PBS Ag Live Answering Montana Ranching Questions
August 20, 2014 Comments are off Montana Stockgrowers Association
Share:

We hear about reduced inventories in beef cattle – what are the facts?

PBS Ag Live Answering Montana Ranching QuestionsGary Brester of the College of Ag has shared some of his research findings with Ag Live. To learn more about PBS’ Montana Ag Live program, visit their website. Submit your questions to be answered by MSU experts in future columns by emailing [email protected].

Inventories are, indeed, down in the US…increased support of crops has had some producers leaving cattle; even though cattle prices are up, a producer doesn’t see increased payoff until that cow is sold, but increased hay prices come long before that – some producers just can’t wait until day of sale; the age of producers is increasing; and technological changes haven’t helped cattle producers the way they might have helped crop producers (GPS, for example, has changed crop practices for many).

In the hog industry, structural change has almost eliminated hog cycles and cattle may be going the same route –a highly technological market has the power to change contracting practices or help establish alliances that haven’t traditionally existed.

In the US, if you compare numbers from 1999 to 2013, we have gone from about a 130 million head to just under 90 million…while Argentina has stayed at about 50 million, Australia is steady at  around 30 million and Canada is about 15 million.  Of that group, only the US has reduced numbers, but we are also the largest producer so that has ramifications worldwide.

Montana Ag Live Column is provided in cooperation with Montana PBS and Montana State University. To learn more, contact Dr. Gary Brester at MSU,

United States Department of Agriculture
July 30, 2014 Comments are off Montana Stockgrowers Association
Share:

USDA Reports Show Total Cattle and On Feed Inventory Declines

July 1 Cattle Inventory Down 3 Percent from 2012

All cattle and calves in the United States as of July 1, 2014, totaled 95.0 million head, 3 percent below the 97.8 million on July 1, 2012. This is the lowest all cattle and calves inventory for July 1 since the series began in 1973. After a year absence due to sequestration, the July Cattle report has been reinstated.

All cows and heifers that have calved, at 39.0 million, were down 2 percent from July 1, 2012.

  • Beef cows, at 29.7 million, were down 3 percent from July 1, 2012.
  • Milk cows, at 9.3 million, up 1 percent from July 1, 2012.

Other class estimates on July 1, 2014 and the changes from July 1, 2012, are as follows:

  • All heifers 500 pounds and over, 14.9 million, down 5 percent.
  • Beef replacement heifers, 4.1 million, down 2 percent.
  • Milk replacement heifers, 3.9 million, down 5 percent.
  • Other heifers, 6.9 million, down 7 percent.
  • Steers, weighing 500 pounds and over, 13.5 million, down 4 percent.
  • Bulls, weighing 500 pounds and over, 1.9 million, unchanged.
  • Calves under 500 pounds, 25.7 million, down 3 percent.
  • All cattle and calves on feed for slaughter, 11.6 million, down 6 percent.

The 2014 calf crop is expected to be 33.6 million, down 1 percent from 2013 and down 2 percent from 2012. Calves born during the first half of the year are estimated at 24.3 million, down 2 percent from 2013 and down 3 percent from 2012.

United States Cattle on Feed Down 2 Percent

Cattle and calves on feed for slaughter market in the United States for feedlots with capacity of 1,000 or more head totaled 10.1 million head on July 1, 2014. The inventory was 2 percent below July 1, 2013. The inventory included 6.46 million steers and steer calves, down 1 percent from the previous year. This group accounted for 64 percent of the total inventory. Heifers and heifer calves accounted for 3.60 million head, down 5 percent from 2013.

Placements in feedlots during June totaled 1.46 million, 6 percent below 2013. Net placements were 1.38 million head. During June, placements of cattle and calves weighing less than 600 pounds were 400,000, 600-699 pounds were 245,000, 700-799 pounds were 320,000, and 800 pounds and greater were 490,000.

Marketings of fed cattle during June totaled 1.85 million, 2 percent below 2013. This is the lowest fed cattle marketings for the month of June since the series began in 1996.

Other disappearance totaled 75,000 during June, 19 percent above 2013.

United States All Cattle on Feed down 6 Percent from 2012

Cattle on feed July 1, 2014, from all feedlots in the United States, totaled 11.6 million, down 6 percent from the 12.30 million on July 1, 2012. Cattle on feed in feedlots with 1,000 or more head accounted for 87 percent of the total cattle on feed on July 1, 2014, up slightly from July 1, 2012.

Released July 25, 2014, by the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), Agricultural Statistics Board, United States Department of Agriculture (USDA).

July 15, 2014 Comments are off Montana Stockgrowers Association
Share:

Montana Rancher Q and A: Cam Cooper, Talon Ranch

Camron “Cam” Cooper of Twin Bridges, Montana had her sights set on running a cattle ranch and about twenty years ago, she was able to accomplish that dream. Cam owns the Talon Ranch which is both a commercial and registered seedstock Angus operation. Cam’s heart reaches far beyond the borders of Montana. She is leaving her entire estate to the Angus Foundation and established a scholarship program to help the nation’s young cattle raisers. Today on the blog, we feature Cam…her work, her ranch, her generosity…

Cam Cooper Talon Ranch 2.jpg

Camron “Cam” Cooper at home on the Talon Ranch

How long have you been involved in ranching?

I got started on my own about 20 years ago. I was a newcomer to the cattle business. In 1996, I bought my first commercial cattle and a few registered Angus which I kept adding to. Then in 2003, I sold all the commercial cows and became completely a registered Angus seedstock operation.

Why did you want to get involved in the cattle business?

It’s in my genetics. I had a cowboy granddad in Missouri, and in the 1920s, he moved out to California. I was born there in 1939. When I was 4-years-old, he bought me my first horse and I was hooked. Many years later, I was looking for a good spot to retire and In 1994, I moved to Montana.

Why did you chose to settle in Montana?

I visited Montana several times for business and had always loved those trips. The state just seemed opened and away from it all. I knew this is where I wanted to retire.

It seems like there is good ranch community support in your area. Do you agree?

I didn’t know very much when I first got into the business, but luckily my neighbors and those involved in the Angus breed helped me quite a bit. They are all very passionate about Angus and its benefits for the national cowherd. I work with the Sitz Angus Ranch in Dillon…they’ve been terrific and a huge support system.

Cam Cooper Talon Ranch Sign.jpgWhat are some of things you’ve learned over the years?

There is a great need for flexibility in the cattle business. You can have the best plan in the world…the best breeding genetics, but sometimes, it just doesn’t turn out like you wanted. Instead of beating your head against the fence post, you better shift gears. There are a number of things you have no control over so learn to deal with it.

Do you have any advice for young people in the ranching business?

Every situation is different and you can’t generalize. Get experience first and define your goals and objectives. But be ready to use that flexibility. You can’t just do it by the seat your pants.

What are your favorite days on the ranch?

I love the calving season…especially at the beginning. It’s one of the most rewarding things. But the thing is, the reward comes from all the hard work you put into the rest of the ranch year…everything from the preparation of the breeding season, (making sure your genetics are set up properly for the herd because it ends up being like a chess game when selecting genetics) to the actual breeding season…and later, the calving season. It’s labor intensive and a 24-hour a day job. We not only have to monitor the calves, but also constantly check the health of the momma cows…often times in drastically cold weather.

What else would you like our readers to know about?

It’s important for ranchers to stand up for what they’re doing. We raise cattle properly…from animal care to land stewardship. We have to do our best, because if not, we’re out of business. We also want to create the most satisfactory experience for the beef consumer we can. It takes time, money and great effort.

Cam Cooper Talon Ranch Mountains.jpgTell us more about the future of your ranch and your scholarship program.

My estate in entirety is going to be left to the Angus Foundation to provide scholarships for students interested in animal husbandry and cattle business operations. The Talon Ranch Scholarship has been up and running for 5 years. It just is so gratifying to provide this money to students who may not have had another means to get an opportunity. It warms my heart.

A word of thanks from Milford Jenkins, Angus Foundation president:

“Cam’s undergraduate and graduate scholarships through her Angus/Talon Youth Educational Learning Program Endowment Fund in the Angus Foundation have literally transformed the lives of the outstanding and deserving youth selected to be the recipients of her prestigious scholarships. A consummate visionary, Cam has a keen understanding and appreciation for the importance of investing today in the next generation who will be tomorrow’s leaders of our beef cattle and agricultural related industries, communities, schools, states and nation.  The Angus Foundation, Angus/Talon scholarship recipients, their families and those that follow in the years to come whose lives will forever be enriched by Cam’s selfless philanthropy, will always owe her a huge debt of gratitude.  She truly is an inspiration to all of us!”

Enhanced by Zemanta
July 1, 2014 Comments are off Montana Stockgrowers Association
Share:

Montana Rancher Q&A Feature: Curt Pate on Stockmanship

8

Curt Pate at Stockmanship Clinic.

Many of us have had the pleasure of attending one of Curt Pate’s stockmanship and stewardship clinics, and today, we would like to feature him in our Montana Rancher Q&A spotlight. Curt has a keen eye for handling livestock, but also, a great ability to teach. He is a blessed with a wonderful family that supports him and has passion for cattle, too.

Tell us about your family’s history with ranching in Montana. 

My grandfather, Leonard Frank, was a cattle trader and a butcher in the Helena Valley, and owned several different small places there.  My wife Tammy’s kinfolk all ranched in the Ryegate area, and we currently own and live on a small place their along with a small place in Texas.

Please tell us about your current work in the cattle industry.

My focus and work is stockmanship and stewardship demonstrations and clinics.  I work in the U.S. and Canada.  I contract with the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association to help promote Beef Quality Assurance practices.

How did you become interested in livestock stewardship practices?

I have always worked with horses to get them to handling better, and when I started hearing about some things with cattle, it just made sense to get better. It has become a passion.  The two go so well together.

Why is it important for Montana’s ranchers, and ranchers across the country, to implement safe livestock handling procedures?

Profit, safety, and marketing to the consumer.  In that order.

Do you think working with family in business is a good idea? Why?

Mesa and Tammy Pate

Mesa and Tammy Pate

I think it is good if it is done right.  Ranching properly is very challenging.  There must be discipline and direction, and time management is so important.  It is a business that requires traditional skills that take time to develop, and technology to keep up with the world we are trying to keep up with and market our products.

What other work is your family involved with? 

My son Rial is one that stays out of the spotlight, but really cares about tradition, the environment, and working properly with animals. (And having a good time while he is doing it).

Mesa is very involved in the bucking bull business and has become very well known.  The thing that people don’t know is how hard she works.  She can do anything from drive a semi to rope bulls and drag them out of the arena.  She likes to write and is real good at promoting the western lifestyle.

My wife Tammy does horsemanship/yoga clinics, helps run my business and also is very involved in the bucking bull world.  She also builds boots, remodels houses, and is a great cook.

What would you say about the value of growing up on a ranch?

I just can’t see how anyone not growing up on a ranch or in agriculture can learn all the lessons needed to live a full life.  I think it may be why we have so many challenges facing society today.

What is one piece of advice you can offer to Montana’s young ranchers about running a successful business?

9Make sure your skill level is higher than your debt level.

What is one thing you wish beef consumers knew more about?

I wish they knew how important grazing animals are for sustaining our environment.  I can’t understand why something that nature has been doing for so long can be looked at as bad.

Is there anything else you’d like to share?

I think ranchers must remember that we are selling to a customer of our product.  We need to listen to what the customer is saying and provide what the customer wants.  We should all remember that people don’t have to eat beef, but want to eat beef.  It’s our job to produce what they want.  I think we can use tradition, technology and the strong moral values that Montana ranchers have to do just that.

For more information on Curt’s clinics, please visit his website by clicking here.

Enhanced by Zemanta
June 20, 2014 Comments are off Montana Stockgrowers Association
Share:

Feeding Weedy Hay: Implications for Future Weed Problems?

Rachel Endecott, MSU Extension Beef Cattle Specialist

In the past few years, many Montana beef cattle operations have purchased hay, sometimes from many counties away, and even from another country based on the Canadian hay that we’ve seen move south the past few winters! Some of that hay might have been fairly weedy, or have different weeds than are found in your area. Just how well do weed seeds survive after going through the digestive system of a ruminant?

A Canadian study from the early 1990s evaluated weed seed viability after 24 hours of rumen incubation for many common weeds. In general, they found that after 24 hours in the rumen, grass weed species were more adversely affected than broadleaf weed species. Many broadleaf weed species have harder seed coats than grass weed species, which was suggested to be the main reason for the difference between grass and broadleaf species. The table below summarizes the results of the study, comparing viability of seeds after 24 hours in the rumen versus a control group (no rumen exposure).Weed Species Treatment and Digestibility in Cattle Rumen Chart

The study also found that the diet the cow was on when the seeds were incubated in the rumen had an impact on some species’ seed viability. For example, wild oats and field pennycress were not impacted much by rumen incubation when the cow was consuming an all-forage diet, but when the cow was consuming a mixed diet of grain and forage, the viability of these weed seeds was dramatically reduced. This suggests that the lower pH environment in the rumen due to grain supplementation may have been better able to decrease seed viability.

What about noxious weeds? Are their seeds impacted by rumen exposure? Several different research projects at Montana State University have tackled this question over the years. Sheep, goats, and even mule deer have been used in these studies rather than cattle, since most cattle avoid grazing these weeds.

Sheep and mule deer were dosed with 5,000 spotted knapweed seeds, and then seeds were recovered from the manure. Less than 20% of the dosed seeds were recovered, and large variability existed in seed viability (0-26%), but it was always lower than the control (98%). In a study evaluating leafy spurge, 18% of dosed seeds were recovered, and sheep were found to be more effective than goats in decreasing seed viability (sheep: 14%, goats: 31%, control: 90% viability). Digestion of sulfur cinquefoil seeds by sheep and goats decreased viability of immature seeds by 92% and of mature seeds by 64%. The difference was attributed to the hardened seed coat of mature seeds limiting digestive impacts.

Weed seed viability is impacted by passage through the rumen to varying degrees. It is important to keep a close watch on areas where weedy hay was fed this winter to ensure proper and timely management of any weed infestations.

References:
Frost et al., 2013. Rangeland Ecology and Management. 66:51-55
Lacey et al., 1992. Weed Technology. 6:599-602.
Wallender et al., 1995. Journal of Range Management. 48:145-149

Enhanced by Zemanta
June 18, 2014 Comments are off Montana Stockgrowers Association
Share:

Inside Trade Agreements – The World Organization for Animal Health (OIE)

Editor’s Note: Part two of a series of articles (Part 1) in which we will look at trade and the organizations that set the standards for these agreements. The next article will focus on the Codex Alimentarius. Provided by the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association for educational purposes. By: Mallory Gaines, NCBA Policy Analyst, Cattle Health

As discussed in the first article in this series, trade is a fundamental part of America’s cattle industry and the NCBA supports free and fair trade based on internationally-accepted, sound science. The framework supporting this principal is the World Trade Organization, which relies on guidelines developed by groups like the OIE.

In 1995, with the establishment of the WTO, the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures entered into force. The purpose of the SPS Agreement was to ensure member countries that their consumers were being supplied with food that is safe to eat, but what is considered safe by international standards? The SPS agreement sets out the basic rules for food safety and animal and plant health standards, allowing countries to build upon this foundation to set their own standards. However, the agreement dictates that those standards and regulations must be based on science. This basis on science separates protection from protectionism. The World Organization for Animal Health, known by its French acronym OIE, is one body that sets those scientific standards.

Established in 1924, the OIE started with 28 countries. The U.S. joined in 1976, and in 1994, the OIE was designated by the WTO as the scientific reference body for animal health. Today the OIE has 178 member countries, with one country – one vote. The OIE collects and disseminates information on disease events, harmonizes health standards for trade in animals and animal products, and provides guidance for disease control and eradication. But today, the OIE is expanding with new mandates, and looking at developing guidelines on animal welfare, food production and safety, and helping member countries improve their veterinary services.

The OIE enforces strict reporting obligations for member countries for listed diseases.  For routine diseases TB and blue tongue, annual and six-month reporting is required. For emergency or foreign animal disease the requirements are for immediate reporting, within 24 hours of confirmation. This applies to FMD, vesicular stomatitis, and BSE.

The OIE is made up of four specialist commissions.  NCBA works most closely with the commission which develops the standards and recommendations for the safe trade of animals and animal products. Moreover, this commission oversees the work on animal welfare and food production and food safety.

As a member country, the U.S. participates at various levels, preparing the U.S. position based on science, sending official comments and working within our Region to build consensus. The OIE played a major role in our trade relationship with the first case of BSE in the U.S. in 2003.  Their recognition of the U.S. as “controlled risk” for BSE helped our negotiators to rebuild foreign market share following market closures and protectionist attitudes. In May of 2013, with the work of USDA APHIS, the risk status was upgraded to “negligible risk” which further helped in gaining market share lost in the Pacific Rim, including Japan. And it is based on the standards out of the OIE that we continue to press for greater access to countries like China, Russia and Korea.

At the end of May, NCBA will attend the annual meeting of the OIE as part of the U.S. delegation. The OIE will adopt a chapter to the code of Terrestrial Animal Health and work on other policy issues. The official U.S. delegate to the OIE is Dr. John Clifford, USDA Chief Veterinary Officer, but the delegation often relies on the expertise of industry in crafting their recommendations and comments. It is important for all cattle producers that NCBA ensures the concerns of our members are addressed at the OIE and to ensure that standards considered and passed fit the needs of our industry. This will become all the more important as this body moves on to consider issues like animal welfare, on farm food safety practices and antimicrobial resistance.

June 10, 2014 Comments are off Montana Stockgrowers Association
Share:

Inside Trade Agreements – World Trade Organization (WTO)

Beef Offal Export Values World Trade OrganizationEditor’s Note: Part one of a series of articles in which we will look at trade and the organizations that set the standards for these agreements. The next article will focus on the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE). Provided by National Cattlemen’s Beef Association for educational purposes.

Trade is a fundamental part of America’s cattle industry, and with new pacts on the horizon like the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Transatlantic Trade Investment and Promotion agreement the beef industry is poised to take advantage of greater opportunities ahead. Ninety-six percent of the world’s population lives outside of United States’ borders, and it is critical to capitalize on these foreign markets to maximize profit margin. Beef demand looks different across the world, and foreign markets drive demand and increase profitability for beef cuts that are less popular here in the states, drivers our cattle industry can capitalize on. In 2013, trade brought home more value to the producer than ever in the past – $307 per head or $6.15 billion total. This premium underlines the value of trade for all segments of our industry. And the major regulator of these opportunities is the World Trade Organization.

The WTO has a long history in international trade. Its formation reaches back to the Treaty of Versailles and the end of World War I, with the establishment of the League of Nations. After World War II, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade was formed. And in 1995 with the Uruguay Round of trade negotiations, under the age is of the GATT, the WTO was formally created to discuss and negotiate the further development of trade rules and seek peaceable resolution to trade disputes. With its history in war, the main function of the WTO then as now, is to ensure that trade flows as smoothly, predictably and freely as possible.

To secure these market opportunities, countries work through the WTO. The WTO was built around trade agreements which were negotiated and signed by many of the world’s leading trade nations. These documents provide the legal ground rules for international commerce. They are essentially contracts, binding governments to keep their trade policies within agreed limits. Although negotiated and signed by governments, the goal is to help producers of goods and services, exporters, and importers conduct their business, while allowing governments to meet social, environmental and safety objectives.

Economic development and well-being is dependent upon free trade and as such, the WTO’s overriding purpose is to help trade flow as freely as possible — so long as there are no undesirable side effects. That partly means removing obstacles and ensuring that individuals, companies and governments know what the trade rules are around the world, and giving them confidence and security without fear of sudden policy changes.

Which brings us to the point of why WTO is important and what their role is in international trade. The NCBA does not necessarily work with WTO directly; we work with our government, the U.S. Trade Representative and the governments of other nations affected by decisions at the WTO. But the WTO makes many of their trade decisions based on standards set by other organizations. WTO gives these organizations credence by recognizing the standards they set. These organizations, like the World Organization for Animal Health, known by its French acronym OIE, and Codex Alimentarius, set the precedent that WTO looks at and that the cattle industry can use as a guide for animal health and food safety.

When our membership calls for free and open trade based on internationally recognized science, OIE and Codex provide the science that underlies that notion. And that is where NCBA works. Over the past several years and through the next months, we will be attending meetings and submitting comments and documents to ensure that the standards set on the global level for animal health and welfare and food safety are in line with the most recent science and that these standards work for the U.S. cattle industry.

An example would be a beef trade dispute with a country that refused to accept U.S. beef that was at any time fed a beta-agonist. Codex, has a set maximum residue level, or MRL, for certain beta-agonists in meat based on the scientific evidence presented by a varied committee of nations, experts and researchers. Since this level has been recognized internationally, it would be among the standards used if the U.S. were to take up a case against that country’s action at the WTO. And that is the type of action that preserves our ability to trade openly with other nations.

Of course not all WTO disputes are based on sound science. There are many other barriers to trade that the U.S. beef industry works with. There is protectionism both domestic and abroad. Policies like COOL, that discriminate against our trading partners and threaten retaliatory action against our beef exports to Canada and Mexico, which alone make up one-third of our total beef exports. And as with other trade disputes, the WTO is not the only way to work out our differences. As with our relations with China, Japan, the European Union and others; the decisions on how to move forward involve not only the possibility of enforcement at the WTO, but diplomacy and leadership through the Administration and our ambassadors and attachés. But we will continue to work with all of these groups to ensure we can provide the same great high-quality beef we raise and produce here in the U.S. to our customers across the world.

Enhanced by Zemanta
June 9, 2014 Comments are off Montana Stockgrowers Association
Share:

Northeast Montana Update | Bakken and ranchers

By Jim Steinbeisser. Sidney, Northeast Region Director

jim steinbeisser, sidney montanaBy the end of May, spring is finally underway! This sure is a great time to be in the cattle business, isn’t it? Strong cattle markets and with that, positive balance sheets for our individual businesses, give us an opportunity to reevaluate where we focus our resources.

Being from the Sidney area in the heart of the Bakken oil boom, I am asked occasionally what it is like to ranch in the middle of all that. I will say it is mostly good. The economy of the area is certainly strong! We have many buildings going up, more businesses starting and more people coming to live here. However, there is a down side. The roads are busier than I would like although after the initial drilling, the traffic does lessen. Crime has increased some and housing is in short supply but even now, it is starting to catch up. Overall, it is a net benefit for our communities. As drilling expands to areas not very experienced with the oil activity, I would encourage landowners and renters to talk to folks who have already been through the process of leases, easements, etc. You do not need to make all the mistakes that have been made by ranchers in the past. Just pick up your phone and call. It could be very helpful!

Being on the MSGA board now for the second year, I can really see the issues that need to be and are being addressed. Your very competent staff is not only working on the front-page issues that we read about or hear about but also working on the smaller, lesser-known issues that are equally important. The board members, officers and staff take all the challenges that we, as an industry face very seriously. Everyone is encouraged to contact us with any concern they may have or just to share their thoughts on a matter. We really are working to build an even better communication channel between the leadership and the members of this great organization.

The newly developed AMP (Affiliate Mentorship Program) will also help us with building dialog with our affiliates. Please get to know the program and its benefits. It is worth knowing, for example, that there is the Affiliate Top Hand Club where your local affiliate can win a John Deere Gator, generously donated by Frontline Ag! Be sure to check the newsletter or our website for all the details! I hope to see you in Miles City for our Mid-Year Meeting in June 13 & 14. It will be a grand time with good meetings and good fun.

Enhanced by Zemanta
May 22, 2014 Comments are off Montana Stockgrowers Association
Share:

Board of Livestock Indefinitely Tables Action on Bison Environmental Assessment

Montana Department of Livestock DOLThis week the Board of Livestock met in Helena for their May meeting. One of the major items on the agenda was to review proposals from Fish, Wildlife and Parks (FWP) and the Department of Livestock (DOL) on an Environmental Assessment that would allow more tolerance of Yellowstone bison on its western boundary.

Click here to listen to this podcast on SoundCloud.

Since the beginning of the Bison Environmental Assessment, MSGA has submitted extensive written comments supporting a no action alternative. The Board of Livestock (BOL), during its three previous meetings in January, March and now May, have also discussed this Environmental Assessment in great detail. In particular, there was an addendum to the EA, which allowed for a population objective that would trigger whether or not Yellowstone bison could come into the state of Montana.

We were very pleased today that the BOL voted unanimously to table indefinitely the subject of the bison EA. While MSGA was very grateful that the DOL, FWP and the Governor’s office were very transparent and allowed us to have adequate input into this proposal and hear our suggestions quite seriously, we still are not able to support the proposal as it was written.

MSGA has continued a close working relationship with the DOL on issues that are important to ranchers across the state of Montana. Moving forward we will be working with the state agencies on a future IBMP plan and encourage ranchers across the state to work with MSGA to provide their input.

Brucellosis in the state of Montana is not going to go away anytime soon. The big call to action for the ranching community and the members of MSGA is to think critically about how to manage the complexity of this issue of brucellosis as it persists in Yellowstone bison, migratory elk, and how it affects our ability to raise commercial cattle in southwestern Montana.

In the next several months and years to come, the state of Montana is going to be engaging in a full-fledged Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to rewrite the Interagency Bison Management Plan (IBMP) from its current version, which was adopted in 2000. Under this process, Governor Bullock and the administration will be taking the lead on what the inputs to this plan will look like from the state of Montana’s perspective. MSGA certainly looks forward to engaging proactively in the process and getting input from our stakeholders at all levels so that we can provide credible information into how to best develop a management plan or bison as relates to the state of Montana.

One of the most immediate and best ways to engage in this conversation is to attend MSGA committee meetings, in particular our Cattle Health subcommittee, which will be meeting in Miles City on June 14. Our team will be having a very comprehensive discussion about brucellosis in bison and elk, as well as our own designated surveillance area for the state of Montana. Ranchers may also send or e-mail your comments to MSGA office and let us know your thoughts on how we can best develop a more comprehensive management plan for the state of Montana at all levels of the brucellosis debate.

For more information on attending our June policy meetings, you can go to the website, mtbeef.org, and find details on our Mid Year meeting in Miles City. We can also be reached by phone at (406) 442-3420.

Enhanced by Zemanta
April 24, 2014 Comments are off Montana Stockgrowers Association
Share:

Montana Ranching FAQ | Copper Deficiency in Cattle

PBS Ag Live Answering Montana Ranching QuestionsWhat questions do you have about ranching in Montana? We’re teaming up with Montana PBS’ Ag Live program to bring you the answers. The Ag Live program from Montana PBS teams up with experts from Montana State University Extension to discuss everything from pesticide use and agricultural techniques involved in ranching and the cattle business. We ask that you submit questions to [email protected]. These questions will be answered by PBS and MSU Extension, then published in our monthly Digital Newsletter.

Q: The hair coat on my black cows is turning red. My veterinarian said something about minerals. Can you help me?

A: The first visible sign of a copper deficiency in cattle is often a bleaching of the hair coat, which may result in a change to a red/brown color in black-haired cattle. Copper deficiencies may result from a primary deficiency, where copper itself is deficient in the diet, or from a secondary deficiency, which can result when dietary concentrations of copper are adequate, but absorption of copper is limited by the interference of other minerals, such as molybdenum, sulfur, or both. High dietary iron can also reduce copper absorption.

Copper is a critical mineral in the immune and reproductive systems, so if an imbalance is suspected, it is important to investigate further. Samples of forage (grazed pasture, hay, etc.) should be sent to a laboratory for a full mineral screen to determine whether a primary or secondary deficiency is at hand. Once results are obtained, an alteration to the mineral supplementation plan may be in order. Your local county Extension agent can help you with forage sampling, analyses, and interpretation of results.

This week’s question was answered by Rachel Endecott, MSU Extension Beef Cattle Specialist.

Related information:

Enhanced by Zemanta