The product you are looking for could not be found.

Forage Diversity

written by

Joel Salatin

posted on

March 9, 2026

March is here, which means we're a few days away from green grass, which means we're close to a new grazing season.

Our area has had quite a winter.  Just three weeks ago we were ice skating on the frozen fields holding onto a rope and pulled by an ATV--running on top of the snow.  I only remember this happening one other time in my life, back in the 1960s.  But that's gone and the green tinge of new spring grass is bringing the photosynthetic hue back to the brown fields.

Where to start grazing? Each year, we pick a different pasture to begin.  

Why? Because grass, forbs, and herbs (the whole panoply of forages in a perennial pasture) do not all grow at the same time.

According to research by the Bionutrient Food Association, only one thing determines nutrient density in beef.  They've been conducting a two-year study sampling hundreds of steaks from various farms across the country.  Evaluating for 150 different nutrients, from minerals to fatty acids to vitamins, they've been trying to find the common denominators for the most balanced and heaviest load of nutrients.

Is it breed, often noted by color in cows.  Black Angus, Red Angus, white Charolais, black and white Pinzgauer, gray Brahman--you know how cows come in many different colors and styles.  Every breed association touts itself as the greatest gift to humanity.

Is it climate, like the difference between Alabama and North Dakota?  

Is it soil fertility?  

Is it the age of the beef?  Most American beef producers shoot for a finished animal at somewhere around two years of age; in France, the preference is for three years, and in some places it's even as high as 5-7 years.

Okay, enough teasing.  The answer to beef nutrient density is profound in its simplicity:  the only consistent determinant of the most nutrient-rich beef is the variety of plants the animal ate in its lifetime. 

Diversity.  Plain and simple.  The more different kind of plants consumed, the better the beef.

When you think about the variety of plants the conventional beef animal eats in America, it's pretty limited.  If the animal spends its last few months eating corn and soybeans, like most in feedlots, it's a simple ration.

Here at Polyface, one of our primary goals is to diversify the plants in our pastures. One of the best ways to do that is to start the grazing season on a different field each year.   The many different plants that can and should grow in a perennial prairie situation thrive under varied conditions.  Some like it cool and others like it hot.  Some like it wet and others like it dry. 

This is why "where to start" each season needs to be staggered year to year to ensure different plants reach physiological and phenotypical expression.  If we started on the same field every year, it would push the forages to mono-speciation rather than poly-speciation.  The plants that thrived under the first early grazing would proliferate in those fields and the ones that were weakened by that pruning period would suffer.

By rotating the start field, therefore, we set up a staggered yearly grazing that stimulates plant diversity.  That, in turn, creates the most nutrient density in the beef.  Isn't it fascinating that what's good for nutrition is also best for the ecology?  Diversifying the pasture sward also facilitates blooms throughout the season which in turn maintains flourishing pollinators.  

The whole ecological chain starts with the first field in the seasonal grazing rotation.  These are things we think about as early spring days wake up hibernating forages and we enjoy those first green tinges in the pastures.  Just like Polyface patrons bring intentionality to the dinner table, we bring intentionality to the grazing plan.

Your dinner is only as nutritious as the food we provide for our animals.  In a pastured livestock operation, it all starts with how many different plants inhabit the field.  Mainline conventional farming and landscaping is all about sameness.  Think lawncare, which dislikes dandelions and clover.  Or golf courses, which dislike anything except grass.

In fact, all these forbs and herbs add magnificent health to the landscape.  Here at Polyface, we treasure everything from chicory to goldenrod and milkweed.  The cows love these garnishes too.  

How to encourage diversity is at the heart of our spring farming tasks and what we're thinking about this time of year.  

Thank you for loyally caring for your health and the farmscape's health with your menu decisions.  They matter, and we're ever grateful.

beef

More from the blog

Speaking the Unspeakable

          All of us encounter taboo topics, going where angels fear to tread, and speaking the unspeakable.  These cliches capture the dialogue land mines we tend to avoid because most of us have a bias toward self-preservation.                   Today, I'm going into that space because we've had a flurry of agriculture activity in the news.  From President Trump's executive order in favor of regenerative agriculture to the opposite elevating the herbicide glyphosate to national security status to last week's decision to import below-market value lean ground beef product to then musing about reducing regulations on farmers processing their animals, we've seen all sorts of perceptions bandied about.                   Without getting into the politics of any of these things, here is the unspeakable truth:  bad farming exists and good farming exists.  There, I said it.  The conventional cultural perspective is that farmers are farmers and farming is farming.  It's an "all for one," and "one for all" Disney idea that all farming and farmers are in this together.                   To be fully transparent, as recently as a couple of months ago I used the term "bad farmers" and "good farmers."  An astute and charitable friend pulled me aside to critique those phrases and suggest I only use "good farming" and "bad farming" in order to honor to not bag people.  Fair enough.                    I'm now using only "bad farming" and "good farming."  The reason this matters is because for decades now, nearly all government subsidies, grants, insurance, and incentives have gone to bad farming.  This is why, for all the billions of annual federal expenditures, farms keep going downhill economically, ecologically, and emotionally.                   Of all the controversial things I've said about farming, by far and away the one that receives the most pushback is when I say bad farming exists.  The conventional industrial complex hates the idea.  Stink up the neighborhood?  "We're just farmers."  Pollute the groundwater?  "We're just farmers."  Dead zone the size of Rhode Island in the Gulf of Mexico due to chemical runoff in the Mississippi?  "We're just farmers."                   With no distinction allowed in the discussion, farming that destroys soil, pollutes the water, desertifies the landscape, produces pathogen-laden food, and disrespects animal behavior gets to ride the emotional equity coat-tails of good farming.  As a culture, we should defund bad farming, both publicly and privately.                   Farm protocols that destroy pollinators, view wildlife as inherently detrimental, and care not a whit about earthworm health are absolutely a national liability whether anyone wants to acknowledge it or not. What are the traits of good farming?  Here are some:                   1.  Build healthy soil.                   2.  Honor and respect biology, both plants and animals.                   3.  Prohibit poisons.                   4.  Increase pollinators.                   5.  Build immunological function.                   6.  Increase landscape hydration.                   7.  Smell good.                   8.  Look beautiful.                   9.  Operated by happy people.                   10.  Interact positively with neighbors.                   These are principles we try to honor every day here at Polyface, and your patronage enables us to continue pursuing these objectives.  The fact that our farm has a 24/7/365 open door policy for anyone to come at anytime from anywhere to see anything unannounced confirms a transparency persona that leads to trust.  If you haven't taken us up on this visit invitation, please do.                   When you look at the above list and think about what most people think about a farm environment, you won't find a single one of those items at a conventional chemical industrial outfit.  That's sad but it's also tragic.  It matters how a farm operates.  It matters how animals get treated.  It matters whether the farmer is happy or frustrated.  Farming protocols determine these elements; hence, bad farming and good farming.                   The term regenerative farming is long and hard and not comprehensive.  Why don't we just change the verbiage and call it good farming?  I'm not embarrassed or afraid to say I practice good farming.  And you should not be afraid to say you patronize good farming.  Our farm family is indeed in this together, and it's all about good farming, good food.                   Don't apologize for saying you buy food from good farming instead of bad farming.  Talk about a conversation starter.  Boy howdy.  That'll turn some heads.  But you might just educate someone.  Speaking the unspeakable is often the first step to waking folks up who are asleep at the wheel.  Look in your refrigerator.  Look in the pantry.  What items come from good farming and which ones come from bad farming?                   Go ahead; make the distinction.  And dare bad farming to defend itself.  Speaking the unspeakable often leads to someone trying to defend the indefensible.  Thank you for being the change we all want to see.