By allowing ads to appear on this site, you support the local businesses who, in turn, support great journalism.
‘Dairy Together’ advocates for needed changes in dairy industry
Farmers seek unified voice
Jack Herricks speaks
JACK HERRICKS, president of the Monroe County Farm Bureau, and Cashton dairyman, shared his thoughts about what a failure to enact some kind of supply management model would mean for the dairy industry going forward.

CASHTON - It’s no secret that there are a lot fewer dairy farmers in America’s Dairyland these days, than there used to be. In the late 1990s, there were 20,000 dairy herds in Wisconsin, and today that number has fallen to under 6,500, with fewer than 30,000 dairy farms remaining in the entire United States. Further, the average age of the dairy farmer is 62 to 65 years of age.

Both Wisconsin Farm Bureau (WFB) and Wisconsin Farmers Union (WFU) have taken on the challenge of exploring ‘how to revitalize dairy’ in recent years. Both groups have been fostering dialogue, debating different models, and consulting with experts in the UW-System since about 2015. That was the year sky rocketing farm bankruptcies and exits began to grab the attention of the nation, with Western Wisconsin at the forefront of the trend.


Joe Bragger speaks
JOE BRAGGER, Buffalo County dairyman and Vice President of Wisconsin Farm Bureau Board, talks with meeting participants about the trend of exits from dairy in recent years.

“Between 2015 and 2020, the United States lost one-third of all remaining dairy farms,” Buffalo County Farm Bureau dairyman Joe Bragger said. “At this time, Wisconsin is losing one-to-two dairy herds every day.”

In 2018, WFU had conducted a five-city tour featuring Ralph Dietrich, Dairy Farmers of Ontario (DFO) Board Chairperson, and Murray Sherk, DFO Board Vice Chairperson. The purpose of the tour was to educate Wisconsin producers about Canada’s dairy supply management program.

“There’s been a lot of talk in the farming community since 2018 about the Canadian model of supply management, and whether that would work here in the United States,” Vernon County Farm Bureau organic dairyman Travis Klinkner said. “The problem that I see with the model is that the requirement to purchase quota is too much of a barrier to young farmers wanting to enter the business.”

Klinkner said that no program is ever going to make everyone completely happy, and it is difficult to find a system that works for both small and large farms. But I know that farmers, processors and consumers want stability in dairy, and I believe that in order to achieve that, we must put controls on dairy supply.

Wisconsin Farm Bureau took their own approach to pursuing solutions to the problem, and former state board president Joe Bragger described a series of resolutions adopted at the state level. In 2018, the members adopted a resolution stating “we are willing to consider a dairy supply management system.” 

In 2019, they went further, expressing support for research and development of dairy growth management and other systems that increased dairy industry stability and producer profitability. This resolution was reaffirmed in 2020 by 89 percent of delegates at their state convention.

Finally, as the pandemic disrupted supply chains and added even more chaos to a difficult situation, they voted to embrace the ‘Dairy Revitalization Plan,’ supporting continuing education of producers about the model put forth by the UW-Madison Center for Integrated Agricultural Studies (CIAS).


Travis Klinkner speaks
TRAVIS KLINKNER, Vernon County organic dairyman and member of the Vernon County Farm Bureau Board, discuses his thoughts about the ‘dairy growth management’ model developed by Mark Stephenson, Director of the Center for Dairy at UW-Madison.

Stitzer meeting

Klinkner described a meeting that had taken place in Stitzer, in Grant County, of Farm Bureau members from the Western District, in November of 2019. 

“What model could potentially fix the problems in dairy in the United States was a subject of hot debate at that meeting,” Klinkner remembered. “Whether it would be supply management like they have in Canada, or something else, was what we discussed.”

What came out of it, according to Klinkner, was “something else,” which is now being referred to as ‘growth management.’ According to the group, the biggest problem the dairy industry was facing was the ever-increasing, out-of-control, increases in the supply. These trends, the group concluded, led to the ‘boom-and-bust’ cycles that destabilized the markets, and left producers never knowing how much they would be paid for their milk, and how much money they would receive in their milk checks.

Out of their discussions that night in Stitzer came a rough draft of what was to become the ‘Dairy Together Key Tenets of Growth Management in Dairy.’

Key tenets

Those key tenets are:

1. There is enough value in the dairy supply chain for farmers, processors, and consumers to ALL do well. That is not happening now, and we need a change.

2. Farmers want a decent price from the marketplace, not from government subsidies. Rather than relying on taxpayers to bail farmers out when the market is flooded, we are asking Congress to provide an incentive to not flood the market in the first place.

3. Profitability is achieved when supply and demand are in balance. Increasing demand through product development and exports is important, but we also need to look at the supply side of the equation. Focusing on demand without thinking about supply is like stepping into the ring with one hand tied behind your back.

4. Growth Management is not incompatible with global trade. We can have an American approach to growth management that improves the U.S. milk price without closing our borders. At the same time, we can’t export our way to profitability. We need to manage supply domestically rather than looking to foreign markets for salvation.

5. We are looking at uniquely American programs such as the Dairy Revitalization Plan that would balance supply and demand without a strict quota, and without stifling growth or innovation.

6. New technologies that save time and reduce labor costs are growing in popularity. But, they are also expensive. Farmers are more likely to invest in current and future technological improvements if they feel confident their milk checks will  cover the cost.

7. Growth management is simply another tool to improve the livelihoods of America’s dairy farm families.

8. Our dairy farmer population is aging. The next generation to take over the family farm often does not see a successful future in dairy, and prospective farmers are deterred from getting started. A fair and predictable pay price would not guarantee a successful future for everyone, but it would give young and beginning farmers a fighting chance.

9. There is growing momentum behind growth management. Farmers and organizations who would have written it off four years ago are now on board or seriously considering it.

10. The best time to get serious about growth management was decades ago, but we can’t undo history. The next best time is today.


Mark Stephenson speaks
MARK STEPHENSON, Director of the Center for Dairy at UW-Madison, along with his colleague Charles Nicholson, were the agricultural economists that worked with farmers to develop the ‘dairy growth management’ model presented at the meeting.

Expert assistance

The Dairy Together group found themselves working with UW-Madison agriculture economists Charles Nicholson and Mark Stephenson to develop a model for growth management in the dairy industry. Their work resulted in the ‘Analyses of Proposed Alternative Growth Management Programs for the US Dairy Industry’ report. 

The work was funded by the University of Wisconsin Baldwin Wisconsin Idea program, the Grassland 2.0 project, the Wisconsin Cover Crops Research and Outreach Program, and Center for Integrated Agricultural Systems (CIAS) of the University of Wisconsin.

“Our interest in this project really got started when we were working with some large dairy producers in California,” Stephenson told the group of 54 assembled at the Cashton Community Hall. “That group of producers wanted to do something different, and preferred coordinating the supply better, but in a way that didn’t shut growth down.”

Stephenson says that with milk prices up this year by $6 per hundredweight (cwt), he can foresee the usual expansion in production that comes with that. He said if the cycle holds true, that next year we would probably see another collapse. He said that his work is trying to model a system that would protect dairy producers from this kind of boom-and-bust cycle.

“The question I and my colleagues set out to answer was ‘what if we had implemented some form of supply management in the 2014 Farm Bill – how would things look different now?” Stephenson told the group.

Growth management

Stephenson said their model, calls for a market access fee for producers that are looking to grow beyond the industry average of ‘allowable growth,’ which he says right now is about one percent per year. Those that keep their production within the range of allowable growth would receive a payment, and would not have to pay the market access fee.

For those that wanted to grow their production beyond the allowable limit, they would pay a market access fee for one year on all of their production. These funds would go into a pool that would be used to issue payments for those that chose not to grow.

While Stephenson showed some different potential scenarios to the farmers assembled for what the plan could look like, he emphasized that each producer would need to use the CIAS ‘calculator’ to look at scenarios for their farm operation. That ‘calculator’ can be found at www.dairymarkets.org.

“With any model proposed, ultimately farmers are going to have to look at the research, apply the model to their own farm operation, and come together to make the implementation rules,” Stephenson said. “The program would likely be administered by a federal agency, and would cost almost zero because most of the data needed to run the program is already being collected.”

Tiers of growth

Stephenson’s model includes two different tiers of market access fees, depending on the magnitude of growth proposed. Tier One would be for growth between one to four percent, and Tier Two would be for growth greater than four percent.

The market access fee would increase with the farm size and volume of production. In one example, Stephenson showed the following numbers for differently sized farms in a Tier One (growth between 1-4 percent) market access fee scenario:

• Less than one million lbs. - $0.25/cwt

• 1-5 million lbs. - $0.50/cwt

• 5-20 million lbs. - $0.75/cwt

• More than 20 million lbs. - $1.00/cwt

For differently sized farms in a Tier Two (growth greater than 4 percent) scenario:

• Less than one million lbs. - $0.50/cwt

• 1-5 million lbs. - $1.00/cwt

• 5-20 million lbs. - $1.50/cwt

• More than 20 million lbs. - $2.00/cwt

For new farms entering the dairy industry, the model proposed a three-year grace period where no market access fee would be paid.

The model, Stephenson explained, was developed through a simulation model of the global dairy supply chain, working with 15 world dairy-producing regions. The analysis included farms, processing, and demand and trade. In all, the model was developed over the course of more than 15 years of work.

The farm categories in the model included:

• a smaller farm, producing less than one million pounds per year

• a Wisconsin grazing farm, starting at 1.2 million pounds per year

• a mid-size farm producing 1-5 million pounds per year

• a farm producing 5-20 million pounds per year

• a farm producing more than 20 million pounds per year

Key findings

In all different designs for growth management in the model, the researchers found that implementing a ‘growth management model’ would result in:

• reduced average price variation and enhanced average farm milk prices

• increased average net farm operating income (NFOI)

• increased wholesale and retail dairy product prices

• reduced the rate of growth in dairy exports

“What we found, in running the model, was that the baseline U.S. All-Milk Price in dollars-per-hundredweight, for 2014-2021, with no growth management program (GMP) in place capped out at about $16.25/cwt. With a GMP in place, that price would have been more like $17.75/cwt –a $1.41/cwt difference.”

Stephenson said that the milk price variation in the same time frame, expressed as ‘mean absolute deviation’ (the average difference in price in a given month compared to the overall average milk price) was also very different in a GMP scenario. Without a GMP in place, the variation was about $0.45/cwt, and with a GMP in place, would have been reduced to about $0.24/cwt.

Also in the same time frame, NFOI was also very different under no GMP, GMP within allowable growth rates, GMP under Tier One growth rates, and GMP under Tier Two growth rates.

The NFOI for the four different scenarios for a farm producing 1-5 million pounds per year was as follows:

• no GMP: $50,000

• GMP within allowable growth: $150,000

• GMP at Tier One growth: $79,000

• GMP at Tier Two growth: $50,000

From 2014 to 2021, if a GMP had been implemented in the 2014 Farm Bill, the impact on value of dairy product exports would have been projected to be less. Specifically, with no GMP, exports were valued at about $1,500 million per month on average. With GMP, that number would have shrunk to just under  $1,100 million per month.

“Under a GMP scenario from 2014-2021, exports would still have grown,  but more slowly than without a GMP in place,” Stephenson explained.

Finally, as compared to a scenario without GMP, federal government expenditures on dairy margin protection programs would have shrunk by almost half if a GMP had been implemented. Without a GMP, federal government expenditures totaled about $6 billion between 2014-2021. With a GMP in place, those expenditures would have been about $3.3 billion.


Farmer Panel answers questions
THREE LOCAL dairy farmers, Jack Herricks, Monroe County Farm Bureau president, Travis Klinkner, Vernon County Farm Bureau board, and Darin Von Ruden, vice president of Wisconsin Farmers Union, were part of a farmer panel at the event. The three answered questions about why some form of supply management model was important for the dairy industry, and spoke about what the loss of dairy farms had meant to their rural communities.

Farmer panel

After a lunch featuring pulled pork sandwiches, and many varieties of locally-produced dairy products, the afternoon session included a panel of local dairy farmers talking about their thoughts on implementing a growth management program. 

Those farmers included Jack Herricks, Cashton dairy farmer and president of the Monroe County Farm Bureau; Travis Klinkner, Vernon County organic dairy producer and member of the Vernon County Farm Bureau Board; and Darin VonRuden, Vernon County organic dairy producer and vice president of Wisconsin Farmers Union.

The first question was how the farmers would describe the current state of the dairy industry.

• Herricks – what we’re seeing now is the consequence of consolidation in the dairy industry. What this does is to remove people from our local communities and our schools. The key challenge is the fickle nature of dairy prices.

• Klinkner: I realize that my farm operation is only as successful as those around me – when we lose dairy farmers, we lose the community of farmers and our local businesses – we need more neighbors who are farmers.

• Von Ruden – it has been exciting to see this dairy revitalization process unfold, and to see the hope making these changes could offer to future generations of dairy farmers. In order to get this done, we are going to need the farmers, but also the processors and our elected officials to all be on the same page.

What do you see as the advantages of ‘growth management’ versus ‘supply management?’

• Klinkner –in the past, the idea was that choosing not to grow was voluntary, and this resulted in those who did choose to grow undercutting others who didn’t – it was a system that pits farmers against farmers.

• Herricks – I am pleased to see that this discussion has lasted and grown for so many years now – I think it means that folks are really interested in this.

• Von Ruden – I like the idea of tying production to consumer demand versus implementing a mandatory quota system.

We had missed opportunities to make changes in the 2014 and 2018 Farm Bills. Now we are getting ready for the 2023 Farm Bill – what do you think will happen if we fail to make needed changes again?

• Von Ruden – if we don’t make a change, the trend of consolidation will continue.

• Klinkner – it will just keep going like it has been with more farmers exiting the industry. I see this issue as a matter of national food security – we need more dispersal of production, and more diversity of farms.

• Herricks – we can’t give up hope – sometimes good things can take a long time. I think it’s great that in the GMP scenario, there is no requirement of a quota investment, because I see that as a barrier to young farmers wanting to enter the business.

What is one thing that gives you hope?

• Herricks – Well, I’m still a dairy farmer – dairy farmers have to have a survival instinct to survive, and I believe that we’ll be able to figure it out.

• Von Ruden – seeing the multi-generation audience in this room gives me hope. What that means to me is that there’s excitement as well as worry, and it is the conversation between generations that is going to move this process forward.

• Klinkner – we’ve had lots of productive conversations with our elected representatives, and with the National Milk Board – so it’s not just the little guys. There is also growing consumer awareness of the issues facing dairy.
Watershed Council members learn about agroforestry
From the Driftless Region
1_Savanna_Group
TOUR GROUP members and Savanna Institute staff gather in the barn prior to launching their walking tour at the North Farm. High above, in the rafters of the barn, an impressive harvest of garlic was hung to dry.

DRIFTLESS - About 10 members of the Tainter Creek, Bad Axe and Coon Creek Community watershed councils, along with Vernon County Land Conservation Department staff, attended a field trip to the Spring Green campus of the Savanna Institute on Thursday, July 20.

The group was there to learn more about agroforestry practices. According to Savanna Institute Executive Director, North Crawford graduate Keefe Keeley, “agroforestry is the integration of trees, crops and livestock into farming systems. In a nutshell, it means farming with trees.”

The Savanna Institute is a nonprofit organization that works with farmers and scientists to lay the groundwork for widespread agroforestry adoption in the Midwest. Inspired by the native savanna ecosystems that once covered much of this region, the Savanna Institute conducts research, education, and outreach to support the growth of diverse, perennial agroecosystems.


2_Savanna_Keeley and Wojahn
KEEFE KEELEY, Savanna Institute executive director, takes a moment during introductions to ponder what his favorite tree crop is, with Ben Wojahn, Vernon County Conservation Director waiting to see what he would say. Though it was a hard choice, Keeley determined that his favorite was maple syrup.

On-hand to conduct the tour of their North Farm and Elder Farm agroforestry demonstration installations were Keefe Keeley, Water Quality Program Manager & Tribal Liaison Devon Brock-Montgomery, and Field Crew Lead, Spring Green Campus Meg Weidenhof.

Chuck and Karen Bolstad represented the Tainter Creek Watershed Council. From the Bad Axe Watershed Council there were organic dairy farmer Travis Klinkner and third generation dairy farmer Phil Hendon. Cashton organic dairy farmer Matthew Pears represented the Coon Creek Community Watershed Council.

“The Savanna Institute is devoted to research, education and outreach to provide assistance to farmers interested in including agroforestry systems in their farm rotations,” Keeley explained. “We offer tools, tested tree crop varieties, and market development, and we are basically committed to de-risking agroforestry and helping others avoid the mistakes that we will make through our experimentation and research.”

Keeley told the group that Savanna Institute is a technical service provider through USDA-Natural Resources Conservation Service. As such, they can assist producers in design of an agroforestry installation, securing funding, and in installing the system on their farm.

“We have four research/demonstration farms in the Spring Green area, and we also conduct research at farms in Illinois,” Keeley explained. “Our goals in Illinois are to explore introducing diversity into a place with little diversity, dominated by growing corn.”

Keeley said that their goal is to refine agrofestry techniques and crop varieties so that farmers can make a profit while at the same time improving their land, and water quality. What we are dedicated to here at the Savanna Institute is to do the legwork to ensure that agroforestry can be a viable option.

“A tree in the wrong place is just a big, dirty weed,” Keeley said. “A tree in the right place can be an asset and a crop.”

Types of agroforestry

Alley cropping is the cultivation of crops in the alleys between regularly spaced rows of trees or shrubs.

Silvopasture is the intentional integration of trees, pasture, and livestock, managed as a single system.

Windbreaks are strips of threes and shrubs designed to enhance crop or livestock production while providing conservation benefits.

Forest Farming is the cultivation of agricultural crops within a forest setting, such as mushrooms or ginseng.


3_Savanna_basil North Farm
KEEFE KEELEY, executive director of the Savanna Institute, discusses the kinds of cropping and partnerships that can be undertaken to pursue diversity in farming operations. Here, rows of honeyberry are seen, with plantings of basil in the ‘alleys’ between the perennial crops, grown by a neighbor who has a processed pesto business.

In fields at the bottom of the farm, just across the road and up from the Wisconsin River backwaters, an impressive planting of fruiting shrubs was combined with various other crops being grown.

In one case, an impressive bed of basil was being grown by a neighboring farmer between the rows of honeyberry shrubs. The basil is used for a processed pesto business sold in the region.

“This planting demonstrates that farmers don’t necessarily have to do all of the cultivation on their farms,” Keeley said. “Sometimes, we’ve found, partnerships with other producers can assist with increasing diversity on the farm.”

Travis Klinkner asked Keeley what the return-on-investment is with the planting of perennial crops.

“We don’t know that yet,” Keeley responded. “What we doing here at the Savanna Institute is taking on the risk and the learning curve, and positioning ourselves to help farmers not make the same mistakes we will in our experimentation and research.

Keeley pointed out that the current dry conditions demonstrate that adding diversity into your farm operation can help to protect your farming business from upheavals related to weather or markets.

In addition, Keeley said that research has demonstrated that the amount of food that can be produced on 100 hectares of integrated crops and trees is equal to the amount of food that can be produced on 80 hectares of cropland plus 60 hectares of forest land.

“Integration of crops and trees intensifies the amount of food production per acre,” Keeley said. “For example, if you grow wheat between rows of walnut trees, the crops use the available sunlight at different times of the year, they access the water at different depths in the soil and trees, in the process of drawing water up out of the aquifer can actually supply more water to annual crops planted between them.”


4_Savanna_upperfield
THE CHANGE that has been achieved on the upper field at Savanna Institute’s North Farm between 2021 and 2023 is impressive. In 2021, shortly after the farm was acquired, the main activity was planting multi-species cover crops, along with hay and row crops. Now the annual crops are intermixed in rows with plantings of many different perennial shrub and tree crops.

The contrast in the upper field at the North Farm campus between this reporter’s visit in summer of 2021, and in summer of 2023 was impressive. In 2021, the farm had just been acquired and the main activity being undertaken was the planting of cover crops to prepare the soil for alley cropping installations.

In 2023, watershed council visitors were treated to a wide vista of rows of chestnut trees, and various crop-producing shrubs such as hazelnuts, black currants, elderberries and more. The ‘alleys’ between were cultivated in cover crops, various row crops and pasture. Just added the week before, a herd of pastured sheep were seen grazing peacefully in the rows between various varieties of Chinese Chestnut trees.

“We are conducting a cold hardiness trial for different varieties of chestnuts here,” Keeley said. “Chestnuts are a very starchy crop, and can be used in product formulations that require starch.”

Keeley pointed out that though not commonly consumed in the United States, Chestnuts are a big part of the diets of Eastern Europeans and in northern Italy. One farmer who grows chestnuts here in the U.S. told Keeley that “his problem isn’t finding a market for his chestnuts, but rather his problem is in rationing them among his customers.”

“Chestnuts require a cold chain like apples do,” Keeley said. “One application for chestnuts is to make a gluten free flour, which has become increasingly in demand by consumers here in the U.S. Another application could be for chestnut finished turkeys, who could be turned out post harvest to clean up the orchard.”

Keeley said that the trees planted this year will be in full production in 10-12 years. Since our area is at the northern edge of the hardiness zone for the tree, the Savanna Institute’s research with UW-Madison is looking to identify cold-hardy cultivars, and also in breeding for “precocity” or cultivars that reach full productivity sooner.

“The size of the tree is similar to an apple tree,” Keeley said. “The canopy will produce about 50 percent shade when mature, and so a producer could get about 80 percent growth of cool season grasses and forbes in the rows between the trees.”


5_Savanna_chestnuts hazelnuts elderberries Hazelnuts
WATERSHED COUNCIL members listen as Keeley describes the opportuni-ties and challenges of including perennial crops like Chestnut, Hazelnut, and Elderberry in farm rotations, leaving room for growing various crops in the alleys between the perennial crops or pasturing of livestock.

A little further up the valley were rows of different cultivars of hazelnuts, with cover crops or root crops established between. Keeley said that the rows between the hazelnuts are meant for cropping, and not for silvopasture. He pointed out that they have also integrated a few alleys containing short grass prairie in order to provide habitat for pollinators.

Keeley explained that the Savanna Institute’s plantings represent the first planting at scale in the Midwest of Hazelnut cultivars. He explained that the shrubs grow in the wild in northern Wisconsin.

“The hazelnut is a shelf stable nut, and can be stored like grain,” Keeley said. “Cultivation of hazelnuts produces more oil per acre than soybeans, and can be sold at a higher margin.”

Keeley said that in 2024, they plan to launch a trial with the Kernza grain, a perennial wheat crop.

Ecosystem services

The Savanna Institute employs an ‘Ecosystem Services Manager, who leads the science to measure various ecosystem services that agroforestry can provide on a farm.

“It’s unclear when the carbon markets will really launch and become widely available,” Keeley told the group. “Nevertheless, our Ecosystem Services Manager is working on measuring the carbon sequestration of various crops, and is also developing the capacity to measure carbon with a drone capture system.”

In addition, they are also conducting a longevity study of water quality conditions before planting, and then every year that the agroforestry systems are in place. The goal is to document the ecosystem services that including trees and shrubs in farm rotations can provide.

“The roots of perennial shrubs and trees grow at a deeper level in the soil than other crops, and can spread out at depth under crop beds,” Keeley said. “In this way, they are available to capture excess nitrogen from crop beds that would otherwise have capacity to leach into the groundwater.”


6_Savanna_Elder Farm Elder Farm
ELDER FARM, a more recently acquired property in Iowa County’s Lowery Creek Watershed, is the site of a silvopasture demonstration project. Keeley explained some of the successes and challenged the prior owner experienced in transitioning sloped woodland to silvopasture.

The Elder Farm is a property acquired by Savanna Institute in 2022 in the Lowery Creek Watershed on the south side of the Wisconsin River in Iowa County. The farm is a silvopasture demonstration farm, and also has a house that will eventually be developed into an event and conference center.

“We were able to acquire this farm because I got to know the former owners, and came to understand their goals for their land,” Keeley said. “We currently rent the pastures to a neighbor who pastures his Murray Grey cattle on the property. It’ a great connection to have because the farmer, Michael Dolan, is the president of the Upland Hills Watershed Council.”

Dairy farmer Travis Klinkner shared with the group that he has a section of woodland on his farm that he wants to improve, and possibly put into some kind of production. He had lots of questions about what the best methods to clean up a woods are, what to do with the resulting brush piles, how much to thin the trees, and what kinds of tree species work best in a silvopasture format.

“Black walnuts are great silvopasture trees, because when they’re mature, their leaf canopy lets more light through than other tree species,” Keeley told him. “Other good species for silvopasture include mulberry, honey locust, black locust, willow and poplar.”

“We are currently working to develop a seed-sterile cultivar of black locust to help control its spread,” Keeley explained.

Keeley emphasized that when considering tree species to plant on your farm, you first need to be clear about your goals. For instance, he said, if you have a good stand of Sugar Maple, you will be able to harvest sap and timber. For this reason, you wouldn’t want that area to be in silvopasture or you would at least want to consider excluding the cattle at certain times of the year. Also if you have an area of your woods where you’re seeing natural regeneration of valuable timber species, then that probably isn’t the best place for livestock.

“If your goal is to pasture livestock, then that’s a different matter,” Keeley said. “Walnut is a high value timber species, and is very compatible with good pasture growth underneath if given the right spacing.”

Keeley pointed to a book by author Steve Gabriel called ‘Silvopasture’ for more information about selection of tree species. He said that willow is good forage for animals. For legumes, you’d want to consider locusts for their nitrogen fixation and as additional forage. For Forbes, you would want to consider including Mulberry.

“These species are all durable, fast growing, and cheap,” Keeley said.

If what you want is timber, then you should look at oak, hickory and walnut.

“Older stands of established trees can be more sensitive to compaction from livestock,” Keeley explained. “On the other hand, younger trees can adapt and deal with it.”

Keeley said that brush and shrubs such as dogwood, willow, raspberries, blackberries, and gooseberries get a bad name, but they do have some forage value. He said that planting these species can also help manage for biodiversity and wildlife.

Keeley pointed out that for those who want to learn more, Savanna Institute will be holding an Open House event on September 23, from 1 to 5 p.m.  They are partnering with Taliesin for a ‘Weekend in the Driftless,’ and the event will offer farm tours, tastings and nutshell talk