Author: Joe Carter

Regenerative ranching is a comprehensive approach to livestock farming that aims to restore and enhance soil fertility while producing food. It goes beyond sustainable practices by actively improving the land through methods like:

• Rapid rotational grazing:
  • Moving livestock frequently to mimic natural herd movements, preventing overgrazing, and allowing pastures to recover after grazing.
  • Extensive use of both permanent and moveable electric fencing to actively manage grazing patterns.
• Soil health focus:
  • Using grazing to stimulate plant growth, increase organic matter and sequester carbon in the soil.
• Biodiversity promotion:
  • Encouraging diverse plant, insect, soil biome and animal life to create resilient pastures.
• Minimal external inputs:
  • Reducing reliance on synthetic fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, dewormers, hormones, antibiotics and grain-based livestock feed by leveraging grass and natural processes.
• Water management:
  • Use of water distribution systems to get livestock water to every corner of the ranch.
  • Improving water retention and reducing runoff through healthy permeable soils and strategic planned grazing.
• Terraforming via livestock:
  • Use of livestock as a natural tool for reseeding pastures, distributing fertilizer evenly in the form of manure and urine and building up organic matter in soil.

This approach often improves ranch profitability, enhances animal welfare, and stores carbon in the soil. It’s rooted in principles of regenerative agriculture, tailored to livestock systems.

Regenerative ranching, focused on restoring soil health, biodiversity, and pasture resilience through comprehensive livestock management, has been shaped by several key pioneers:

• Allan Savory: Developed the Holistic Management framework in the 1960s, emphasizing planned rotational grazing to mimic natural herd movements, improving soil carbon sequestration and grassland health. His TED Talk in 2013 popularized these ideas.
• Gabe Brown: A North Dakota rancher, Brown adopted regenerative practices in the 1990s, integrating cover crops, no-till, and diverse livestock systems. His book Dirt to Soil (2018) and speaking tours have inspired widespread adoption.
• Joel Salatin: Through Polyface Farm, Salatin pioneered rotational grazing and multi-species systems since the 1980s, emphasizing local food systems and soil fertility. His books, like Salad Bar Beef, spread his methods.
• Greg Judy: A Missouri grazier, Judy advanced adaptive multi-paddock grazing, leasing land to scale regenerative practices. His books and YouTube channel have made him a key educator since the 2000s.
• Will Harris: At White Oak Pastures in Georgia, Harris transitioned from industrial to regenerative ranching in the 1990s, using multi-species grazing to restore degraded land. His farm is a model for large-scale regenerative systems.

These figures built on earlier influences like André Voisin’s 1950s work on rational grazing and the broader organic movement, adapting practices to diverse landscapes and sharing knowledge through books, talks, and demonstrations.

Detractors of regenerative ranching raise several concerns, often focusing on its scalability, scientific validation, and environmental impact. Here are the main criticisms:

1. Limited Scalability: Critics argue that regenerative ranching, which often relies on rapid rotational grazing and smaller-scale operations, is difficult to scale to meet global meat demand. Industrial agriculture, they claim, is more efficient for feeding large populations, especially in regions with limited land or water resources.
2. Inconsistent Carbon Sequestration Claims: While proponents highlight regenerative ranching’s potential to sequester carbon in soils, detractors question the consistency and magnitude of these benefits. Studies, such as those cited in critiques from groups like the Breakthrough Institute, suggest that carbon sequestration varies widely based on soil type, climate, and management practices, and may not offset livestock methane emissions as claimed.
3. Lack of Robust Evidence: Some scientists and environmentalists argue that regenerative ranching lacks sufficient peer-reviewed, long-term data to support its environmental benefits. They point to studies, like those from the University of Oxford, showing that grass-fed systems can have higher methane emissions per unit of meat compared to feedlot systems, undermining climate benefits.
4. Land Use Concerns: Critics note that regenerative ranching requires significantly more land than conventional feedlot systems due to lower stocking densities. This could lead to deforestation or habitat loss if scaled up, especially in biodiverse regions like the Amazon, counteracting environmental gains.
5. Economic Viability: Detractors highlight that regenerative ranching can be costlier and less profitable for ranchers due to higher labor and land management demands. This could limit adoption, particularly for small-scale farmers in developing countries, as noted in critiques from agricultural economists.
6. Animal Welfare Misconceptions: Some argue that regenerative ranching’s “natural” branding oversimplifies animal welfare. While animals may graze freely, critics point out that issues like predation, disease, or extreme weather can pose risks in extensive systems, which may not always be addressed adequately.
7. Overhyped as a Climate Solution: Environmental groups like Greenpeace have criticized regenerative ranching as a distraction from reducing overall meat consumption. They argue that even if it sequesters some carbon, livestock farming inherently has a high environmental footprint compared to plant-based systems, and scaling regenerative practices won’t sufficiently mitigate climate change.

These criticisms often stem from a tension between regenerative ranching’s holistic philosophy and the demand for quantifiable, universally applicable solutions in conventional agriculture. Detractors call for more rigorous research and realistic assessments of its global potential.

Proponents of regenerative ranching respond to detractors with a mix of practical examples, emerging research, and a reframing of the critiques to align with their holistic approach. Here’s how they address the main criticisms:

1. Scalability Concerns: Proponents argue that regenerative ranching can be adapted to diverse contexts, citing examples like large-scale operations in Australia and the U.S. (e.g., ranches managed by the Savory Institute). They emphasize that global meat demand should be reduced overall, with regenerative systems prioritizing quality over quantity, supporting local food systems, and reducing reliance on industrial monocultures.
2. Carbon Sequestration Evidence: While acknowledging variability, proponents point to studies, such as those from Michigan State University and the Soil Carbon Initiative, showing significant carbon sequestration in well-managed regenerative systems. They argue that long-term soil health improvements, including increased organic matter, enhance sequestration over time, and methane emissions can be offset through practices like adaptive multi-paddock grazing.
3. Need for More Research: Advocates agree more peer-reviewed studies are needed but highlight existing research and on-the-ground success stories. Organizations like Regeneration International and ranchers like Gabe Brown provide data showing improved soil health, water retention, and biodiversity. They argue that science is catching up to practices farmers have refined for decades and that funding for such research has been limited compared to industrial agriculture.
4. Land Use Efficiency: Proponents counter that regenerative ranching restores degraded land, making it productive without requiring deforestation. They cite examples of restored grasslands in the U.S. Great Plains and Africa, where holistic management has increased carrying capacity. They also argue that industrial agriculture’s land efficiency comes at the cost of soil depletion and ecosystem loss, whereas regenerative systems enhance biodiversity and resilience.
5. Economic Viability: Advocates acknowledge higher initial costs but argue that regenerative ranching reduces input costs (e.g., fertilizers, feed) over time. Case studies from ranches like Polyface Farms show profitability through diversified revenue streams (e.g., direct-to-consumer sales, agro-tourism). They also point to growing consumer demand for regeneratively raised meat, which commands premium prices, and emerging carbon credit markets as financial incentives.
6. Animal Welfare: Proponents emphasize that regenerative systems prioritize animal well-being by mimicking natural herd behaviors, reducing stress, and eliminating feedlots’ confinement practices. They argue that risks like predation or weather are manageable through vigilant monitoring and adaptive management, and the overall quality of life for animals is higher than in industrial systems.
7. Climate Solution Scope: Rather than positioning regenerative ranching as a silver bullet, proponents frame it as a critical part of a broader food system transformation. They argue it produces high-quality, nutrient-dense food while restoring ecosystems. Organizations like the Rodale Institute stress that regenerative practices can be applied beyond livestock to crops, amplifying climate benefits.

Proponents often emphasize that regenerative ranching is a context-specific, evolving practice that prioritizes ecological and social outcomes over industrial efficiency. They call for collaboration between scientists, farmers, and policymakers to refine and scale these systems while addressing gaps in data and implementation.

At OrangeStone Ranch, we’re not nearly as concerned about climate change and carbon sequestration as we are about simply retaining, building and regenerating our topsoil. As one commenter on social media said recently, “We no longer have topsoil. We have sand to which we add fertilizer and hope for the best.”*

We’ve been watching our own pastures and our neighbors’ pastures deteriorate steadily over the past 60 years while we and our neighbors continued with business as usual. At this rate, our progeny will be lucky to have any sand left to regenerate in 60 years. We need to turn the tide. If we can achieve our immediate goal of regenerating our soil and pastures, 90% of the climate change and carbon sequestration concerns will take of themselves.

If we were to quit ranching entirely as some in the environmentalist community would have us do, it’s unlikely that our pastures would recover on their own. The prairies around us evolved over millions of years in a win-win-win relationship with the climate and millions of roaming ruminants. Regenerative ranching holds out the promise of getting us back to that 3-way win.

* We apologize for not providing the attribution of this excellent quote. If you’re the originator, please let us know and we’ll be glad to give you the credit for it.

When we were growing up in the 1950’s, 60’s and 70’s, we spent many happy days on the ranch visiting our grandparents. Having acquired the main portion of the ranch in 1928, our grandparents were excellent stewards of the land. Our grandfather raised cattle, sheep and dryland peanuts. He had a large garden near the farmhouse.

As we remember it, the grass always looked plentiful. There was little or no bare ground anywhere. The soil was teeming with subterranean life. If we needed bait for fishing, we could take a shovel with us to the nearest stock pond and dig up a shovelful of earthworms. Dung beetles were a source of entertainment, along with butterflies and wild honey bees. Our grandfather, along with his sheep and cattle, kept the brush and mesquite trees under control. We could easily walk anywhere on the place without being impeded in any overgrowth. Our favorite pastime was exploring up and down the creek that runs diagonally across the ranch. It was on average about 10 feet deep and 20 feet wide. The ranch was replete with wildlife including squirrels, horned lizards (horny toads), bobcats, raptors, quail, dove, waterfowl, foxes, o’possums, skunks, rabbits, deer and armadillos.

After our grandparents passed away in the early 70’s, our family members managed the ranch. We implemented many improvements including new fences, new coastal bermuda fields, mesquite eradication, a new shop building, stock pond cleanouts and a large new stock pond.

As family members grew older, the ranch improvements waned but we continued to practice continuous grazing with livestock wandering at will throughout the pastures. As a result, the ranch is in poor shape at present. Current status is summarized as follows:

• Pastures are in poor condition with spotty grass, broom weed infestations, uncontrolled brush, mesquite coverage and significant patches of bare dirt.
• The creek is now 5 feet deeper and 15 feet wider than it was under our grandfather’s watch.
• There is active erosion underway into the creek with large new ravines forming in the pastures.
• Approximately half of the perimeter fencing had to be replaced. Fence replacement is now 90% complete.
• Invasive coyotes and feral hogs have their run of the place
• Horny toads and quail have completely disappeared. We assume this was caused by the following factors:
  • Fire ant incursions
  • Pesticides broadcast to fight fire ants killed killed both the horny toads and the harvester ants that make up their diet. The harvester ants have now recovered but the horny toads have not.
  • Widespread adoption of coastal bermuda grass for hay fields throughout our region eliminated the native grasses. Coastal bermuda does not produce seeds which the harvester ants eat. Coastal bermuda hay fields are no-go zones for horny toads and other wildlife like quail that are dependent on grass seeds in their diet.
  • Feral hogs and coyotes may be eating horny toads and/or disturbing their nests
• There are no earthworms in the topsoil. We assume this was caused by improper use of cattle dewormers, antibiotics and chemical fertilizers.
• There is little to no organic matter or insects in and on the soil. Notably, there are no dung beetles at work. We assume that over-grazing, dewormers, antibiotics, herbicides, insecticides and chemical fertilizers are the culprits.
• Some of the stock ponds have silted up and need to be cleaned out. The stock pond dams have become overgrown with brush and trees, leading to stock pond water leakage.
• A heavy fuel load of brush has built up around our large oak and pecan trees. This places these beautiful hundred year+ trees at significant risk in the event a grass fire comes through the ranch.
• We’ve lost a significant amount of topsoil to erosion. There is significantly more orange sandstone protruding on the pastures surfaces now than when our grandparents operated the ranch. At the current rate of erosion, there won’t be much topsoil left in 50 years.

To further document baseline conditions as we begin our ranch regeneration efforts, we’ll be doing the following:

• Soil fertility and permeability testing
• Soil microbiome testing
• Grass inventory and grass coverage
• Photo and video records of pasture and creek conditions including drone video footage
• Etc.

We’ll update this post as our baseline documentation efforts are completed. These baseline records will help us measure progress and alter course as necessary during our regeneration projects.

"Since the Texas horned lizard is a threatened species, it is illegal to pick up, touch, or possess them in Texas. Handling horned lizards is illegal even if your intentions are good. For example, if you help a Texas horned lizard cross the street or move it to what you believe is better habitat, you are in violation of the law and could be ticketed for your actions. Scientists are required to obtain collecting and handling permits from the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department prior to conducting research on horned lizards." Link to source, see page 5

These restrictions are counter-productive. The underfunded government monopoly on repopulating horny toads may be one of the biggest factors in limiting their return. At present, the breeding program in Texas is severely limited to a couple of secretive TPWD sites and 3 zoos {verify this}. These breeding capacity of these 5 sites is limited because they have only one supplier for the harvester ants that feed the horny toads, and that supplier is tapped out. {provide source} We have scores of harvester ant beds on our ranch alone. Government needs to partner with private and commercial entities who can help out with the effort. 

Commercial breeders could very well be the solution to the dwindling population of horned toads. I, for one, would be more than willing to purchase a few dozen breeding pairs and do whatever prep work necessary to ensure they have plentiful and safe habitat on our ranch. We're already doing our best to ensure that our thriving harvester ant populations aren't disturbed. 

And if I ever see one crossing a county road, I'm sure as heck going to be out directing traffic until it gets to the other side. 

Although our ranch regeneration plan is multi-faceted, our primary grass and pasture regeneration tool is a livestock grazing technique we call Regenerative Grazing. This grazing method attempts to mimic, as closely as possible, the effects of a wild ruminant herd munching their way across a prairie.

Wild ruminants such as bison move in a tight mob to better ward off predators. On a wide open prairie with no fences to block their movements, they eat roughly 1/3 of the grass, trample 1/3 and leave 1/3 standing. The trampled third decomposes to enrich the soil. The third of the grass left behind quickly regenerates. They tend to eat whatever is in front of them because their movements left and right are limited by the mob. As they move, they distribute fertilizer and moisture in the forms of manure and urine evenly across the landscape. Subterranean life in the forms of earthworms, insects, fungi and bacteria thrive. Ruminants’ cloven hooves break up the soil surface, creating suitable conditions for germinating seeds. Both the bison and the prairie evolved to depend on this symbiotic relationship. The predominant grazing practices of modern ranching violates this symbiosis.

Continuous grazing is the most common livestock grazing practice in Central Texas today. In this grazing method, ranchers turn livestock loose  in large pastures over extended periods. In the absence of predators, domesticated livestock have lost their mob grazing behavior. They wander freely throughout the pasture, favoring their preferred grasses, shade trees and the area around watering holes. As a result, the favorite grasses get eaten down to the root. Less desirable plants get left behind to over-propagate. Favored areas get compacted and over-grazed. Manure and urine are spread unevenly. Livestock trails develop, contributing to pasture erosion. 

A slight improvement over continuous grazing is the practice of rotational grazing. In this grazing method, a rancher subdivides large pastures using cross fencing. The livestock are rotated between these smaller pastures every few weeks. Ideally the cattle are moved before they over-graze any particular pasture, but they can still over-graze spots within a pasture. The subdivided pastures have some time to recover between grazings, but most of the other characteristics of free-range wild ruminant grazing aren't achieved. 

In recent years, many different grazing methodologies have been developed to counteract the negative aspects of continuous grazing. These methods go by names such as mob grazing, ultra high density grazing (UHDG), managed intensive grazing (MIG), adaptive multi-paddock (AMP) grazing, prescribed grazing, total grazing and holistic grazing. These techniques vary in subtle ways, but they all share a desire to return to the symbiotic benefits of wild ruminant herds foraging in tight formation across an open prairie or woodland savannah. 

For our purposes, we're adapting all of the best practices from this collection of grazing techniques. We've chosen the umbrella term Regenerative Grazing to refer to all of them collectively. This descriptive term provides a mental model when we need to describe what we're doing and why we're doing it. Just picture a herd of bison moving slowly across a verdant prairie in tight mob formation and you'll have a pretty good idea of the what's and why's. 

Although Regenerative Grazing harks back to ancient times, today's implementation is made possible by modern technologies. It wouldn't be possible without solar powered electric fencing, poly-wire, solar-powered water pumps and plastic water pipe. 

To mimic bison grazing patterns as close as possible, we cross fence our pastures using permanent high-tensile electric fencing. We then fence off smaller temporary paddocks using portable electric poly-wire rolled off of a geared spool.  We pump water to a portable trough in the paddock.  We move the livestock to a new paddock on average once a day. When fully implemented, we will have  45 to 60 paddocks of 3 to 5 acres apiece, giving each paddock 6 to 8 weeks of rest on average between grazings.  

The results we expect from Regenerative Grazing are as follows:

• Fewer parasite problems
  • Parasite larvae in manure will hatch and die before livestock return to a paddock
• Fewer fly problems
  • Cattle get a fresh paddock devoid of fresh manure every day
• Livestock will get a more varied diet of grass and forbs
• No more over-grazed pastures
• No more compacted and denuded spots in pastures where livestock congregate and less erosion caused by cattle trails
• Manure and urine spread more evenly across all pastures
• A layer of decaying thatch on the soil surface
  • Aids in water retention
  • Builds new soil as it decays
  • Provides a substrate for growth of beneficial insects, earthworms, bacteria and fungi
• Faster recovery and regrowth of grass after each grazing
• Greater carrying capacity of the ranch in total since every inch of available land will be grazed uniformly
• Better management of both the livestock and the pastures since they’re being observed daily
  • We can make real-time adaptive adjustments of paddock sizes and grazing periods based on our daily observations
  • We’ll catch livestock health issues faster via daily observations
• Longer growing seasons for grasses and forbs since we keep them vegetative longer by clipping the plants before they seed out
• Creation of new top soil as thatch and manure decompose
• Improved soil health as the soil biome improves with beneficial worms, insects, bacteria and fungi
• Reduction of erosion in our pastures and creeks via improved ground cover, improved root systems and restricting livestock from sensitive areas
• Improved soil fertility
• Improved water retention
• Working off our beer guts because we have to get out and move cattle every day (not kidding).

Of course all these benefits aren’t achieved without costs. Some of these are the following:

• Labor required to move livestock on a daily basis
• Cost of electric fencing, chargers, batteries and solar panels
• Cost of pumps, batteries, water pipe, water storage tanks and solar panels
• Cost of additional stock ponds and/or water wells
• Cost of clearing brush to accomodate paddock fencing
• Maintenance costs for all of the above

These costs have to be weighed against the benefits.

The various grazing practices that we’ve lumped under the umbrella of Regenerative Grazing have both proponents and detractors. Anyone planning to pursue these practices should examine the arguments and evidence of both sides before taking the leap. We’ve provided a representative sampling of arguments on both sides in our Resources and References section. {Add link} An excellent literature review on regenerative grazing is provided at this link.

The main thing that strikes us as we research the relevant literature is the paucity of well-designed scientific studies of various grazing practices. Given the stakes, one would think that we’d know for sure whether and under what conditions these techniques work by now. That’s not the case. What we’ve found is a lot of poorly-designed studies built around the summer vacation schedules of undergraduate cheap labor comparing apples to oranges and the like. Along with that, we find a plethora of enthusiastic advocates providing anecdotal evidence that these practices work.

The one thing we do know is that continuous grazing is rapidly turning our family ranch into an eroded desert. Given that, we’re giving Regenerative Grazing a try. Can’t hurt.