cotanch@whminer.com

WHAT’S HAPPENING ON THE FARM

Our bred heifer and cow buying adventures are done; we’ve almost doubled = herd size in the past year, currently 301 cows including 190 first-calf heifers, with 267 milking. Milk per cow has increased (currently in the low 80s, assisted by our resumption of 3X milking) and our somatic cell counts are s= till under 100,000. Frequent ration changes due to research project requirements keeps the barn crew on its toes, but that’s business as usual in a research facility.

We found a good use for late-cut grass silage (harvested in June, not July). We stored the silage in bags and are feeding it to heifers, which are growing = well but not getting roly-poly. Maybe for a change we won’t have fat heife= rs for the county fair! We’re pleased that we can make good use of this forage since we simply aren’t able to harvest all 360 acres of hay cr= ops in May.

Crop season got off to a good start with ten days of dry weather in mid-April, a= nd we were able to broadcast urea onto grass and grass-alfalfa fields just as the grass was turning green. Alfalfa has overwintered better region-wide this y= ear than it has in the past few years. We seeded 46 out of 57 acres of alfalfa-grass just ahead of the late April rains. Our seeding rate on most = of the fields was 14 lbs leafhopper-resistant alfalfa + 3 lbs reed canarygrass + 2 lbs timothy, the timothy because we’ve had variable results getting canarygrass established. We’ve had good results when we’ve seeded reed canarygrass with low rates of red or Ladino clover, b= ut often it seems that the alfalfa seedlings are too aggressive for the canarygrass when both germinate in the drill row. We don’t know if the timothy-canarygrass combination is a good idea, but to date nobody’s said it’s a bad one.

Steve Couture couture@whminer.com

Ev Thomas thomas@whminer.com=

PLANTING RATES FOR SOYBEANS AND CORN

Soybeans: Cornell University has been revisiting i= ts soybean seeding rates. Currently recommended rates are 200,000 seeds per ac= re, but with the increased price of soybean seed and $5.00/bushel beans, some farmers are asking if they can reduce seeding rates. Research is continuing= on this question, but the first two years of results suggest that seeding rates can be reduced.

Soybeans were seeded in 7” rows in 2003 and 2004 at rates of 150,000 to 320,000 per acre. There was no yield response past 200,000 seeds per acre in 2003, while in 2004 there was no more than a 2 bu/A difference between any of the seeding rates. Cornell’s Bill Cox hopes to make a more definite recommendation for 2= 006, but in the meantime growers should run test strips on their own farms to se= e if they can reduce seeding rates below 200,000/acre without affecting yields. = From looking at the data it seems that a good goal is to wind up with at least 140,000 plants per acre. How many seeds you have to drop to get that many plants depends on planting method, seedbed preparation, etc.

Corn: Cornell tested planting rates for corn harvested as grain, dropping 25,000 to 40,000 kernels per acre. Based on this research, Cornell recommends a 26,000 to 28= ,000 harvest population, which, assuming a 90% emergence rat= e (a reasonable assumption after the soil warms up in May), means planting 29= ,000 to 31,000 seeds per acre. For silage you can increase this by 2000-3000 see= ds per acre. On sandy soils and those with poor moisture holding capacity we’d keep silage populations closer to 30,000. At Miner Institute we = aim for 33,000 seeds and have been winding up with just under 31,000 final plan= t stand. That’s over a 90% germination/survival ra= te, but with today’s superior seed quality and modern corn planters this = is about right.

F= ROM THE PRESIDENT’S DESK – A Sweet Subject?

Recently a group of scientists got together after the New England Dairy Feed Confere= nce in New Hampshire to discuss what we know, and more importantly what we don’t know but need to know about nonfibe= r carbohydrate (sugars, starch, soluble fiber) nutrition of dairy cattle. Bec= ause these highly digestible carbohydrates impact rumen fermentation so greatly, it’s one of the most important topics we can discuss. Unfortunately, = at the end of the discussion, I believed the old adage “If you’re = not confused, you just don’t understand!”

Many nutritionists are just starting to formulate rations using values for sugar, starch, and other nonfiber carbohydrates. A rec= ent survey indicated that about 50% of nutritionists track these values when formulating diets. Some general recommendations in current use suggest 5-7% sugar and 24-30% starch in the dietary dry matter as reasonable targets. Th= ese targets are based primarily on field experience with very little actual research basis. At the New Ha= mpshire meeting we focused on two subjects: 1) What should we be measuring, and 2) = How do we best measure them? I’ll leave the analytical discussion for some other time and focus on what we should be worrying about when we formulate diets.

All agreed that to do the best job of formulating rations in the future we need values for sugars, starch, and soluble fiber. Currently, organic acids are considered as part of the nonfiber carbohydrate fraction when using CPM-Dairy, but of course they aren’t really carbohydrates. It’s worth pointing out, however, that we and others h= ave good evidence that some organic acids, such as malic acid, improve microbial efficiency and cow performance. We need to consider these acids more in the future as an effective dietary tool to improve rumen efficiency and save dollars for the producer.

The most common sugars found in forages are sucrose, glucose and fructose, with sucrose ordinarily predominating. If milk byproducts are fed, then lactose becomes an important dietary sugar. Our discussion pointed out the fact that there are analytical challenges with these sugars that a feed testing lab w= ould need to contend with. Ultimately, we will figure out the best means of analysis. How rapidly various sugars are fermented in the rumen, and the subsequent impact on the rumen microbes, is a key question we need to answe= r. The bottom line here is that 5-7% sugar as a recommendation is a good start= ing point, but we really need to delve deeper and provide nutritionists much mo= re detail to allow them to formulate the most efficient and effective rations.=

Another major topic of discussion was soluble fiber and the role that fructans may (or may not) play in dairy cattle nutrit= ion. Fructans can be quite high in grasses, particularly u= nder cool growing conditions. We need to learn more about how they behave in the rumen, and how best to measure them in forages. Our discussion focused on t= he potential for this class of soluble fiber to negatively impact the rumen fermentation if fed improperly.

The real purpose of this article is to let you know = where the cutting-edge of nutrition is for carbohydrates. Will we be using these values to formulate diets tomorrow? No, certainly. But, we will likely be u= sing them in the next several years, and we need to begin familiarizing ourselves with the terms and what their potential role may be in ration formulation.<= /p>
Ri= ck Grant<= /p>
grant@whminer.com

RESEEDING ALFALFA

For several years we’ve cautioned against seeding alfalfa into winter-dam= aged alfalfa stands. Minnesota agronomists seeded alfalfa into spring-killed alfalfa right after plowing as well as two and four weeks later, finding no effect on initial alfalfa stan= d counts. This was surprising since in previous research, autoto= xicity (toxins produced by the alfalfa) reduced stands. However, in three of the s= ix Minnesota trials= , yields the following spring were about 20% lower than where alfalfa followe= d a non-alfalfa crop. Autotoxicity may affect the taproot, perhaps explaining the lower yield. Delaying seeding by two or four weeks actually reduced yields—nothing to do with autotoxicity, but because later spring seedings often produce a poorer crop.   <= /span>

Current recommendations on reseeding alfalfa, based on this research:

If possible, allo= w at least one year between plowing down an old alfalfa stand and seeding alfalfa.

Don’t try to thicken existing alfalfa stands with alfalfa. Red clover would be a mu= ch better choice.

Delaying spring s= eeding by a few weeks won’t alleviate autotoxicity= and will probably result in a poorer stand simply because it’s l= ater in the planting season.

MORE ON 24 vs. 48 HR. IN VITRO DIGESTION

Ev’s article on 24 vs. 48 hr in vitro digestion times elicited a letter from Peter VanSoest in Oxford, England, complete with a hand-drawn Rate of Digestion curve and the comment that “You have some misunderstanding, as does Sniffen= .” Since ERN Sniffen and I are distantly related (= very distant, thankfully), it’s perhaps not inappropriate (embarrassing, y= es; inappropriate, no) that Pete paints us with the same brush. The Word accord= ing to Peter: “ 48 hours is maintenance retention (in the rumen). 24 hours gives the highest correlation for rate (of digestion) because it is in the main part = of the fermentation curve—48 hours is over the hill, where fermentation = has slowed down and lignified fractions dominate…A ratio of 1.2 correspon= ds to a digestion rate of about 5.6%. (Editor’s note: 1.2 was suggested in Ev’s article as the relation= ship between 48-hr and 24-hr digestion times.) Slower digesting forages have much higher ratios. The 24-hour values offer the possibility of constructing fermentation curves and predicting not only the rate of digestion, but also= disappearance at 48 hours. Lignin values will be needed. 24-hour measurements will be much more convenient for laboratory operations.”

Guess we’ve been= told. Thanks to Pete for straightening out the old Crops Dude and an even older Eminent Ruminant Nutritionist. Of course this won’t end the controver= sy between 24, 30, and 48 hr in vitro times. (We thought there were only three until we read an article from UCal-Davis = where they mentioned a digestibility time of 45 hours. Why 45 instead of 48? Maybe the 3-hour time difference between the East and West Coasts? We sincerely hope it was a misprint…)

MORE BSE REGULATIONS ON THE WAY?

USDA has tested about 200,000 samples for BSE (Mad Cow Disease) since June 2004, with no further cases uncovered. However, Canada has discovered another BSE case in a native cow born after feed controls were put into place in 1997…bad news even though that cow was born during the early phase of= the BSE feed rule. Canad= a exports most of its beef, and has lost many markets since the discovery of = BSE there. More stringent rules are being proposed.

The new Canadian proposal would ban all “specified risk materials” = (SRMs) in any feed, and require ingredient statements = on feed labels—now an option, not a requirement. (S= RMs are the skull, brain, spinal cord, vertebral column, two specific ganglia, = and eyes in cattle over 30 months old; and the small intestines and tonsils from all cattle.) Another change under consideration would require the dyeing of= all feeds containing prohibited mammalian protein.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is considering a ban on SRMs, but may not impose it in part because they didn’t find BSE in any of the 200,000 aforementioned samples. There’s also the legal issue of banning an ingredient in species such= as swine and poultry that haven’t contracted BSE. Then there’s the conce= rn that banning SRMs in all feed would bring the o= n-farm pickup of dead animals to a screeching halt, thus eliminating a large potentially high-risk sampling group. Finally, there’s the problem of disposing of all that SRM if it can’t be included in any animal ratio= ns. Stay tuned; FDA is currently reviewing its options and isn’t saying anything about which way the regulatory winds are blowing.

MILK PRODUCTION DROPS

From looking at published DHIA herd averages it appears that farmers have had a = bit of difficulty making milk, and NY Agricultural Statistics confirm this. In spite of a 3% decline in milk cows on farms between Jan. 2002 and Dec. 2004, milk per cow declined by 2% on an annual basis, from 18,101 to 17,786 lbs/c= ow. While NY Ag and Markets says nothing about the reason behind the drop, we’d guess it’s the same old reason: Lower forage quality due to bad weather.

We would also note that N.Y. trout sales were down 43% in 2004, and Empire State honey production dropped a decidedly unsweet 27= %. These figures have no direct relationship to the dairy industry, but we fou= nd them interesting.

A LITTLE TLC GOES A LONG WAY …

In this photo, the calf on the left was born 4-4-05 = as a twin weighing 50 pounds (her larger twin sister did not survive at birth).<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> #1127 was fed good quality colostrum for the first 6 days of life at a rate of 1= quart of colostrum four or five times per day (approximately every 4 hours). At 3 weeks of age she is now consuming 1 ½ -2 quarts of high quality milk replacer 3 times a day and has had no scours yet! For comparison, the calf on the ri= ght was born 4-8-05 and weighed 110 pounds at birth. She received 3 feedings of colostrum at 3 quarts per feeding and then switched t= o milk replacer at 2 days of age was fed 2 ½ quarts of milk replacer twice/day. She scoured for a = few days but is now doing fine and is drinking 3 quarts of milk replacer twice/= day.

BethAnn B= asto

basto@whminer.com

VET’S CORNER

In last month’s Vet Corner, we emphasized the value of a top-notch dairy replacement program to maintain milking herd population. During three separate farm investigations of one-week-old calf deaths this spring, the s= ame problem was diagnosed. With little warning, calves were dying that had an appetite and normal vigor at the previous feeding. Common causes of sudden death syndrome in week-old calves include:

·      =    Clostridium perfringes D= (Overeating Disease)<= /span>: This is seen occasio= nally when calves are fed excessive volumes of milk or replacer that floods the <= span class=3DSpellE>abomasum and sets up an energy-rich environment for <= span class=3DSpellE>endotoxin formation in the upper small intestine. The= most common cause of Clostridial overgrowth is from feeding waste milk or colostrum that hasn’= ;t been refrigerated between milkings.<= /span>

·      =    Septicemia (blood poisoning): This is an overwhelming bacterial infection in= the blood stream, most commonly caused by a strain of E. coli. A common entry point of E. coli is through the unprotected umbilical cord of = the newborn in an unsanitary calving area. In all three investigations of this spring, this was the diagnosis.

For years, veterinarians have recommended dipping the navel with 7% Iodine with alcohol, twice a day for the first two days of life. If navel dipping is the only management change, little improvement has been noted. Proper sanitation of the matern= ity pen is the real key to preventing septicemia. Spring is a common time for navel infections to increase because the maternity pens have been = used continuously and not been given a break by pasture freshening since last summer. This allows pathogens to build up and overload the system. By follo= wing the same protocol as recommended for breaking the John= es and Salmonella cycle, the herdsperson should disinfect and re-bed each maternity pen after every use. Our best experience has been with sand or st= raw bedding in the maternity area. Wet sawdust provides a perfect media for E. = coli growth, sticks to the umbilical cord, and should not be used in maternity p= ens of herds with a navel ill problem.

To reduce calf loss at the three farms, we added a step to the calf caretaker’s protocol. At day three of life, the umbilical cord of all calves is examined. This is a trick picked up from veal feeders: When calves are dropped at the veal barn, they are three to five days old. All calves a= re examined as they leave the truck and if the umbilical cord feels as big = as your thumb it’s put back on the truck. When enlarged or warm nave= ls are found on three days old heifer calves, we recommend treatment with 10 ml Pro Penicillin G SQ once a day for a week. In herds with resistant bacteria, the veterinarian can prescribe more aggressive treatment.=

Besides septicemia, another sequela to navel ill is umb= ilical hernia. With the recent spike in prices paid for heifer calves, there has b= een renewed interest in correction of hernias. At the Miner Institute farm, a hernia in a 10-week-old calf that measured “two fingers” was successfully wrapped for three weeks to allow the stomach muscles to over g= row the hernia. Another calf had a 9-inch hernia behind the umbilicus at birth.= It was allowed to grow to post-weaning age and surgery was performed at the fa= rm. This is the largest hernia our practice has ever attempted to repair, so we consider it to be an “experimental case.” One week post-op the incision is holding, but we realize that a cure cannot be pronounced for a = full month. Cost of surgery was $150 to save a $800-1= ,000 registered Holstein heifer calf—a = reasonable investment.

Kent E Henderson, DVM

Northwest Veterinary Associates, Inc.

cowdoc@adelphia.net<= /p>

NOTABLE QUOTES BY WILL ROGERS

·  &n= bsp;      “T= he minute you read something you don't understand, you can be almost sure it w= as drawn up by a lawyer.”

·  &n= bsp;      “Always drink upstream from the herd.“

·         “There are three kinds of men: The = ones that learn by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them h= ave to pee on the electric fence and find out for themselve= s.”

·         “If you don't learn to laugh at trouble, you won't have anything to laugh at when you are old.”

·         “Never kick a cow chip on a hot day.”

DIAMOND JIM BRADY

Miner Institute is the legacy of William H. Miner, w= ho made his fortune in the railroad industry during the “gilded age of railroads”. However, Mr. Miner didn’t become wealthy without somebody selling a whole lot of his railroad equipment, and that somebody was James Buchanan Brady—better known as “Diamond Jim” Brady. Becau= se of this link between Brady and Miner Institute, we thought you might like to know more about this interesting fellow.

Brady was born in 1856, starting his working life as= a bellboy and messenger in New Y= ork City. He then worked for the New York Central Railroad, and by age 21 was chief assistant to the general manager. He’d already made something of a na= me for himself as a super salesman before starting to sell railroad equipment = for Mr. Miner. Brady got his nickname from his love of jewelry and especially diamonds; his jewelry collection was valued at over $2 million.

Diamond Jim was a gourmand, with a legendary appetit= e. His favorite restaurant was Charles Rector’s in New York City, and Rector called him his “best 25 customers”. His usual evening meal began with an appet= izer of several dozen oysters, six crabs, and a few servings of turtle soup. The main course was two whole ducks, six or seven lobsters, a sirloin steak, two servings of terrapin and a variety of vegetables, all washed down with huge= quantities of lemon soda. He topped dinner off with a platter of pastries and often a two-pound box of candy. Brady loved chocolates, and when his favorite choco= late manufacturer couldn’t honor his order of several hundred boxes to sen= d to friends and business associates, he wrote the company a check for $150,000 = on the spot so they could build a bigger factory. Five years before his death = at age 61 from diabetes, doctors determined that he’d stretched his stom= ach to six times normal size.

A lifelong bachelor, Brady’s girlfriend was Li= llian Russell, the famous actress and singer. He had a dozen gold-plated bicycles made for the two of them. (Diamond Jim wasn’t a small man, and the im= age of him on a bicycle is amusing to say the least.) He owned the first car to ever traverse the streets of N= ew York City (in 1895) and was responsible for the city’s first automobile-related traffic jam. In his later years Brady became a philanthropist, including a large grant to = Johns Hopkins Hospital to found t= he James Buchanan Brady Urological Institute.

SOMETHING OLD, SOMETHING NEW

I’m amused at the recent flurry of popular press articles on shorter dry period= s, like it’s a completely new topic. Back in the late 1960s Cornell University did a field study on dry period length. Cooperative Extension Agents (including your faithful correspondent) asked the owners of the top 5 DHIA herds (based on rolling h= erd average) in each county to participate in the study. If one wouldn’t, we’d ask #6, etc. Of the top 5 herds in Clinton County all but one agreed so we started with 5 of the top 6, in those days meaning milk production of 15,000 lbs or so per cow. Remillard= Farm in Peru was one; = so was the Ashley farm (ChaLiz Holsteins) in West Chazy.

Each cow was assigned at random to a dry period length of 30, 40, 50 or 60 days. This worked fine until a few “special” cows in a couple of the Registered Holstein herds were assigned 30-day dry periods; soon after that these farms dropped out of the study. Enough farms stuck with it, though, t= hat Cornell was able to conclude that, except for first calf heifers, a 40 or 50-day dry period was about right. Sound familiar?

Speaking of the past, here are a few terms that have disappeared from farm terminolo= gy. In most cases, good riddance to them.

·      =    Milch cow—= Essentially the same a= s milk cow, this term was still being used by Merle Reese, the Extension Agent here in Clinton County when I arrived in 1966. The difference between milch cow and milk cow is the spelling.

·      =    Farm Bureau Agent—The N.Y Farm Bureau was started in 1911, and the Farm Bureau= in Clinton County hired its first county agricultural agent in 1912. No, it wasn’t Sniffe= n. (The College of Agriculture wasn’t able to contribute financially, but gave “advice and encouragement”. How generous.) After WWII Farm Bureau Agents became known as County Extension Agents, but a few old codgers were still calling me the Farm Bureau Agent in 1966. Old habits do indeed die hard.

·      =    A nice bottom—This didn’t refer to the farmer’s daughter (though if the shoe fits…) but to hay so over-mature that it had gone to seed and was regrowing= from the base of the plants. Always offered as an optimistic assessment by = an underachieving farmer, such as: “Yeah, maybe this hay isn’t cut= yet and here it is August, but it has a nice bottom.”



WHOLE COTTONSEED—STILL A SUPER FEED FOR DAIRY COWS=

Whole cottonseed (WCS) is a very popular feed for dairy cows bec= ause it has the unique distinction of being very palatable and high in energy, f= at, protein, and fiber. Seldom are all these nutritional characteristics found = in one feed. In a nationwide survey conducted by Missou= ri researchers, it was found that approximately 40% of the lactating cows in t= he US (41% in the Northeast) are fed WCS.

According to the USDA, about 98% of the cotton planted in the US in 2004 was Upland cotton = and 2% was Pima cotton. The Upland cotton planted was made up of 24% traditional varieties (no genetic modification), 28% herbicide resistant varieties (like Roundup Ready [RR] cotton), 18% Bt varieties, an= d 30% stacked gene varieties. Therefore, genetically modified cotton made up 76% = of the cotton planted in 2004.

Cotton breeders are continually developing new varieties, and cotton growers are q= uick to adopt improved varieties. For example, genetically modified cotton was planted in <15% of acres in 1996 and >70% of acres in 2001. Genetical= ly modified cotton provides several advantages to cotton growers and processors since the plants are more resistant to pests, tolerant to herbicides, and t= he quantity and quality of the lint is improved. Because the cotton varieties being grown are changing continually and little attention is given to the nutritional composition of the seed in cotton breeding programs, it is important to routinely check WCS composition.

Researchers from Clemson and Texas A&M reported in the April issue of the Journal of Dairy Science the nutrient content, gossypol content, and in vitro digestibility (IVDMD) of traditional WCS and WCS with genetically modified traits (Bt cotton, RR cotton, and stacked Bt+RR cotton). Samples were collected from cotton grown in multiple years. Conten= ts of DM, CP, fat, NDF, ADF, lignin, ash, NE_{L<=
/sub>,
total fatty acids, amino acids, and gossypolwere not different =
for
traditional, Bt, RR, and Bt+RR WCS grown under
similar cultural practices and locations. Since there were no differences in
nutrient content or IVDMD among different seed types, their feeding values =
were
similar. Year effect was significant for content of all nutrients and IVDMD.
This was due to differences in weather conditions.}

Although there were no differences in the nutrient content of WCS in the controlled research study, it is important to remember that considerable variation exists in the nutrient content of WCS = in a commercial setting. The nutrient content of WCS is affected by type of cott= on, weather, growing location, growing, harvesting, and storage conditions, and processing. Dairy producers must work with their nutritionist to insure that appropriate nutrient values are used when formulating diets. Feed analysis = at a commercial laboratory is recommended.

Heather Dann<= /p>
dann@whminer.com=

COMPACTION ACTION—First of Three Parts

Editor’s note: The following is condensed fro= m an article by Randall Reeder, Extension Agricultural Engineer at The = Ohio State University, who was guest speaker at our recent Corn Congress.

Compaction from heavy machinery affects some soils m= uch worse than others. The effect of compacting loads and deep tillage can be q= uite variable, and difficult to predict. Some soils are much more prone to severe yield losses from compaction than are others. Following are some actions a farmer can take to help prevent, manage or correct compaction problems. The= se actions do not necessarily “solve” compaction problems, and some are better than others.

·      =    Controlled traffic

·      =    More axles to spread the load

·      =    More or bigger tires to reduce the pressure on the soil<= /span>

·      =    Rubber tracks

·      =    Subsoiling to loosen deeply compacted soils

In 1987 we started compaction research at the Hoytville and South Charleston Research Stations in Northwest and Southwest Ohio respectivel= y. For four years, after harvest we compacted entire plots with loads of either 20 tons/axle or 10 tons/axle. The control plots= had no extra compaction. Our research farms use fairly light equipment, contributing practically no additional, unintentional compaction. The plots were chisel plowed afterwards to minimize surface compaction effects on yie= ld.

Yield losses from compaction for the first four years at Hoy= tville were 45% for soybeans and 35% for corn. In contrast, for silty clay and silt loam soils at So= uth Charleston, in four years we had no yield loss gre= ater than 10% so we stopped research on those two soils. At Hoytville, in the 13 years following the last compaction in 1989, both corn and soybean yields averaged about 10% lower in the 20-ton compaction plots compared to = the control. The greatest reduction was in the first two or three years, but the effect continued to show up years later. Measurements in July 1995 and July 2000 on Hoytville silty clay loam showed that soil physical properties were still different several years after compaction with a 20-ton axle load.

Compaction can stay in the soil below normal tillage depth for many years. The effect = of “historic” compaction on yields probably depends on the weather patterns during the growing season.

Next month: Surprising subsoil= er results.

CLONED HORSE BORN

In February the clone of a castrated horse was born in Italy, a joint effort of Fren= ch and Italian genetic engineering laboratories. Pieraz, a former world endurance champion, was gelded before anyone knew how good he was…oops. (Don’t you just hate it when that happens?) On the ot= her hand, if Pieraz still had his testicles maybe he wouldn’t have had the endurance. Reminding us of = the Woman’s Rule of Thumb: If it has tires or testicles, you’re goi= ng to have trouble with it. Except we’re not sure this is referri= ng to horses.

The breeders (cloners?) say their objective is to restore the reproductive capa= city of the original Pieraz. The cloned foal, Pieraz-Cryozootech, will be used exclusively for bree= ding purposes since this time they’ll keep the whole horse.

DROUGHT IN THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST

Farmers in the Northeast aren’t used to drough= t, and even when we do get a dry growing season it’s usually just that—= ;one season. When is the last time we’ve had two abnormally dry years in a= row in Northeastern NY? (Answer: Not f= or at least 40 years.) Farmers in the Western U.S.<= /st1:place> aren’t nearly as fortunate: Not only are limited water supplies a frequent problem, the current drought has persisted for a long time. The go= od news is that some parts of the previously parched Southwest are now in their best shape in several years. Most of the Northwestern U.S. is dry, with lar= ge parts of Wyoming, Montana and Idaho classified as extreme drought. Farmers in Western areas of Washington and Oregon are concerned about the effects of extremely little winter snowpack, but current soil moisture isn’t nearly as limiting as it is just East of there. After watching the PGA golfers try for three months to complete a go= lf tournament without at least one rainout, it seems a worthwhile idea to sche= dule a PGA tournament in Wyoming.

AMINO-SUGAR NITROGEN SOIL TEST FOR CORN

Miner Institute was one of six locations in Northern N.Y.<= /st1:place> involved in 2004 field research evaluating a new test to predict the sidedress N needs for corn. Currently, the presidedress nitrate test (PSNT) predicts N needs just before nitrogen application, and only measures nitrate N. A new test develo= ped at the University of Illinois, the amino-sugar N test, measures a more stable organic N fraction in the soil a= nd may offer more reliability in N recommendations for corn.

At each site, soil samples were taken at 0-8” and 0-12” depths at planting, at the normal PSNT time, and at harvest. The trial here also incl= uded soil samples before and after fall 2003 manure application. Nitrogen treatm= ents at the various sites included, in addition to the starter fertilizer, 0, 25, 50, 100 and 150 lbs N per acre. These results will be combined with data fr= om other years and other locations, and any assessment at this time is preliminary. However, it appears that amino sugar N is relatively stable ov= er the growing season, meaning greater flexibility in when to take soil sample= s to predict N fertilizer needs.

This research was funded with a grant from the Northern N.Y. Agricultural Development Program, a Smith-Lever Grant, and an Andrew W. Mellon Student Research Grant.

WHAT FARMERS THINK

Late this winter, Doane’s Agricultural Report asked its subscribers for their opinions on a numbe= r of issues: Here’s a summary of the answers (from the over 600 responding= to the survey, 71% of them farmers) we found most interesting:

ü      = 53% G= MOs have obvious benefits= , and opposition will be replaced by general acceptance.

ü      = 2% Genetic engineering is a huge mistake, and glob= al opposition will keep growing.

ü      = 48% Today’s farm pol= icy is probably enough safety net to keep us in business.

ü      = 4% Farm programs have done more harm than go= od by increasing rents and hurting our &= nbsp; competitiveness with South America.

ü      = 47% I have a positive atti= tude about farming.

ü      = 16% I have a negative atti= tude about farming.

ü      = 35% Farming is more enjoya= ble now than it was 5 years ago.

ü      = 23% Farming is less enjoya= ble than it was 5 years ago.

Source: Doane’s Agricultural Report, 2/25/05

DUELING DOCTORS

A study published in the April American Journal of Clinical Nutrition found that young women who increased their dairy intake from three to four servings per day maintained a healthy weight. But not so fast: The “Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine” (actually an extremist animal rig= hts group with significant funding by PETA) wants the dairy industry to stop us= ing what it says are misleading claims in its advertising about dairy and weight loss, and has asked the Federal Trade Commission to make the dairy industry stop the ads and issue corrective statements.

DAIRY CATTLE STOLEN

A short item in a recent Hoard’s Dairyman reported that 100 dairy cows were stolen from a Calif= ornia dairy. But what caught our eye is that the thefts apparently occurred somet= ime between June 2004 and February 2005. A dairy loses 100 cows and nobody noti= ces it for up to seven months? Unless they were stolen a few cows at a time, it seems like someone might have noticed that one of the milking strings was, = uh, not there. Even in a big milking parlor, 100 cows is at least a couple of turns. You can imagine one milker saying to the other: “Hey, Fritz: Did you notice that it took us an hour less to mi= lk this morning?” “Yes, I did indeed notice that, Luigi. Guess we’re getting a lot more efficient, eh?”

INTERESTING FACTS

·  &n= bsp;      People with high IQs have higher concentrations of copper and zinc = in their hair.

·  &n= bsp;      It’s impossible to rotate your right leg clockwise while at t= he same time rotating your right arm counterclockwise. (See—told you.)=

·  &n= bsp;      28% of Africa is wilderness, but 38% of North America is wilderness.

·  &n= bsp;      Honey is the only food that won’t ever spoil. If it starts to look a bit off, put your honey in a warm water bath to refresh it. (This wo= rks well for spouses, too.)

CALENDAR EVENTS

http:= //www.whminer.com/calendar.html=

CLOSING COMMENT

While money can't buy happiness, it certainly lets you choose your own form of misery.

CORRECTION

In the “Corn Silage Maturity” article on p. 4 of the April Farm Report, silage packing density was expressed in lbs. per acre. The correct measure of packing density is lbs. per cubic foot. =