The Decision to Finish Cattle on Pasture: An Ethnographic Approach

Lozier, John; Rayburn, Ed; Shaw, Jane

doi:10.1300/j064v28n03_03

Cited by 11 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The grass-based production model has been closely tied with direct marketing (Lozier et al 2005;Lozier et al 2006;Evans et al 2007;Weber et al 2008;Gwin 2009), although the need to aggregate and coordinate production has been identified (Winrock International 2012; Gwin and Thiboumery 2013). To design local food programs, a better understanding of the system is needed.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The stochastic or statistical distributions were used to estimate seasonal variability in output, prices, pasture availability, and animal performance. Lozier et al (2006) used an ethnographic approach to explore the decision to finish beef on pasture. The ethnographic or cultural anthropological approach was used to help explain the decision making process in different cattle enterprises.…”

Section: Grass-based Productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Ohio Livestock Producers’ Perceptions of Producing and Marketing Grass-Based Beef and Lamb

McCutcheon

Morton

Zerby

et al. 2014

Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although small and mid-size cattle and sheep producers may be positioned to meet local market demand for grass-based meat and meat products, they share similar challenges as they consider converting to grass-based systems. A survey of Ohio beef and sheep producers reveals a number of underlying factors that influence the decision to convert a livestock management system to a grass-base including available infrastructure, knowledge and technical skills, financial costs and a desire to change their system. These findings demonstrate that there are substantive production and marketing issues that influence producer decisions to change an existing management system. A better understanding of the livestock production system and direct marketing opportunities can improve local food programs' capacity to increase the supply of grass-based meat and meat products.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Grass-based Productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ohio Livestock Producers’ Perceptions of Producing and Marketing Grass-Based Beef and Lamb

McCutcheon

Morton

Zerby

et al. 2014

Agroecology and Sustainable Food Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While many raise multiple livestock species together, we primarily focus on producers raising grassfed cattle. In grassfed systems, ruminant animals, such as cattle, are fed only grass and grass‐based forage products for their entire life after weaning (Lozier, Rayburn, and Shaw ). This is in contrast to conventional livestock producers, who typically graze young cattle on grass for several months in “cow/calf” operations, after which they move their livestock to a “finishing” or feedlot operation, where the animals are confined and their diets are switched to consist mainly of grain (Hinrichs and Welsh ).…”

Section: The Grassfed Livestock Movementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Grassfed livestock producers purposefully raise livestock using methods that run counter to the industrial agricultural paradigm by eschewing corn and other grain‐based feed for grass and forage‐based feeds. Some grassfed producers have established a unifying collective identity to facilitate their entry into AAF marketplaces, and have utilized that market niche to supply lifestyle‐oriented AAF activists with foodstuffs that align with their ethical, environmental, and health ideals (Gwin ; Lozier, Rayburn, and Shaw ; Weber, Heinze, and DeSoucey ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“That's not Grassfed!” Identity Formation, Maintenance, and Co‐Optation in Oklahoma's Grassfed Livestock Movement

Raridon

Mix

2016

Sociological Inquiry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using interview data from thirty-one grassfed ranchers across Oklahoma, we adapt a culturally focused social movement framework to explore a regional grassfed livestock movement. Drawing on social movement and agrifood literature, we examine how grassfed actors forge a cohesive grassfed collective identity and how collective identity processes inspire engagement in forms of individualized, cultural protest. We address how collective identity politicizes movement actors, moving them to prioritize cultural issues of the grassfed movement and development of a grassfed activist identity, sometimes above other tangible, economic rewards. We also consider how grassfed ranchers are restricting the boundaries of movement membership in response to increased interest in alternative agricultural practices by new producers and by agrifood elites, and how they use market-oriented tactics to enforce those boundaries. In doing so we draw parallels to conventionalization processes in the organic sector. By emphasizing the identity work of grassfed producer-activists, we provide new perspectives on an emerging agricultural movement gaining traction in the US and abroad.

show abstract

“…Forage communities with sustained productivity could provide a measure of stability in hill‐land terrain, where spatial and temporal microsite variability complicates production patterns (Belesky et al, ; Deak, Hall, Sanderson, & Archibald, ). Metrics that quantify risk or uncertainty associated with sward characteristics are rarely provided to farmers (Rayburn, ), although risk avoidance is a major deciding factor in pasture management in the Appalachian region (Lozier, Rayburn, & Shaw, ). As the fluctuations in sward botanical composition influence sward productivity, then sward composition should be a key feature of pasture system design (Carlassare & Karsten, ; Chesson, ; Silvertown, Dodd, McConway, Potts, & Crawley, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Designed and naturalised sward response to management: I. Patterns of herbage production

Belesky

Halvorson

Ruckle

et al. 2019

Annals of Applied Biology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pastures in the Appalachian region of the United States comprise a mix of grasses, legumes and forbs that tend to differ in productivity within and among years. A high degree of spatial variability in hill-land pasture creates microsite conditions that influence botanical composition of pasture. The variation in sward composition presents logistical challenges to livestock producers who rely on a dependable supply of herbage mass and nutritive value to meet production goals. Our objective was to determine if forage communities sown for specific functions, for example, superior dry matter productivity, resource patch exploitation or targeted seasonal production, adapted to changing growing conditions within and among years. Productivity of communities differed among years reflecting the cumulative influences of time, ontogenetic and environmental variations. Maximum productivity was influenced by the specific forage community and less so by simple clipping and fertiliser management.Naturalised swards clipped to emulate hay management tended to have sustained herbage productivity but lower nutritive value when compared to sown communities.Rankings of dry matter productivity of communities were similar for each year where bioactive composition, high productivity and warm season tended to produce the most, and stoloniferous-rhizomatous and naturalised pasture the least. Regardless of initial sward composition, effective number of species as an index of diversity increased when frequently clipped swards were not fertilised, and when infrequently clipped swards were fertilised. Dry matter production patterns were not influenced by the effective number of species in any forage community suggesting that key species sustained productivity with volunteer species making lesser contribution to total productivity. The species composition of forage plant communities appears to be more important than clipping or fertiliser management practices as a means to sustain forage productivity. K E Y W O R D Sdry matter productivity, grasses, legumes

show abstract

The Decision to Finish Cattle on Pasture: An Ethnographic Approach

Cited by 11 publications

References 1 publication

Ohio Livestock Producers’ Perceptions of Producing and Marketing Grass-Based Beef and Lamb

Ohio Livestock Producers’ Perceptions of Producing and Marketing Grass-Based Beef and Lamb

“That's not Grassfed!” Identity Formation, Maintenance, and Co‐Optation in Oklahoma's Grassfed Livestock Movement

Designed and naturalised sward response to management: I. Patterns of herbage production

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About