A quarterly news publication of The Ohio State University Extension, Editors: Clif Little and Mark Sulc
Click here for past issues of this publication.
Click here to subscribe to an e-mail version of Amazing Graze.

Contents:

• Bale Cost
• The Ohio Pasture Measurement Project
• Brassicas
• Pasture vs Confinement Lamb Finishing

[top] Bale Cost - Clif Little, Extension Educator, Guernsey County

Recently, a local hay producer asked what hay worth was. Of course, each forage producer will have a different cost of production. After he told me his price, I asked the weight of his bales. He was not exactly sure but guessed 1000 pounds. He went on to say that most hay is bought and sold by the bale. He stated that, most articles he reads mentioning price or cost are on a per ton basis. This farmer’s comment provoked a couple of pertinent questions. First, what is the cost of not knowing the weight of a bale? Second, what is forage value based on current feed prices?

To answer the first question I went to the USDA Farm Service Agency. In the past couple of years, they have been weighing many large round bales due to the forage quantity and quality loss programs and conducting yield checks. The weight of large round bales checked in Noble and Guernsey counties ranged from approximately 750 pounds to 2100 pounds. Obviously, bales vary in size, moisture content, and tightness. If we guess the weight of a bale at 1000 pounds and overestimate its weight by 100 pounds per bale, and purchase 50 bales at $50 per bale what did it cost?

Example: 50 bales X 100 lbs. = 5000 pounds of hay we thought to be purchasing $50/900lbs = .0555 or 5.5 cents per pound of hay 5000 lbs. X .0555 = $277.50 we lost by not knowing an accurate weight of the bales.

On the other hand, if we find legitimate 1000 lb. bales for sale of like quality and dry matter at the same price as the 900 lb. bales we could potentially pay ourselves $277.50. Whenever possible weigh a sampling of hay bales before purchasing, consider bale spoilage, and obtain a forage analysis. As we can see when comparing the best value in hay, weight is an important consideration. However, the most important factor influencing forage value is quality. Let us look at how quality affects value.

Using the University of Missouri-Columbia, FEEDVAL III: Comparative values calculated from Crude Protein, Net Energy Gain, Calcium, and Phosphorus, we can put a value on forages based on the quantities of the above-mentioned nutrients and local prices for corn, soybean meal, feed-grade limestone and dicalcium-phosphate. Current and local prices for energy, protein, calcium and phosphorus were utilized to establish forage values based on nutrient content of mature grass hay on an “as fed” per ton basis (Table 1).

Bottom-line: It has never paid more to understand the quality and quantity of the forage you are purchasing and feeding. Forage value and price will be high this winter. Know your cost of production; know when to buy hay, and when to make it. Seriously consider how you will bring your livestock though the winter months. Plan now while there is still time to impact forage quantity and quality.

[top]The Ohio Pasture Measurement Project - Jeff McCutcheon, Extension Educator, Knox County

The Ohio Pasture Measurement Project was started in 2005 to help producers understand the value of timely measurement of their forages.

Objectives

1. Provide a source of current, objective information on the relative performance of forages growing in Ohio accessible to producers across the state.
2. Demonstrate the use of pasture measurement/monitoring to aid in the management of grazing.

Methods

• Graziers from across Ohio measure at least one pasture field each week during the grazing season.
• Measurements are taken before and after grazing or clipping of that field.
• Measurements are taken with a commercially available rising plate meter.

Currently there are 16 graziers across the state of Ohio who measure the same field each week and report the results. Some measure more than one field. See figure 1. for their approximate locations.

The results of their measurements are reported weekly as a summary of daily growth on the Forage Team’s blog located at http://ohioforage.blogspot.com. Results are reported in pounds of dry matter grown per day per acre. This allows for differences in reporting dates. Basically each cooperator takes the measurements when they can. Since that is not all on the same day the growth per day is calculated for the time period between the measurements.

So how are pastures growing? If we compare the same weeks for the last four years, pasture growth does not look too bad. Growth has slowed compared to 2005 and 2006, but is better than 2007.

If we look at the growth curve for our cool season grasses that says 20% of our total growth comes in May and 19% comes in June, then apply the ‘standard’ planning number for Ohio that says we produce 3.5 tons of forage from our pasture. Based on that calculation we should be growing an average of 45 lbs/ac/day in May and 44 lbs/ac/day in June.

So how could you use this information? Evaluating, measuring and observing pasture growth can give valuable information during a grazing season to help you make management decisions. You know how much your animals eat on a daily basis. Using pasture growth measurements can help you evaluate; the rotation in your grazing system, if a change in stocking density is needed, if planting alternative forages would help or even if fertilizer would be beneficial before the need for more forage and when there is adequate soil moisture to still grow more forage.

[top]Brassicas- Chris Penrose, Extension Educator, Morgan County

Extending the grazing season to reduce costs is critical for ruminant livestock producers’ economic viability. About 60 percent of forage growth from traditionally grazed cool season grasses and legumes in Ohio occurs within a two month period in the spring. Feed costs account for over 90 percent of the variable costs on many cow-calf operations and the major portion of the cost is for hay production. Recent increases in materials such as fuel, fertilizer and metal for equipment have sent the cost to produce stored forages higher.

There are several low cost options to lower stored feed costs. Stockpiling forages is one of the best options, but there are several other options that have a niche. One of these include the brassica (turnips, rape, kale, swedes, etc.) family. Many studies and producer experiences reinforce that brassicas are a viable option to extend the grazing season, and reduce stored feed costs.

Forage brassica crops such as turnip, swede, rape and kale can be spring seeded to supplement perennial forages in late summer, or more commonly, summer seeded to extend the grazing season into early winter. Brassicas are annual crops which are highly productive and digestible and can be grazed 70 to 150 days after seeding, depending on the species.

Generally crops which produce roots or bulbs will out-yield those which do not produce edible roots. Whether the roots can be efficiently utilized by the species of livestock, and the manner of harvesting will be considerations in determining which species will be best suited for a particular use. Sheep are more efficient at grazing roots than cattle. With the upper set of teeth, sheep can chew on most of the root and leave only the bottom part of the root. Cattle can actually pull the entire plant out of the ground when grazing if the plant is at the right stage of growth (not too mature or immature) because most cultivars have the majority of the roots above ground. Cattle and sheep can make good use of both the tops and roots when strip grazed. This grazing method greatly reduces the waste from trampling.

One of the advantages of brassicas is that it is a high quality, high yielding, fast growing crop that can be planted late in the growing season, especially if a deficit in winter feed is anticipated. Both tops (stems plus leaves) and roots can be grazed and are very nutritious. Brassicas can be seeded (1) in the early spring for summer grazing or (2) in July or August for fall/winter grazing. All members of the brassica family - turnips, rape, kale, and swedes - produce forage of exceptionally high (often 85-95%) digestibility. Weight gains by stocker cattle and feeder lambs have been 0.2 to 0.4 lb/day for lambs and 1.5 to 2.0 lb/day for stockers.

Turnips and rutabagas are short-season root brassicas that provide roots, stem and leaf growth for rotational grazing or strip grazing 70 to 90 days after seeding. The leaves can be grazed from mid-September until January depending upon critical low temperatures and snow cover. Top growth generally will survive temperatures between 15-20 degrees F, while bulbs will be about 5 degrees hardier. If temperatures fall below this level, it is best to try to graze prior to temperatures going above freezing. The plants tend to become mushy and undesirable. A notable exception based on research in Illinois (Ballard, 1999) has been when brassicas are planted with other annual crops such as spring oats (planted in the late summer). Brassicas survived much colder temperatures when there was considerable protection from a tall stand of oats and a snow cover.

The common purple top garden type turnip as well as other cultivars can yield over 10,000 lb/acre of dry matter. The tops average 12-20% crude protein while roots contain 8-12% protein. Maximum quality of the plants occurs around 75 days (purple top turnips tend to mature earlier than other cultivars) and maximum quality is around 90 days as the roots mature (but the tops start to decline). At maturity, dry matter yields average around 40% in the tops and 60% in the roots. Some forage-type turnip cultivars such as All Top produce relatively more top dry matter than roots. Turnips are seeded from mid July to mid August at a rate of 2-3 lb/acre and produce maximum yields approximately 90 days after seeding.

While brassicas have been successfully used for centuries for livestock feed, the following precautions should be noted. Brassicas are very high in crude protein and energy, but extremely low in fiber. Their low fiber content results in rumen action similar to when concentrates are fed; thus the need for proper roughage supplementation. Brassicas therefore should never comprise more than two-thirds of the forage portion of livestock diets with the remainder provided by grass hay or stockpiled pasture. Strip grazing where forage is rationed every day or two provides the most efficient usage. Rape, kale and mustard have regrowth potential if not grazed below six inches. Turnips will regrow if the growing point at the top of the bulb is not removed. Two or more cycles should be possible with rotational grazing if rainfall is adequate. Rapes, kale and mustard can be green chopped for confined animals.

No-tillage seeding in sod is recommended, but competition from the sod must generally be controlled by herbicides during the first two weeks after emergence. Broadcast spray a burndown herbicide prior to seeding. Once established, brassicas will smother out most weeds. They also can be seeded with rye or oats which will help protect the soil after brassicas are consumed by animals and provide a more balanced diet.

In conclusion, brassicas offer a means for livestock producers to produce high quality forage either (1) during the critical summer period of slowed pasture growth and/or (2) to extend grazing into the late fall-early winter period. The rapid growth and yield potential make the crop an excellent option, especially when a shortage of feed is anticipated.

[top]Pasture vs Confinement Lamb Finishing- Clif Little, Extension Educator, Guernsey County

Introduction
When wether and ewe lambs are fed free choice concentrates during the finishing phase and supplemented both on pasture and in the barn, how will growth rates compare? Will wether lambs grow faster than ewes, will being inside provide an advantage and how will the use of an ionophone impact growth?

In September of 2007 we decided to evaluate these questions on finishing lambs at the Eastern Agriculture Research Station (EARS) in Belle Valley, Ohio.

For this trial we compared the use of four different concentrate supplements fed in two replicates in the barn and two outside on pasture. Comparisons were made between male and female growth rates and feed efficiency.

Methods
Lambs were randomly assigned to feed groups and separated by sex. Four ad lib concentrate rations were evaluated and replicated twice in the barn and on pasture. Lambs were fed in a total of sixteen pens of five individuals each. All lambs were born in May 2007, weaned in August, vaccinated for C,D and T, and de-wormed prior to the start of the trial. Distribution by weight ranges were made across groups. The pasture consisted of unfertilized, stockpiled fescue and white clover. A cattle creep feeder was utilized to provide feed on pasture. Paddock size was approximately 1/3 acre each. Lambs finished in the barn were on a manure pack with approximately 38 square feet per lamb, open-fronted barn, and provided free choice hay and concentrate, via a gravity flow feeder. All lambs were provided with free choice water and minerals.

Lambs were started on test September 27th and taken off test December 4th, 2007. Both start and end weights were recorded (Table 2).

Results
For this project a statistical analysis using a completely randomized design was utilized.

Hypothesis: (1, 2, 3)

1. Lambs fed the same ration on pasture and in the barn will not have a rate of gain and feed efficiency (F/G) that is significantly different.
   
   Results indicated feed type was highly significant (P<.001), but location (inside or outside) had a probability of P=.1109 and thus little effect on average daily gain (ADG). Feed per pound of gain was significant at a P=.0004 (Table 1).


2. Lambs supplemented with an ionophone will have a significantly improved feed efficiency when compared to groups of lambs not supplemented with an ionophone.
   
   Results demonstrated that ionophone status did make a significant improvement in feed per pound of gain, P=.0197 (Table 1).


3. There is no significant difference in rate of gain and feed per pound of gain between males and females.
   
   Results showed that neither ADG (P=.6470) or F/G (P=.9801) were affected by lamb sex (Table 2).

Discussion
Animal performance at this location and for these lambs was not significantly different when self-fed on pasture or in the barn. However, it appears that feed efficiency could become a concern in foul weather as potentially more feed can be wasted outside. Ionophones did significantly increase feed efficiency in both males and females and was a cost effective measure to improve animal performance (Table 1). Based on the feeds used at this location, males and females gained equally well during this phase of finishing (Table 2). Feeding lambs outside with a self-feeder is an inexpensive option for finishing lambs. However, feed wastage due to spoiling is a concern and producers should protect feed from excess moisture. Feed cost calculations are based on the amount of concentrate fed and does not account for pasture, hay, or death loss. Two lambs in the SH 101 groups, one lamb in an inside group, and one in an outside group died of acidosis. The 2008 feed prices will be significantly higher than 2007.

Feed Tags