Welcome to our Online Newsletter! Here's, where we share our thoughts and some of the little things we learn about life and ranching along the way. In the end, we are hoping that all these "little things" add up in a really big way, and maybe make a difference to everyone.

Hey, our water is disappearing! We better do something about it! Water has been an issue in other parts of the United States for many years. Why is Kansas just now beginning to wake up?

Some are beginning to wonder what Southwest Kansas would look like if there were no water to sustain the people and the industries located there. Without water, agriculture and the industry in Southwest Kansas would have a much different look. We still like to hide our head in the sand like an ostrich. Right now we "need" this water to carry on the economy in Southwest Kansas, so let's keep on using it up. We would rather have others deal with the drastic effects later.

I believe that point in time is nearly upon us now. More and more of our fellow ranchers have drilled their windmill wells deeper due to dropping water levels. When our own wells are pulled, it is obvious levels are down. Our artesian springs are drying up and our monitored creek flow lessens each year.

Why are we not willing to accept the inevitable now and do something about it? I believe we would be better off economically in the region if we limited our usage of our natural resources to the rate of the self- renewal. When we artificially use such things as technology to circumvent the inevitable, we only speed up the process.

I know that blatant banning such over-usage is not the answer. I understand firsthand the problems of having borne the cost of irrigation wells, systems, equipment, fences, permanent feed bunks and needing the hoped for income from these costs to pay for them. However, it would behoove all in agriculture to look at the way they use their resources whether they be grass, soil, water, trees or wildlife. Many times technology is applied to speed our productiveness, but many times this only speeds up the ultimate demise of the enterprise.

If you believe you have an open mind, take the monetary forces out of the picture and critique yourself on the use of your non- renewable resources. If the resources were utilized differently, could you see your business fairing better 40 years down the road? Now bring the monetary forces back in. If you changed the way you use your resources might you be better off financially also? I have witnessed several farmers and ranchers who have done this. The financial situations of their business forced them to utilize their resources differently. Several years later they are in the 28% tax bracket and glad to be there!

No one needs to preach about government ineffectiveness. We all understand it, even government employees. We work with several very educated conservationists on our ranch who work for the Federal Government. Although they may understand that our solutions are more cost effective and may even be better conservation tools, they are bound by the general conservation laws passed by government.

Usually however, we are not bound by these restrictions if we do not accept the government money from conservation programs. In the past 3 years, we know we have preserved more soil and wildlife habitat by refraining from participated in some very intriguing cost share programs. Cost share programs are always very tempting. We have found however, that in some circumstances we have saved ourselves a tremendous amount of money by completing the project with 100% of our own monies and using our own specifications.

One example was a wonderful program that would help us pay for a watering system. This watering system would enable us to increase our utilization of our grassland by about 300%. We went ahead full steam with the program planning. The specifications for water tanks and holding tanks were much higher than we would ever by able to utilize. There was no way to circumvent these specifications. If we wanted to participate in the program, we had to buy the huge tanks and reservoirs. Suddenly a switch turned on in our minds. We considered what it would cost us to put in effective size tanks and we paid all of the costs. We saved ourselves more money by paying 100% of the costs than participating in the program and paying only 50%. Since that time, our scrutiny of such programs has increased. It has actually made us much more innovative. The challenge to overcoming obstacles has become a welcome one.

It seems we often like to reinvent the wheel. Altering things is not always the best option, especially when Mother Nature is involved. If most cattlemen will look out their window and watch their cows graze, I would venture to say they are viewing a wheel that has been reinvented. This alteration is probably not in the best interests of their pocket book or common sense.

Consider something with me for a moment. Suppose a friend has decided to raise the fruit sevlac. That sounds acceptable. Sevlac is a very marketable product. In the event you are not familiar with sevalc, it is a vine that produces fruit once a year, either in the spring or winter. Of course winter-bearing sevlac needs a bit of pampering to get through the weather. The vines need a bit more fertilizer when asked to produce during the fall and winter. When the fruit is on the vine during the winter, they also require more labor. Once in a while they must be covered to protect the tenderness of the fruit during cold spells. When the sevlac plant is laden with fruit, it requires quite a few nutrients that are not readily available in the fall and winter. In contrast, sevlac produced in the spring requires less water, no fertilizer and virtually no labor is involved in production.

Due to these obvious facts, you assume your businessman friend will raise his sevlac in the spring and summer when his labor and direct costs are remarkably less. You are surprised to learn the opposite. Not only is your friend going to raise sevlac in the chilly months, he is going to build a greenhouse. When you try to reason with him, he only insists that the extra monies he makes from his fall grown selvac will more than offset the costs involved, the greenhouse, the labor and the time away from his family.

Aha! Go and look out your windows again. Unfortunately, most of you are the friend I am speaking about above. I dare to point fingers only because I have raised selvac in the past. Notice that sevlac is the inverted spelling of the word calves.

As with the sevlac vine, the cow's nutritional requirements are much higher 45 days before calving and during lactation. When calving in the late winter months, they require additional feed. Like the selvac vine, when calves are raised in the winter, they require much more pampering. Many times baby calves need to be protected from the weather either by bringing them in to warm up at birth or by having barns.

Like the friend, you and I have been tempted to beat Mother Nature. We have asked our cows to give birth in the middle of a blizzard, and raise a hardy calf. We have expected our bank account to muster excessive, unnecessary hay costs, the cost of barns, and expensive pickups capable of hauling tons of hay in one clean sweep.

At Moore Ranch we have become more amazed each year. We have changed our calving date to late spring, calving in April and May. At first it was hard to look across the fence at our neighbor's cattle and see their much larger calves compared to ours in June. We closed our eyes and trudged on.

The bottom line has been the total economics involved. We have cut our winter hay bill to virtually nothing. Last winter was tough. A neighbor who calves in January and February began feeding his cows in November. His cows were beginning to be heavy with calf in November increasing their demand for nutrients along with the stress the cold weather had on them. Most of our neighbors fed their cows nearly two tons of hay last winter. Our grass was in the same condition, however our cow's nutritional demands were dramatically less. We fed our cows less than 2 square bales of hay per head the entire year.

When we compared the economics of late calving and early calving, observed the condition of our cowherd and the calf crop raised out of each, the decision was simple. We won't be raising any sevlac anymore.

About a year ago Joe and I attended a grazing school. Consider these comments made by Jim Gerrish, a common sense grazing professional from the University of Missouri.

In Missouri, the average cattleman feeds his cattle 120 to 140 days out of the year.

In Minnesota the average cattleman feeds his cattle 120 to 140 days out of the year.

It makes you wonder if we feed what we are able to produce or do we feed what we need to maintain a cow?

In Manitoba Canada, a cattleman said their cattle are able to graze through 2 feet of snow. In Saskatchewan, cattle graze on swaths of grass through 3 feet of snow. In Alberta, the cattle graze through four feet of snow.

If they can graze through four feet of snow, why can't we cut our feeding days back.?

When we moved to Southwest Kansas, an "old time" reliable vet commented this: If we raise a lot of hay during the year, we are probably in for a bad winter, or there will be enough to hold over for the next year. But, whenever hay is held over, it will be a bad haymaking year, but the carryover hay will get us through the winter, usually a mild one. "Don't worry about having enough hay , he said, there is always enough one way or the other."

I have pondered on this over the years. In essence I think my vet and Mr. Gerrish concur. We feed the amount of hay that we are able to produce. Shouldn't we be feeding only the amount of hay our cattle need to be productive, healthy animals?

~ Nancy Moore