A Publication of:

831 College Ave., Suite D, Lancaster, OH 43130

Phone: 740.653.5419

and the

OSU Extension BEEF Team

BEEF Cattle questions may be directed to the OSU Extension BEEF Team through Stephen Boyles or Stan Smith, Editor

Previous issues of the BEEF Cattle letter

Issue # 443

July 13, 2005

Late Summer and Extended Winter Grazing Forage Options - Stan Smith, OSU Extension PA, Fairfield County

With many harvested small grain fields that weren't double cropped to soybeans now sitting idle, cattlemen have an excellent opportunity to yet be creating high quality forages that may be grazed well into winter, and even next spring. With now having three years of experience with summer planted oats under our belts, preceded by several years of experience with cereal rye, we know certainly there's still plenty of time to 'create' anywhere from two to five tons of forages in presently vacant fields. Better yet, if you are fortunate enough to be in a Conservation Security Program (CSP) watershed and are accepted into the program, the "extended grazing" options that are discussed below are eligible for a $30 per acre per year "enhancement" payment.

For the balance of the summer we are continuing to demonstrate and experiment with a number of variations on the August seeded oats you've heard about previously. Based on what we've learned so far, we believe the alternatives mentioned below deserve consideration by anyone needing additional high quality forages to extend the grazing season.

If your primary needs are a forage for grazing, hay, or silage later this summer and fall, oats appear to be the most productive, least cost option at this time. Alternatives include:

* No-til 60-90 pounds into harvested wheat or oat fields or harvested corn silage fields anytime up until early September. It appears that late July or early August may be the optimum time to plant oats when high quality forage is the goal. "Spring" oats seldom make seed when planted after the days begin to shorten in July, but will continue to grow leaf until Thanksgiving or after in Ohio. Consider applying ~ 50 pounds of nitrogen about 60 days before you plan to harvest them, regardless of the harvest method.

* Fly 80-120 pounds of oats into standing corn in August. Pay attention to the herbicide program you've used on the corn to be certain it doesn't conflict with oat establishment or grazing/harvest restrictions. Our experiences with this alternative have been variable - some fields produced very well, while others didn't achieve a very good stand. It appears that the best stands come in fields that are totally weed free. However, in nearly every case, the value of the forage produced has exceeded the costs of aerial seeding (~$9/acre) plus the seed costs. In addition, the high quality oat forage that results will allow for better utilization of the grazed corn stalks.

* Fly 80-120 pounds of oats into standing soybeans in early September as the soybean leaves first begin to turn. Again, pay attention to the herbicide program you've used on the soybeans to be certain it doesn't conflict with oat establishment or grazing/harvest restrictions. Results with this alternative have been a little more consistent than what we experienced in the standing corn, but less productive than the best corn stalk fields due to the later planting date.

This web link has photos and data of a few of past year's attempts at the alternatives described above: http://fairfield.osu.edu/ag/graze/wntrgraz.htm

If your primary needs are forage for grazing, hay, or silage next spring, cereal rye appears to be the best alternative. The opportunity exists to graze it in the late summer and fall, however, the most abundant tonnage will come in the spring. In addition to planting it with the options mentioned above for oats, you may also no-til it after row crop harvest - particularly soybeans and silage corn - this fall. See the OSU Extension Agronomy Fact Sheet AGF-0026-00, entitled Winter Rye for Extending the Grazing Season for more details on growing cereal rye. This publication may be found in OSU Extension offices or on-line at: http://ohioline.osu.edu/agf-fact/0026.html

If your primary needs are a grazeable forage as soon as possible, consider turnips or a combination of oats and turnips. Previous summers we've seen good results locally when planting a 'grazing turnip' called Appin in combination with oats. If some precipitation is received shortly after planting, this combination could be strip grazed as early as 5-6 weeks after planting. The oats will provide some additional fiber in this grazing mix, and the Appin turnips will continue to regrow after being topped off with an early grazing. These web links will show you what this combination looks like after only 5 weeks of spring growth: http://fairfield.osu.edu/ag/beef/OatsTrnp.JPG and also after 6.5 weeks of growth: http://fairfield.osu.edu/ag/beef/OatsTrnp2.JPG

As you review your options, realize that at times seed oats are difficult to purchase this time of year. Contact the Ohio Seed Improvement Association (ph: 614.889.1136 or visit http://www.ohseed.org) for a list of growers who may have seed oats available. If you take the opportunity to try any of these extended grazing or forage production alternatives, please keep us updated on your progress and success.

Potato Leafhopper in Alfalfa - Mark Sulc, Ron Hammond, Bruce Eisley, OSU Forage and Entomology Specialists

Although populations of potato leafhopper on alfalfa were somewhat low in June, we are now receiving reports of large numbers occurring on later cuttings. Growers are advised to check their alfalfa for potential problems. The threshold on leafhopper-susceptible alfalfa is as follows: when the average number of leafhoppers in a single sample (10 sweeps) equals or is greater than the height of the alfalfa, treatment should be considered if harvest is more than 7 days away. For example, if the alfalfa is 8 inches tall and the average number of leafhoppers per sample is 8 or higher, treatment is warranted. If the average is 7 or lower, the grower should come back within a few days to see if the population is higher or lower.

The threshold should be lowered when the alfalfa is under stress, especially for new seedings made this year. Consider lowering the threshold to half the normal level for new 2005 seedings that are growing slowly because of drought stress. In those situations, there may NOT be a yield response from insecticide treatment in the current growth cycle, especially if drought conditions persist. However, protecting the plants from leafhopper damage now will protect the stand and its future yield potential.

The thresholds are higher for glandular-haired varieties rated as highly resistant to potato leafhopper (at least 50% resistance ratings). The threshold for established stands of highly resistant alfalfa, based on three years of our research data, is 3X the regular threshold. Thus, using the example above, if the alfalfa is 8 inches tall, the threshold would be 24 leafhoppers per sample. We recommend this threshold for any highly resistant alfalfa that is beyond its first cutting of the seeding year. However, we feel that the regular thresholds should be used for potato leafhopper resistant alfalfa prior to the first cutting of the seeding year, which includes most fields planted this spring. However, beyond that very first cutting, the higher thresholds can be used, especially if the highly resistant alfalfa is growing vigorously and not under stress.

More information can be found in the factsheet "Potato Leafhopper on Alfalfa".

BSE Just One Factor Playing On The Cattle Market - Nevil Speer, PhD, Western Kentucky University (reprinted with permission from CattleNetwork.com)

Timing is everything. There's never a good time for bad news but early is always better than late. Case in point: confirmation of the first domestic case of BSE would have been somewhat less disruptive in late-November rather than lingering until mid-June. The unexpected events of late played out just as the beef complex was seemingly on the verge of reestablishing trade with Japan. Documentation of BSE should not materially influence trade negotiations but reality may be a different matter. Best-case scenario is resumption of trade will be delayed for several months. Ambiguity about testing protocol, questions regarding agency authority and communicative responsibility are all issues that will likely need to be addressed.

Logic has prevailed within the market amidst the events-of-late. Participants successfully mitigated the potential of an emotive, speculative plunge - the market has responded very deliberately and rationally. The situation has chipped away at the market in a relatively mundane fashion. It's partially responsible for approximately $4 which has been sapped from fed trade over the past four weeks: the cash market has moved from $85 to $81-2 during that period.

To no one's surprise, the fed market traded lower during the week (ending June 17) following USDA's June 10 announcement of impending tests regarding the cow in question. As the market awaited outcome of sample analysis from The Veterinary Laboratories Agency in Weybridge, England (week ending June 24) fed sales drifted further into negative territory. And upon announcement of confirmation (week ending July 1) cash trade slipped yet again. Favorably, though, last week's sales found support and were steady-to-firmer: negotiations in the north ended at $81-2 while southern trade settled at $82-$82.50.

Alluded to above, despite receiving a large degree of media attention, BSE is just one factor among many currently playing on the market. Its apparent effect is compounded by several other considerations that inherently influence both fundamentals and psychology. As mentioned last month those include Canadian trade litigation, Asian export resumption, beef demand, harvest throughput, seasonality deviations and corn crop development.

From the demand side ongoing concerns in 2005 appear to be very real. Drs. Glenn Grimes and Ron Plain explain that "…demand for all meats but broilers was down for January-May of 2005 compared to 2004. Beef demand was down 0.8%... It is obvious that we have a different demand situation for meats in 2005 than 12 months earlier" (Cattle Outlook, 7/1/05). Wholesale prices partially reflect that trend. Seasonally, cutout values have slid more sharply in 2005 compared to last year's decline: the Choice cutout retreated over $13 during the month of June alone. Early-July brought about some reversal but that proved short-lived; the cutout again retreated further last week and is currently at levels par with early-September of 2004.

The effect of softening demand is potentially more influential from the supply perspective. Throughput for May and June ran approximately 20,000 head per week behind last year's pace. That lends to apprehension regarding currentness in the feeding sector. Front-end supply, indicated by cattle on feed more than 120 days, stands at 36.6% of total feedyard inventory - the highest proportion for June since 2001. Growing front-end supply is confounded with placement patterns of recent months biased towards yearlings (see this table). And lastly, carcass weights continue to trend well ahead of 2004 due to both heavy placements ("heavy in-heavy out") and extended feeding periods.

CME's October Feeder Cattle contract has advanced steadily since its setback in June and now closing in on previous highs. Calf prices, though, may come under some pressure in coming months. Bullishness and volatility in the corn pits coupled with negative closeouts could weigh on the market. And if the front-end supply becomes burdensome further decline for the fed market may compound those concerns. During the past several years marketing passivity has proven rewarding for cow/calf producers as the market steadily advanced. Indicators are that more vigilance may be prudent in 2005 when it comes to marketing the calf crop.

Cowherd expansion appears to be underway in the United States. As referenced in last month's MMP, though, current trends may require some modification of long-held concepts regarding aggregate rebuilding of the cowherd. Previous discussion focused primarily upon potential restraint within the current expansion phase resultant from several factors:

-- despite this year's improvement some long-term drought concerns still exist in several key areas causing some reluctance to invest in developing heifers;

-- commercial operations are becoming increasingly diversified - expansion requires resource reallocation and possible deviation from overall goals of the operation (for a detailed discussion of this issue see MMP: July, 2004);

-- farmer/rancher demographics reflect a population advancing in age - for many business plans are likely prioritizing short-term objectives;

-- mandatory animal ID may present a barrier for involvement in the production sector.

Clearly, the extent to which those aspects converge remains to be seen. Meanwhile, several indicators may provide some insight into current plans and perspectives of commercial producers.

Independent of purchasing females, increasing the size of one's cowherd can be facilitated via two primary means - increased heifer retention and/or reduction in cow dispersal rates. Outlined below are two illustrations relating to those strategies, respectively: the first graph depicts annual heifer marketings relative to steer slaughter; the second graph portrays federally inspected cow slaughter relative to annual beef cow inventory.

With respect to the first graph depicting heifer retention several items are significant. First, beginning in 1997 the industry has increasingly utilized heifers as part of its marketing mix; the proportion is consistently higher than during the late 1980's. The shift stems from increasing feedyard demand for cattle and ongoing advancements in terms of heifer management efficiency. Additionally, changes in USDA Quality Grade standards for B-maturity were implemented in 1997 impacting heiferette values and corresponding retention practices at the cow/calf level. Cow dispersal patterns portrayed in the second graph are less obvious. Variation from year to year is dependent upon many factors including drought conditions, calf prices, and feed costs.

The trends in combination provide some important insight into current expansion strategies in the cow/calf sector. Traditional views dictate that higher calf prices signal producers to retain heifers. However, it appears that historically strong calf markets have spurred producers to maximize revenue and oblige the feeding sector with feeder cattle by selling an increasing proportion of replacement heifer prospects. Simultaneously, amidst the current expansion collective strategy appears to be biased towards declining cull rates and cow retention in lieu of keeping back heifer calves. In other words, cows that traditionally might be designated as culls (viz. open or dry cows) are being held and bred back for another calf versus developing replacement heifers; stated another way, many operations are opting to minimize costs over the short-run (annual cow maintenance) while foregoing extended investment in heifer development.

What's all this tell us about the industry economics? Several items are noteworthy. One, due to a variety of reasons (namely those outlined above) the cow/calf sector is becoming increasingly careful with respect to operational investment and risk. Two, in light of ever-increasing costs, retaining open / dry cows which are still in their productive stage proves to be more profitable than raising replacement heifers (an eternal debate among academics). And three, if continued, the industry will continue to become increasingly efficient and productive as only the "elite" or "best" heifers are allowed to become cows.

Ron Plain noted in reference to inventory numbers that, "…stability appears to be the new theme of the U.S. sow herd" (Swine Economics Report, June 27). That theme also appears increasingly appropriate for the beef industry. Per the indicators discussed last month, and those outlined above, current expansion may prove protracted and incremental. The beef industry continues to undergo significant changes - many of which will likely influence decisions to expand. As such, all stakeholders are encouraged to carefully evaluate respective positions and profit drivers relative to ongoing shifts within the industry's economic structure.

Stock Dog Trial

Participants at the Gearld Fry cattle workshop held May 1 at the John Lavelle farm near Athens were treated to a stock dog cattle-handling demonstration. It is really amazing how a well-trained dog can help a livestock producer move and handle all kinds of livestock. Recently the Buckeye Cow Dog Association has been formed thanks to the efforts of John Lavelle and Scott Pfeiffer. The association is sponsoring a cow dog trial on July 30 and 31 at Lavelle Farms. Anyone interested in learning more about the trial can go to the Lavelle farms web site at: http://www.lavellefarms.com or Scott Pfeiffer at 740.593.5090 or John Lavelle at 740.664.3313.

Ohio Bull Test Prepares for 37^th Year

Plans for the 37^th annual Ohio Bull Test are nearly complete and will be available within a week or so. The OBT program will be very similar to recent years, with nominations due in September. Bull delivery day in Belle Valley is October 26. The sale of those bulls meeting the OBT requirements will be on April 15, 2006.

As in the past, the Ohio Bull Test also welcomes the consignment of bulls for custom development. Custom fed and developed bulls must meet the same criteria for entrance as all other bulls. Bulls tested at the Ohio Bull Test are not required to be consigned to the sale. Therefore, it provides an opportunity for on entire contemporary group to be developed at the test station without committing them all to the auction.

Visit the OBT website (http://bulltest.osu.edu) for details about the Ohio Bull Test program.

Visit the OSU Beef Team calendar of meetings and upcoming events

BEEF Cattle is a weekly publication of Ohio State University Extension in Fairfield County and the OSU Beef Team. Contributors include members of the Beef Team and other beef cattle specialists and economists from across the U.S.

All educational programs conducted by Ohio State University Extension are available to clientele on a nondiscriminatory basis without regard to race, color, creed, religion, sexual orientation, national origin, gender, age, disability or Vietnam-era veteran status. Keith L. Smith, Associate Vice President for Ag. Admin. and Director, OSU Extension. TDD No. 800-589-8292 (Ohio only) or 614-292-1868

Fairfield County Agriculture and Natural Resources