MINER INSTITUTE FARM REPORT

Silo Plastics: Pictures speak volumes

Ralph, our feeder, wanted to point out some observations regarding silo plastic and forage quality. First of all is the successful use= of bunker plastic to line the concrete wall, especially the end wall that is d= ug into the earthen bank. These = walls tend to allow moisture to seep through the concrete and into the silage, resulting in at least 1 foot of spoilage. We figure between 4 and 5 tons o= f silage is lost with an unlined end wall. Note in the picture 1 below how the plast= ic successfully forms a barrier to ground moisture soaking through the concrete into the silage. In picture 2, silage directly next to the wall is fresh and shows no signs of spoilage. In spite of this feed being at least three years old we were able to feed all of it.

Reg= arding using gravel bags as silo cover weights: They certainly are easier, less time-consuming and provide no shelter for “wildlife”. But as ca= n be seen in picture 3, they do not provide adequate coverage when holes appear = in the plastic that allow air and moisture to infiltrate the top of the silage mass. On a windy day air can get under the plastic, resulting the billowing= of the cover. The holes (picture 4) resulted from crows pecking through the plastic. Once exposed to air, the plastic between the stone bags is free-floating. Tire to tire would not prevent the holes but certainly minim= ize the air allowed under the length of the silo cover. A few tires or gravel b= ags between the rows of bags would help to minimize the billowing.

̵= 2;Kurt Cotanch, cotanch@whminer.com<= /i>

New Infestation of Alfalfa Pest Found in Northern NY

A new Alfalfa Snout Beetle (ASB) infestation has been found on a farm north of Peru, NY, not far from the si= te of the discovery of the invasive insect pest in 1992. In the fall of 2008, an infestation of Alfalfa Snout Beetle was found north of Plattsburgh in fields near Lake Champlain.

=

The Northern New York Agricultural Development Progra= m, the Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station, and the New York Fa= rm Viability Institute are funding the research taking place on privately-owned farms, at the E.V. Baker Agricultural Research Farm in Willsboro, and at Mi= ner Institute. Shields is part of a Cornell University<= /st1:PlaceType> research team developing two promising biological controls for the pest that destroys alfalfa. He has successfully applied nematodes to fields with ASB.= The microscopic worms eat the insect’s larvae, thereby reducing the populations of the pest that eats the alfalfa plant roots. Shields is now developing a cost-effective method for farmers to “grow” and apply their own nematodes to control ASB. “We think the protocol for using nematodes will require only one inoculation per field with farm-grown persistent nematode strains to reduce the snout beetle population on a farm. The nematodes, in combination with planting ASB-resis= tant alfalfa varieties, may just be the long-term biological solution the region’s farmers need.” <= /span>

=

Since 1998, Cornell University plant br= eeder Dr. Donald R. Viands has been selectively breeding ASB-resistant varieties = of alfalfa. Fifth- and sixth-cycle selections of ASB-resistant varieties grown= in Cornell greenhouses from native New York= and Hungarian varieties of alfalfa are now being evaluated in field trials on f= arms in Northern New York. “We have seen promising trends of less and less root damage on the greenhouse-grown alfal= fa and are eager to see how well the experimental plant populations showing the greatest potential for resistance perform on the farms.”

=

Certified Crop Advisor Eric Beve= r says he has been reporting increased signs of winterkill in the alfalfa cro= ps in the Peru and Plattsburgh area. “What looks like winterkill in alfalfa can be a sign of both root diseases of the crop and damage caused by Alfalfa Snout Beetle. It is impor= tant for farmers to know as soon as possible if ASB exists in their fields and to know that control methods are becoming more and more available to them.R= 21;

=

Cornell Cooperative Extension of Clinton County Execu= tive Director Amy Ivy says, “Our farmers can take heart from the two-prong= ed approach to reduce the populations of ASB and grow ASB-resistant alfalfa. T= he efforts by Cornell researchers to combat this problem are now benefiting North Country farms.”

=

The Northern New York Agricultural Development Program includes fact sheets on the ASB’s history= , life cycle and control treatment developments on its website at www.nnyagdev.org. =

=

Alfalfa snout beetle statist= ics

Surveys funded by the Northern New York Agricultural Development Program show ASB to be present in all six NNY counties: Clinton, Essex, Franklin, Jefferson, Lewis, and St. Lawrence. ASB= is also found in Cayuga, Wayne and Oswego counties, and southeastern On= tario.

=

4    ASB is known t= o exist on approximately 13 percent of NY’s agricultural land.

4    The adult ASB = is about as long as a human thumbnail with a tough gray shell.

4    The adult ASB = is wingless and migrates by walking, often causing large dark moving masses al= ong rural roadsides. ASB also spreads by traveling on trucks and farm equipment= .

4    ASB is believe= d to have first arrived in the U.S. in the ballast of sailing ships arriving in Oswego in the 1800s.<= /p>
=

The research to develop control methods for Alfalfa S= nout Beetle is funded by the Northern New York Agricultural Development Program, Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station, and New York Farm Viabi= lity Institute. Tom Sleight, executive director of the NY Farm Viability Institu= te, says, “The New York Farm Viability Institute funding for this project reflects concerns we heard from New York farmers. The alfalfa snout beetle can devast= ate fields, and we are interested in solutions to controlling this pest, and ma= king sure the problem does not spread deeper into the state.’’

&n= bsp;

Protein and Amino Acid Nutri= tion 101 - Part 3

As mentioned in my earlier articl= es, methionine and lysine are most often the first and se= cond limiting amino acids in dairy rations fed in North A= merica. This is because corn and soybean products make up a large proportion of the diets that we feed to dairy cows. Corn is deficient in lysine and soybeans = are deficient in methionine. Therefore, the amounts= of lysine and methionine in dairy diets limit the = amount of milk protein that can be synthesized by the cow.

=

Metabolizable protein is the term use= d to describe the total protein and amino acids that are digested and absorbed by cattle. Metabolizable protein in cattle comes f= rom two major sources: microbial protein synthesized in the rumen and bypass protein. Requirements for methionine and lysine= in dairy rations are generally expressed as a percent of = metabolizable protein. The optimal level of methionine and ly= sine in metabolizable protein is 2.4 and 7.2%, respectively. However, these levels of methionine and lysine are very difficult to achieve; therefore, the more practical recommendations of 2.2 and 6.6% of methionine a= nd lysine in metabolizable protein are given (will change slightly depending on the nutritional model used). These numbers indicate that there should be three times as much lysine in metabolizable protein as methionine, or a 3:1 ratio of lysine= : methionine.

=

There are three basic steps to balance dairy rations = for amino acids:

4&nb= sp;   Maximize synthesis of microbial protein in the rumen.

4&nb= sp;   Provide adequate bypass protein to meet the metabolizable protein requirements of the cow.

4&nb= sp;   Balance = for lysine and methionine in m= etabolizable protein.

=

What can be used to balance diets for lysine and methionine? Generally you start with lysine, and get = the concentration of lysine as close as possible to 6.6% of metabolizable protein. To do this you generally need to bring in one of the high bypass soybean meal products and/or blood meal. Then you can add a ruminant methionine source so that the ratio of lysine: methionine is 3:1. This ratio is important because in= some feeding situations it's undesirable or even impossible to achieve lysine concentrations of 6.6% due to feed costs. For example, if in a particular dietary situation the lysine concentration in metaboli= zable protein is 6.4%, you would only want the methionine concentration to be 2.1% of metabolizable prote= in. If the methionine concentration is higher, then it= will not be utilized efficiently by the cow for milk protein synthesis.

=

What really gets me is when I see a ration with 6.6% lysine and 1.9% methionine. This is because in general to get the lysine concentration that high, a high-cost protein sour= ce such as a high bypass soy product or blood meal needs to be added to the di= et. However, the lysine provided by those sources won't be utilized efficiently= for protein synthesis by the cow. In this situation, methi= onine will limit protein synthesis. What I would do is increase methionine to 2.2% or decrease lysine so that the ratio of lysine: methionine is closer to 3:1 without making the diet deficient in = metabolizable protein.

=

If your nutritionist is balancing your rations for am= ino acids, take a look at what he's doing. If your nutritionist is not balancing your rations for amino acids and you're looking for ways to increase milk protein production, talk to him about it.

Sarah Boucher, boucher@whminer.com

&n= bsp;

From the President’s Desk – Overcrowding and Public Perception

An article published this month by Belgian researchers explored societal concerns related to stocking density = and group sizes on commercial farms in Europe. We all recognize that simply maximizing productivity is no longer the only, or even the primary, driver = in contemporary agriculture. Increasingly, European society also places substantial emphasis on sustainability and perceived ethical issues associa= ted with farming. American society – i.e. the consuming public – may not be far behind their European counterparts. A 2008 survey conducted by Information Resources, Inc. found that 50% of US consumers consider at least one “sustainability factor” when selecting brands to purchase or stores at which to shop. These sustainability factors include:

Environmentally sensitive production practice= s,

Humane worker treatment, and

Humane treatment of farm animals

=

The purpose of this Belgian study was to determine wh= ich components of animal welfare received the greatest attention by typical consumers.

=

The survey was conducted in 2006 on 459 people that represented the Belgian population: 51.5% females, average age of 37.8 year= s, 39% urban dwellers, and 69% had education beyond 18 years of age. The resul= ts of the study found that stocking density ranked first in perceived importan= ce and concern level among these people. Females were more likely than males to consider stocking density an important welfare concern. Education beyond the age of 18 was also associated with a greater concern over stocking density. Somewhat surprisingly, age and urban versus rural had no impact on whether = the people considered stocking density to be a welfare concern.

=

I have to admit that I would not have expected a perception of overcrowding to be the greatest welfare concern. These results indicate that perceived overcrowding is a great concern for at least some European consumers – what are the potential implications for the US dairy industry? Trends are toward fewer and larger farms with larger group sizes.=

=

Results are interesting in that group size per se did= not seem to be an issue with these consumers. Rather, pen size or space availab= le per animal was most important. So, the consumers were not concerned by larg= er farms, but rather by overcrowded conditions. If US consumers are similar, t= hen we could expect them to be highly concerned with ensuring adequate space per cow in our confinement production systems.

From the cow’s perspective, which is important = as well, we find a similar relationship. Research conducted by Purdue University researchers in the 1990s showed that cow behavior was not negatively impact= ed by larger group size by itself as long as management level was sufficient to handle the larger group sizes. Cows were able to practice natural behavioral routines and did not experience any excessive aggressive interactions even = with group sizes up to 299 cows.

We often think that consumers focus on welfare issues that are highly visible such as tail docking which is undoubtedly true. But= the lesson here is that management practices related to group size, pen stocking density, and the resulting public perception of overcrowding cannot be igno= red. Even though the data is from Europe, there has certainly been a history of these trends in public attitudes crossing the Atlant= ic. Clearly, the overall image of livestock farming in general, and in our case dairy farming, among the consuming public can be enhanced by avoiding overcrowded situations. The bottom line is that consumer perception of anim= al welfare translates into purchasing decisions that affect all of us associat= ed with animal production.

—Rick Grant, grant@whminer.com

=

&n= bsp;

DAIRY WAGE SURVEY 2009

Every three years, ag labor specialists at the University of California-Davis ask dairy producers across the United States to pick one milker and then answer the 17 question survey with th= is individual in mind. As much as possible, use April 2009 data to answer the questi= ons. To take the su= rvey log onto http://ucce.ucdavis.edu/survey/survey.cfm?surveynumber=3D1559.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> Results from the 2006 survey are available at http://www.cnr.berkeley.edu/ucce50/ag-labor/7research/7res06.h= tm.

TOPDRESSING ALFALFA-GRASS WI= TH MANURE

With milk prices continuing to be= very low you'll want to limit fertilizer expenses as much as possible, and topdressing forages with manure is a great way to do it. "The book&quo= t; says to apply manure immediately after harvest, but the most important job after you harvest a field is to harvest another field, and keep doing so un= til your first cut is safely tucked away. That's because you stand to lose more= in forage quality by harvesting first cut late than by any effect delayed manu= re application would have.

=

What are the consequences of waiting a few days or mo= re between alfalfa-grass harvest and manure application? We did research on th= is subject at Miner Institute in 2007, supported by funding from the Northern = N.Y. Agricultural Development Program. We harvested first cut alfalfa-grass and waited 3 and 7 days before applying slurry dairy manure, measuring yields a= nd forage quality for these treatments and for an unmanur= ed control. (Data is for the combined second and third harvests.) <= /span>

There wasn't any statistically significant difference in yield, milk per ton or milk per acre between the treatments. However, dry matter yield and milk per acre were both 7% lower with a 7-day delay between harvest and manure application. This wasn't surprising, since while it was difficult to see any wheel tracks with a 3-day delay, they were obvious when we delayed manure application for a week--but only for second = cut. By third cut all wheel tracks had disappeared. We also examined alfalfa cro= wn condition for both second and third cuts, but there wasn't any difference between treatments for either cutting.

=

What should this mean to you? For topdressing manure,= the sooner the better but you won't kill your alfalfa by applying manure a week after harvest. You'll probably be able to see the wheel tracks for a few we= eks, and yield within the wheel tracks will be lower. We didn't measure this in = our 2007 trial, but in prior research at the Institute, with a similar manure application rate after first cut as in the 2007 trial (approximately 4000 gallons/acre), we found a 46% reduction in secon= d cut alfalfa yield within the wheel tracks. But today's slurry manure spreaders fling the stuff a long way, so only a small percentage of the alfalfa is run over by the tractor and/or manure spreader.

—Ev Thomas<= /span>, thomas@whminer.com<= o:p>

&n= bsp;

RESEARCH SUMMARIES

4    Manure contain= ing two rates of copper as copper sulfate plus a no-copper control was applied in slurry dairy manure to plots at Miner Institute and both early and late maturing corn hybrids were grown. Treatments were applied in both 2006 and 2007. Soil samples were analyzed for copper concentration using three soil = extractants. Following two consecutive annual applica= tions of high-copper dairy manure there were no effects on growth or yield of cor= n. Nor were there effects on forage quality or mineral concentration of corn tissue. The available copper in the soil as measured by Modified MorganR= 17;s extraction increased only after a second application of high-copper manure;= the extraction of copper by calcium chloride was not affected. There was no evidence of vertical movement of copper in the soil. Source: Northeastern Branch meeting of the American Society of Agronomy. Contact: ballard@whminer.com

4    In Quebec research, first and second cut alfalfa was mowed at 4:30 pm after a sunny day and at 8:00 the following morning. Alfalfa was allowed to dry in wide swaths for the first cut and without swathing for the second cut. Samples were taken at mowing and every hour after the AM mowing until dry matter was approximately 30%. At the tim= e of mowing, nonstructural carbohydrates (NSC) were 15.5% and 10.6% for PM and AM-mowed alfalfa for first cut, and 13.5% and 9.9% for the PM and AM for second cut. The difference in NSC between PM an= d AM harvest was still there at the end of the wilting period at second harvest,= but not for the first harvest. Cutting time influences NSC, but these may be reduced by the end of the wilting period.&= nbsp; Source: Northeastern Branch meeting of the American Society of Agron= omy. Contact: Chantale Morin, University of Laval, = Quebec, QC K1K 7P4<= /st1:PostalCode>.

PASSING THE TORCH

The Crops Dude is delighted that = Eric Young has accepted the position as Agronomist at Miner Institute. Eric was = here as a graduate student and therefore should have some understanding of what = this terrific place is all about. You'll be seeing at least one crops-related Farm Report article each month from him, but there will still be crops articles and the usual assortment of "fluff and stuff" from me.

I'= ll work closely with Eric as he familiarizes himself with our dairy and crop operat= ion. However, Eric was raised on a Central N.Y. dairy farm and has done crops consulting including CAFO planning, so he sho= uld be a quick study. I've continued to provide crops management guidance during this year's spring planting, but as we move into crop harvest and storage E= ric is going to be "the man with the plan".

I spent most of the week of April 13th at the Institu= te, teaching several Advanced Dairy Management classes and participating in the agronomist interview process in an ex-officio way. At 6:30 one morning I walked through ou= r new dry cow barn. Almost every cow was lying down, the proverbial "content= ed cows"; what a great environment! I don't even mind that the free stalls are bedded with sand, since I don't have to figure out how to dispose of the sand-laden manure. Dry cows are getting a much better start to their lactat= ion, and herd health has improved noticeably since last fall. If you haven't seen the barn (including the attached animal handling area) since the cows moved= in late last fall, put it on your schedule.

—E.= T.

Vet’= ;s Corner: Pregnancy Hard Counts

To set a breeding goal, various pregnancy hard count formulas have been used to forecast the number of preg= nant cows that the reproductive program is producing on a regular basis. Some formulas get a bit complicated and include culling rate and desired calving interval and desired growth rate of the herd. These formulas have valu= e in forecasting internal herd growth, but have too many factors that cloud the specific goal of monitoring the number of pregnancies needed every month.

=

From PC DART report 126 or Dairy Comp 305 Bredsum 21-day pregnancy report, for a herd that wish= es to have 300 cows in milk, pregnancies and abortions during consecutive 21-day cycles are reported:

Fo= r the 21-day interval Dec 15 to Jan 5, 82 cows were breeding eligible as of Dec 1= 5, but only 81 cows completed the 21 day interval to be listed as Pregnancy Eligible, because one of these cows was culled or changed breeding status t= o Do Not Breed in that time period. 20 pregnancies and 1 pregnancy that ended in abortion were created in this time period, so the pregnancy hard count for = this 3 week interval is 21.

To maintain 300 cows in milk, it's necessary to fresh= en in 10 heifers and 20 cows a month. Embryonic loss in this herd is on = the high normal side in cows at 12% per year (33/252) and 1% in heifers, = so it's necessary to create 23 cow pregnancies(20/1.00-0.12) and 10 heifer pregnancies every month to maintain 300 milking cows without purchasing replacements.

Pregnancy hard count goal is 17 cow pregnancies for e= ach 3 week interval (23 cow pregnancies/month) x (3 week interval/ 4 weeks/ month). This comes out to 6 per week. Since rectal palpation is done weekly on this farm, pregnancy hard count goal is six cows a week on this 300-head farm.

For the year, 285 pregnancies (252 pregs and 33 aborts) were created. The annual pregnancy hard count goal is 2= 76 (23 cow pregnancies/mo x 12 mo=3D276). So this farm is meeting its reproduc= tive goal of creating pregnancies to maintain a fresh herd and prevent the need = of purchasing replacements. If there is no internal growth in the herd, other reasons for culling or losing cows, such as mastitis and injuries, should be investigated.

—Kent Henderson, DVM, Northwest Veterinary Associates, Inc<= /p>
hugamoo@comcast.net

&n= bsp;

WHAT'S HAPPENING ON THE FARM

The beginning of June is traditio= nally a busy time of year at Miner Institute for several reasons. Primarily, as e= very farmer out there is aware, cropping season is in full swing. Stones have be= en picked, corn has been planted, and hay is being harvested. Managerial challenges concerning upcoming research studies are being contemplated and resolved. The arrival of our Summer Experience interns also adds to the seasonal craziness. This summer, four dairy interns have been selected with SUNY Cobleskill representing one half and Cornell University<= /st1:PlaceType> and Virginia Tech comprising the remainder. While the addition of summer he= lp may not sound burdensome initially, there are challenges. Interns arrive wi= th varying levels of dairy management experience. Training students to perform competently can be a time-consuming process, to which I can attest because I was a student that took more time to train than others.
=

Sadly enough, this will be my final Farm Report artic= le as I gear up for veterinary school at the Cornell University College of Veterinary Medicine in August. I would like to thank everyone associated wi= th Miner Institute, ranging from nutritionists and breeders, to veterinarians = and the dairy barn staff, and everyone in between. As previously mentioned, I w= as an individual in need of extra assistance along the path of developing competence. I came to Miner Institute as a fledgling and through the patien= ce and teaching of my coworkers I will depart for veterinary school with the confidence and drive a young dairyman should possess, especially in these d= ays of tumult. Whether I milked with you in the pit, trimmed feet in the dirt p= en, dehorned calves on the hill, managed cows in the barn, requested your consultation in the office, mowed hay in the fields, or conversed with you = at lunch time, I gained invaluable insights applicable to either dairy managem= ent or life in general. Obviously there were a plethora of other activities I engaged in with many other great people during my time at Miner Institute, = and I am thankful for every single one. Working at Miner Institute was a great learning experience that undoubtedly helped propel me to vet school and will not be forgotten.

—Glenn Palmer, Dairy Intern, gpalmer13@gmail.com

&n= bsp;

HOLD OFF = ON TOPDRESSING FERTILIZER ON ALFALFA

Regular readers may recall that l= ast fall I recommended against ordering fertilizer at that time, under the assumption that prices were likely to come down by spring. Farmers who foll= owed this recommendation were well-rewarded, to the tune of thousands of dollars= in many cases, as fertilizer prices came down by 50% or more from their fall highs. (Farmers who are overwhelmed in gratitude are free to express their thanks in more tangible terms. Cash, check or money orders are all accepted= .) No, I didn't think you were that grateful...

=

What about topdressing potash to alfalfa after first = cut? I have no idea what potassium prices will be a couple of months from now, b= ut don't think they'll change all that much. Prices may come down a bit as dem= and from spring planting fades, and there's currently a larger-than-normal stockpile of 0-0-60. However, potash mining was recently reduced when the industry discovered that supplies were unusually large, so this may temper price drops. But there's more to this decision than fertilizer price alone: Crops take up potassium more readily under moist, cool conditions, which accurately describes many North Country alfalfa fields this time of year. Alfalfa and grasses will take up more K t= han they need--called "lush consumption"--so if you apply potash now = much of it may be gone by fall, which is just when you're going to need it to al= low alfalfa to store enough nutrients for a long, cold winter.

=

It's OK to buy potash now if you can get a good price= , or if you think prices will increase between now and early fall. But unless so= il test K is extremely low, don't apply the potash until after third cut--assu= ming this will be in late August or early September. (If you take a fourth cut, apply the potash after third cut since there usually isn't enough nutrient uptake after fourth cut.) That's for alfalfa, or alfalfa-grass that doesn't have a lot of grass. If your alfalfa-grass fields are really grass-alfalfa,= the grass will probably take up most of the potassium fertilizer you apply even= if you delay application until early fall. Manure is by far your best (and most economical) fertilization alternative for these fields. <= /p>
—E.T.

&n= bsp;

Improved method for detecting subclinical ketosis?

A successful transition into lact= ation is critical for both the welfare of the cow and economic performance. Along with the numerous clinical ailments (ketosis, metritis, and displaced abom= asums) that affect dairy cows during the transition period, disorders occurring on= a subclinical level can also have a detrimental effect on long-term productiv= ity. The nature of subclinical ketosis, i.e. the lack of observable symptoms, ma= kes it difficult to detect and treat. Further complicating the situation is that measuring the concentration of circulating ketone bodies is a laboratory assessment, limiting the practical application of th= is approach. Several inexpensive tests are available that can be conducted dur= ing fresh cow health exams, but each has its limitations. = Ketostix require the collection of urine, and the concentration of ketone bodies is estimated from the intensity of color change. Ketolac estimates ketone bodies in milk samples, but ma= y not be accurate in cows with high somatic cell counts. Researchers from the Free University of Berlin examined the feasibility of using an electronic device originally developed for human use to monitor β-hydroxybutyrate (BHBA) concen= trations in whole blood samples for cowside diagnostic u= se. The objectives of this study were to: 1) Determine the performance of the electric meter relative to laboratory analysis, Ketost= ix, and Ketolac and 2) Assess the performance of the electric meter when used by multiple people on various farms.

=

The first trial was conducted on two commercial farms. 196 Holstein cows between 4 and 40 DIM w= ere enrolled and milk, urine, and blood samples were collected within 15 min of= each other. BHBA concentrations were determined from the milk and urine using Ketolac and Ketostix respectively. The electronic device was used to determine the BHBA concentration in the whole blood, and those samples were reanalyzed followi= ng the laboratory procedure. The second trial was conducted with participants = from 35 vet practices working with 77 farms.&nb= sp; Similar to the first trial, milk, urine, and blood samples were collected from 10 to 15 cows per farm and analyzed immediately with the Ketolac, Ketostix, and el= ectronic device. The blood sample was = then reanalyzed following the laboratory process.

=

In the first trial, all methods of cowside examination tested were highly correlated to the laboratory assessment of B= HBA concentrations. Similarly, in the second trial the electronic device had a = high level of sensitivity (diseased cows testing positive), specificity (healthy cows testing negative), positive predictive value (portion of cows testing positive that are diseased; +PV), and negative predictive value (portion of cows testing negative that are healthy -PV). The Ketol= ac was also found to have a high sensitivity, specificity, and –PV; Howe= ver, the +PV of this test was substantially lower than the electronic meter. The= Ketostix was found to have a high degree of specifici= ty, +PV, and –PV; However, it had a substantia= lly lower sensitivity than the electronic meter.

=

There are several take-home messages from this resear= ch. First, it reinforces the relative ease that clininal or subclinical ketosis can be monitored during routine health exams on fresh cows. If not part of routine management, it may be worthwhile to consider adding in order to decrease the long-term detrimental effects on production and reproduction. Second, the electronic device performed substantially better than either the Ketolac or Ketostix tests. However, without knowing the costs of each test, it's impossible to recomme= nd one test over another. If using the Ketolac or = Ketostix tests, you keep in mind the limitations of e= ach. Using Ketolac may lead to an overestimation of = the rate of subclinical ketosis (about half of cows testing positive were actua= lly diseased). Using Ketostix may result in disease= d cows not receiving the treatment they need (between 22 and 78% of diseased cows = tested positive, depending on the threshold for a positive test).

—Peter Krawczel, krawczel@whminer.com

=

Iwersen, M., U. Falkenberg, R. Voigtsberger, D. Forderung, and W. Heuwi= eser. 2009. Evaluation of an electronic cowside test to detect subclinical ketosis in dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 92:2618-2624.

&n= bsp;

DO WE NEE= D TO CONDITION FORAGE CROPS HARVESTED FOR SILAGE?

Recent research by Cornell University suggests= that we may not need to condition hay crops that are going to be ensiled. A few years ago we relaxed the conditioner rolls on Miner Institute's John Deere = MoCo for 4th cut alfalfa. We mowed in the morning and chopped 40% DM alfalfa that same afternoon. While our 4th cut yielded a ton= or less of dry matter per acre, others have tried the "no conditioning&qu= ot; option on higher-yielding crops with similarly good results. Two "Old Order" Amish brothers in = Lancaster County, PA mowe= d a 20-acre field of alfalfa, conditioning only half of the field. (The partial conditioning was unintentional; either the conditioner broke or something happened to the horse pulling the conditioner.) When they chopped the forage they were amazed that the half they didn't condition had a slightly higher dry matter content.

If we were able to find a 15-foot disc mower without a conditioner we'd have bought one two years ago. We're still looking. Do you want to see if conditioning is necessary on your farm? Try this on a field = of first cut: Mow and condition most of the field as usual, stretching the windrows to the maximum the conditioner unit will allow--often about 2/3 of= cutterbar width. The "no conditioning" opti= on will work only when combined with wide windrows. Then for the last few wind= rows in the middle of the field, reduce the tension on the conditioner rolls so = that the forage flows through the conditioner but with little crimping or crushi= ng action. Then when you chop, check the dry matter on both the conditioned and unconditioned forage.

Make sure your conditioner is adjusted properly. You = can measure conditioner roll clearance by wrapping a sheet of tinfoil around a pencil, then with the machine not running, run the tube of tinfoil minus the pencil (duh) through the conditioner rolls. In a properly adjusted conditio= ner the tinfoil should be compressed to the thickness of a 25-cent piece. Don't assume that the factory setting is correct; it's too easy to check this yourself.

We'd be interested in hearing of your experiences if = you try a "no conditioning" field comparison. Let me know and we'll s= hare them (no names, of course) with our readers. Sooner or later there will be = disc mowers without conditioner units on the market of sufficient size and paint color (green and yellow, for instance) and farmers will be faced with the decision of buying either a mower or a mower-conditioner. It would be nice = to be able to base this decision on local/regional on-farm experience in addit= ion to university research.

—E.T.

MOWING HEIGHT FOR ALFALFA AND GRASSES

Alfalfa can be mowed at a 2" stubble hei= ght without harming the plant. With an annual alfalfa dry matter yield of 4 tons/acre, total yield is increased or decreased by about 500 lbs for every inch of stubble height. Forage quality declines only modestly with shorter stubble height, so on balance shorter is better. However, if mowing at a 2" stubble height results in your occasionally scalping the soil surfa= ce, raise the mowing height a bit. Shearing the crown from the alfalfa plant wo= n't help it at all; neither will the soil, topdressed manure residues, and other debris that you're depositing onto the windrow. =

The mowing height recommendations for grass are considerably different. While alfalfa stores the nutrients needed for regrowth in its tap root, grass stores its nutrients = in the bottom few inches of the above-ground portion of the plant. Mowing forage grasses at a 2" stubble height can reduce regrowt= h, and in some states (Pennsylvania, Maryland, Indiana) is killing out orchardgrass. (Not that this necessarily is a bad thi= ng since I hate orchardgrass, though many farmers = beg to differ on this.) We generally recommend mowing forage grasses at about 4&qu= ot; stubble height.

The potential problems from close mowing shouldn't co= me as a surprise when we consider the recommendations from lawn care professionals; in the Northern U.S., minimum mowing height for a healthy la= wn is usually 2-3". (Of course, with a typically busy summer some farmers have the goal of shocking their lawn into submission as quickly as possible; mowing at 1" will often do the trick.)

Most alfalfa in the Northeaste= rn U.S. isn't seeded alone but with a forage grass, and here's where things get tricky. Do we mow alfalfa-gras= s at 2" to maximize yield while possibly hurting the grass, or mow at 4&quo= t;, sacrificing some yield? The answer depends on several variables, including the relative proportion of alfalfa vs. grass in the field, how uniform the field surface= is, what type of mower-conditioner you have (sicklebar vs. disc) and how long you intend on keeping the field in forage before rotating it to corn. If alfalfa is the predominant species but there's a fa= ir amount of grass, we'd recommend mowing at about 3". What we don't know= is how different grass species respond to varying mowing heights, but orchardgrass and reed canarygras= s both appear to be harmed by a 2" mowing height.

—E.T.

CORN SILAGE QUALITY: HOW MUCH DIFFERENCE DOES HYBRID SELECTION REALLY MAKE?

To answer this question, we'll use the 2008 <= st1:PlaceName w:st=3D"on">Cornell University corn silage hybrid trial planted in Madrid, one of two such sites in North= ern NY. (The 2008 Cornell trial= at Miner Institute was wiped out by a horrific July windstorm.) There are seve= ral maturity categories in these replicated trials, but we'll use the 90-95 RM = one since it's most representative of the corn hybri= ds planted in the region. Following are some facts and figures that while base= d on this trial, I think are generally true. For discussion purposes the one BMR hybrid in the trial isn't included because BMR is simply "different st= uff". For instance, the BMR hybrid in this trial, UFO 105B6, had the lowest yield= but by far the highest NDF digestibility of all 24 hybrids in the trial.

=

1.      = There's more difference in yield than in silage quality. The 35% DM yield of the 23 (mostly dual-purpose) hybr= ids ranged from a high of 31.5 tons/acre to a low of 23.5 tons/acre. The top hy= brid yielded 34% more than the bottom one.

2.      = How much quali= ty was sacrificed to attain higher yields? None at all. Cornell reports milk production potentia= l as Milk2006, a University of Wisconsin spread= sheet that includes dry matter, protein, NDF, and NDF digestibility. The top five hybrids for yield averaged 3279 lbs of milk/ton, while the bottom five aver= aged 3252 lbs/ton.

3.      = What about sta= rch? No meaningful difference: The top five for yield aver= aged 33% starch and the bottom five averaged 34%.

4.      = What's more im= portant: Milk per ton or Milk per acre? Milk per ton is more important to the cow. While you can increase forage supply by purchasi= ng feed or by renting more land, you can't increase the quality of corn silage once it's in the silo. However...

5.      = ...there's muc= h more difference among dual purpose hybrids in milk/acre than in milk/ ton. The top hybrid for milk/ton was 3399 lbs. and the bot= tom was 3143, a difference of only 8%. Meanwhile, the top hybrid for milk/acre = was 36,551 lbs. while the bottom hybrid was 26,830, a 36% difference.

=

Conclusions: There's not much difference among dual-purpose hybrids in fiber digestibility. In this trial, with the except= ion of the BMR hybrid most of the hybrids were within five percentage points for 30-hour NDF-d--from 53 to 58%. Since 1 percentage point of NDF-d is reporte= dly "worth" about 0.5 lbs of milk production, 5 points of NDF-d certa= inly isn't meaningless. However, you can't afford to give up much yield potentia= l to gain a couple of points of digestibility--especially since corn silage is o= nly one part of the ration. And finally, there's reasonably good agreement betw= een trials in the relative ranking of hybrids: The hybrids that did well for yi= eld and/or quality in one trial generally ranked high in the other trials.=

—E.T= .

=

CROP BRIEFS

4    If you use post-emergence herbicides, make sure you don't delay too long before application. The taller the weeds get, the more competition they provide. W= e're learning that the competition is more severe than once thought. Every added= day of weed growth not only results in competition for water and nutrients, but= the crop responds to this competition in heretofore unknown ways.

4    Here's another= good reason to apply post-emergence herbicides--in this case, glyphosate--before the weeds get too tall. There are an increasing number of reports from arou= nd N.Y. State of poor lambsquarters control in both corn and soybeans when glyphosate is applied after these= weeds are over 3" tall. If the lambsquarters is already over 3" when you get in to spray, either increase the glyphosate rate or add a h= erbicide labeled for broadleaf weed control. As always, read the label.

<= span style=3D'mso-armenian-font-family:Calibri;mso-currency-font-family:Calibri; mso-cyrillic-font-family:Calibri;mso-default-font-family:Shannon;mso-greek-= font-family: Shannon;mso-hebrew-font-family:Calibri;mso-latin-font-family:Shannon; mso-latinext-font-family:Calibri'>4    Corn plant population: Don't rely completely on either your corn planter operator's manual or even a seed monitor for plant population. Check the units of seed used vs. acres planted, and follow up t= his with a number of plant counts when the corn is about a foot tall. For 30&qu= ot; rows, use a 17' 4" length of twine and multiply the plant count within this distance by 1000 to determine plants per acre. Do this at least ten ti= mes in a field to get an average population. You shouldn't have much variation between plant counts; if you do that's a sign of problems, either with the planter or with insects, soil conditions, etc. And even the best electronic monitor can't predict what will happen after planting.
=

CROPLAND RENTAL RATES

USDA recently published cropland rental rates for many (but not all) N.Y. counties. In Northern NY, prices were published for Lewis, Jefferson and St. Lawrence Counties, but n= ot Clinton or Franklin. Following are the per-acre annual rental rates for non-irrigated cropland:

4    Lewis $41.00

4    Jefferson $28.00

4    St. Lawrence $= 32.50

4    Washington $37.50

4    Central NY $35.00

=

With no data to go on, we'd guess that the rate in Clinton County is in the $35/acre range, similar to rates in Centra= l NY. There's certainly plenty of competition for good cropland in the county, especially the approximately five mile wide strip along Lake Champlain.

=

USING CUSTOM OPERATORS WISELY

An increasing number of = dairy farms (Miner Institute included) are having one or more work done by custom operators, primarily nitrogen fertilization and herbicide application. A go= od custom operator will be alert for problems while he's on your fields, and should report any unusual situations to you--especially if you ask him to do so. This includes poor/uneven plant population, weed outbreaks, deer or oth= er wildlife feasting on your crops, etc. While either you or a crops consultant should be checking fields for these types of problems, nobody gets the bird= 's eye view of your crops like the guy on the spray coupe. On occasion much of= the custom application cost can be saved by this early warning detection system= .

=

It's fine to design your own herbicide program, but be sure that the applicator knows he has some leeway in this regard and is fre= e to substitute another herbicide (or at least seek your permission to do so) if= he encounters a weed problem that he knows the originally-intended program won= 't control. For instance, a serious quackgrass pro= blem in a corn field that was to be sprayed with Prowl + at= razine. A good applicator is well aware of the financial stresses on dairy farms th= is year, and won't substitute a high-priced herbicide when a less costly one w= ould do the job. He needs you at least as much as you need him.

=

THE BEST PLACES= TO FARM

The April issue of Farm Futures magazine had a list of the best counties to farm in the U.S. The magazine's website included a ranking of 3000+ counties in the U.S., b= ased on Census of Agriculture data through 2007 that included profit margin, average net farm income, return on assets, and asset turnover. Northern N.Y. came out looking great, but that's not a surprise to thos= e of us involved in farming here. Following are the rankings of the six NNY counties, the two top-ranked N.Y. State counties, and the only Vermont county in the top 500.

=

4    Clinton 101 (Wow!)

4    Lewis 154=

4    Jefferson 237

4    Franklin 347
4    St. Lawrence 5= 82

4    Essex 2691 (Oh= well, Lake Placid sure is pretty...)

4    Suffolk (NY) 65

4    Genessee (NY) 69<= /o:p>

4    Addison (VT) 3= 73

=

The magazine also rated the top states for farming. T= he top five (in order) are North Dakota, Nebraska, Iowa, = South Dakota, and Kansas. Surprised at the Dakotas' high ranking? = Both North and South Dakota were in Farm Futures' top 5 five years ago, too. New York rose from #17 to #7 and is th= e only state in the East in the top 10, but with the current dairy situation a 2008 ranking would almost certainly be a lot lower.

=

RANDOM THOUGHTS

4    A friend says = he's a "liberal Republican": He thinks that people should be able to do whatever they want to as long as they don't do it anywhere near him.

4    According to a= University of Virginia study, our brain activity= peaks at age 22 and what's called "brain decline" starts at age 27. Mem= ory stays intact until age 37, while our abilities based on accumulated knowled= ge, such as performance on vocabulary tests continues to increase until age 60.= What happens after age 60? Do we start to lose vocabulary?

4    Worth consider= ing in these troubled times: Contentment isn’t the fulfillment of what you w= ant, but the realization of how much you already have.

4    Michelle Obama= has planted an organic vegetable garden at the White House. Wonder how many wee= ds she'll pull, and the real cost (including labor) of each tomato she grows? While opinions differ widely at what kind of a message this sends, the First Lady has one advantage: There's an abundance of organic fertilizer in our nation's capital, though farmers have a different term for it.

—E.T= .

=

SUPPLEMENTAL N FOR CORN

Dairy farmers are in bet= ter shape for soil N status than most cash crop farms because they have manure. However, unless manure is applied during the spring and incorporated the sa= me day, much of the ammonia N in the manure is lost. We estimate that only abo= ut 30% of the total N in fall-applied manure is available to the next year's c= orn crop, and the figure probably isn't much higher for manure applied this spr= ing and allowed to sit there for days before incorporation. If you manure fields regularly, a small amount of the N from previous years' applications is available, but this doesn't add up to a lot.

=

Many dairy farm corn fields will benefit from sidedress or topdress N. = Sidedress N including incorporation is preferred, but= if you have it custom done (like Miner Institute does), UAN is dribbled onto the surface with no incorporation. In this case it rea= lly pays to use a urease inhibitor such as Agrotain that greatly reduces ammonia loss. Extensive= field testing by universities across the U.S. found that where rainfall didn't occur for at least three days following UAN application, the use of = a urease inhibitor increased corn yields by an average = of 14 bushels per acre. That's about 2 more tons of corn silage per acre for an investment of only a few dollars, and why we have our custom applicator add= Agrotain to the UAN.

CRITTER NEWS
4    We're all reli= eved that Tinker Bell the Chihuahu= a has been reunited with her owners. Tinker Bell was blown away by a 70 mph wind gust in Rochester, Michigan. Her owners credit= a psychic for leading them to a wooded area about a mile from where the dog w= as last seen.

4    A British man = was accustomed to taking his Labrador retriever on a walk on a golf course. But after a while he noticed that the pooch's stomach rattled when it walked. He took the dog to a veterinarian, who in a one-hour operation successfully removed 13 golf balls. The vet admitted to keeping the five Titleist Pro VI balls that he removed. Both dog and vet obviously have good taste (in the dog's case, literally) in golf balls.

4    The residents = of Tuscarora, Nevada= are often plagued by invasions of Mormon crickets, which devour just about = all the vegetation in their path. But they've discovered something the crickets just hate: Hard rock. When the crickets approach, the townspeople--all 13 of them--turn the local rock station on full blast and when the crickets hear = the tender strains of Led Zeppelin and the Rolling Stones they head for the hil= ls. And can you blame them?

=

APPLYING INSECTICIDES TO GRASSES AND MIXED STANDS

A few years ago there was a serious armyworm infestation in grass hayfields in Northeastern NY and Vermont. The armyworms seemed to prefer reed canarygrass= but readily consumed all forage grasses. Many hundreds of acres of grass were sprayed with insecticides, which did a good job of killing the armyworms but had the slight disadvantage of being completely illegal since none of the insecticides used were labeled for forage grasses. Before long word of these applications reached environmental authorities, and soon the famous material hit the fan. Some commercial applicators were fined, while farmers with gra= ss forage that had been sprayed faced the potential that they wouldn't be able= to feed it. Eventually cooler heads prevailed and the farmers were allowed to = feed (but not sell) the forage. This was (hopefully) a learning experience for a= ll involved.

The armyworm control situation has improved greatly since then because now there are at least two insecticides labeled for use on grasses and mixed alfalfa-grass stands. It's good to have options in case we get another seri= ous infestation of armyworms or another insect pest. However, my personal prefe= rence is not to apply any insecticides to alfalfa or alfalfa-grass unless the infestation is really serious. The alfalfa weevil parasite is doing a great= job in most (perhaps all) alfalfa fields in the Champlain Valley. It's been many years since the alfalfa weevil was a serious pest in this ar= ea. And by using leafhopper-resistant varieties we can also avoid problems with= the potato leafhopper, which invades Northeastern NY in damaging numbers once= every few years. I don't know how many alfalfa weevil parasites we'd kill by appl= ying insecticides, but it certainly wouldn't be good for them. I'm not an anti-pesticide crusader, but if we can avoid using insecticides and still g= et good crops, that certainly seems like the prudent choice. At Miner Institute we haven't applied an insecticide on any alfalfa field since at least 1981 and maybe a few years before that.

—E.T.=

Secrets to current production levels

The forage lab has received a numbe= r of inquiries concerning our recent and continued high milk production levels. = This is certainly a time to reflect and consider on not what has gone wrong in o= ur nutrition program, but what is going right. When production is good, I beli= eve we all tend to relax a bit and take a “hands off” approach to nutritional management and just wait for things to fail. But let’s consider some of the factors contributing to high milk production. First, s= ound nutrition. We still debate energy levels and amino acid profiles, but gener= ally keep the diet consistent, with about 26% starch, 4.5% fat and 17% CP. Forage quality is good, not necessarily outstanding, but good. Good grass haylage, early harvest NDF 50-55% and both corn silag= es are good, not exemplary NDF digestibilities. Corn s= ilage is over 6 months to a year fermented making the starch highly degradable. T= here is also very little spoilage in any in the forages. Since switching to our “upper” bunk of BMR CS and no longer feeding silage out of Bunk= 6 that soaks up ground water, the high quality BMR CS is feeding like it ought to. Management continues to be good. The new dry cow barn has vastly improved calving and transition health. We are still on full BST; we have n= ot started weaning off.

=

No, there are no secret feeds or unique ration balanc= ing cues that we watch. Good management, good forage and good weather go a long way. We focus on the first two and do our best with the third.

—K.C= .

= ;

PRECONCEPTUAL SCIENCE

A recent Non Sequitur co= mic strip really hit home, defining "preconceptual science" as "reaching a conclusion before doing research, then si= mply dismissing anything contrary to your preconceived notions". Well. The reason it hit home is this: Like many who have been involved in research, I= 've been guilty of designing a research project primarily to prove a point, not= to learn something. All well and good, except when the results don't agree with what I think should have happened.

=

A case in point is the alfalfa height of cutting rese= arch we did at the Institute a few years ago. I'd been telling farmers that mowi= ng to a 1-2" stubble height was a mistake, that the slight increase in yi= eld is more than negated by the decrease in forage quality. This was contrary to what some university agronomists were recommending but I just knew I was ri= ght. And when we did the research, lo and behold but alfalfa harvested at a 2&qu= ot; stubble height yielded a lot more than that harvested at a 4" height, = with much less impact on quality than I imagined. Did I take this like a man, ch= ange my recommendation and move on? Nooo, I found all sorts of reasons the research wasn't done quite right--notill alfalfa field, only one cut, etc. etc. So we did a second year of research--better field, three cuts...same results. Mark Twain once commented that "Facts are stubborn things, but statistics are more pliable." However, Miner Institute's Director of Research Katie Ballard used to watch= me like a hawk to make sure I didn't take liberties with the results.

=

Which just goes to show that we need to occasionally test our preconceived notions to make sure they're based on fa= cts. As someone on= ce said, the problem isn't that we don't know enough, but that we know so many things that aren't true.

—E.T= .

2007 CENSUS OF AGRICULTURE

Clinton County, which is where Miner Institute is located). We've rounded off some numbers = for simplicity's sake.

=

4    Farm numbers d= eclined slightly, from 604 to 590, but this is an utterly meaningless number since = it includes even farms selling under $1000 of farm products and we all know th= at this isn't really a "working" farm. A better gauge is farms with = over $100,000 in farm product sales because this at least approaches something of commercial size. These farm numbers declined from 136 to 117.

4    There were 160= dairy farms in 2002, 120 in 2007. However, dairy cow numbers were little changed, 18,970 in 2002 and 18,145 in 2007. Milk cows per farm: 119 in 2002, 151 in 2007.

4    Land in farms = declined by 11%, from 168,000 to 149,000 acres, which is worrisome. However, what we don't know at this point is how much of this acreage decline was cropland on commercial farms. We expect that it wasn't much, since there's a good demand for cropland.

4    Corn silage ac= reage was almost unchanged at about 13,500 acres, while corn harvested for grain increased from 4400 to 6500 acres. Soybean acreage declined slightly, from = 1600 to 1500 acres, which was a bit of a surprise.

4    Apple acreage = had been on a slide, but over the past five years held steady at 3100 acres.

4    Average age of operator is 55 years. Another worrisome figure, if accurate. Old farmers do= n't make the improvements to land and buildings that younger ones do.

=

'TIS THE SEASON=

Summer is the season to = make low-potassium grass hay or silage for prefresh = dry cows. Cows will use the K in grass silage slightly more efficiently than in= dry hay, so hay is a bit better than silage for prefresh cows. Grasses usually are lower in potassium during the summer since K upta= ke is less when the soil is warm and comparatively dry. Cool, moist conditions promote K uptake, which is why first cut grass is less desirable for prefresh cows.

=

Cool-season grasses don't usually yield much during midsummer, which has more to do with soil temperature than with moisture. (That's why they're called cool season grasses, folks.) Fortunately, most d= airy farms don't need a lot of low-K forage since a dry cow's prefresh period is usually only two or three weeks long. Choose fields that have had little or no manure in 2009. N fertilizer applied right after the previous harvest will considerably increase yields, and if soil K is low, N fertilization may reduce grass K concentration. Don't bet the farm on this,= though; the root systems of grasses are remarkably resilient at sucking up even very low amounts of soil K. Grasses will thrive, and often contain 2.5% or more = K, at soil test K levels so low that alfalfa would starve to death in one seas= on.

=

Be sure to have a mineral analysis done on this grass, using wet chemistry, not NIR to determine K concentration. If the grass is around 2.0% with good quality, feed it to your prefres= h cows. If the grass is much over 2.0% K it's still OK for early dry cows. If even your best efforts wind up with grass that's closer to 3.0% K, join the crowd; it's tough to produce high quality, low K grass! One way to harvest = low K grass is to let the forage get so mature that it almost dies a natural de= ath. The resulting "forage"--using the term loosely--would probably be= low in K (and low in most other minerals as well), but would be so unpalatable = that you'd be well advised to bale it with plastic twine since if you used sisal twine the cows may eat it in preference to the hay.

—E.T= .

&n= bsp;

Closing Comment

Being a good communicator means that people may find out what's really wrong with you.