FROM THE PRESIDENT’S DESK: State of the Institute 2009
We just completed=
our
year-end review of programs and activities at Miner Institute for 2008 and I
thought I’d share some of the highlights with you. Each year, as I lo=
ok
back over the accomplishments of the Institute staff and their programs, I =
am
amazed at what we are able to accomplish.
Our
educational programs remain the fundamental reason that we exist. The Advan=
ced
Dairy Management program monopolizes our efforts during spring semester with
dairy management students spending an entire semester in residence at the
Institute. These are primarily students who have spent two years at
Dur= ing fall semester, our focus shifts to Agriculture and the Environment and students primarily from SUNY-Plattsburgh with limited agricultural background. Here = our goal is to use the Institute’s farm and forested resources to teach students how agricultural practices interact with the environment. The cont= rast in student backgrounds, experiences, and expectations between spring and fa= ll semester is a significant part of what makes it stimulating to work here. <= o:p>
Our=
Summer
Experience programs in crop/dairy management, equine management, agricultur=
al
research, and Heart’s Delight History remain vibrant and highly
competitive, attracting students from across the US and even internationally
(for example Puerto Rico in 2008).
Our
research group conducted numerous studies on topics ranging from evaluating=
effects
of stocking rate on dairy cow behavioral response to successfully feeding l=
ow
starch diets. Student projects are a significant portion of our research and
educational programs – providing them with a glimpse into the research
process and simultaneously generating useful, practical knowledge. In 2008,=
10
students conducted research projects ranging from the effects of diet on mi=
lk
components (a M.S. student) to the effect of silage storage time on starch
digestibility (an undergraduate project).&n=
bsp;
Ind=
ustry
outreach consumes substantial amounts of all staff time, and this reaches b=
ack
to the Institute’s core mission of application of the latest
technological advances to solve problems confronting North Country agricult=
ure
(or, in fact, national and global issues). More than 2400 people attended o=
ver
40 workshops/seminars held at the Institute in 2008.
The=
Farm
Report continues to be our outreach effort with the single greatest impact =
on
crop and dairy farmers. In addition, The Stable Sheet delivers timely
information to the equine industry.
Increasingly, our web site is an important vehicle for delivering
information. Over 2000 people per month visited the web site in 2008 with t=
he
Farm Report and Stable Sheet being most frequented.
The
Institute’s most visible demonstration program continues to be the da=
iry
herd. The dairy staff did an excellent job of balancing research and
educational demands with our need for maintaining a highly productive herd.
Throughout 2008, herd milk production averaged near 30,000 pounds rolling m=
ilk
production. A high level of dairy herd performance is necessary for our
research results to be applicable to the modern dairy industry, for relevant
educational programs, and for effective demonstration of the latest technol=
ogy in
a dairy-crop system.
Obv= iously, I’ve skipped over many other significant accomplishments and programs, but I did want to provide a quick glimpse of the breadth and vigor of our research, educational, and demonstration programs. As I travel, I find that many folks have heard of Miner Institute, but usually their impression is one-dimensional. If this brief overview stimulates interest on your part in learning more about the range of Miner Institute programs, please feel free= to contact us. And, most importantly, I hope that 2009 brings you prosperity!<= o:p>
—
2009: A GOOD YEAR TO CONSIDER UAN?
UAN
is most often used for sidedressing corn, but c=
an
also be used for topdressing grasses in early spring. This practice is
increasing, and farmers switching from urea to UAN are very pleased with the
results. While volatility of urea isn’t usually a problem during our =
cool
spring conditions, UAN volatility is even less since ammonium nitrate is al=
most
completely non-volatile. Last year we used UAN for topdressing first cut
grasses and were quite pleased. We had it custom-applied so it didn’t
interfere with other spring work. Our crop consulting firm, Agricultural
Consulting Service, has had considerable experience with topdressing UAN on
grass, and highly recommends it. Applied at the first signs of green-up and
didn’t see any burning of the foliage. We slightly reduced our
application rate; we normally apply 90 lbs/acre of actual N as urea, but la=
st
year we applied 70 lbs/acre of N as UAN.
When pricing UAN vs.
urea, remember that urea is 46% N while UAN is usually 30% N (though analys=
es
can differ). Therefore, if the UAN is 30% N, multiply the UAN price by 1.53=
to
get an “equivalent” price. Research has shown that the two form=
s of
nitrogen in UAN can result in a yield advantage, but this is hard to pin do=
wn
since it depends on weather conditions, crop grown, etc. I simply like UAN
better than urea, in part because of uniformity =
of
application (Some dry fertilizer spreaders do a lousy job of distribution.)=
In
switching to UAN we reduced our N application rate from 90 to 70 lbs per ac=
re,
even though I don’t know of any research indicating that 70 lbs of N =
as
UAN is as good as 90 lbs of N as urea. However, the combination of applicat=
ion
uniformity and the chemical form of N makes UAN a product worth considering=
for
2009.
—
In
December 2008 cows were moved into our new dry cow barn for the first time.=
For
the cows, it was a short trailer ride from the old dry cow/heifer barn to t=
he
new dry cow barn. However, for many of the Miner Institute staff, it was a
journey that started during the fall of 2006. I was fortunate to join sever=
al
of my coworkers in the process of designing and overseeing the construction=
of
the barn. I had never gone through a process like this one and received a g=
ood
hands-on education in Barn Building 101. Some of the lessons that I learned=
are
listed below.
Designing the barn
4 Define current=
and
future goals of the dairy to identify use, size, and placement of barn. The
barn was sized to house dry cows for a herd size of 450 lactating cows base=
d on
plans to expand the herd in the future. The barn was sited to allow for an
addition on the south end to house lactating cows.
4 Consider how t=
he
design affects manure management and the ability to meet environmental
regulations. Ev made sure I learned this lesson=
. The
barn was designed to have sand-bedded freestalls on
one side of the barn and bedded packs on the other side. The existing manure
management system for the lactating cows would not accommodate the sand-lad=
en
manure or the extra volume of manure and bedding. The solution was to build=
a
composting site north of the barn and haul manure to it on a daily basis.
4 Identify the n=
eeds and
wants. The dairy staff, research staff, and finance officer had different
lists, but we were able to compromise once the goals were defined. Research
needs and wants complicated the design.
4 Input from sev=
eral
people on the design is great especially when there are many proposed uses =
for
the barn. However, one or two people need to take responsibility for making=
the
final design decisions and keeping the project moving forward.
4 It is easier t=
o find
fault with a design than to provide viable alternatives to the design.
4 Designing a ba=
rn to
have flexibility sounds great, but can be a challenge. Flexibility was need=
ed
in our barn to be able to vary the number and size of pens and switch betwe=
en
two feeding systems (headlocks and Calan gates =
to
provide individual cow intake in a pen setting).
4 Remember the c=
ow. She
is the one that will live in the barn.
4 The little det=
ails are
important and remembering them during the design process will benefit you o=
nce
the barn is finished. Placement of light switches, electric outlets, control
panels, sinks, hoses, and gates were important for us.
4 Stick to the b=
udget.
Contrary to popular belief, we don’t have an unlimited supply of
“George Washingtons” at the Institu=
te.
Building the barn
4 Good communica=
tion
with the contractor is key to avoiding costly de=
sign
mistakes and material purchases. Meeting with the contractor during the
designing stage is highly recommended.
4 Be on site as =
much as
possible. At a minimum check on things daily as the building process can ha=
ppen
quickly. Planned weekly meetings and impromptu daily meetings with the
contractor worked for us.
4 Don’t as=
sume the
professionally drafted plans are correct. Some discrepancies in the plans t=
hat
were realized after the fact caused us to have a few areas of the barn that
were not sized as originally intended.
4 Things will be
forgotten in the plans and unexpected problems will arise.
4 Pick your batt=
les
wisely and be willing to compromise during the building process.
4 Make someone e=
lse
tells the contractor that the poles are in the wrong spot after they are
set…thanks Steve C. and Steve F.
4 There will alw=
ays be
something you want to change after the building is done. However, good plan=
ning
and frequent discussions with the contractor during the building process wi=
ll
minimize them.
4 There are seve=
ral ways
to finish concrete. If you care about the finish be sure to specify you cho=
ice
to the contractor and concrete crew.
4 Watch where yo=
u step
to avoid fresh concrete and wet paint.
4 Be careful of =
mud/sink
holes after a rain on recently worked ground. I learned to wear my tall rub=
ber
boots after a few mud soaked shoes and socks.
4 Construction w=
orkers
do notice what you wear. Dirty barn clothes don’t get the same reacti=
on
as professional dress clothes.
4 Your attitude =
rubs off
on everyone working on the project.
4 Take lots of p=
ictures.
Someday you may need to know were the electric cables or water pipes were
buried.
4 Timelines are
adjustable and deadlines get broken.
4 Enjoy the
experience…not everyone gets to design and build a new barn!
Cow Response to Varying Leve=
ls
of TMR and Pasture Access
Although
the
To establish the individual intakes required to calcu=
late
the amount of TMR required to achieve the treatm=
ent
allocations, cows were fed from Calan gates for=
4
weeks prior to the initiation of treatment. The cows in the mixed feed
treatments were given access to ryegrass pasture between the AM and PM milkings (roughly 7 hours per day) and received 33% o=
f the
TMR in the morning and 67% following the PM milking. Cows on the 100% TMR
treatment were provided access to a dirt paddock for daily exercise. The
response to Fall pasture (Exp. 1) was evaluated =
from
late October to early December and the Spring response was quantified betwe=
en
late March and early May (Exp. 2).
During Exp. 1, cows ate significantly more TMR (as
designed); however, they consumed more only when pasture consumption was
factored in. This variation did not result in meaningful differences in body
weight or body condition score. Milk production (both in terms of raw or 4%=
fat
corrected milk) did not differ between treatments. Milk composition was alt=
ered
by the diets. Conjugated linoleic acid increase=
d with
the greater incorporation of pasture. Increased levels of pasture resulted =
in a
decrease in total saturated fatty acids and an increase in total unsaturated
fatty acids. During Exp. 2, total DMI intake and total intake of crude prot=
ein
was greater for the 100% TMR cows than all of the pasture treatments. Yet,
these increases in DM and crude protein did not result in biologically
meaningful differences in body weight or body condition score. Greater milk
production (both total and 4% FCM) was observed in the 100% TMR cows, but t=
hese
cows tended to produce less milk fat (%). There were similar differences in=
milk
composition observed during Exp. 2 as Exp. 1.
The results of this study suggest that it can be
economically feasible to incorporate some pasture feeding in the management
plan of lactating dairy cows.
Furthermore, this study draws its conclusions solely from the milk
production response, but as previously demonstrated there is a potential for
additional benefits, related to animal welfare, to be achieved. Additional fac=
tors,
such as distance from pasture to parlor, length of growing season and herd =
size
need to be considered when considering the utilization of pasture.
—
Source: Vibart. R. E., V. Vellner=
, J. C.
Burns, G. B. Huntington, and J. T. Green.&=
nbsp;
2008. Performance of
lactating dairy cows fed varying levels of total mixed ration and pasture.<=
span
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> J. Dairy Res. 75:471-480.
Lysine Misbehaves
Dr.
Glen Broderick at the U.S. Dairy Forage Research Center (
Maybe the first question on your mind is why should we
even worry about the “misbehavior” of lysine? Well, lysine is an
important amino acid in ruminant nutrition. It’s an essential amino a=
cid,
which means that the cow cannot synthesize lysine in amounts adequate to me=
et requirements
for protein synthesis and other metabolic functions. Therefore, lysine must=
be
supplied to the dairy cow through microbial protein and by-pass protein. If
lysine is not supplied by these sources in amounts adequate to meet
requirements for protein synthesis, the amount of protein synthesized in the
body, including the mammary gland, will be limited. Diets fed to dairy catt=
le
in
If lysine is limiting, improving lysine supply can
positively impact production. To improve lysine supply to the dairy cow,
it’s important to first maximize synthesis of microbial protein in the
rumen. This will be a “cheap” source of lysine. Then you can ch=
oose
sources of by-pass protein that contain higher amounts of lysine, such as b=
lood
meal or by-pass soy products. However, accurately measuring lysine supplied=
by by-pass
protein is difficult because lysine “misbehaves”.
The chemical structure of lysine (Figure 1) is rather
unique, and this structure leads to the “misbehavior” of lysine.
The NH2 group=
on
the long carbon chain of lysine is a highly reactive chemical group that
readily participates in chemical reactions. When feedstuffs are heated, thi=
s NH2 group=
of
lysine will react with glucose and other sugars to yield Maillard
reaction products. During the Maillard reaction=
brown
pigments and appealing aromas and flavors are formed in foods and feeds. Th=
e Maillard reaction is part of the reason we like choco=
late
chip cookies so much. Lysine contained in the egg protein will react with s=
ugar
in the cookie batter when heated in the oven to yield the brown coloring and
those yummy flavors and smells we all enjoy.
However, the implications of the Maillard
reaction reach beyond our taste buds and noses. In a feed, if lysine
participates in the Maillard reaction it may no=
t be
available for digestion and absorption by the animal. If lysine is limiting=
for
protein synthesis, “damaged” lysine will only add to the proble=
m.
In addition, when feeds that have been heated are analyzed for lysine conte=
nt
by traditional methods, some of the lysine that has participated in the
—
Phosphorus removal of milkho=
use
wastewater using treatment wetlands
Although
typically utilized for treating municipal wastewater, industrial wastewater,
and storm water runoff, constructed wetlands can also be useful in managing
agricultural wastewater. Physical, biological, and chemical processes
contribute to a wetlands ability to remove nutrients from the water column.
Physical removal is related to the velocity of the flow, and length travele=
d; a
longer, slower route allows more particulates to settle. Biological treatme=
nt
occurs through uptake by wetland plants and algae. Chemical removal is defi=
ned
as a change in chemical structure of the pollutant in question; an example =
of
this is phosphorous precipitating with calcium to form stable Ca-phosphate
minerals in the soil.
There is some concern that as a treatment wetland age=
s,
plant growth slows down after initial growth, plants or soil becomes
“saturated” with nutrients, and the treatment loses its treatme=
nt
capability. In a 2008 Wetlands article, scientists from the
Dairy wastewater was stored, and allowed to enter the
wetlands at variable rates to mimic natural variability expected with on-fa=
rm
systems. Water flowing into and out of the wetland was sampled weekly from
November 2000 to April 2005.
Outflow volume was greater than the wastewater inflow
when precipitation, snowmelt, and other external events influenced the wetl=
and.
The efficacy of phosphorous removal was influenced by the overall water
balance. When monthly outflows were low (less than 100mm), P reductions were
greater than 50%. When monthly outflow was high, (great=
er
than 100mm), less P was removed, and sometimes more P was detected in the
outflow than the inflow. The decreased P removal was often seen in
conjunction with high amounts of precipitation, and ice and snow melt. High
loading rates of wastewater (assuming at rates greater than the wetland was
designed for) also contributed to less effective P removal.
Addressing the concern of aging treatment wetlands, t=
his
study showed that efficacy of P removal was related to acceptable loading r=
ates
more than the age of the wetland. Design and management of the wetland shou=
ld
minimize external hydrologic input, allowing the water balance to be contro=
lled
by wastewater loading rates. Design considerations such as berms,
snow fences, and using reliable and practical wastewater flow estimates in =
the
planning stage, can help minimize overloading the wetland.
—
Source: Wood, J.D., R. Go=
rdon,
A. Madani, and G.W. Stratton. 2008. A Long Term Assessment of Phosphor=
ous
Treatment by a Constructed Wetland Receiving Dairy Wastewater. Wetlands 28:715-723.
MONITORING SILAGE DRY MATTERS
Years ago the
PRACTICAL RUMINANTS: GAS
PRODUCTION IN THE RUMEN
In
the new “going green” world, we hear a lot of talk about carbon
footprints and greenhouse gases and some heated discussion about what our c=
ows
as domesticated ruminants may or may not be contributing to these global gas
pools. So, what gases are coming out of the rumen anyway?
Cows make their living by fermenting feed in the rumen
and, to lesser extent, in the hindgut. Fermentation, regardless of where it
takes place (in the rumen, at a brewery, in Swiss cheese, in the muck at the
bottom of a swamp etc.), produces gases as byproduct. An
active ruminal fermentation will release=
more
than one quart of mixed gases per minute and, over the course of a day, a
lactating dairy cow can release more than 500 gallons of gases from her rum=
en.
Some of these gases are absorbed across the wall of the rumen and breathed =
out
through the lungs but, because gas production greatly exceeds absorption, t=
he
majority of the 500 gallons of mixed gas is removed through a specialized
process called “eructation” which is triggered when gas pressure
builds in the rumen. The process starts with a contraction that empties the
reticulum. Accumulated gases at the top on the rumen are moved into the emp=
ty
reticulum then up the esophagus where they are exhaled with normal breathin=
g.
When eructation is prevented for varied reasons, bloat occurs and, with nor=
mal ruminal production of gases, can cause problems in a =
very
short time.
The dominant gases produced by the ruminal
fermentation are carbon dioxide and methane. Carbon dioxide is the primary
fermentation gas and is generated as a byproduct of VFA production. Methane=
is
generated in the next greatest amount with other gases such as hydrogen and
hydrogen sulfide produced in small amounts. The yield and composition of the
fermentation gas mixture produced is variable and dependent what type of fe=
eds
and how much went into the rumen when. Carbon dioxide usually accounts for =
60%
of the mixed gas and methane may account for one-third. Higher fiber diets
produce proportionally more methane and higher concentrate diets proportion=
ally
less methane.
Putting carbon dioxide and methane from ruminal fermentation into the bigger greenhouse gas
discussion, the EPA estimates that dairy production accounts for 0.7% of
greenhouse gas emission in the United States (See www.ansci.cornell=
.edu/bauman/envir_impact
for a more complete discussion and accounting on this topic.) and the
greenhouse gases produced in the ruminal fermen=
tation
would only be a portion of that. We must remember that the carbon dioxide p=
roduced
during fermentation (and from the cow’s digestion and metabolism of
nutrients for that matter) is not created from nothing, but is a continuati=
on
of the natural carbon cycle. Plants photosynthesize, removing carbon dioxide
gas from the atmosphere and transforming it into solid compounds (fiber,
protein, sugar, starch) that grow the plant. And whether the plant is eaten=
by
a cow or just falls over and rots, the carbon dioxide within the building
blocks of the plant is released to the atmosphere to continue the carbon cy=
cle.
—
PESTICIDE POISONING DECLINE
Data from the
We=
’d
expect a continued decrease in pesticide poisonings after 2004 since in the
past few years there’s been a big move toward controlling corn insects
with genetic traits instead of insecticides. Most seed corn sold in
Vet’s Corner: Evaluation of cost
effective treatment of calf pneumonia
Despite
advances in ventilation, nutrition, and vaccination, treatment of calf
pneumonia remains a concern for the herd health veterinarian. By midwi=
nter
we have seen enough cases to have a clinical impression of which antibacterials are resolving cases best for this seas=
on and
our area. A common strategy is to record temperatures and clinical scores on
all calves at the beginning of the outbreak. Then three or four antibacterials are selected and used individually on =
calves
for 48 hours. Temps and attitude are recorded again, and treatment
continues on all calves with the antibacterial that most successfully reduc=
ed
fever and improved respiratory rate.
During the choice of antibacterials the=
cost
of the medicine is always evaluated but it’s not as simple as choosing
the least expensive bottle. Sometimes a more expensive bottle can be less
expensive to use because of reduced dose size and longer duration of action
which also cuts labor cost. The following table attempts to show that
it’s not as simple as choosing the cheapest bottle.
Of course, the most cost effective treatment is the one that quickly
cures the calf and results in the least amount of permanent lung damage, but
when selecting antibacterials to compare, these=
cost
differences come into play. The least expensive bottle (Med C) did not have=
the
lowest cost of treatment because it requires daily treatment, and the most
expensive bottle (Med D) had a similar cost to the least expensive bottle
because it is only used once. Med G was expensive because of repeated
daily treatments and Med H was most expensive because of the higher volume =
of
medicine needed per treatment.
In closing, the point of this discussion is not to start a guessing
game about the identity of the meds and their prices. The examples listed a=
re
for 100 to 500 ml bottles and there have been significant price increases in
six of these products since fall, so don’t assume that these are curr=
ent
prices.
—Ke=
nt E
Henderson, DVM, Northwest Veterinary Associates, Inc.
SOYBEANS IN CHAZY
One of lesser-known
field crop “facts of life” in Northern N.Y. is the outstanding
performance of soybeans in the annual
Consider the past five years’ yield results from the Cornell
soybean variety trials at Miner Institute: In 2008, the early trial (ten Gr=
oup
I varieties) averaged 63 bu/A while the late one
(eight Group II varieties) averaged 61 bu/A. All
Roundup Ready varieties, since that’s mostly what N.Y. farmers are
planting. The top-yielding variety in the early trial was 66 bu/A and the lowest 58
Looking back at 2004 through 2007 results: Yields those four years
averaged 65 bu/A, ranging from a low of 56 bu/A in 2004 to a high of =
72 bu/A in 2007.
This doesn’t mean that soybeans should replace forages on dairy
farms. However, farmers interested in a profitable cash crop might consider
soybeans, which require much less fertilizer than corn and which, as legume=
s,
not only supply most of their own N but leave about 1 lb of N per bushel of
yield for the following crop.
—E.=
T.
WHOLESALE FERTILIZER PRICES PLUMMET
Hopefully you liste=
ned
to the Crop Dude this past fall and didn’t buy your 2009 fertilizer n=
eeds
back then. We recently ordered some UAN but with price protection if the pr=
ice
goes down further, which it almost certainly will. The wholesale prices of N
and P have plummeted in the past month; urea by about 60% and phosphate
fertilizers by about 40%. Muriate of potash has=
also
declined, but not by nearly as much—by about $100 per ton wholesale.
While this may be good news for cash-strapped dairy farmers, it’s put=
ting
fertilizer dealers who filled their bins when prices were higher in a real
bind. They can’t afford to sell the fertilizer they bought early for =
the
price they paid, even with no markup. That’s why retail fertilizer pr=
ices
haven’t declined nearly as much as wholesale prices.
This will be a rough year for many dealers, who will have to balance
the losses they’ll almost certainly take on these early purchases with
profits on the less costly fertilizer they’ll buy to refill their bin=
s.
As you bargain with fertilizer dealers this winter and spring, try to
understand the financial pressure they’re under. They were told that =
there
could be shortages of some fertilizers, and took early delivery to assure t=
heir
customers of adequate supplies. As you can see, high fertilizer prices
don’t always mean high profits for dealers. The risk is that if every=
one
waits too long to order (and more importantly to take delivery), fertilizer
supply this spring could be a problem. This would be a good time to sit down
with your dealer and the discuss situation—both his and yours. You ne=
ed
to make a profit to stay in business, but so does he.
<=
/span>—E.T.
NOBODY ASKED MY OPINION, BUT…
4&nb=
sp;
Anyone who’s spent t=
ime
in one of the poorer sections of a big city knows that cigarettes aren̵=
7;t
always sold by the pack; one street person buys a single smoke from another,
with the going rate about a quarter. If fertilizer prices stay high and milk
prices stay low, dairy farmers will be going to their farm supply store this
spring with a pail and asking for $10 worth of 15-15-15. Make that a small
pail.
4&nb=
sp;
Chesterfield, Virginia, the
Crop Dude’s new winter home (just south of Richmond), isn’t the
Deep South, and we get the occasional nighttime low in the teens. But then I
get on-line and check out the weather in Chazy and our weather here doesn&#=
8217;t
seem nearly so bad. The Bride agrees. (It was 75F on Christmas Day.)
4&nb=
sp;
The term “lake effect
snow” isn’t in the vocabulary here. Any snow is cause for
celebration by kids (no school!) and panic by local drivers, whose tendency
when driving on snowy roads is to floor the brake pedal and wait until the =
car
either slides to a stop or hits something solid. My son and his wife,
Virginians now but native New Yorkers who spent about ten years living in <=
st1:City
w:st=3D"on">
—E.=
T.
TIME TO SAMPLE CORN SILAGE (AGAIN)
Both on-farm trials=
and
forage lab summaries of digestibility analyses point to big changes happeni=
ng
(or about to happen) in the starch digestibility=
of
your corn silage. One summary suggested that in vitro starch digestibility
decreases slightly after ensiling and continues to decrease for a month or =
so,
then starts to increase shortly after the New Year. And European research f=
ound
that the big changes in corn silage starch digestibility didn’t start
until about 4 months post-ensiling—which for many farmers in this reg=
ion
is about now. The European study found that beginning at 4 months, starch
digestibility continued to increase for a 6 months (which is when they ended
the study), suggesting that not only should you be testing your silage for
digestibility now but that you should continue to do so into the summer. Th=
ese
changes in digestibility, especially in herds feeding a lot of well-eared c=
orn
silage, may be large enough to require ration changes. Is it simply coincid=
ence
that the increase in starch availability is occurring at just about the same
time farmers start to report problems with “spring acidosis”? B=
ut
what do I know, I’m just an agronomist.
The best time and place to sample is right out of the TMR mixer. Put
corn silage in the mixer first, stir it up a bit=
, and
sample from the discharge chute.
Don’t sample from the face of stack or bunker silos; not only =
is
it harder to get a representative sample, but every year farmers are killed=
by
falling masses of silage. One feed company wisely prohibits its nutritionis=
ts
from sampling from the silage face of stack and bunker silos.
—E.=
T.
CRITTER NEWS
4&nb=
sp;
Scientists are looking into
the possibility of transferring the bacteria in kangaroo digestive systems =
into
cattle and sheep. That’s because the gas that kangaroos expel
doesn’t contain any methane, a noted greenhouse gas.
4&nb=
sp;
Police in
4&nb=
sp;
A
4&nb=
sp;
A 10-week old hedgehog too=
k a
spin the other day after wandering into a house and taking a nap in a laund=
ry
basket. The lady of the house tossed the basket of clothes into the washing
machine and turned it on—fortunately on slow spin. After discovery, t=
he
stowaway was taken to the local wildlife hospital for rehabilitation, where=
she
was reported to be doing fine. In fact, the manager of the hospital said th=
at
the hedgehog checked in clean and shiny, without the normal infestation of
fleas. (Do not try this at home.)
4&nb=
sp;
Zookeepers in
TRANSGENIC CORN RESEARCH NOTES
Another recent study concluded that there’s no difference bet=
ween
Bt and non-Bt hybrids in the ability of corn res=
idue
to be broken down in the soil. This confirms the results of previous resear=
ch.
The corn rootworm t=
rait
may consistently yield higher than other hybrids without this gene, even wh=
en
rootworms are controlled by other means. Soil insecticides were applied to =
all
hybrids in a
EquiDay 2009 at Miner
Institute is a daylong symposium on horse topics and a mini-expo to launch =
the
spring season in the
Whe=
ther it
is your first foal or you’re an experienced mare manager, Dr. Christi=
na
Cable’s experience and expertise will be sure to prove helpful. As on=
e of
the partners of Early Winter Equine practice (www.earlywinterequine.com) f=
rom
Lansing, NY, Dr. Cable and her husband, Dr. Michael Ball, provide care to a=
ll
levels of performance horses as well as often traveling with the USEF’s show jumping team.
Dr.=
Michael
A. Ball, author of Understanding the Equine Eye, will speak on this topic. =
The
horse’s eye is complex; the ability to recognize a problem quickly is
critical in maintaining good health. Dr. Ball has written several books on
equine health care and published many articles in peer-refereed journals.
=
220;Does
NY have a limited liability law? What are my risks operating a horse
business?” These are just two examples of the many questions asked by
horse owners. Michelle A. Crew, Esq. is a lawyer and Regional Director of t=
he
New York State Horse Council. She will speak on these questions plus others=
you
may not have even thought to ask yet!
Bei=
ng
environmentally friendly is not just trendy, but can be healthier for your
horse too. Dr. Josie Davis, Professor of Equine Studies at the
Adi=
rondack
Tack of Plattsburgh, NY will put on a fashion show and describe the outfits=
for
various disciplines. A good time to find out the latest in what’s hot,
what’s NOT, or simply what’s comfortable!
No =
matter
the weather (EquiDay is famous for snowstorms),=
the
show will go on. EquiDay is held in the
CALENDAR EVENTS
Corn Congress at Miner Institute
Speakers for this annual event will include Dr.
Contact
Ad=
mission
is free and lunch is available for $5.00.
Speakers include Damian Mason, a dairy producer from
Indiana; Dr. Michael Hutjens, University of Ill=
inois,
“Higher Feed Costs with Lower Milk Prices,” Dr. Adam Lock,
University of Vermont, “What’s in Your Milk?”, Lennart Petersson, IBA, I=
nc.,
Milking Machines/Milkers/Cows-A complex
triangle”, and Dr. Normand St. Pierre, the Ohio State University, US
Dairy Production in a Global World Context.” Pre-registration is $45, contact U=
VM
Extension, 802-334-7325, ext. 11 by February 16.
New England Dairy Feed a=
nd
Nutrition Conference; Thursday, April 9, 2009; Fireside Inn,
4
Pat Hoffman,
4
Limin Kung,
4
Matt Lucey,
4
Joe Stewart, Stewart Farms Inc,
Registration information available through Northeast Ag and Feed Allian=
ce,
CLOSING
COMMENT
One nice thing about egotists: They don't talk about other people.=