I did a podcast interview just recently where I was asked why I am a contrarian in my field. I could answer that a number of different ways, but in the field of silvopasture, Trees For Graziers stands out because we focus very little on timber. And I believe that has been absolutely key to our success so far.
Much of this is context dependent, and I’m not going to say timber isn’t the right fit for any silvopasture. Timber silvopasture happens to be the most widely spread silvopasture practice in the country, with large sections of the Southeast integrating pine and cattle. But TFG does not yet operate in pine country. Our genesis is in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania, where land goes for $30-50k per acre, and dairies dominate the landscape. Our clients are graziers, first and foremost. They rely on forages for their animals, and have very little interest in becoming foresters or waiting 20 years for cash flow from a timber crop. They also cannot afford to take land out of production for 5+ years while the trees mature enough to reintegrate livestock, given the small land bases they farm and the price of land. So, for most of our clients, quick shade is the first thing we aim for, followed by trees that will boost feed production at critical times of the year, thereby reducing feed costs and improving the bottom line.
But I believe this strategy works outside of the unique economics of Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. I was in Virginia talking with a landowner who was looking to create a silvopasture from an open pasture. The landowner had been advised to add pine for timber, but, at a lower stocking rate than a typical timber planting, to accommodate forages. So far, so good. But when I asked about the size of the plot, and how large of an area was needed to do a profitable commercial timber harvest, the economics started to fall apart. I can’t recall exactly what the numbers were, but let’s say the plot was about 20 acres, and in that area they would have needed 15 acres of solid pine plantation to make it worthwhile for a timber crew to bring their rigs and conduct a profitable timber harvest. Given that they were planting at a much lower density, they would have needed several times that amount of land to make a timber harvest economically feasible, more land than the landowner had available to put into silvopasture. So at the start, it’s a set up for a future situation the landowner is stuck with trees that are marginally profitable, if at all, and will almost certainly not repay anything for the materials, labor and time invested in them. What might have made sense on 200 acres just doesn’t work for smaller properties.
What’s more, some of the biggest and easiest gains with silvopasture, especially in the South, come from simply providing shade trees to reduce heat stress. With a timber silvopasture that’s based on an all-in, all-out harvesting model (as opposed to high-value timber trees that can be selectively harvested while maintaining plenty of shade), you have a period of no shade while the trees get to size, then a time when there is nice shade for a decade or so, until all the shade gets harvested and it’ll be years again before you have the benefit of shade. I would much rather see a combination of short-term shade trees planted for quick shade, mixed in with longer term trees that will drop persimmons and honey locust pods and low-tannin acorns for generations to come. The beauty of such a system, which is focused on serving livestock directly, is that it can work just as well on 1 acre as on 1,000 acres. And if someone wants to do timber, I would highly recommend the book Heartwood by Rowan Reid. It’s an Australian book, so the context is very different from mine, but the philosophy of integrating trees into farms for shade and shelter primarily, with the added benefit of high-value, well-managed timber, is spot-on.
So if you’re a small landowner looking to create a silvopasture, please look really closely at the economics and scales of efficiency before you move forward with a timber planting, especially a low-margin, commodity crop like pines. And even if you have 1,000 acres, you’ll still want to look very carefully at the numbers before you move forward. I’m no forester, and certainly don’t have experience in pine plantations, but I’ve not heard a whole lot of great things about the economics of them. Many folks throughout the country have planted pine timber only to learn decades later that their stand had become worthless due to increased supplies of timber (because everyone else planted these trees as well) and the loss of local sawmills.
Thankfully, even though pine silvopasture has been the most widespread form of silvopasture, it isn’t the only option, and I soundly believe that we’ll see much more profitable versions in the years ahead, with high-quality trees decreasing farm inputs, raising outputs, while adding diversity and resilience to farms for generations to come.
