ann Adams of space discussing key issues of avoiding predation books. Without a doubt, Harvey Ussery’s and how to keep the poultry out in winter (two The Small-Scale Poultry Flock is the best The Small-Scale Poultry Flock critical issues with pastured birds). Many books do book I’ve read about how to raise poultry in an allBy Harvey Ussery, not cover these topics or are not as clear in what can natural way. Ussery not only discusses the usual ins Chelsea Green Publishing, 2011 be done. Certainly Ussery speaks mostly from an East and outs of animal husbandry, shelter, feed, butchering, 394 pages coast perspective, but his years of work with the etc. but he also discusses the critical piece of how to American Pastured Poultry Producers Association, get the poultry to build soil fertility and integrate the American Livestock Breeds Conservancy, and the these important livestock in the garden. Given the need Society for the Preservation of Poultry Antiquities brings the lessons he has for livestock integration within cropping, this text is even more valuable learned from many different regions to the fore in his writing (not to mention by addressing this issue. the writing he has done for Mother Earth News, Countryside & Small Stock Of additional value is that Ussery has done the numbers and gives Journal, and Backyard Poultry). examples of what the net profit is for different types and sizes of poultry Be prepared to challenge your paradigms of poultry management when operations as well as marketing options. For example a scenario with 250 you read this book. Of particular interest to me was Ussery’s decision to order layers and eggs selling at $4.50/dozen with $13/hour labor costs at 10 hours straight runs of chicks because of the moral issue of euthanizing hundreds of of labor/week yields a net profit of $10,284 the first year and $12,827 the thousands of cockerel chicks for the convenience of all-pullet chick orders. second and $13,327 the third with the sale of spent hens included. With the Likewise, for those who argue that you can’t integrate livestock and cropping, scenario of 2000 layers (still considered a small flock) with 30 hours/week of Ussery explains how he has accomplished this task in his garden space (or labor you have net profits of over $141,000. There’s nothing like numbers to rather, spaces). By alternating which area the birds are and which are the get you thinking of the possibilities. crops are, he has an effective way to build organic matter while addressing Besides the detailed spreadsheet examples, the appendices for this book concerns of pathogens. But his “chicken cruiser” that can work a raised bed include: instructions for making a mobile A-frame shelter and trap nests, a feed formulation spreadsheet for making your own feed, a comparison of definitely makes a variety of possibilities of integration possible. nutrients between industrial eggs and pastured eggs, and a list of additional I don’t think I’ve read such a useful farming book in a long time. valuable resources. And also of great value are the numerous color“Chookfull” of useful information and thoughtful commentary, this book photographs on such critical instructions as how to butcher a chicken. is a must have for any poultry producer.

20 IN PRACTICE

Book Review

November / December 2011

T H E

M A R K E T P L A C E

SOIL FERTILITY FOR WINE GRAPES Determining & Calculating Needed Nutrients July 30-31 & Aug. 1, 2012 LOCATION: THE EMBASSY SUITES, NAPA, CALIFORNIA

—SPONSORED BY —

KINSEY AGRICULTURAL SERVICES, INC. CONDUCTED BY NEAL KINSEY

Use 100 new and updated vineyard soils on the Albrecht System to explain how to determine each formula and calculate nutrient requirements for grape production.

— MONDAY — Working with Soil Tests, pH and Liming REGISTRATION: $1,200 per person, including lunch each day.

Or, $1,550/person, includes breakfast, lunch and lodging for July 29, 30, and 31.

— TUESDAY — Building Vineyard Fertility with Major Nutrients

For room reservations call Kinsey Ag. Services, Inc. (573) 683-3880

— WEDNESDAY — Working with Micronutrients

For consulting or educational services contact:

Kinsey Agricultural Services, Inc. 297 County Highway 357 Charleston, Missouri 63834

Western Canadian Holistic Management Conference

Ph: 573/683-3880, Fax: 573/683-6227 www.kinseyag.com • neal@kinseyag.com

— THURSDAY — WE ACCEPT CREDIT CARD ORDERS (VISA, MC)

Optional Vineyard Soils Tour

SPEAKERS INCLUDE: David Irvine • Roland Kroos • Wayne Berry Joshua Dukart • Arlene Jorgenson And more!

Hold the Date! February 21-22, 2012 YORKTON, SASKATCHEWAN, CANADA

Number 141

Early bird registration $100 For more information email: Pamela.Iwanchysko@gov.mb.ca

TO REGISTER, CALL: (306) 786-1531

IN PRACTICE 21

T H E

M A R K E T P L A C E

4 2 1 1. WRAPPER WIRE with 6 stainless steel strands that deliver a high shock impact. White or orange.

3

2. BRAIDED MEGA WIRE with 9 stainless steel strands, this superior strength wire is an e ex xcellent conductor.

3. POWER T TA APE High visibility tape with 6 stainless steel strands. White or orange.

4. MEGA T TA APE with 10 stainless steel stra rands creating an excellent conductor. White or orange.

.!4)/.7)$% . !4)/.7)$% $)342)"54)/. $ ) 3 4 2 )"5 4 )/ .

s 3AN ! NGELO 4EXAS s TWINMOUNTAINFENCE COM En Mexico : Lada sin costo 01-800-640-3156

0310

CORRAL DESIGNS

By World Famous Dr. Grandin Originator of Curved Ranch Corrals The wide curved Lane makes filling the crowding tub easy.

Includes detailed drawings for loading ramp, V chute, round crowd pen, dip vat, gates and hinges. Plus cell center layouts and layouts compatible with electronic sorting systems. Articles on cattle behavior.

27 corral layouts. $55.

Low Stress Cattle Handling Video $59.

Send checks/money order to:

GRANDIN LIVESTOCK SYSTEMS 2918 Silver Plume Dr., Unit C-3 Fort Collins, CO 80526

970/229-0703 www.grandin.com 22 IN PRACTICE

January / February 2012

$

20

At Home with Holistic Management

As a Holistic Management Certified Educator, mediator, and mother, Ann Adams has created a workbook that helps individuals and families easily understand Holistic Management and put it into practice.

To order call 505/842-5252 or visit www.holisticmanagement.org

T H E

M A R K E T P L A C E

WORLD CLASS FENCING

HMI GRAZING PLANNING SOFTWARE UPGRADE

www.powerflexfence.com

PowerFlex G2 Post

NEW FEATURES INCLUDE:

Holistic Management Handbook Healthy Land, Healthy Profits The Holistic Management Handbook gives you step-by-step guidance for managing R a ranch or farm holistically.

E ORD It is essential reading for TODAY! anyone involved with land management and stewardship.

30

100

$

• Easy calculations to determine SAUs • Auto-fill functions for closed plan dy given “This tool has alrea • Account for multiple herds urn beyond ret d fol ny ma a us ent and we our initial investm • Added ability to identify to use it.” n gu be t have jus exclusion periods and paddocks Ma — Arnold ttson, nch, needing special attention rvices Bra Agri-Environment Se ri-Food Canada Ag and e ltur ricu Ag • Compares estimated SAUs with planned peak SAUs • Grazing Manual hyperlink TO LEARN MORE OR references for each step for TO ORDER CALL: ease of reference HMI at 505/842-5252 or • New Livestock and Land go to our online store at www.holisticmanagement.org/store/ Performance worksheet

PowerFlex Geared Reel

$

The HMI Grazing Planning Software is an electronic version of the Holistic Management Grazing Plan and Control Chart.

This software tool does all the grazing planning calculations for as many as 100 paddocks.

Learn how to create healthy land and healthy profits.

Call 505/842-5252 or order online at www.holisticmanagement.org!

See the Big Picture ~ Respond to Change ~ Be Sustainable

Get Started Today – Join Our

Holistic Management Distance Learning & Mentoring Program Realize Immediate Benefits Save money on education — and get more for your money with highly personalized training.

All you need is a telephone, a computer is NOT needed. Learn at your own pace; apply what you learn to your situation and get results now!

Don’t change your life to learn.

Let your education change your life!

Visit: www.wholenewconcepts.com Email: hminfo@wholenewconcepts.com Call Cindy at 970/882-4222 for a free consultation!

Cindy Dvergsten, is a Holistic Management® Certified Educator, offering you over 15 years experience in training, mentoring, and facilitation; 30 years in natural resource management; and a lifetime of experience in diversified farming.

Offered By Whole New Concepts, LLC P.O. Box 218 Lewis CO 81327 Number 141

IN PRACTICE 23

healthy land. sustainable future.

NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION U.S. POSTAGE PAID ALBUQUERQUE, NM PERMIT NO 880

a publication of Holistic Management International 5941 Jefferson St. NE, Suite B Albuquerque, NM 87109 USA return service requested

please send address corrections before moving so that we do not incur unnecessary postal fees

HOLISTIC MANAGEMENT MAIL ORDER EMPORIUM Subscribe to IN PRACTICE

Software

_ A bimonthly journal for Holistic Management practitioners

Grazing Planning software (single-user license). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $100

Subscribe for 1 year for only $35/U.S. ($40/International) 2 years ($65/U.S.; $70/International) 3 years ($95/U.S.; $105/International)

_ Gift Subscriptions (same prices as above). _ Special Edition: An Introduction to Holistic Management

Upgrade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . electronic $30 hardcopy $45

Pocket Cards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $5

Holistic Management® Framework & testing questions, March 2000 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$4

Planning and Monitoring Guides

FREE DOWNLOADS: Free downloads of many of HMI’s educational materials are now available on HMI’s website. Click on the Free Downloads link on the homepage to learn more.

_ Policy/Project Analysis & Design August 2008, 61 pages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$17

_ Introduction to Holistic Management August 2007, 128 pages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$25

Books & Multimedia Holistic Management: A New Framework for Decision-Making,

_ Second Edition, by Allan Savory with Jody Butterfield. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $50 _ Spanish Version (soft) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $40 _ Holistic Management Handbook, by Butterfield, Bingham, Savory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $30 _ At Home With Holistic Management, by Ann Adams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $20 _ Holistic Management: A New Environmental Intelligence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $10 _ Improving Whole Farm Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $13 _ Video: Creating a Sustainable Civilization—An Introduction to Holistic Decision-Making, based on a lecture given by Allan Savory. (DVD) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $30

_ Stockmanship, by Steve Cote . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $35 _ The Grassfed Gourmet Cookbook, by Shannon Hayes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $25 _ The Oglin, by Dick Richardson & Rio de la Vista . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $25 _ Gardeners of Eden, by Dan Dagget. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $25 _ Video: Healing the Land Through Multi-Species Grazing (DVD) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $30 _ PBS Video—The First Millimeter: Healing the Earth (DVD) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $25 TO ORDER

_ Financial Planning August 2007, 58 pages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$17

_ Aide Memoire for Grazing Planning August 2007, 63 pages. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$17

_ Early Warning Biological Monitoring— Croplands April 2000, 26 pages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$15

_ Early Warning Biological Monitoring—Rangelands and Grasslands August 2007, 59 pages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$17

_ Land Planning—For The Rancher or Farmer Running Livestock August 2007, 31 pages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$15

Planning Forms (All forms are padded – 25 sheets per pad) _ Annual Income & Expense Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$17 _ Worksheet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$ 7 _ Livestock Production Worksheet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$17 _ Grazing Plan & Control Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$17 MAKE A TAX DEDUCTIBLE DONATION Amount $_____________ Please designate program you would like us to apply contribution toward _________________________________________

Questions? 505/842-5252 or hmi@holisticmanagement.org

Indicate quantity on line next to item, make sure your shipping address is correct, mail this page (or a copy) and your check or money order payable in U.S. funds from a U.S. bank or your credit card number and expiration date to: Holistic Management International, 5941 Jefferson St. NE, Suite B, Albuquerque, NM 87109.

You can also call in or fax credit card orders. Phone calls to: 505/842-5252; Fax: 505/843-7900.

For online ordering, visit our secure website at: www.holisticmanagement.org.

Printed on recycled paper

Shipping & Handling Shipping and handling costs to the right are for U.S. media mail only.

Call 505/842-5252 for all other shipping rates.

up to $15: $16 to $35: $36 to $50: $51 to $70: $71 to $90: over $91:

add $ 5 add $ 6 add $ 8 add $ 9 add $10 add $12