Economic implications of pollution control on Texas rangeland

Abstract

Overgrazing rangeland increases soil erosion, thus reducing its livestock carrying capacity. This study focused on the possible effects of Section 208 of P.L. 92-500 created by Congress to control soil sediment losses on the Texas ranch firm. A 20 year multiple goal programming model was used to optimize alternative of typical ranch firm in the Edwards Plateau region of Texas. The alternative available to the ranch firm included the following; (1) heavy continuous grazing, (2) moderate continuous grazing, (3) light continuous grazing, (4) four-pasture deferred rotational grazing and (5) a seven-pasture high intensive low frequency grazing. The ranch firm also had the option of controlling brush by root plowing in years 1, 6, and 11 on range used with light continuous grazing, four-pasture deferred rotational grazing, and seven-pasture high intensive low frequency grazing. The range was grazed with either a 60:20:20 ratio of cattle, sheep and angora goats, or cattle only. Deer grazing was included on range with both domestic livestock grazing combination. Ranch management was allowed to purchase additional rangeland or to expand internally by increasing the stocking rate through brush control and/or the use of an improved grazing system. Risk was considered in the model by using two different discount rates and by changes in the leverage ratio. The firm was allowed to invest excess cash in a savings account during surplus years and to borrow within credit limits during periods of insufficient funds. Multiple firm goals and satisfactory goal achievement levels were ranked in the following order: (1) to maximize profit, (2) to purchase 6400 acres of rangeland, (3) to maximize ending cash balance, (4) to utilize 2080 hours of labor per year, (5) to reach 32.5 percent climax vegetation as a measure of range condition, (6) to maintain 42.66 deer per section, (7) to maintain 21.3 AU of domestic livestock per section and (8) to minimize soil sediment losses. These goal ranking were projected to represent those of the typical ranch firm. Alternative goal rankings and goal levels were examined to determine the tradeoffs among those goals...