Production Systems

Livestock have been integrated with crop production systems throughout the history of agriculture, providing fertility, weed and pest control, and residue breakdown. There are many ways to successfully combine crops and livestock, along with many potential challenges. Each farm also has a unique combination of climate conditions, skills, infrastructure, and markets. Here we present the results of our research with integrated livestock production systems (ILPS) in Corvallis, Montana, feedback from other ILPS farmers across Montana, and many tips and links to resources for trouble-shooting and problem solving.

Potential Benefits of ILPS

• Provides cash flow for the farm business while crops are dormant or immature
• Can save cost, fuel use, and machinery hours by reducing farm inputs for fertilizer and weed control 
• Can use alternative feeds that would otherwise go to waste
• Grazing failed crops creates a type of crop insurance for the business
• Diversifying operations with livestock increases resilience when climates and markets are unpredictable (keep back breeding stock on good years or sell calves/lambs on lean years)
• Increases opportunities for agritourism

Risks and expenses of ILPS

• Livestock can damage or destroy crops by browsing, scratching, or roosting.
• Livestock usually need to be rotated to avoid damage to soil, plant communities, and their own health. However, rotational systems can require unexpected amounts of labor and infrastructure. These systems can also be difficult to incorporate into existing crop systems.
• The ideal livestock species or breed for your farm may not have strong market value or available processing options.
• Labor for livestock care can be costly and/or year round, reducing life balance for farmers
• Husbandry needs of stock may not mix well with crop systems. For example, electric fencing may be difficult to move within an orchard, or water/shade/shelter may not be available where animals need it
• Food safety or crop protection may mean livestock can’t be housed with crops at useful times of the year, such as when weed pressure is the greatest. Multiple management strategies may raise costs.

Resources for choosing or troubleshooting ILPS

Choosing a species and breed

• Decision-making tools for choosing stock—Purdue Extension (PDF)
• Meat options overview—BeginningFarmers.org
• Our review of different poultry species and breeds

Rotational systems

• Overview of grazing systems—University of KY
• Holistic management—Allan Savory
• American GrazingLands—Jim Gerrish; Maia Management Tool
• Pastures for Profits—USDA/NRCS, University of MN & WI Cooperative Extensions (PDF)
• Recommended books—American Grazing Lands

Fencing

• Solid fencing options—The Free Range Life
• Electric fencing options—Premier1 Supply Catalog
  • Solar-powered energizers—Solar Technology Hub
• Choices for predator control—Living with Wildlife Foundation (PDF)

Shelters

• Mobile shelter overview—Walking in High Cotton
• Shelters for poultry

Predator protection

• Predator friendly ranching—Predator Friendly
• Fencing—Living with Wildlife Foundation (PDF)
• Livestock guardian animals—National Center for Appropriate Technology
• Deterrents
  
  • “Eyes”, lights, and lasers—top5reviews
  • Scarecrows for poultry protection—Wide Open Pets
  • Scent repellents—Predator Guard
• Automatic coop doors—The Happy Chicken Coop

Mobile water systems

• Our review of poultry waterers
• Progressive Cattle
• The Conscious Farmer
• On Pasture
• Grass Fed Solutions

Animal handling

• Behavioral Principles
• Low stress handling - Basics (PDF)
• On Pasture - Bud Williams Method

Processing and marketing

• Montana Poultry Growers Cooperative and Processing Facility
• Pastured poultry buyers guide—American Pastured Poultry Producers Association
• Processing Requirements for Meat—University of California (PDF)

Preliminary Research Findings

Our research project primarily investigated rotational poultry systems within apple orchards and grape vineyards, but also interviewed producers around the state about systems using cattle, hogs, and small ruminants on their farms.  Providing secure fencing, adequate shelter, predator protection, feed and water efficiently and at a reasonable cost is no small feat, especially when farmers also need to avoid issues with damage to crops, soil compaction, or pathogen contamination.  Here are some of our findings and observations:

Table 1. Plot map for integrated livestock dwarf cider apple tree planting (2019)

Tree Damage

Tree damage was measured within the Western Agriculture Research Center’s new planting of dwarf cider apple seedlings. Batches of 50 chickens (broilers and layers) are grazed on a third of each row for a week at a time, with access to 76 seedlings in each study plot. The other 2/3s of each row are divided into one compost and one fertilizer control plots. Rows 1 through 3 are planted with 216 'Roxbury Russet' on G.11 rootstock, and rows 4-6 have 216 'Ashmead's Kernel' also on G.11 rootstock. Between each plot are 2 pollinator trees ('Wickson Crab' and 'Harrison').  

Primary causes of apple tree damage from poultry:

• Pruning (height of lowest leaves)
• Poultry species (layers vs broilers)
• Poultry age (7 weeks and older)
• Tim spent in area (6 days or longer)

Tree damage was unaffected by:

• Painting tree trunks
• Feed availability
• Roost options

We have avoided using any other poultry species in the cider apple planting due to potential for far greater damage to saplings and to drip irrigation from large and active animals like turkeys, geese, or large ducks (ex: muscovies, cayuga, khakis). Small ruminants, hogs, or cattle would be even more disastrous to this young orchard system unless fenced securely only in alleyways. Small breeds of ducks (like runners or calls) are known for their weeding prowess and have good potential for use in young orchards, but require access to bathing water that would be inconvenient in our orchard systems.

Table 2. Tree Damage 2019

Financial Breakdown 2019

(200 ft perimeter, 1,875 ft²)

In 2019, our system was made up of 150 broiler chickens broken into 3 groups. Chicks were in a 4’x4’ brooder for 2.5 weeks, then introduced to 8’x10’ chicken “tractors” with heat lamps for 1.5 more weeks before being allowed to free range in the electric fence pen. Once birds reached 6 weeks, a second tractor was added so there were 25 birds/tractor (3.2ft²/bird).  Starter, grower, and finisher made with Montana-grown grains was purchased from Lakeland Feeds, fencing and chargers from Premier1, and feeders and waterers from North 40. 

Table 3. Annual Costs for 2019

Cost details:

• 2 Shelters: $100 ea (used) + $35/yr repairs (tarps, wheels, misc. damage), 4 yr lifetime 
• 200’ Fencing: $379/4-yr lifespan = $94.75/yr
• Solar Charger: $205/6-yr lifespan = $34.20/yr
• 2 Waterers: $98/2-yr lifespan = $49/yr
• 4 Feeders: $76/4-year lifespan = $19/yr
• Labor: 182 hrs x $15 = $2,730/yr (at 150 birds, $18.20/bird)
• Feed waste: 510#/150 chickens, or $140; $0.94/bird
• Losses: 20/150 = 13% ($217 revenue - $95 processing - $7 feed saved)

2019 REVENUE (150 birds)

Direct Market: $2,104

Wholesale: $1,670

2019 PROFITS:

Direct Market :  -$17/bird: -$2,585 (less marketing)

Wholesale:  -$20/bird: -$3,019 

2019 PROFITS w/o Labor Cost:

Direct Market: -$0.97/bird: -$145 (less marketing)

Wholesale: -$1.93/bird: -$289 

BREAK EVENS

Fixed Costs: $2,987 ($257 w/o labor)

Current Price per Unit: Wholesale (WS) - $12.97, Direct Market (DM) - $16.32

Variable Costs per Unit: $11.33

Break Even Volume =WS: 1,821 birds, DM: 599 birds

*Break Even Volume w/out Labor: 157 (WS) & 52 (DM)

Break Even Price = $31.26/bird ($8.93/lb)

*Break Even Price w/out Labor = $13.06 ($3.73/lb)

Observations

• Weed control by chickens was significant but temporary, and effect lost after 6 weeks
• Livestock soil compaction (primarily from presence during wet weather) reduced water infiltration but also reduced gopher activity
• Chick cost, loss to predation, and disease problems barely impacted overall profitability, while labor and processing costs had the biggest effect
• Feed usage was hardly impacted by forage availability, while theft by bird and rodent pests had the biggest effect
• Filling water created the biggest labor cost, followed by moving shelters which is slowed down significantly by birds confused and unable to keep up
• Chicken growth rate was significantly impacted by cold nights, and batches raised later in the summer grew on average almost a pound heavier in 8 weeks

Our review of poultry waterers

Challenges with finding the right waterer

• Contamination: Poultry, especially waterfowl, contaminate their water sources rapidly and thoroughly through grooming behaviors and fecal matter 
  • Leads to dehydration and stress
  • Unsanitary waterers encourage bacterial growth, increasing risk of illness
  • Exposes humans to bacteria during refills and cleaning 

• Leaks: Most waterers leak immediately or within a single season
  • Can lead to animal stress, illness, or death 
  • Increase labor costs hauling water out to pasture
  • Make it difficult to estimate actual water needs  

Types of Waterers

• Nipple waterers
  • Pros: Very little water contamination; evaporation loss can be minimized with a lid
  • Cons: Birds drink less; nipples are very vulnerable to freezing in cold weather; nipples usually become leaky over time; chicks and small birds may struggle to use nipples
• Pressurized line waterers
  • Pros: No contamination; can be set up off a bucket if water lines aren’t available in pasture
  • Cons: Vulnerable to freezing and leaking; birds drink less
• Cup waterers
  • Pros: Birds drink more; less contamination than dish waterers
  • Cons: Generally don’t work for chicks; more water contamination than nipples; ducks may drain these quickly just playing with the water 
• Dish and float valve waterers
  • Pros: Birds drink well; waterfowl can use water for grooming; many types 
  • Cons: Significant water contamination; float valves are very prone to malfunction, often leading to large leaks; water loss to evaporation
  • Alternatives: float valve models are often easier to fill with buckets but can be less reliable; negative pressure models 

Tips

• Place waterers away from feeders to reduce contamination—just 5 or 10 feet help significantly. Turkeys and chickens, in particular, like to rinse their beaks while eating
• For waterfowl, placing open waterers on a hard surface or on gravel will reduce water contamination with dirt
• Choose dish and float valve waterers with reservoirs that overhang the open dish of water—these get less contaminated by simply blocking bird butts from getting too close
• Larger capacity waterers (8 gallons and up) may seem appealing; however, consider using several smaller waterers to reduce chances of problems should one leak. Smaller waterers are also easier to carry between pastures if you move paddocks frequently and don’t have easy hose access
• Some dish and float value waterers rely on suction rather than a - invest in a really big funnel if filling with buckets instead of hoses
• Some floats are made of two plastic pieces (avoid these types if possible). Water leaks into the float and it needs to be pried open and emptied with increasing frequency as it ages 
• Waterers made of transparent plastic are likely to grow more algae and can get clogged over time. Non-transparent white plastic seems to work best for keeping algae at bay. 
• Geese and large ducks may sabotage any moving pieces in or near the water—if there is a piece that spins or pulls out to open/close the reservoir, they may be likely to shut off their own water. Although we generally don’t recommend float valves, this is a place where they can perform better than waterers using negative pressure.
• Even if geese and ducks have adequate open water for grooming, they will still groom in the drinking water. Open water for bathing plus nipple waterers for drinking may be the solution.
• Geese and ducks may pack mud and gravel under the float valve, if accessible.

Our review of poultry species and breeds for use in the orchard 

Broiler Chickens

• Cornish Cross, Jumbo Cornish Cross
  • Pros: fast growth; easy to butcher; unlikely to damage crops; easy to market; desirable to consumers; docile (unlikely to break through fences and easy to catch)
  • Cons: very attractive to predators; poor tolerance of weather extremes; very little foraging or weed control; few survival instincts; more susceptible to ailments like sour crop 

Freedom Rangers, Red Rangers

• Pros: medium-fast growth; reasonable to butcher; good foraging and some weed control, somewhat desirable to consumers (improving with time), good tolerance of weather extremes;
• Cons: likely to damage crops; very little foraging or weed control; reasonable—but not excellent—survival instincts and health
• Multipurpose breeds like Orpington, Delaware, Bell Rouge
  • Pros: excellent foraging and weed control; good tolerance of weather and survival instincts, hens can be retained for egg production 
  • Cons: slow growth, hard to butcher (well-affixed feathers and narrow abdominal opening); undesirable for most consumers (small breast, dark skin); inclined to escape fences (may need wings clipped); likely to damage crops (both through grazing and roosting)

Layer Chickens

• Heavy breeds like Orpington, Brahmas, Delaware
  • Pros: excellent foraging and weed control; good tolerance of weather and survival instincts; 3+ years of egg production; reasonably good health and longevity
  • Cons: slow growth, hard to butcher (well-affixed feathers and narrow abdominal opening); undesirable for most consumers (small breast, dark skin); inclined to escape fences (may need wings clipped); likely to damage crops (both through grazing and roosting)
• Active Breeds like and Aruacanas, Easter Eggers, Hamburgs 
  • Pros: excellent foraging for insects and weeds; colorful eggs; excellent survival instincts; generally good health and longevity 
  • Cons: very skilled at escaping fences; likely need wings clipped; feisty temperaments and may pick on other birds 
• High-Producing Hybrids like Red Stars
  • Pros: superior egg production for first two years; excellent foraging for insects and weeds; generally easy temperaments
  • Cons: short lifespan; less disease tolerance
• Bantams
  • Pros: good for smaller spaces like backyards; adorable; good insect foraging
  • Cons:  almost no meat value; some breeds are prone to escaping fences; less cold tolerance than larger breeds; may be pecked if in a mixed flock

Turkeys 

• Broad Breasted Whites
  • Pros: fast growth; desirable to consumers; unlikely to escape fences; easy temperaments
  • Cons: more susceptible to disease; appealing to predators; low survival instincts and tolerance for extreme weather; very little weed control
• Broad Breasted Bronze
  • Pros: rapid growth; easy temperaments; will roost happily on the ground 
  • Cons: very little weed control, may need wings clipped (especially hens)
• Heritage Breeds like Bourbon Reds, Narragansett, and Royal Palm 
  • Pros: excellent at foraging; good longevity; able to reproduce naturally; charismatic and beautiful 
  • Cons: slow growth; likely to forage on crops and able to fly into branches; unappealing to most consumers and hard to butcher; able to escape many types of fencing; prefer roosting in high places

Geese 

• Pros: Superb weed control, especially grass; very predator-proof once 3+ months old; little interest in or skill at escaping; easy to move between pens; least aggressive and quietest of goose breeds
• Cons: need large quantities of water for grooming and quality of life; somewhat aggressive temperaments; still among the noisiest of poultry species

Ducks

• Runner Ducks
  • Pros: good grass and insect control, will prune lower grape and apple leaves; can’t fly or jump up onto trees/vines; don’t girdle trunks
  • Cons: little interest in most weeds; need quite a bit of water for grooming and quality of life; nervous temperaments; strong odor
• Muscovy Ducks
  • Pros: need less water than other breeds; reasonably grass control; can’t fly or jump up onto trees/vines; regular egg layers; calmer temperaments
  • Cons: large and hard to market as meat birds; need large quantities of water for grooming and quality of life