February 24, 2015 Comments are off Montana Stockgrowers Association
Share:

The Case for Relative Forage Quality When Feeding Cattle Hay

Emily Glunk Montana State Forage ExtensionBy Emily Glunk, MSU Extension Forage Specialist

Feeding represents a large portion of the production and maintenance cost of animals. Some estimate that feeding can represent over 70% of the annual costs of maintaining a livestock herd, with hay representing a significant portion of that cost. Making sure that we are buying quality feedstuffs, and feeding in appropriate amounts, is critical in ensuring that we are being as economical as possible. In recent years, the cost of hay has increased significantly, and so efficient purchasing is critical.

A hay analysis is key in knowing the quality of the hay, how much to feed our animals, as well as being helpful in the buying process. Tools such as Relative Feed Value (RFV), which can be found on a hay analysis, have traditionally been used to compare hay. RFV uses fiber estimates, the acid detergent fiber (ADF) and neutral detergent fiber (NDF) portions of a hay analysis, to estimate the quality of the hay. This has been helpful in comparing between two types of similar hays, i.e. comparison of two alfalfa or two grass hays, however, it does not tell us everything about the availability of the fiber or other nutrients in that hay.

Several years ago, University of Wisconsin researchers developed a new method of comparison, called Relative Forage Quality, or RFQ. This value takes into account not only the fiber components of the plant, but the digestibility of those components as well. This tool is extremely helpful in telling us a little more about what may be available to the animal to use from that forage.

The ADF portion of a plant analysis is an estimate of the cellulose and lignin portion of the plants, cellulose being slowly fermented by the rumen or hindgut microbes before it can be converted into energy for the animal. Lignin is indigestible by both mammalian and microbial enzymes, and so is completely unavailable to the animal. Because it includes the parts of the plant that are relatively indigestible, ADF has been found to be negatively correlated to digestibility of plant material. This means that as ADF increases, digestibility of the plant decreases.

The NDF portion of a plant includes both cellulose and lignin, similar to ADF, but also includes hemicellulose, a fiber that is fermented more rapidly than cellulose by microbial enzymes in the hindgut or rumen. NDF has been found to be negatively correlated to intake, so as NDF increases, intake will decrease. This is largely a function of gut fill, so as an animal consumes a more fibrous feed, it will take less to fill up the gastrointestinal tract, thereby decreasing intake.

The problem with RFV is that it does not evaluate the availability of the nutrients. On average, a grass will typically have more fiber than a legume. However, the fibrous portion of grasses are  usually more digestible than the fibrous portion of a legume. Relative forage quality, RFQ, was developed to help account for that, using total digestible nutrients (TDN) in the calculations. This will be a better indicator of what is available to the animals and the microbes within that animal to use, and convert to energy. RFQ is typically going to be higher in grasses than the RFV value, while legumes may slightly decrease.

RFQ and RFV are also a great means of evaluating who got a “better deal”. Typically, if the RFQ ends up being higher than the RFV, then we say that the buyer got a better deal. This is because initially, with RFV, we may have thought that the forage was more indigestible than it actually it, which was shown in the RFQ. If the RFQ is lower than the RFV, we like to say that the seller got the better deal, as the forage was higher in indigestible fiber, so less is going to be available to the animal to use.

It must always be kept in mind that both RFV and RFQ are to be used only as a comparison between hays, its purpose is not to aid in ration balancing, but as an evaluation and buying tool. For any questions, please contact Emily Glunk, MSU Extension Forage Specialist, at 406.994.5688 or [email protected].

October 8, 2014 Comments are off Montana Stockgrowers Association
Share:

Flooding Rains cause issues in Montana hay

Emily Glunk Montana State Forage ExtensionProvided by Emily Glunk, PhD, Forage Extension Specialist and Assistant Professor, Montana State

After the large amounts of rain received throughout Montana in recent days, we have been receiving reports of heating and molding of hay bales stacked and stored outside. Rain can be detrimental at several points of the haying process, including after storage. It will increase the amount of wasted hay, due to molding and quality issues, as well as pose a safety hazard due to fire and health risks.

Problems following heating and water damage of hay include decreased quality, increased waste, and molding. Generally, the larger and more dense the bale of hay, the greater chance for heating and storage losses. Large round bales and large square bales are more susceptible than small square bales to losses and spontaneous combustion.

Rained on hay can cause increases in the internal temperature of the bale, which can then lead to spontaneous combustion. An Oregon report stated that the bottom bales of large stacks of hay stored outside had soaked up a large amount of moisture from the ground after a heavy rain, causing heating and internal combustion in the hay stack.

Spontaneous hay fires usually occur within six weeks of baling, however when external moisture such as heavy rain is added, issues can arise outside of that timeframe. Increases in bale moisture increase microbial activity, with heat as a by-product. It is typical to see temperatures peaking 3 to 7 days post-rainfall, but should return to normal by 60 days. This will depend on factors such as relative humidity, bale density, and amount of rainfall received. The longer it takes for the bale temperature to return to normal the more likely for a fire or significant damage will occur to the hay.

When available, a bale thermometer will be the most accurate estimate of internal bale temperature. Ensure that the thermometer can read up to 200⁰ F and is long enough to reach the middle of the bale. If a thermometer is not available, an easy way to test the temperature of your bale is to stick a crowbar or a metal rod into the middle of the bale and keep it there for approximately 10 minutes. When the crowbar is removed, it should cool to the touch. If it is warm to the touch, then it is an indication of internal heating and should be taken care of immediately. If the crowbar is too hot to touch, this indicates that spontaneous combustion could be imminent. All stacked bales should be spread out, to allow for as much air movement through and around the bale as possible. (See Table below)

Round Bale Fire Temps

Beyond possible spontaneous combustion, there are other quality losses associated with rained-on hay, especially hay that continues to sit in water. When hay begins to heat due to additional moisture, some of the proteins become unavailable for digestion due to binding with fiber, and is known as acid detergent insoluble nitrogen (ADIN). Unfortunately, this will still show up as crude protein on a standard lab test, and so may not exactly represent the amount of protein available to the animal.

You can ask for an analysis to include ADIN, which depending on the lab may also be referred to as acid detergent fiber nitrogen (ADF-N) or acid detergent fiber protein (ADF-P), usually at an additional charge. If the ADIN is <10%, then you do not need to adjust the crude protein (CP) levels. If the ADIN is >10%, then you should subtract 10% from the ADIN value to determine available CP. As an example, your analysis comes back with ADIN= 27% and CP=12%. To determine the available CP:

  • 27 (% ADIN) – 10 = 17% ADIN
  • 17 (calculated % ADIN from above) * 12% (CP) * 100 (conversion factor) = 2.
  • Subtract this from the total CP, so 12% (CP) – 2 (calculated above) = 10% CP available.

Perhaps a more well-known effect of rained-on hay is molding. In a standing crop of forage, the plant surfaces are covered with bacteria to help protect the plant against external assaults such as fungal infections, yeast, and potentially visible light. Once cut, the forage moisture begins to decrease, altering the bacterial populations and potentially increasing fungal and yeast populations. In normal moisture hay (<15% moisture), fungi will not grow well and there are usually limited mold issues. However, when the bale moisture is increased, this opens the opportunity for fungal and mold growth.

Hay left in field after an intense rainstorm in Phillips County. Photo courtesy of Marko Manoukian.

Hay left in field after an intense rainstorm in Phillips County. Photo courtesy of Marko Manoukian.

Cereal hays are especially prone to molding issues. At harvest, the stems of the plant are sufficiently dry, however the moisture in the grains is still above desirable levels. The grain loses moisture at lower rates than the rest of the plant, and so at baling are often above 15% moisture. Mold is commonly seen in these areas first, which then can spread to the rest of the bale.

Mold, and especially the mycotoxins that some molds produce, can be harmful to animals and humans alike. Horses are the most susceptible, with ingestion of moldy hay potentially resulting in respiratory and digestive issues. Ruminants aren’t as sensitive to moldy hay, but can have experience negative effects such as abortions or aspergillosis. Additionally, there is a condition known as “farmer’s lung” that can occur in humans due to fungus growing in lung tissue after fungal spores have been inhaled.

Moldy hay can be fed to ruminants, however it does not come without risks. If the hay is dusty from mold spores, then do not feed it to sensitive animals, and ensure that where you are feeding it is properly ventilated. Make sure to dilute the moldy forage by feeding with “clean” hay, or hay that is not moldy. Mold does decrease the palatability of the forage, causing animals to avoid it, but if mixed in with other hay it will generally be accepted. However, ensure to remove any rejected forage that animals will not consume, and provide new hay at the next feeding.

If you are experiencing moldy hay, it is advised to have it tested. Laboratories such as Midwest Laboratories (Omaha, NE) and Dairyland Laboratories, Inc. (Arcadia, WI) have tests that can check for mold and mycotoxin levels in your hay.

If you have any further questions, please contact Emily Glunk, Forage Extension Specialist, at [email protected] or 406-994-5688.

August 29, 2014 Comments are off Montana Stockgrowers Association
Share:

Eastern Montana Updates from MSGA Directors

Southeastern District Update from Terry Haughian, Kinsey

Terry Haughian, MSGA Director for the Southeastern District

Terry Haughian, MSGA Director for the Southeastern District

I hope everyone has had a great summer. So far, this area has not had any real bad hail or fires. Last year this whole area was hit hard by hail, the King Valley was hit twice and the Circle County hit hard. We have had a great grass year and a great year to refill reservoirs and pits. It looks like a very good “perfect storm” year with calf markets as good as they are.

I have visited with several producers who are interested in joining MSGA because of all the issues concerning bison, water rights, sage grouse, etc. I plan to follow up after haying season is over. The good markets should help with membership this year. I believe the mid—year meetings at different venues around the state help people realize that MSGA is alive and well and a viable entity for them to take part in. I encourage all members to converse with producers in your area at the fairs, rodeo and events going on nearby. Happy Pre-Vac and shipping to all!

Northeastern District Update from Lee Cornwell, Glasgow

Lee Cornwell, MSGA Director from the Northeastern District

Lee Cornwell, MSGA Director from the Northeastern District

Things in Northeastern Montana have been busy with hay and harvest this summer. Producers have enjoyed good weather for the season as most dry land hay is already put up and the combines are rolling. Ranchers should enjoy a good Fall weaning season as calf prices are expected to remain near record highs.

Many producers have been concerned about bison management discussions throughout the state and MSGA has continued to be involved in these. Rail transportation for many grain crops has seen quite a backlog this year as farmers compete with other commodities and oil traffic. These backlogs seem to be easing up as harvest progresses and grain needs to be transported.

We have continued to be involved in discussions with the Board of Livestock concerning the DOL budget process and I believe the subcommittee focusing to correct these problems is a positive step in the right direction.

I am enjoying the opportunity to be involved in my first year on the MSGA Board of Directors and look forward to being involved in the many meetings we have scheduled this Fall season.

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
December 3, 2013 Comments are off Montana Stockgrowers Association
Share:

Forage Testing for More Efficient Use of Feedstuffs

Rachel Endecott, Montana State University Extension Beef Cattle SpecialistRachel Endecott, MSU Extension Beef Cattle Specialist

Greetings from Bozeman! I can’t believe it’s nearly MSGA Convention time, but I’m looking forward to seeing many of you in Billings in December.

I received a great question the other day about considerations for feeding “environmentally impacted” feeds, like rained-on hay or hailed-out crops. My first recommendation – for any feedstuff, not just weather-beaten forages – is to obtain a nutrient analysis. I’m a big fan of the saying, “in order to manage, one must first measure,” and a forage nutrient analysis is a critical step in determining least-cost rations. This is even more important when you’re unsure how poor harvest conditions may have impacted the forage.

The first step in getting a nutrient analysis is to collect a representative sample. A common rule of thumb is to sample from 10% of the feedstuff; for example, if you had 100 bales of hay, sample 10 bales from various locations in the stack. For hay samples, I highly recommend a hay probe for the most accurate results; most Extension offices have hay probes to loan out. For silage, grain, or cubes, a grab sample is appropriate since the feed is much more uniform in nature.

The second step is to find a testing lab and send the sample in for analysis. Your local Extension office probably has an established relationship with a lab and can assist with sampling and selecting the right testing package. For hailed-out or otherwise drought-impacted annual crops, testing for nitrate content is definitely recommended in addition to a base testing package.

The final step is to interpret the nutrient analysis. You can learn more about that process from the January 2013 Cow Sense Chronicle, my monthly e-newsletter. The archives are located at www.msuextension.org/beefcattle/cowsensechronicle.html. If you’d like to be added to the e-newsletter distribution list, please send me an email at [email protected].

 

February 23, 2011 Comments are off Montana Stockgrowers Association
Share:

Ehlke Herefords – Townsend

Ehlke Herefords in Townsend, Montana is a family-owned ranch that focuses on the female. Mark, Della, Jane’a and Lacey work the ranch with Ryan Hamilton. The Ehlke Family is a great group of people and have worked hard to develop the Hereford breed.  Check out photos from Lauren’s visit to the ranch during calving season. Click here. 

August 5, 2010 Comments are off Montana Stockgrowers Association
Share:

Montana Rancher Profile: Dusty Hahn

MSGA’s intern Lauren Chase talked with Montana rancher Dusty Hahn about the importance of water management on ranch land. He also shared his reasons for working on the ranch, explaining why he loves the hard work. This video is brought to you by MSGA’s Research, Education, and Endowment Foundation.
July 23, 2010 Comments are off Montana Stockgrowers Association
Share:

Hahn Ranch – Townsend, MT

MSGA’s multimedia intern Lauren Chase spent some time with the chairman of the Stockgrowers’ Research, Education, and Endowment Foundation’s (REEF) Dusty Hahn. His family owns a ranch south of Helena in Townsend. Dusty discussed the importance of water management as a natural resource. To see more photos from Lauren’s time on the ranch, click here. 

This photo album is brought to you by MSGA’s Research, Education, and Endowment Foundation.

July 5, 2010 Comments are off Montana Stockgrowers Association
Share:

MSGA’s President Tom Hougen – Melstone, MT

MSGA’s media intern Lauren Chase spent two days at the Hougen Ranch in Melstone, MT. This ranch belongs to MSGA’s president, Tom Hougen. During her stay, she learned how to bale hay, trailed a cattle drive, and saw quite the lightning storm. To see more photos, check out our Facebook page by clicking here.