FIRST CUT HAYLAGE: HAPPY WITH NEW PRESERVATIVE

This year, we have been using an acid preservative, (buffered propionic acid) on hay crop silage. So = far we have been very pleased with the quality of forage showing minimal to no mol= d or spoilage. We are currently fe= eding both early and late 1^st cut 2009 haylage to lactating cows and heifers and dry cows respectively.

The early cut was harvested the first week of June. We had waited for weather to break, which allowed us a greater yield without sacrificing too much in maturity.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> The early cut feed is testing abou= t 16% CP, 49% NDF, 32% ADF with NDFD 24 hour of 59%…good feed. The late= 1^st cut haylage was harvested the last week of June= and is testing 12% CP, 65% NDF, 40% ADF and 45% NDFD24…just right for dry cows and heifers.

You may recall that under our former Crops Dude, we typically used a lactobacillus inoculant as silage preservative.= In his absence though, we decided = to try a commercial propionic acid product…not in spite or to appease the new Crops Dude, but with good reason. Because we have such small fields, scattered around the county and with weather as it has been, it is difficult to harvest haylage at the optim= um moisture content for effective inoculant establishment and fermentation. Given a rather wide range of DM levels in our hay crop, we decided to try an acid product.

The table on page 1 shows the wide range in DMs of the early and late 1^st cuttings, average, standard deviation = and min and max DM% of the fields harvested.&n= bsp; Also noted is the number of samples in DM ranges of less than 30%, between 30-40% and greater than 40% DM. Granted this data is of many smaller fields and not weighted by yield.

&= nbsp;

For ex= ample, we had one tiny field that dried down too fast and resulted in a few tons o= f halyage at >50% DM. However, that stuff still goes in the bunk and creates dry pockets, which are difficult to pack, leaving air pockets and subsequently mold pockets. Inoculants work best= in optimal 30-40% DM range, acids work rather well across a larger DM range, b= ut should be applied at higher rates as DM increases. The photos on page 1 show the resu= lts of the acid product on this year’s 1^st cut haylages, note very little spoilage at the top and wall and no white mold in the bulk= of the silage mass. Even at laye= rs of harvest delay with varied moisture levels in the forage, no signs of mold.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>

There is a downside of the acid though – equipment corrosion. The crops guys have the applicator feeding in at the knives to maximize application and minimize corrosion of = the pickup rolls. Application rat= e is about 14 oz/minute of chopping, which equates to 1 lb/T of forage. It seems to be working.=

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; — Kurt Cotanch, cotanch@whminer.com

PROTEIN & AMINO ACID NUTRITION 102

We hosted the Cornell/Miner Dairy Nutrition Shortcourse here August 17 to 20. If you’ve read my previous articles you might g= uess that I was asked to speak about protein and amino acid nutrition of dairy c= ows. One thing that came up during my talk was the different methionine products used in dairy rations to meet the cow’s requirement for methionine. This may be a good time to clarify what s= ome of the products are and explain briefly how they work in the dairy cow.=

The rub with meeting the methionine require= ments of dairy cows is that you cannot simply feed the cows a cheap feed grade methionine source. The microbes in the rumen rapidly degrade methionine and use its components for synthesis of their own protein. They are greedy little bugs. Therefore, methionine needs to “packaged” in a way t= hat it can resist those ravenous bugs in the rumen.

There = are three major forms of methionine marketed for ru= minant nutrition: 1) HMB or hydroxy-methyl butanoic acid (try saying that three times fast), 2) = HMBi, and 3) rumen-protected met= hionine. HMB is similar to methionine in terms of its ch= emical structure, but the major difference is that methionine= has an ammonia (NH₃) group attached, but HMB does not. In the cow’s liver, NH₃ can be added to HMB to create methionine. However, HMB is also degraded by the rumen bugs. If they get to the HMB first, it cannot be used directly as methionine by the cow. The amount of methionine provided by HMB to the dairy cow is debated. However, beneficial effects of= HMB on the microbial population in the rumen have also been reported.

HMBi is similar to HMB, but HMBi has an extra chemical group attached. This chemical group is termed isopropyl and consis= ts of additional carbon and hydrogen molecules. The isopropyl group from HMBi allows the HMB to be absorbed directly across the rumen wall. The absorption of HMBi via the rume= n wall provides for more methionine equivalents from <= span class=3DSpellE>HMBi than HMB. A benefit of both HMB and HMBi is that they can b= e pelleted. Rumen-protected methio= nine has either a fat or a fat/polymer coating so that the = methionine is protected from rumen degradation. The methionine becomes available in the small intestine either through pH-sensitive techno= logy that releases the methionine in the stomach, or= via fat-degrading enzymes in the small intestine that release the methionine from its fat capsule. There are several different rumen-protected methionine products available in the marketplace today. Rumen-protected me= thionine products use different technologies and vary the amount of methionine delivered to the dairy cow. However, these products cannot be incorporated into pelleted feeds.

If you are a dairy producer and your nutritionist has a methionine source in your ration, the important questions to ask are 1- How much methionine will this product provide to the cow each day? (Make sure they have data to back= it up.) 2 - What is the cost of the product per unit of m= ethionine delivered to the animal? Some products will provide more methionine per unit, but that's not the most important issue. What's more important is that the amount of methionine the product deliv= ers to the cow is well researched and clearly defined. Then adjustments can be mad= e on the feeding rate of the product to yield the desired amount of methionine delivered to the cow. Accurate estimates of available methionine will yield more consistent= herd responses to methionine supplementation.=

A rumi= nant methionine source is often needed in dairy rations to= meet the dairy cow’s requirement for methionine. However, don’t let your nutritionist throw in just any source of methionine without justifying his choice of product. = When fed appropriately, methionine can improve herd profitability and cow performance, particularly through increased milk prot= ein production. Just be sure to ask questions and understand why the products a= re in your rations.

= &nb= sp;

= &nb= sp; R= 12; Sarah Boucher, boucher@whminer.com

VEGGIE TALES

The soils in our Peasleevi= lle vegetable garden were thin and poor, and it took a lot of water, organic ma= tter additions and fertilizer to grow decent vegetables. However, the soils at o= ur home at Oak Point are rich and moist, ideal for growing just about anything including tomato plants six feet tall and more zucchini than any normal cou= ple can eat. After boiling, broiling, baking and grilling = zukes for a couple of weeks the urge to share becomes overwhelming. However, our neighbors also have vegetable gardens, and therefore no shortage of summer squash. (Squash math: There is no such thing as a sufficiency of squash<= /i>: Zero plants is a de= ficit, while one squash plant is a surplus.) Solving the surplus: Tossing squash though the open windows of passing cars is one idea, though not a particula= rly safe one (especially if tossed through the driver's window), but traffic is rather sparse at Oak Point. Ever resourceful, your Crops Dude has discovere= d a solution: Under cover of darkness, carefully place surplus zucchini in and around your neighbors' zucchini plants. They might wonder why the squash ar= en't attached to the plant, but by the time they become suspicious, fall (and a killing frost) will be here. = <= o:p>

DAIRY COW BEHAVIOR: HIGHLIGHTS FROM CONGRESS OF INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY&= nbsp; OF APPLIED ETHOLOGY

In July I = had the opportunity to travel halfway around the world and attend the annual meetin= g of the International Society of Applied Ethology (= ISAE), the professional society of scientists studying the behavior of animals, in= Cairns, Queensland, Australia= . The paper presented ranged from the behavior of cats adopted from animal shelters in= Australia to a survey of the effectiveness= of stunning at slaughter in Sweden. There were also quite a few interesting papers related to the behavior and welfare of dairy cows and calves, which are summarized below:

Behavioral response of calves to illness depends on the amount of milk being feed. Researchers from Agricu= lture and Agri-Food Canada and the University of Brit= ish Columbia compared the behavior of calves diagnosed with either a respirator= y or gastro-intestinal disease to matched (same age and feeding protocol), healt= hy calves when fed high (12 L) or low (4-6 L) amounts of milk or milk replacer. The amount of milk offered did not affect the likelihood of a calf developi= ng an illness, but there were significant differences in the behavioral respon= se. Calves offered 12 L/day decreased their intake by roughly 2.5 L/day, feeding time, and number of visits to the feeding compared to the healthy calves. Conversely, the calves offered 4 to
6 L/day only decreased the time spent at the feeder. These data suggest the ability to detect illness in calves fed from automated feeders may be depen= dent on the amount of milk being offered.

Wireless system developed to monitor sleep in <= /span>calves. Researc= hers from the University of Helsinki presented a validation of a wireless system intended to measure the amount of time calves spent engaged in both REM and non-REM sleep. Resting postur= e was also used to quantifying the amount of time calves spent sleeping. The amou= nt of sleep recorded by the two methods did not differ. This system should all= ow researchers to gain a greater understanding of how much sleep animals requi= re. Currently it's speculated that sleep is a key component of an animal’s health and well-being, but there's very little data to support this.

Mastitis treatments should consider both pain alleviation and treatment of infection.&nb= sp; Researchers from the Ohio State University evaluated the behavioral differences of healthy cows and those injected with li= popolysaccaride (LPS), a component of the cell wall of bacteria used to generate an immune response without actually causing illness. Intake, rumination, and lying ti= me were all reduced in the cows given the LPS challenge. The importance of these behaviors = to the cow suggests that pain alleviation might assist in her recovery. Steps take= n to limit the impact of infection on behavior may also limit the effects on per= formance.

            =             &= #8212; Peter Krawczel, krawczel@whminer.com

            =             &nb= sp;            =            * References are available on request.

SOLAR RADIATION

Miner Institute has an automated data logger managed by the Northeast Regional<= /st1:PlaceName> Climate Center. Although farmers seem to care mostly about rainfall and temperatures, the d= aily data also includes solar radiation measured in watts per square meter.

Crops are Mother Nature's way of converting sunlight energy into edible energy. Adequate sunlight is especially importa= nt for corn harvested for silage, and the more surface area of green tissue (therefore, a larger production facility) the better the plant will grow. That's why early planting is so important – so the corn plant has a l= ot of leaf area to collect sunlight during the longest days of the year. =

For instance, in the first two weeks of July 20= 09, the data logger at Miner Institute recorded 5540 watts/square meter of solar radiation, while for the first two weeks of July 2008, there were 7000 watt= s, or 26% more. That's a lot more sunshine!

In addition to affecting yield, the digestibili= ty of corn harvested for silage is reduced following summers with below-normal solar radiation.

LET US CONSIDER LOTUS

At the behest of The Bride I recently applied Agent Orange to the weeds in our lawn. (Actually 2= ,4-D + dicamba + MCPP but it's orange-colored, so...) T.= B. has the notion that a lawn should consist of naught but grass, while I have a m= ore laissez-faire attitude toward lawn species: "If it's gre= en it's good." But husbands everywhere will understand the concept that "If Momma ain't happy, ain't nobody happy" so there I was out there spraying. Anyway, along with the dandelions, plantain and other weeds there was a growing population of birdsfoot trefoil, Lotus corn= iculata. This year we've mowed our lawn every five days at a height of 2", a harvest management system not recommended for b= irdsfoot trefoil. One source recommends harvesting first cut trefoil at 10% bloom wi= th the second cut in August, while USDA recommends leaving a 4-6" stubble= on all harvests. By August we'd "harvested" our trefoil at a 2" stubble height over a dozen times! But not only was the trefoil healthy (at least until it got a snort of Agent Orange) but it was in bloom. I thought = the bright yellow flowers were pretty; T.B. did not.

Contrast this with our attempts to grow birdsfoot trefoil at Miner Institute: Twice we seeded trefoil, once with timothy and the other time with tall fescue. The trefoil germinated well and we got a nice initial stand. We mowed it on a conservat= ive schedule, but the trefoil disappeared so fast it's like it was sucked back = into the ground. One year after seeding the only place we could find any birdsfoot trefoil in the trefoil-tall fescue field wa= s at the edge of the field where we missed it with the mower-conditioner. Why is mowing two or three times a year lethal to the birdsfo= ot trefoil at Miner Institute, while the trefoil here at Oak Point survives cl= ose mowing every five days?

Maybe we have a super strain of birdsfoot trefoil. Maybe I should let it not only blo= om but set seed, then harvest the seed and market it as a new variety (L. corniculata v. "Cropdude"). However, this would mean telling T.B. that she'd have lots of little yellow flowers in her lawn, and I don't think that's gonna happen.

The point here = 212; yes, there is one — is that nature is adaptive. Mowing frequently kills most trefoil plants, but a few are able to survive and even thrive. This should come as = no surprise: Farmers' "all the corn, all the time" use of atrazine in the 1970s resulted in triazine-resistant lambsquarters before the end of that decade, extensive use of glyphosate beginning in the 19= 80s has led to a growing list of glyphosate-resista= nt weeds, and unless we mind our Ps and Qs we'll get corn rootworms resistant = to the Bt traits most corn farmers are now using. In the end, nature always= wins. The Bride usually does, too...            =             <= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:2'>        &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;

        =             &nb= sp;            =             &nb= sp;            =             &nb= sp;            =             &nb= sp;            =             &nb= sp;           &= #8212; E.T.

FERTILIZER PRICE OUTLOOK

About this time of ye= ar, the Crops Dude consults his crystal ball and predicts what will happen to fertilizer prices, plus when you should order fertilizer. If he's correct (= as he has been the past two years), he modestly reminds you of this at least o= nce in subsequent issues of the Farm Report, noting that he sure hopes you listened to his advice. If he's ever wrong — and with no recollection that he ever was — he will hope you forget the whole thing.

That said: After rising to astronomic price lev= els in fall 2008, the combination of the global economic crisis and reduced cre= dit availability resulted in a collapse in worldwide demand for fertilizer. Nev= er before did fertilizer prices drop so fast and so far, though they bottomed = out at prices that were still quite high compared to what we were used to. World fertilizer consumption was down by over 5% for the most recent marketing ye= ar, which is a lot. The economic recovery has been sluggish, and so has the dem= and for fertilizer. Even though some fertilizer companies shut down production facilities last fall, fertilizer supplies for the 2010 crop season should be adequate with the possible exception of nitrogen.= In recent years, China ha= s been a big player in international urea markets, and nobody can reliably predict what China will do. While there's a very good North American corn crop now being harvested, world demand for all food and feed grains remains strong: More people wanting to eat better than they have before.

Last year's high fertilizer prices caused many farmers to postpone purchases, but they can't continue to do so and expect = to get decent yields. If commodity prices are high, there will be at least a moderate increase in fertilizer demand, and increased demand usually leads = to increased prices. (Economics 101.) When this will happen is less certain than the fact that it will, but the best fertiliz= er buys should be from now through early winter. Natural gas prices are much lower than they were a year ago, significantly reducing fertilizer production costs— for now at least. If you don't = like the prices your fertilizer dealer quotes you this fall and early winter, do= n't expect them to be lower next spring.

  &nb= sp;            =             &nb= sp;            =

  &nb= sp;            =             &nb= sp;            =         — Ev Thomas, thomas@whminer.com

VET’S CORNER: BHBA TESTING
(FOR SUBCLINICAL KETOSIS) UPDATE

Seven years ago, our practice began to send serum samples to a university lab to = test groups of fresh cows for subclinical ketosis. As noted in a recent = Farm Report, an affordable, convenient cowside t= est is now commonly used. The cost of the ketone test = strips are less than the cost of laboratory testing, the results are known immediately, and we have confidence in the accuracy of the hand-held test.<= o:p>

<= /p>
The most common use of the test in our practice is during the initial and follo= w-up visits of a transition cow problem investigation. If the farm walk-around uncovers concern that subclinical ketosis could be predisposing cows to DAs= , metritis and other metabolic diseases; the BHBA meter= is used to confirm the diagnosis.

Twelve cows that are 5-25 days in milk and appear to be in normal health are place= d in headlocks and blood is drawn from the tail vein with a 1 ml TB syringe (sor= ry, the lancet provided for use on human finger tips doesn’t work on cow hide.) If only one cow tests high, the investigation proceeds to determine nutrition and management causes of ketosis.

The problem isn't considered to be solved until a subsequent group of cows test negative after going through an improved management program. A new use of the blood test has been to help with accurate diagnosis of Fatty Liv= er Syndrome which can complicate displaced abomasum cases. Veterinary clinicians have learned to use the BHBA test before doing surgery to help producers decide if a cow is a good candidate for the surge= ry. Some cows test so high that a slow recovery can be predicted and the producer can anticipate an extended treatment period or decide to send a cow with a poor prognosis to slaughter.

A potential use of BHBA blood testing could be in problem herds that are in t= he process of correcting diet or management of transition cows. For herds where sick cows turn up in the high production group shortly after moving from the fresh pen, some producers are testing every cow before she makes the move a= nd only graduate normal BHBA testing cows from the fresh pen to the high production group. This would only be used in addition to management improve= ment and not a permanent task.

        &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;            &= nbsp;            &= nbsp;          — Kent E Henderson, DVM

        &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;        Northwest Veterinary Associates, Inc.

        &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;            &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;             =             <= st1:PersonName w:st=3D"on">hugamoo@comcast.net

FINE-TUNING FERTILIT= Y

Soil is nothing if not variable. As part of ongoing research on a 2= 0 acre crop field at Miner, we evaluated the variation in soil test results in a 10 acre section currently in 2^nd year alfalfa-grass. The objective = was to evaluate the extent of fertility variation and determine whether creating different management zones might be economically advantageous. <= /span>

Soil samples along four transects at ten equally spaced locations were taken and composited = for soil test analysis. The resul= ts revealed that fertility varied widely across the field. Soil pH, soil test P, K, Ca, Mg, a= nd organic matter content all showed significant spatial autocorrelation, which means they depended on where we took the sample. A procedure called kriging generated maps for each soi= l test variable (the figure shows a ‘best fit’ map of soil test P leve= ls across the field).

This variation in fertility reflects historical differences in P & K inputs, soil type, and crop nutrient removal. Transects C & D had significan= tly greater soil test P and K compared to transects A & B. Because this field has high overall fertility, grouping the transects didn’t r= esult in different P & K recommendations (see Table). If we assume that the field had ha= d 50 % lower soil P & K, different P & K recommendations would result for = corn and alfalfa. This may seem tr= ivial, but these differences add up with acreage and will mean more when fertilizer prices increase. Though you’ll not likely take 40 samples in one field anytime soon, the mess= age is to sample larger fields by known sources of fertility variation such as changes in soil type, drainage or manure history. Taking one composite from each ‘side’ of this field would have given the same information. The average of the 40 samples gave= the same recommendation as one field composite. In this case we can easily fine-tu= ne P and K applications since the ‘manageable variation’ runs along = the field length. Plenty of fields won’t offer this, so take advantage of ones that might. The larger the field the better ch= ance of finding meaningful variation, and the greater chance of having over- and under-fertilized areas. This is why precision agriculture = pays such dividends on very large fields.

Clay soils have a much lower K need than coarser-textured soils, so determining if crop K needs vary by soil type in large fields might be money well spent.&nb= sp; Soil samples are cheap ($10- 15), fertilizer is usually not.

  &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;        — Eric Young, young@whminer.com

  =             &nb= sp;            =             &nb= sp;        — Jordi Bakovic, University of Massachusetts

WHAT’S HAPPENING ON THE FARM

Summer seems to b= e flying by, and it's hard to believe that corn season is upon us again! Our Summer Experience in Farm Management students have left, returning to college or starting a job. Before they left at the end of August, we took an afternoon= off from work for a field trip to several farms. Everyone arrived early to work= on Thursday morning and we flew through our daily chores (milking, cleaning ba= rns, feeding calves, fresh cow check, etc.) and also completed those jobs that o= nly occur on Thursdays – bST injections and d= rying off cows. By 10:15 a.m., we were showered, changed, and ready to head south on Interstate 87 for our farm visits.

Our first visit was to John and Denise Dickinson’s farm, Ideal Da= iry, in Hudson Falls, NY. Our connection to this farm = was through our nutritionist who also works with this 700-cow dairy. We purchased some animals from Ideal Dairy when we were expanding our milking = herd several years ago. Denise had just finished vet check when we arrived, and = she gave us a tour of the farm, taking us into several pens to show us some of their best cows.   Having selected for superior genetics for year= s, the farm has some beautiful animals that also are highly productive –=
the herd averages just under 3= 0,000 lbs.

We headed south to Salem, NY where we stopped to see = Battenkill Valley Creamery. They had just finished wa= shing down after a morning of bottling and Seth McEachron gave us a tour of the facility, explaining to us the whole process from delivery of the raw milk to the finished pasteurized, homogenized product r= eady for sale. The milk comes from the family farm just down the road, and Seth explained to us not only how the creamery got started, but also all the ste= ps they take to ensure a top quality product is sol= d to the public. In addition to selling milk in glass and plastic jugs,

they also make their own ice cream that they sell in the farm store in front of the creamery. Who can pa= ss up
real homemade ice cream?! Not us – we all had
some and agreed that it was delicious!!

Later in the afternoon, we got to see the rotary parlor at Woody Hill Farm, also = in Salem, = NY, where the cows are milked from the center of the rotary. While most of us h= ad seen a rotary parlor, few of us had seen this type of design, and couldn’t imagine how the cows entered and exited the carousel…n= ow we know and the cow flow was pretty smooth! Not only was it fun to get off = the farm to visit other dairy operations, but seeing other facilities and management practices gave us some good ideas to consider implementing back = at Miner Institute. If you are in our area, you are always welcome to stop by = and visit our farm!

=

            =             &nb= sp;            =             &nb= sp;          — Anna Pape, pape@whminer.com
&n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ; — Steve Couture, couture@whminer.com

HARVESTING FROSTED CORN FOR SILAGE

Even with some great corn-growing weather in August, the combination of tough spring planting conditions and a cool June/July has resulted in a lot of corn for silage that will be still in the field (and well below 30% DM) when the first frost occurs. Here are some suggestions for dealing with frosted corn:

Immature corn still has quite a bit of sugar in the plant. This acts like antifreeze, making milk-stage corn somewhat tolerant of a moderate frost. Even if the leaves g= et singed, as long as there's green leaf tissue--or even if only the stalk rem= ains green--the plant will continue to mature. Don't jump the gun after the first frosty night, but this depends on how much frosted corn you have to harvest= for silage.

Farmers often overestimate the drying effects of frost. They look at those crispy leaves = and start chopping. However, leaves are only about 10% of whole plant dry matte= r. Much of the moisture (and yield) is in the stalk, especially the bottom hal= f, and this often dries quite slowly. Harvest timing should be based on a dry matter test, not how the field looks from the seat of your pickup truck.

= Once the plant is dead, if the husks are still tightly wrapped around the ear st= art harvest ASAP. A tight husk cover holds in moisture, and under warm conditions ear molds can start within a w= eek after the plant dies.

A hard frost may k= ill many of the naturally-occurring fermentation bacteria in your fields, so us= ing a bacterial silage inoculant is highly recom= mended when ensiling frosted corn. (The same goes with alfalfa harvested after a killing frost.)

Make sure you get a forage analysis before starting to feed it. Compared to well-dented corn, immature corn is often higher in protein but always lower in starch = and energy. How much higher and lower? That's what you're testing to find out!<= o:p>

  &nb= sp;            =             &nb= sp;            =

  &nb= sp;            =             &nb= sp;            =         — Ev Thomas, thomas@whminer.com

FARMERS AND
THE INTERNET

I'm probably not the = best one to be writing about this topic since I had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the Computer Age: "Give up my Canon electric typewriter? Never! I don't need any &$%# computer!" I certainly haven't become= a techie: I don't twitter (or is it tweet? I hear that too much of that can m= ake you go blind), I don't text, and I've never used an ATM machine. However, arrive I did and now I have a hard time imagining how anyone in agriculture= can get along without a computer and Internet access. A high percentage of farmers use the Internet, mostly for business purposes (or so they claim): A recent USDA study reported that 81% of commercial farms (annual sales $250,000+) are now using the Internet. While 81% is good, it's hard to imagine any commercial-scale farmer not us= ing the Internet to track prices, get up-to-the-minute weather status, or locat= e a hard-to-find part. Apparently the remaining holdouts are stubborn as mules, since in the past two years the percentage of all farms with Internet use increased by only 2%.

The Farm Report = is available in both printed and electronic versions. We'll send you either, though the email version represents a lot less time and expense for us. If = you currently get this newsletter in printed form and would like to switch to t= he electronic version (which gets to you several days earlier each month), con= tact Rachel Dutil: dutil@whminer.co= m.

IS ORGANIC FOOD
MORE NUTRITIOUS?

No, it's not; at least that's the conclusion of= the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine after the most exhaustive re= view of pertinent research ever conducted. The researchers examined over 50,000 papers and found 162 articles published over a period of about 50 years that compared the nutrient contents of organically and conventionally grown food= s. They found no evidence that organically produced foods are nutrition= ally superior to those grown by conventional methods, which include the use of genetically modified crops and commercial fertilizers. Source: The American Jour= nal of Clinical Nutrition, July 2009

The study didn't incl= ude a review of possible pesticide residues. However, considerable research has been done on this subject, with little if any difference found in pesticide residues between organic and conventional crops — typically, no resid= ues in either. That's for crops grown in the U.= S.; I'd much rather eat conventionally-produced foods grown in the U.S. (or <= st1:place w:st=3D"on">Canada) than so-called "organic" foods grown in a country far from our shores (and far f= rom USDA food inspectors). Food safety regulations are quite strictly enforced = in the U.S, but the same cannot be said for some developing countries. =

        &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;            &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;            &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;             =

        =             &nb= sp;            =             &nb= sp;            =             &nb= sp;            =             &nb= sp;            =             &nb= sp;           &= #8212; E.T.

FERTILIZER BURN

In Pioneer's Walking Your Fields newsletter, Don S= pecker had some useful information on the injury potential of various fertilizers. Here's a slightly condensed version plus some Crop Dude comments:

=

Liquid fertilizer (10-34-0) is relatively safe--within limits. I'm not a fan of "pop-up" applications — fertilizer applied right in the seed furrow — but if you apply pop-up fertilizer, limit rates to a few gal= lons per acre. You say you've applied more than this in the past without any problems? That's probably because there was rain soon after planting. Fertilizer injury potential is greater when conditions are dry for an exten= ded period after planting. This doesn't usually happen in the Northeast, but I remember one dry spring in Co= nnecticut (Could it really have been 45 years ago?) when farmers applied their normal= 300 lbs/acre of 15-15-15, many using "split boot" planters. Conditions were dry at planting and remained so for several weeks. Some farmers had ov= er 50% plant loss and had to replant.

=

Note the higher injury potential of DAP vs. MAP. Even though it's a bit more expensive, MAP is preferred in starter fertilizers. Potash also has a moderately high injury potential because it's a salt, and salts can burn te= nder roots. That's why a complete liquid fertilizer (9-18-9) has more injury potential than 10-34-0. Urea tops the injury potential list, so limit the amount of urea in your starter fertilizers. Rule of thumb: For starter fertilizers, nitrogen + potash shouldn't exceed 100 lbs/acre. For instance,= 300 lbs/acre of 15-15-15 contains 45 lbs each of N and K₂O for a tot= al of 90 lbs. If the primary source of N is urea, keep the total of N + K_=
2O to 80 lbs or less.

=

  &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;            &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;            &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;            &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;            &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;            &= nbsp;    — E.T.

BUYING HAY

A wet summer has made= it almost impossible for many farmers in the Northeast to make high quality dry hay. Many dairymen think it's important to include a few pounds of high qua= lity hay in lactating cow rations, often chopped and included in the TMR. Since = good hay will be even harder than usual to find locally, more farmers may be buy= ing so-called "Western alfalfa". If you're one of these, don't buy a "pig in a poke": You'll be paying a fancy price for this hay, so = make sure you're getting what you pay for — with a digestibility analysis. This will almost certainly not be provided with the hay, so you'll h= ave to ask for one (lots of luck there) or submit a sample for digestibility analysis. Easier said than done, but with very low milk prices, do you want= to pay $200 or more per ton for Western alfalfa that looks good but was grown = in hot weather with flood irrigation, and therefore may have poor digestibility?

Rant alert: One problem I have with some hay judging cont= ests is that they that don't include digestibility analysis. Many of these are no more than beauty contests, just about worthless except perhaps for entertainment value. Without knowing the digestibility of the hay the judges are just guessing at true quality, even if they know crude protein and N= DF. Also, there's no attempt at linking forage qua= lity with economics. I've looked at a lot of these hay samples at various contes= ts, and from the length of the stems (very short) and NDF levels (very low) it's obvious that the alfalfa was cut and baled at about a two-week harvest interval. No farmer would harvest this to feed his livestock: The cost of harvest would far exceed the value of the forage. But this is the stuff tha= t so often wins. The University of Georgia's Marshall McCullough, who took a similarly dim view of hay judging contests, many years ago said to me in his syrupy Southern drawl: "That isn't hay, it's poultry feed."= ;

  &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;    — E.T.

FROM THE PRESIDENT’S DESK — ASSESSING COW COMFORT

Several indices h= ave been used to assess the comfort and well-being of dairy cattle. A successful ind= ex provides the consultant or farmer with a tool to quickly assess the comfort= of stalls and the cows using the stalls in a short time frame. I will summarize the most commonly used indices, their advantages and disadvantages. As you might guess, most indices of cow comfort have been developed for cows house= d in free-stall barns. But even though few indices exist to evaluate the comfort= of cows in tie stalls, obviously the design and comfort of tie stalls are just= as important as free stall comfort. In fact, tie stall comfort may be more important since the freedom to select a specific stall is removed from the = cow in the tie-stall system.

The Cow Comfort I= ndex (CCI) was first described over 10 years ago and remains the most commonly u= sed index. It is measured as the proportion of cows in contact with a stall that are actually lying down. The advantage of the CCI is that it estimates motivation to enter a free-stall and lie down and is useful for both free- = and tie-stall barns. A substantial limitation is that it is not associated with mean daily lying time and is insensitive at stocking rates much above 100% = of stalls. It remains useful as a simple index of stall comfort, but we must understand that it is not related to actual lying down time. Well managed free-stall systems should have a CCI greater than 85%.

The Stall Standin= g Index (SSI) was developed a few years ago at the University of Wisco= nsin in an effort to improve upon the CCI and measures the proportion of cows in contact with a stall that are standing (inverse of CCI). Unlike the CCI, increased SSI is actually associated with increased daily standing time. Knowing when cows are spending too much time standing is important because = of the strong positive relationship between standing and greater incidence of lameness. In well managed herds, the SSI should be less than 15 to 20% and = an SSI greater than 20% is associated with standing times in excess of 2 h/d a= nd lameness problems.

The Stall Use Ind= ex (SUI) was developed by California researchers to assess the proportion of cows within a pen that are lying do= wn divided by the cows within a pen who are not actively feeding. The SUI accurately reflects cow comfort within an overcrowded pen and reflects cows that are “wasting time” idling in alleys waiting for a stall to become available. Well managed herds should have a SUI of greater than 75%. Because

the SUI is sensitive= to changing stall stocking rates it should be the preferred comfort index at higher stocking rates. Really, the best assessment of overall cow comfort within a specific environment would be obtained by use of the SSI and the SUI togeth= er.

All indices of co= w comfort should be measured when cows are most motivated to lie down, typical= ly 1 to 2 hours after milking or approximately 2 hours before milking. Use of th= ese simple tools does not replace more in-depth analysis of cow comfort and sta= ll design on a dairy. But they do provide a quick and relatively accurate assessment of potential limitations in herd management that compromise cow comfort.

            =             &nb= sp;            =

            =             &nb= sp;            =            R= 12; Rick Grant, grant@whminer.com<= /i>

MINER INSTITUTE COOLS DRY COWS

Last week was a scorcher here in Chazy, with several= days in the high 80’s with high humidity. Luckily, we don’t have too many weeks of heat stress conditions. However, we have enough heat stress during the summer that heat abatement strategies are needed in our barns. F= ans are used in one side of our lactating barn to cool lactating cows, while fa= ns and sprinklers are used in the other side. We have fans and sprinklers in o= ur parlor holding area.

The dry cow barn is often a low priority for cooling on several dairies. Howeve= r, the dry cows shouldn’t be neglected since they experience many of the same physiological changes as lactating cows under heat stress conditions, = such as increased body temperature, increased respirations, and decreased intake. This summer we installed fans in our dry cow barn to reduce heat stress in = the far-off and close-up cows. Five 52” fans were installed about every 50’ over the sand-bedded freestalls. A to= tal of twenty-two 36” fans were installed about every 32’ at the feed = bunk associated with the sand-bedded freestalls, the= feed bunk associated with the bedded pack, and the bedded pack. The 36” fa= ns instead of the 52” fans were used to accommodate research needs to ha= ve small replicated bedded pack pens with similar heat abatement strategies. <= /span>

Our dry cows appeared reasonably cool and comfortable last week. We expect the investment in fans to payoff in the subsequent lactation. A California study found that adding fans and shades to an existing sprinkler system over a fe= ed bunk in a dry cow pen resulted in a profit of $8.92 per cow when the additi= onal costs of cooling equipment, electricity, and feed and the benefit of 3.1 lb= of milk per day during the first 60 days in milk were considered. We realize t= hat our cows probably experience less heat stress than cows in California so our return on investment= is probably less. However, there appears to be a consistent milk response in the subsequent lactation to dry cow cooling (Table 1). In addit= ion, a Mexico study showed improvements in reproductive performance (fewer days open and services per conception) and a Florida study found improvements in immune status in the subsequent lactation with = dry cow cooling.

Signs that your dry cows are experiencing heat stress include rapid swallow breathing or open mouth breathing, sweating, decreased intake, and increased body temperature. A quick way to make an assessment is to take a rectal temperature from 10 cows. If at least 7 of 10 cows have temperatures about 103°F, then cows are = probably experiencing heat stress. In addition, if at least 5 out of the 10 cows have greater than 100 breaths per minute, the cows are experiencing heat stress. It’s not too early to start thinking about heat abatement strategies = for your dry cows for next summer.

  &n= bsp;            = ;            &n= bsp;            = ;        — Heather Dann, dann@whminer.com