Agroforestry Systems

, Volume 10, Issue 3, pp 187–197 | Cite as

An analysis of a silvopastoral system for the marginal land in the Southeast United States

  • C. W. DangerfieldJr.
  • R. L. Harwell


Almost 20 million acres of non-forest cropland in the South can be classified as marginal. Demand projections for forest products call for a 40 percent increase by year 2030. Recent regenerated tree acres lag behind harvested acres. Multiple land use practices combining trees and grazing adjust cash flows forward mitigating negative flow period associated with conventional forest production. Profit opportunities for private, non-industrial landowners can be increased by ranking inputs in order of changes to net present value(NPV). A sensitivity analysis of an agroforestry scenario, including trees, beef cattle, and pasture, allows producers to concentrate management efforts where returns are greatest. Model results show greatest returns to NPV was realized from improvement to Chip-N-Saw income. The least increase in NPV came when the cost of control burns was changed.

Key words

Agroforestry southeast pines cattle NPV multiple use sensitivity inputs 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Barry JP, Hopkins JA and Baker CB (1983) Financial Management in Agriculture, The Interstate Printers and Publishers, Inc, Danville, IL, Third EdGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Blinn CR and Rose DW (1986) CASH, A General Cash Flow and Sensitivity Analysis Microcomputer Program for Conducting project Analysis, Staff Paper Series No. 54, Department of Forest Resources, College of Forestry, University of Minnesota, St. Paul MN 55108, AugustGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bond WE and Campbell RS (1951) Planted Pines and Cattle Grazing — A Profitable Use of Southwest Louisiana's Cut-Over Pine Land, Bulletin No. 4, Louisiana Forestry CommissionGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brown RE and McKissick JC (1988) Cow-Calf Budget, South Georgia, Sec. III, p. 9, Decisions for Profit, Extension Agricultural Economics, The University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Byrd NA and Lewis CE (1983) Managing Pine Trees and Bahia grass for Timer and Cattle Production, General Report R8-FR2, USDA Forest Service, OctoberGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fedkiw J (1984) An Economic Outlook for Grass, Cattle, Trees, and Wildlife Hunting in the Southeast, presented at the Southeastern Grazing Lands and People Conference, Atlanta, Georgia, DecemberGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Haney HL (1980) Economics of Integrated Cattle-Timber Land Use, Proceedings of Southern Forest Range and Pasture Symposium, New Orleans, Louisiana, MarchGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Harwell RL and Dangerfield CW (1988) Sustaining Multiple Use on Marginal Land: Agroforestry in the Southeast, FS 88-22, Division of Agricultural Economics, College of Agriculture, The University of Georgia, DecemberGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hepp TE (1988) A Users Manual for Yield, Version 1.1c, Tennessee Valley Authority, AugustGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lewis CE and Pearson HA (1987) Agroforestry Using Tame Pastures Under Planted Pines in the Southeastern United States, In Agroforestry: Realities, possibilities, and potentials. Henry L. Gholz, (ed.) Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Dordrecht, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lewis CE, Tanner GW and Terry WS (1985) Double vs. Single Row Pine Plantations for Wood and Forage Production, Southern Journal of Applied ForestryGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lewis CE et al. (1983) Agro-forestry in Florida, The Florida Cattleman, pp 82–84, SeptemberGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lundgren GK et al. (1983) An Economic Analysis of Forest Grazing on Four Timber Management Situations, Southern Journal of Applied Forestry, Vol 7, No 3, AugustGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mooso GV and Morrison DG (1988) Evaluation of Short Duration Grazing for Stocker Beef Production, Louisiana State UniversityGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pearson HB and Whitaker LB (1973) Returns from Southern Forest Grazing. Journal of Range Management, vol 26, number 2, pp 85–87, MarchGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Percival NS and Knowles RL (1983) Agroforestry: Expanding Horizons, 1983 Raukura Farmers Conference, Raukura, New ZealandGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Reid R and Wilson G (1986) Agroforestry in Australia and New Zealand, Goddard and Dobson Publication, Victoria, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sullivan AD and Matney TG (1980) Trade-Offs in Wood and Forage Production, Proceedings of Southern Forest Range and Pasture Symposium. New Orleans, Louisiana, MayGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tustin JR, Knowles RL and Klomp BK (1979) Forest Farming: A Multiple Land Use Production System in New Zealand, Forest Ecology and Management, No 2: 169–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    US Department of Agriculture (1983) Conversion of Southern Cropland to Southern Pine Tree Plantings, Office of Budget and Program Analysis, DecemberGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    US Department of Agriculture (1985) Planting Intentions Report, Statistical Reporting Service, FebruaryGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    US Department of Agriculture (1987) The South's Fourth Forest, Alternatives for the Future, US Forest Service, J Lamar Beasley, Project ChairmanGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. W. DangerfieldJr.
    • 1
  • R. L. Harwell
    • 2
  1. 1.Extension Agricultural Economics, ColiseumThe University of GeorgiaAthensUSA
  2. 2.Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, Barre HallClemson UniversityClemsonUSA

Personalised recommendations