25. Infrastructure Cost and Information Gaps Limit Sustainable Grazing Adoption Among Southern U.S. Cow-calf and Stocker Producers.

Abstract

The objective of this study was to characterize sustainable grazing management practices, identify barriers to adoption, and evaluate associations between demographics and management decisions among beef producers in the southern United States. An anonymous, 80-item online survey was distributed between April and October 2024 through Texas A&M AgriLife Extension events, regional cattle conferences, Extension social media, and a national magazine advertisement. To encourage participation, respondents were entered into a drawing for one of nine $100 gift cards. The survey was delivered via Qualtrics (Provo, UT) and screened to include only U.S. cow–calf, stocker, or backgrounder producers; incomplete, duplicate, or non-U.S. responses were excluded. Descriptive statistics, Spearman rank correlations, Mann-Whitney U tests, Fisher exact tests, and Friedman test were used to evaluate responses (R v4.2.2; R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria; α = 0.05). Respondents (n = 77) were predominantly from Texas (78%), male (65%), and operating multigenerational family ranches (93% family-owned). Median age was 46 yr (IQR: 34–57), median ranching experience was 14 yr, median grazed land was 92 ha, and median herd size was 34 cows. The majority (76%) derived less than half of household income from cattle. Rotational grazing was the most common strategy (39%), followed by continuous grazing (32%). Over half (54%) had no written grazing plan, and 26% kept no grazing records. Most producers calculated stocking rates at least annually (73%) and monitored soil health (67%). Technology attitudes were positive, with 56% reporting comfort with or active pursuit of new tools. Forced ranking of 9 adoption barriers differed significantly (Friedman χ² = 194.8; P < 0.001). Logistical and economic constraints dominated: infrastructure costs ranked highest (mean rank = 2.2 of 9), followed by time investment (3.8), lack of pasture infrastructure (4.2), and limited labor (4.2). Skepticism about environmental (5.8) and economic benefits (6.0) ranked substantially lower. Only 46% of producers were aware of government conservation programs such as EQIP, despite infrastructure cost being the primary reported barrier. First-generation ranchers (n = 15) were less likely than multigenerational producers to calculate stocking rates (40 vs. 79%; P = 0.004), less aware of conservation programs (20 vs. 50%; P = 0.041), and ranked lack of knowledge as a more influential barrier (median rank 4 vs. 6; P = 0.020). Larger operations and more experienced producers reported greater conservation program awareness (rs = 0.399 and 0.343; P < 0.01). In conclusion, logistical constraints and gaps in information access, rather than attitudinal resistance, were the primary limitations to managed grazing adoption. First-generation and smaller-scale producers may be priority audiences for extension programming that integrates cost-share education with foundational grazing management training.