A Publication of:
OSU Extension - Fairfield County
831 College Ave., Suite D, Lancaster, OH 43130
and the
BEEF Cattle questions may be directed to the OSU Extension BEEF Team through Stephen Boyles or Stan Smith, Editor
You may subscribe to this weekly BEEF Cattle letter by sending a blank e-mail to beef-cattle-on@ag.osu.edu
Previous issues of the BEEF Cattle letter
Issue # 587
Creep Feeding With DDGs - Stan Smith, PA, Fairfield County OSU Extension
As we've discussed over the years, the feed conversion for beef calves still nursing mamma on good spring pasture is not great. In fact, in times of high feed costs, it's a practice that may not be profitable. Regardless, as cattlemen look for lesser cost feed alternatives, we've been asked if dried distiller grains (DDG) are a viable alterative in a creep feed ration. Simply . . . yes they are.
By all indications from those who have done work with DDGs in creep rations, the ration could be comprised of up to 50% DDGs. Francis Fluharty suggests that an upper limit of 40% in the ration is safer, especially if pasture becomes short in summer, prior to weaning.
The inclusion rate of DDG up to the 40-50% limit will be largely dependant on their cost versus other feed stuffs. With corn currently trading for greater than 10 cents per pound, DDGs presently being purchased for $150-$180 per ton are a cost effective alternative source of energy in the ration, and provide more than adequate levels of protein. DDG may be mixed with whatever the next lowest cost of energy may be such as cracked corn, wheat midds, soyhulls, rolled barley, oats, etc.
For more information from mid western beef cattle researchers and specialists on the inclusion of DDG in creep rations, visit these links:
http://www.ag.ndsu.edu/pubs/ansci/beef/as1242w.htm
http://www.ddgs.umn.edu/abstracts-beef/2004-Lancaster-%20Effect%20of%20ddgs%20as%20protein--.pdf
http://www.ddgs.umn.edu/articles-beef/2007-Lasley-%20AS%20Leaflet%20R2186.pdf
http://jas.fass.org/cgi/content/abstract/84/8/2200
http://animalscience.tamu.edu/main/academics/beef/browsing/may07.html
http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1062&context=animalscinbcr
http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1290&context=agecon_cornhusker
Do The Math Before Creep Feeding - Karl Hoppe, Extension Livestock Specialist, NDSU
Calving is winding down in North Dakota, and producers soon will be making decisions that could affect their profit margin when they sell those calves months from now.
One of those decisions is whether to supply the calves with creep feed. That's essentially any food a producer provides calves while they're still nursing.
The amount of creep feed required to produce the desired result in the calves is a major factor producers must consider when deciding whether creep feed is cost-effective, according to Karl Hoppe, Extension Service area livestock specialist at North Dakota State University's Carrington Research Extension Center.
"Make sure you do the math with the right feed conversions," he advises.
Producers must keep in mind they will need more creep feed if they are using it as a replacement for pasture grasses than as a supplement, he says. For example, he estimates calves would need 5 to 7 pounds of creep feed for 1 pound of weight gain if creep feed is a supplement. However, if it's replacing pasture grasses, calves might need 8 to 9 pounds of creep feed for 1 pound of weight gain.
"So if the pasture condition is good to exceptional, then be sure to use a creep feed formulated to supplement grass, rather than replace grass," he says.
Favorable and profitable conversions of 5 to 7 pounds of creep feed to 1 pound of gain are typical where pasture forage is limited and feed is balanced with nutritional requirements, says John Dhuyvetter, area livestock specialist at NDSU's North Central Research Extension Center in Minot. Such conversions also are likely for calves of first-calf heifers and very old cows where milk and grass don't meet calves' growth potential.
Hoppe recommends producers start calves on creep feed as soon as possible to avoid digestive upset.
"I'm always concerned when pastures become overgrazed and then creep feed is introduced," he says. "This can lead to extremely high intakes of creep feed and result in sickness and possible death."
When producers plan to sell their calves is another big part of the creep feed equation.
"If you sell calves at weaning, the extra weight they've gained on creep feed needs to be worth more than the extra cost of the feed," Hoppe says.
Producers also should consider the source of the creep feed. Commercially produced creep feed is more expensive than the home-gown varieties. The commercial product might be less costly in the long run, though, because it will result in fewer digestive upsets and it contains correctly formulated rations, Hoppe says.
The type of creep feed used could be another issue. He suggests using creep feeds containing higher amounts of protein and fiber and lower amounts of starch as a supplement to grass. These creep feeds improve the digestibility of grass. Calves eating creep feeds that are starch-based, or mostly grain, will substitute creep feed for grass.
"Creep feeding in most all situations will increase calf weights and herd revenue," Dhuyvetter says.
However, calculating profit margins from creep and alternative feeds is very important with today's high feed costs, he says. To calculate the feed cost per pound of additional weight from supplemental feeding, multiply the cost per pound of feed by the projected rate of conversion (pounds of creep feed consumed per pound of added weight gain).
Since heavy calves usually sell for less per pound than lighter calves, the value of added pounds from creep feeding often is less than market price. If there are small or no price slides, this is sometimes the case when cattle feeders are aggressive bidders for early heavy calves capable of finishing for the April or earlier seasonally high markets. Then the added weight can be valued near market price.
"More typically, we see a 6- to 8-cent per hundredweight price slide associated with increasing calf weights, making the added pounds worth about 65 percent of market price," Dhuyvetter says.
Creep feeding is not likely to pay when conversions are high, in situations where pastures provide good nutrition and cows are milking well, he adds. It also is of questionable value for heifers that will be retained and developed for replacements, and calves that will be backgrounded for an extended time postweaning.
For Hoppe and Dhuyvetter, the bottom line is producers need to consider all the variables and spend a little time with their calculators before making a decision on creep feed.
Start Fly Control Early - Gene McCluer, OSU Extension Educator, Hardin County, Ohio
Do you see a few flies? The time to act is NOW, before one fly turns into 10,000 or more. See the On-farm Fly Control fact sheet, by Extension Educator, Stephen Foster, for control products and ideas. http://beef.osu.edu/library/FlyCont.pdf
Forage Focus: Forage Harvests Between the Rains - Paul Craig, Dauphin County PA Educator
Unlike the two most recent springs, moisture has become abundant and proving difficult for harvest of first cutting. Considerations for adequate drying time, rapidly increasing stage of maturities of the crop, wet soil conditions and reliability of weather forecasting is making the 2008 harvest more than challenging. The question is "what is the potential gain verses risk of more mature forage or rained on forage or worse too wet forage."
Mike Rankin, Wisconsin Field Crop Educator summarized results from investigations done at U of W by Dr. Dan Undersander. The results of field studies show that losses in both yield and quality of forage can be caused by many different effects. These include longer plant respiration from the time the forage is cut until it is preserved by ensiling or dry hay harvest; leaching of the soluble plant nutrients in the leaves, leaf loss from shattering, bleaching of the color which can affect price; and molds, bacteria and yeasts that consume the soluble carbohydrates while the forage is laying in the windrow.
Unfortunately all forage losses are not the same. The highly digestible contents of forage dry matter are the soluble carbohydrates. These nutrients are rapidly leached out of the forage by rainfall. Silage producers recognize that these soluble nutrients are needed by bacteria during the early stages of silage and baleage fermentation. Severely damaged haylage can benefit from the use of proper haylage inoculants.
All plants produce carbohydrates to sustain production by the process of photosynthesis. In the presence of sunlight, chlorophyll in plant cells continue to function, even for a period after the plants are cut. During this process the plant cells create additional carbohydrates and releases internal moisture through the stomates located on leaf surfaces reducing plant moisture levels. When plant moistures reach the mid to lower 60 percent range these stomates will close. This process is driven by sunlight. Mowing and putting the forage in as wide a swath as possible will help to speed up dry down times. The timely and proper use of a tedder to evening distribute forage on the soil surface can be invaluable during short harvest windows.
Mike Rankin summarizes the risk of mowing or waiting for less risky weather with the following guidelines: Ensiling permits shorter dry down windows; large harvest acreage requires the risk of many acres not being cut in timely manner; forage rained on shortly after mowing has less negative effects than hay almost fit and then rained on again; and a short duration rain causes less leaching than a long duration rain event.
Make sure all harvesting equipment is ready to go and be sure to keep in contact with any custom harvesters if you use their services. What about storage sites? Are the bunkers or silos ready to go? What about silage wrap and inoculants?
Grass Hay Fertilization - Doug Beegle, Soil Fertility Specialist, PA Extension
As grass hay harvest gets underway we need to be thinking about fertilizing those stands with nitrogen (N). The most efficient way to fertilize these grass hay stands is to split apply N based on the expected yield of the next growth. The actual rate should be 50 lb N/ton of expected hay yield. Fertilizer should be applied as soon after cutting as practical. All of our common N fertilizer materials work well. If urea or UAN are used, applying these right before rain will help to minimize N volatilization loss.
Manure is an excellent choice for these grass hay fields, especially with current high fertilizer prices. Grass hay has a high demand for all manure nutrients so it will make good use of manure nutrients. Be aware that if manure is used as the sole source of N for a grass hay crop, excess P and K will likely be applied over time. Follow regular soil testing to monitor for excesses of these nutrients. Grass hay fields are a much better choice for manure than legume based hay fields because they need the N, where as the legumes do not need the N. Applying manure between cuttings also provides another window to spread manure. This is typically manure that, if not spread on these hay fields, would be stored and spread in the fall when manure nutrient use efficiency is generally very low. Applying to these hay fields can thus dramatically increase the economic return from manure nutrients compared to late fall applications of the same manure for next year's crops. Be careful not to apply too much manure that you smother the hay. Also, apply as soon after harvest as practical to reduce potential injury to the regrowth.
Finally, watch soil conditions so that you do not cause compaction by driving heavy manure spreaders on wet soils in these hay fields. Liquid manure is probably best on hay fields because there is less chance of smothering and you are less likely to gather up remnants of the manure in the next hay harvest. Estimate the amount of N that will be available from the manure application to make sure it is adequate for optimum production.
Depending on the rate applied, supplemental fertilizer N may be needed also. The availability of manure N applied between hay cuttings will range from around 50% if it gets significant rain (~1/2 in) within a day of application to only 20% if there is no rain for a week (See PA Agronomy Guide Table 1.2-14 for details).
For example, using book values, applying 5000 gal/A of dairy manure and getting it rained in right away will supply adequate N for most 2nd cuttings of grass hay (5000 gal/A x 28 lb N/1000 gal x 0.5 = 70 lb avail. N). However, if you apply 5000 gal/A anticipating rain and it does not rain you may only get 28 lb avail. N/A (5000 gal/A x 28 lb N/1000 gal x 0.2= 28 lb avail. N), which means you would need an additional 42 lb N/A, probably as fertilizer, to meet the crop needs for optimum production in this situation. The bottom line is that with good management, this 5000 gal/A manure application to a grass hay field could be worth as much as $150/A in fertilizer nutrient value.
Weekly Roberts Agricultural Commodity Market Report - Mike Roberts, Commodity Marketing Agent, Virginia Tech
LIVE CATTLE futures on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME) were down on Monday. The JUNE'08LC contract closed at $94.300/cwt, down $0.225/cwt but $3.100/cwt higher than last Monday. AUG'08LC futures were off $0.100/cwt at $100.100/cwt but $2.650/cwt higher than a week ago. Profit taking and expectations for a peak to holiday grilling order placements pressured prices. Highs were set or near-set last Thursday and Friday in many contracts. USDA placed the 5-area average at $93.86/cwt, up $1.59/cwt. USDA put choice beef at $156.59/cwt, up $0.55/cwt while reporting March beef and veal exports up 36.4% over last year and almost 10% higher than last month. Exports to South Korea are expected to resume sometime this week. Estimates for the soon-to-published Cattle on Feed report range from 97 %-100.3% over this time last year with placement estimates running from 83% - 110.6% of a year ago. Marketings are expected to be 105% - 110.9% over last year. USDA will release the official numbers this Friday. According to HedgersEdge.com, the average packer margin for Monday was placed at $41.40/head based on the average packer buy at $92.89/cwt vs. a $96.15/cwt breakeven. Cash sellers should consider pushing cattle off the feed lot as soon as they are ready. It might be a good idea to price more short-term corn inputs before Wednesday.
FEEDER CATTLE at the CME closed mostly up on Monday. The May'08FC contract finished at $107.925/cwt, up $0.575/cwt and $2.675/cwt higher than a week ago. The May contract expires on May 22. AUG'08FC futures were up $0.850/cwt at $110.775/cwt and $2.525/cwt higher than last Monday. A drop in corn prices was supportive as chart-based buying kicked in late in the day. Funds were noted spreading September (buying) /August (selling). The latest CME Feeder Cattle index for May 8 was placed at $105.42/cwt, up $0.24/cwt. August feeders may still be supported on continued good rain for pastures. It might be a good idea to price any short-term corn needs before Wednesday … if you don't have grass.
Visit the OSU Beef Team calendar of meetings and upcoming events
BEEF Cattle is a weekly publication of Ohio State University Extension in Fairfield County and the OSU Beef Team. Contributors include members of the Beef Team and other beef cattle specialists and economists from across the U.S.
All educational programs conducted by Ohio State University Extension are available to clientele on a nondiscriminatory basis without regard to race, color, creed, religion, sexual orientation, national origin, gender, age, disability or Vietnam-era veteran status. Keith L. Smith, Associate Vice President for Ag. Admin. and Director, OSU Extension. TDD No. 800-589-8292 (Ohio only) or 614-292-1868
Fairfield County Agriculture and Natural Resources
