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 the weekly Ohio BEEF Cattle letter by sending an e-mail to smith.263@osu.edu
Previous issues of the BEEF Cattle letter
Issue # 637
Forage Focus: Ohio Pasture Measurement Project lets you watch growth from week to week - Jeff McCutcheon, OSU Extension Educator, Knox County (reprinted from Farm and Dairy newspaper, May 14, 2009)
How are your pastures growing? If you are like most you would reply in terms like fast or rapid.
It is the month of May and pastures should be right in the middle of the 'spring flush.'
'Spring flush' is the term to describe the rapid growth of our cool season forages during April, May and June.
From March to June cool season forages will complete 60 percent of their annual production.
Knowing that does not really help you manage your pastures to provide feed for your livestock. We expect pastures to meet the nutritional needs of our ruminant livestock for at least six months.
Some graziers plan for their pastures to supply nine to 11 months of high quality feed. So how much feed do you have today? How much is being grown?
It is amazing that graziers say their focus is on the forage but they don't measure it. Many of you could probably quickly come up with how much hay, silage or concentrate feed you have.
There are many good reasons why graziers should measure the amount of forage in their pastures. Measuring pasture growth can give you valuable information during a grazing season.
It can help you make decisions in regard to your grazing management.
Using pasture growth measurements can help you decide to slow or speed up the grazing system, change stocking density, consider planting alternative forages or fertilize before you need the forage and when there is adequate soil moisture to still grow more forage.
The Ohio Pasture Measurement Project was started in 2005 with three producers. It has two objectives - to provide a source of current, objective information on the relative performance of forages growing in Ohio accessible to producers across the state; and to demonstrate the use of pasture measurement/monitoring to aid in the management of grazing.
Since 2005 the number of people participating in the project has increased to more than 30 in 2009.
These 30 volunteers from across Ohio measure the same pasture field every week using a commercially available rising plate meter and report the measurement.
From that measurement we then calculate how much the pasture has grown since the last measurement.
The weekly growth information will now be included in the weekly Farm and Dairy publication as well as the Ohio Forages Blog. The table below shows the growth from pastures participating in the project.
The information is reported in pounds of dry matter grown per acre per day. This helps relate pasture mass into feed terms.
The table contains the reported results as of the published date.
The volunteers are measuring their pastures on their schedule. We get reports every day of the week. Some reports may be delayed for various reasons.
Results that come in late are still included in the data and are updated on the Ohio Integrated Forage Management Team's blog at http://ohioforages.blogspot.com.
What can you gain from this information? First the average growth last week was 67.3 pounds per acre per day. This can be easily related to feed.
Your livestock consume between 2-4 percent of their body weight in dry matter each day. A 1,500-pound beef cow eating 3 percent of her body weight consumes 45 pounds of dry matter.
So each day last week you were growing 22 pounds more feed per acre than she was eating. You may change your stocking density to account for this or pull some out of the grazing rotation and make a first cutting of hay on those.
Your pastures could have grown the minimum, less than six pounds of dry matter per acre per day. This would mean you need 7.5 acres to grow enough feed for that same cow.
If you grew the maximum, close to 140 pounds per acre per day, you could feed three cows on one acre.
Watching growth from week to week you will see when growth changes. Changes in growth may mean you need to adjust your grazing management.
When growth slows later this year, your rotation may need to slow down. You might need to bring more acres into the rotation.
We hope you will find this information useful as you make decisions about your grazing management.
Table 1: Weekly Pasture Growth for 2009
| Week Starting | Fields Sampled | Minimum | Maximum | Average |
| (number) | Pounds of DM per Day | |||
| April 5 | 10 | 2.6 | 52 | 23.5 |
| April 12 | 9 | 10.8 | 167.1 | 62.6 |
| April 19 | 20 | 1.6 | 166.5 | 59 |
| April 26 | 44 | 4.6 | 178.7 | 59.7 |
| May 3 | 32 | 5.4 | 162.3 | 68.8 |
| May 10 | 33 | 9.9 | 353.4 | 98.1 |
Cutting Excess Spring Pasture for Hay - Dr. Bruce Anderson, Professor of Agronomy, University of Nebraska - Lincoln, Lincoln, NE
Extra rain produces extra grass, something many of us didn't count on this spring. As pastures grow faster than cattle can eat, finding ways to use this extra grass efficiently can be like money in the bank.
The most obvious way to conserve extra growth is by cutting hay from parts of the pasture. Normally I try to avoid extra hay cutting but if you have the equipment and more pasture than you can use this spring, and some time, cutting hay for use later in summer or winter when pasture becomes scarce is a good option.
If you choose the hay option, cut as seedheads are about to emerge for good hay quality and plant regrowth potential. Also, fence out soon the area to be cut from the rest of the pasture. Otherwise, cattle will ignore and waste the taller, stemmier grass as they just graze new regrowth after cutting hay. You might even apply a little nitrogen fertilizer to stimulate growth if soil moisture still is good.
Don't be surprised if certain weeds like common ragweed or foxtails become abundant in areas cut for hay. Ragweed or other non-palatable broadleaf weeds can be killed easily with herbicides. Not much can be done about the foxtails or other annual grassy weeds, but cattle will graze them quite well if you allow them access before these weeds begin to head out. And the same holds true for many broadleaf weeds.
Don't let extra spring pasture go to waste. Cutting the excess as hay is one way to save and stretch your forage supply.
Springs, Ponds, and Streams - Clif Little, OSU Extension Educator, Guernsey County
Important elements for maximizing a grazing system include the best-planned paddocks, good fencing, improved forage and livestock genetics, and adequate pasture fertility. However, water distribution is arguably one of the most important elements of pasture based livestock systems. Pasture water systems vary based on livestock species, availability of electric, soils, water supply needed, travel distance to water, and seasonal needs. Each farm has a different set of circumstances and water systems should be developed based on individual farm resources.
In Southern and Eastern Ohio, spring systems are the most often developed water sources. Springs can provide adequate low cost, low maintenance water systems. Water quality and quantity are major considerations when developing a spring. The first question to answer about a spring development: "Is this site worth developing?" If a spring is not running in July and August, it may be an intermittent spring and would have limited production. Creating enough storage capacity for a poor producing spring can be costly. When possible attempt to develop springs at high elevations on the farm, this would allow the spring to gravity flow to lower tanks, potentially supplying water to many paddocks. There are many water tank options, whether pressurized or gravity systems are developed. The correct tank to use depends on the livestock species and the time of year you want to provide water. The capacity of the tank should be increased based on travel distance to water. Used, heavy, earth-moving tires are frequently used as water tanks and are inexpensive and freeze resistant. Plan the livestock system of rotation identifying the areas of the farm where freeze proof systems will be needed. Winter watering systems vary in susceptibility to freezing. Many frost-free waters use geothermal energy to keep the system from freezing and each varies in the freeze resistance. Water systems in the wintering area should have the ability to be drained, with lines that can be easily shut-off.
Once the spring volume has been determined and found to be worth developing, if you are concerned about the quality of the water have it analyzed before development. The local OSU Extension office can provide laboratories capable of analyzing livestock water. Cost to develop a spring will vary greatly and can range from $2500-$3000 per spring. Determine your spring development needs by sitting down with professionals experienced in this area to discuss the grazing system.
Ponds are often used as a source of livestock water where there are no springs. Livestock owners desire ponds as a watering source partially because they also have a recreational use value. However, soils, drainage, and cost can limit the practicality of ponds. If you think a pond is what you need contact the local Soil and Water Conservation office for advice before construction. Ponds may be completely fenced off from livestock and piping used to deliver water or fencing can be used limit access to shoreline. The best water in a pond is located near the center and about 2 feet below the surface. Granting livestock unlimited access to ponds and streams can cause bank erosion and water quality issues. For streams and ponds, consider developing limited water access points utilizing fencing, geotextile fabric and stone. As with springs, water quality can be an issue when utilizing ponds and streams.
For help in designing a livestock watering system contact the local USDA/NRCS Conservationist or your local Ohio State University County Extension office. The USDA/NRCS office may also have cost share incentives available to farmers that can help in reducing the cost of your livestock watering system.
EQIP Application Deadline is Extended
USDA has announced that the original funding decision deadline for funding of EQIP, WHIP and WRP has been extended to May 29, 2009. Contact your local NRCS/SWCD office for details.
No-tilling Corn after First Cutting Alfalfa: Remember Glyphosate can be used Pre-harvest - William Curran, Penn State Weed Scientist
Harvesting first cutting alfalfa and then no-tilling corn into the alfalfa stubble can be challenging and certainly risky. Two of the biggest challenges are 1.) Getting acceptable control of alfalfa after first cutting, and 2.) Even with acceptable control, what impact can the dying alfalfa crop have on corn yield? To start, choose the correct herbicide program and make sure there is adequate regrowth before making the herbicide application. Cutting the alfalfa a bit high and leaving some leaf tissue will probably increase successful control. In some research we conducted at Rock Spring and Landisville, we harvested the alfalfa in early to mid May and no-tilled corn into the stubble shortly thereafter. We compared PRE applications about 5 days after harvest to an EPOST application about 10 days after harvest (6 inches of regrowth) to a MPOST application about 17 days after harvest (10 inches of regrowth). Our herbicide programs focused on 2,4-D and dicamba (Banvel or Clarity) alone or in combination. The combination of these two herbicides is probably the most consistent for control of alfalfa. Glyphosate will add some alfalfa control and is a definite must if annual or perennial grasses are present, but it really doesn’t alter the success of application timing. In short, none of the PRE treatments were effective (40% or less). Waiting about 10 days after harvest to make the herbicide application provided 79 to 99% control by early July with the combination of 2,4-D + dicamba providing the best results. By waiting 17 days after harvest when the alfalfa was 10 inches tall, all treatments effectively killed the alfalfa.
Now the bad news; because of dry weather in May, corn yields were severely reduced in all treatments. Yields averaged 8 bu/acre in the untreated checks, 52 bushels in the PRE treatments, 84 bushels in the EPOST timing and 76 bu/acre in the MPOST timings. Yields were fairly similar at the two locations and although we did not include an alfalfa-free check, typical corn yields at both research farms were at or above normal for the regions. So, even with adequate alfalfa control a month into the growing season, we could not recover from the early season competition and the moisture deficit. Although this season is starting out much differently, keep in mind the importance of alfalfa regrowth for adequate control (6 inches is the minimum) and how soil moisture may make the ultimate yield decision.
Alternatively, and still somewhat risky, glyphosate can be used as a preharvest application for stand removal in alfalfa and clover. Glyphosate may be applied to declining stands to help control the legumes and other plant species. This can be particularly helpful for control of perennial grasses including quackgrass. If the crop is to be harvested or grazed by livestock, use up to 1.5 lb ae/acre (2 quarts of a 3lb ae/gal) in alfalfa or 1.125 lb ae/acre (1.5 qt of a 3lb ae/gal) for clover. The minimum interval between application and harvest is 36 hours for alfalfa and 3 days for clover. This treatment will not provide sufficient control of the legume, but it will suppress it and potentially allow for more timely control and reduced competition in no-till corn. In no-till corn, a POST application should be made to control the legume regrowth. The plant growth regulator herbicides (2,4-D, dicamba, clopyralid - Stinger and Hornet, as well as Distinct or Status), should help control alfalfa post in corn. In Roundup Ready corn, glyphosate can also help suppress the legume and a growth regulator herbicide could be tank-mixed with the glyphosate. This approach should at least insure more timely control of the forage, but will not prevent the negative effects of a dry spell early in the growing season.
Cattle Outlook, May 15, 2009 - Glenn Grimes & Ron Plain, University of Missouri
The odds appear very high that the production of all meats will be down this year compared to 2008. USDA current estimate is for beef production to be down but by only 0.1 percent from a year earlier but pork production is expected to be down 2.6 percent, chicken down 3.8 percent and turkey down 7.4 percent from last year. These levels of decline would result in a 2.8 percent decline in all meat production in 2009 compared to 2008.
For 2010, USDA is estimating beef production to be down 2.0 percent, pork production down 0.5 percent, chicken production up 1.7 percent and turkey production up 2.1 percent compared to this year. This would result in a gain of total meat products in 2010 by less than 0.1 percent from 2009.
We certainly hope pork production is down more than 0.5 percent in 2010 then 2009, otherwise the odds are very high that the average cost producer would face three years of substantial losses. It is uncertain whether lenders will hang with higher cost and weak financial producers that long.
With a two percent decline in beef supplies next year and the potential for stable or some growth in demand would be the environment to see strength in fed cattle prices.
Beef exports in March were up 5.2 percent from a year earlier. Beef imports in March 2009 were up 7.1 percent from 12 months earlier.
Beef and veal exports for January-March 2009 were up 6.6 percent from a year earlier. Beef imports for January-March were up 10.4 percent from last year.
Net beef imports as a percent of production for January-March of 2009 at 5.22 percent was up from 4.35 percent of production in 2008 or an increase of 20 percent.
Live feeder cattle imports from Mexico in January-March were up 39.1 percent but total cattle imports from Canada were down 26.9 percent from a year earlier. Total cattle imports for the first three months of 2009 were down 10.3 percent from 2008.
Feeder steers $2 per cwt higher, heifers steady and stocker cattle and calves were not well tested but higher undertone noted at Oklahoma City this week compared to last week.
The price ranges by weight groups for medium and large frame Number One steers were: 400-500 pounds at $120-124.50 per cwt, 500-600 pounds at $114-122.75 per cwt, 600-700 pounds at $103.50-111.25 per cwt, 700-800 pounds at $97-107 per cwt and 800-1,000 pounds at $84.85-99.85 per cwt.
Wholesale beef prices Friday morning with Choice beef at $146.59 per cwt was up $1.60 per cwt from last Friday. Select beef at $143.23 per cwt was up $0.98 per cwt from seven days earlier.
Weighted average live steers for the week through Thursday for the five-market area at $85.11 per cwt were up $1.05 per cwt from a week earlier.
The weighted average negotiated carcass prices for the five-market area at $136.52 per cwt were up $2.73 per cwt from seven days earlier.
Slaughter this week under Federal Inspection was estimated at 672 thousand head, down 6.5 percent from a year earlier.
Weekly Roberts Agricultural Commodity Market Report - Mike Roberts, Commodity Marketing Agent, Virginia Tech
LIVE CATTLE futures on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME) were up somewhat on Monday in. The JUNE'09LC contract closed at $82.525/cwt; up $0.150/cwt but $0.750/cwt lower than last report. The AUG'09LC contract closed up $0.600/cwt at $83.125/cwt but $0.775/cwt lower than last Monday's close. DEC'09LC futures closed at $90.900/cwt; up $0.375/cwt and $0.075/cwt higher than last report. Short covering and spreaders buying August and October while selling June futures was supportive. The market is warily watching reports that a six-year-old dairy cow in Alberta has been confirmed as Canada's latest mad cow case. Higher cash cattle contributed to the price strength. The USDA 5-area average price was placed at $85.12/cwt; $1.08/cwt higher than this time last week with reports of cash cattle in Nebraska as much as $2-$3/cwt higher. USDA early Monday put the Choice Boxed Beef cutout at $147.15/cwt; up $0.16/cwt and $2.01/cwt higher than a week ago. According to HedgersEdge.com average packer margins were raised $28.35/head from this time last week. The average processor margin was placed at a positive $34.95/head based on the average buy of $84.81/cwt vs. the average breakeven of $87.58/cwt. Hopefully feed needs for several weeks were bought on previous advice.
FEEDER CATTLE at the CME finished mixed on Monday. The MAY'09FC contract closed at $99.000/cwt; even from Friday and $0.55/cwt lower than last Monday's close. AUG'09FC futures finished at $101.825/cwt; up $0.175/cwt and $0.225/cwt higher than last report. The May contract will expire on May 21 as spreading into August out of the May was the play for the day. Pressure was put on feeders because of the expected numbers coming off spring wheat. However, cash feeders in Oklahoma City were $1-$2 over last report. The latest CME Feeder Cattle Index was placed at $99.37/cwt; up $0.31/cwt and $0.40/cwt over last week at this time. With corn going higher it may be a good idea to hold feeders to heavier weights if you have the 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
