Out to Pasture Spring 2016

Transcription

1 Out to Pasture Spring 2016 Cooperative Extension Service Woodford County 184 Beasley Drive Versailles, KY (859) Fax: (859) UPCOMING EVENTS March 12 Fayette County Farm Bureau Equipment Auction, KY Horse Park, Lexington, KY March 15 Grain Production Meeting, Woodford County Extension Service, Versailles, KY April 12 Advanced Grazing School, C. Oran Little Research Center; Versailles, KY May Kentucky Grazing School, Woodford County Extension Service & C. Oran Little Research Center; Versailles, KY ACROSS THE AGENT S DESK This cool, wet winter has definitely brought with it an old sickness back to farmers throughout the Bluegrass. Spring fever is starting to really set in with some folks as these warmer days bring the knowledge that spring is almost here! As our winter meeting months wind down, I hope that we can learn some things in the field this spring. Keep a lookout for a field day or two, as a few are in the works for some chances to see some new ideas and technology this spring and summer. Here s to a great spring, and I hope you don t get the fever too bad! TOBACCO Burley Tobacco Costs and Returns: Pre vs Post-Buyout Source: Dr. Will Snell, Dr. Steve Isaacs, Laura Powers; UK Agricultural Economics & Dr. Bob Pearce; UK Tobacco Extension Specialist In the midst of a turbulent outlook for the KY farm economy, tobacco growers, as well as a few tobacco companies, have been inquiring about current burley tobacco production costs and returns. Unlike grains, where input parameters (excluding land rent) are fairly consistent across farming operations, many tobacco budget parameters (labor hours, H- 2A vs domestic labor wages, big vs small bale, yields, fully depreciated vs relatively new equipment/infrastructure, contract vs auction sales) do vary considerably among growers. As a result it is really a challenge to come up with a precise estimate of the cost and returns on a typical tobacco operation. Consequently we have always encouraged individual growers to develop their own budget analysis to match their particular operation. Let s first look at some historical trends on prices, yields, costs and returns before we provide some estimates for the 2016 burley crop. Prices: USDA has not released their official average price for the 2015 U.S. burley crop [as of this writing], but it will likely be near the 2014 average of $1.94/lb. Despite ample global supplies entering the 2015 season, along with slumping global blended cigarette sales, a strengthening U.S. dollar and crop quality concerns, prices for the 2015 burley crop held up fairly well in response to relatively strong U.S. cigarette sales, an improved U.S. burley trade balance, and quality/quantity concerns over the 2016 South American and African burley crops related to El Niño weather patterns. Recent U.S. burley grower prices in the $1.95 to $2.00/lb range result in actual (nominal) prices returning to pre-buyout levels, but real (inflation adjusted) prices have declined by more than 20% relative to 2004.

2 TOBACCO CONTINUED... Yields: While other crops/livestock enterprises have achieved steady improvements in yields/rates of gain over time to help offset declining real prices, burley tobacco trend yields have remained relatively flat. Average yields were expected to show some improvement during the post-buyout era with the exit of marginal managers and lower yielding land which could not survive in a more competitive marketing environment. Along with some weather and disease challenges, burley yield gains have likely been hampered during the post-buyout era by the movement to larger scale of production units (reducing management intensity), a change in the labor supply away from family labor, production incentives by the companies which reward certain grades, and abuse of the federal crop insurance program. Costs: According to USDA input cost indices, fertilizer prices have increased 107% since the passage of the buyout, while chemical prices are 28% higher. While changes in fertilizer and chemical prices receive attention, these two input groups account for a relatively small share of burley production expenses. Tobacco costs and returns are driven primarily by changes in yields, labor efficiency, and wage rates. Labor efficiency for most growers has improved over time with the adoption of labor-reducing practices, (e.g., purchasing transplants, bale package, housing design/practices) but most burley farmers are still using approximately 150 to 200 labor hours per acre. Tobacco budgets clearly reveal that labor accounts for 50% or greater of the cash expenses associated with burley production. The Kentucky H-2A wage rate increased from $10.28/hour in 2015 to $10.85/hour for 2016 and is 42% higher since the passage of the tobacco buyout. Accounting for transportation, housing, utilities, worker compensation insurance, fees and other expenses associated with H-2A labor, the total wage rate for H-2A guest worker program in 2016 is likely in the neighborhood of $13.00 to $14.00/hour. Net Returns: Prior to the end of the federal tobacco program in 2004, USDA would annually update tobacco cost of production as a variable in determining the average price support level. However beginning in 2005, USDA suspended calculating tobacco costs and returns. The table below summarizes the pre-buyout USDA burley costs and returns reports from the 2003 and 2004 crops and projected estimates for 2016 from University of Kentucky and University of Tennessee burley budgets. The UK budget assumes a higher yield (2,200 lbs vs 2,100 lbs for the UT budget) but also higher hired wage rates ($12.50/hour vs $10.00/hour for the UT budget) to conservatively reflect the wage rate of an increasingly used H-2A labor force. In this analysis, we only consider cash costs, excluding the value of quota (for pre-buyout calculations), land costs and operator labor expenses. The analysis reveals that net cash returns have declined from more than $1.00/lb in 2003 and 2004 (using actual average yields below 2,000 lbs/ acre) to an anticipated 40 cents/lb for the 2016 crop (using average yields of 2,100 to 2,200 lbs/acre). This represents the cash left over to compensate the operator for use of his own labor, management and land. Accounting for these inputs, results in both budgets leaving virtually no cash remaining to encourage infrastructure investment for future crops or to encourage younger farmers to replace an aging tobacco grower base UK 2016 UT Price ($/lb) $1.98 $1.99 $2.00 $2.00 Average Yield (lb) 1,920 1,945 2,200 2,100 Gross Value of Production ($/acre) Total Variable Cash Expenses ($/acre) Total Fixed Cash Expenses ($/acre) $3,801 $3,863 $4,400 $4,200 $1,389 $1,485 $3,032 $2,806 $350 $356 $500 $502 Net Cash Returns ($/ $2,062 $2,021 $866 $892 acre) Net Cash Returns ($/lb) $1.07 $1.04 $0.39 $0.42

3 Corn Seeding Rates in Kentucky Source: Dr. Chad Lee; UK Grain Crops Specialist GRAIN CROPS Corn yields have steadily increased over time in part to increasing the seeding rates. Identifying the proper seeding rate is a balance between having enough plants to maximize yields with having too many plants to hurt yield in stressful conditions. The following is the University of Kentucky guidelines for corn populations on various soils in Kentucky. Soil Productivity Target Seeds per Acre Comments Low 24,000 to 26,000 Soils that are shallow, sloping, or non-tiled clays. Expected yields are less than 140 bu/acre on average. Medium 26,000 to 30,000 Many soils in Kentucky with less than 12% slope and depth of about 3 feet. High (non-irrigated) 32,000 to 34,000 Deeper soils (river bottoms) with about 6 feet of rooting depth and excellent waterholding capacity. High (irrigated) 32,000 to 42,000 The lower range is for limited water supply. The upper range is for fields at very low risk for water stress. Stalk strength is extremely important at the upper range. Consult with seed representatives on stalk strength and hybrids suited to the very high populations. These seeding rates were developed from research, from soil depth and water holding capacity, and from the risk of soils running short on water for the season. The logic behind these seeding rates is that soils at greater risk of running out of water will have a lower seeding rate. Deep soils that are more likely to carry sufficient water throughout the growing season will have higher seeding rates. There are a range of rates for each soil type and that reflects the variability in the data we currently have. More data from more research may help us refine those numbers. Water availability can drastically impact corn response to plant population as displayed in Figures 1 to 3. In Figure 1, the red line is corn yield response to plant population in 2009 (adequate and timely rainfall). In 2009, yields increased as plant population increased. Just the opposite occurred in 2008, where rainfall was scarce and water was limited. In 2008, yields dropped as plant population increased. The same four hybrids were planted each year into the same soil type with the same crop rotation and the same fertilizer program. Water - or the lack of - greatly influenced crop yield response to plant population. Corn yields in Figure 2 are during a very dry year (2012) and corn yields in Figure 3 are from a year with much better rainfall (2013). In a year with more water, corn yields increased as populations increased and in a year with very little water, corn yields decreased as population increased. The hybrids in Figures 2 and 3 are the same. If we could predict how the frequency of rainfall and the quantity of rainfall during the growing season, we could very accurately predict a seeding rate. Until that happens, we are left with trying to find the correct balance between enough plants to produce high yields while not having too many plants to severely hurt yields in stressful years.

4 GRAIN CROPS CONTINUED... FORAGE CROPS Buttercup in Grazed Pastures Source: Dr. JD Green; UK Weed Scientist One of the signs that spring has arrived is when the yellow flowers of buttercup begin to appear, but it s during the winter months that the vegetative growth of buttercup takes place. As a cool season weed, this plant often flourishes in over grazed pasture fields with poor stands of desirable forages. In fact, many fields that have dense buttercup populations are fields heavily grazed by animals during the fall through the early spring months. Buttercups are sometimes classified as short-lived perennials, but often grow as winter annuals. Plants typically produce five, shiny yellow petals in the early spring. There are four different species of buttercups that may be found in Kentucky: bulbous buttercup (Ranunculus bulbosus), creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens), tall buttercup (Ranunculus acris), and small flower buttercup (Ranunculus arbortivus). Although each of these plants may have somewhat similar flower heads, each of these buttercup species differs somewhat in their vegetative leaf characteristics. New seed are produced during the time petals are showy. Waiting until after flowers appear can be too late to implement control tactics. This is one reason buttercups can survive year to year and new plants emerge each year. For chemical control, herbicides registered for use on grass pastures that contain 2,4-D will effectively control buttercup. Depending on other weeds present products that contain dicamba+2,4-d (eg. Weedmaster), aminopyralid (eg. ForeFront, Milestone), triclopyr (eg. PastureGard, Crossbow), or metsulfuron (eg. Cimarron) can also be used. However, legumes such as clovers interseeded with grass pastures can be severely injured or killed by these herbicide products. For optimum results apply a herbicide in the early spring (February - March) before flowers are observed, when buttercup plants are still small and actively growing. For best herbicide activity wait until daytime air temperatures is greater than 50 F for two to three consecutive days. Consult the herbicide label for further information on grazing restrictions, precautions, or other possible limitations. For fields heavily infested with buttercup a variety of control tactics may be needed. Apply a herbicide to help reduce the population of buttercup plants in the spring plus use good pasture management techniques throughout the year to help improve and thicken the stand of desirable forages. Most buttercup plants emerge from seed during the fall or late winter months. Therefore, pasture management practices that improve and promote growth of desirable plants during these months is one of the best methods to help compete against the emergence and growth of this plant. Whereas, livestock animals allowed to overgraze fields during the fall and winter months is one of the main factors that contribute to buttercup problems. Mowing fields or clipping plants close to the ground in the early spring before buttercup plants can produce flowers may help reduce the amount of new seed produced, but mowing alone will not totally eliminate seed production.

5 BEEF CATTLE Selenium in Beef Cattle Nutrition Source: Dr. Roy Burris; UK Beef Extension Specialist Selenium (Se) was discovered in 1818 but its role in animal nutrition wasn t understood until the 1950 s when Se was identified as an essential nutrient. Selenium is thought of as a trace or micro mineral in beef cattle diets. Beef cattle only require 0.10 parts per million (ppm) of Se in the total diet (not the mineral supplement). Although plants in some parts of the country can contain toxic levels of Se, forages grown in many parts of the country do not contain adequate levels of Se for optimum animal performance. What is Selenium? Selenium is a trace element (mineral) which is incorporated into proteins to make selenoproteins, which are important antioxidant enzymes. One of the most important of these is an enzyme known as glutathione peroxidase. The antioxidant properties of Se-inclusive enzyme systems help prevent cellular damage from free radicals. Free radicals are natural by-products of oxygen metabolism and a functional immune system that may contribute to the development of health problems. What are the deficiency symptoms? The classic clinical deficiency of Se and Vitamin E is white muscle disease which is myodegeneration of the heart muscle. However, as all good managers know, there are a lot of unseen problems in a nutritional deficiency before cattle exhibit clinical signs such as decreased immunity, growth and fertility. As indicated in the chart, immunity, growth and reproduction can be impaired before clinical symptoms appear. For example, cattle that have a compromised immune system may not mount an immune response despite being vaccinated for various diseases. Do not wait until clinical signs appear to supply trace minerals to cattle diets. Dietary sources of selenium Plants (forage and grain crops) are the major dietary source of Se. The Se content of plants is influenced by the concentration and availability of Se in the soil. Feedstuffs grown in Se-deficient areas are poor sources of Se. Areas in the U.S. like the Northwest, Great Lakes Region, West Coast, Eastern Seaboard and the Southeast may have low Se soils where deficiencies can be a problem. Beef cattle require 0.1 ppm (mg/kg) of Se in the diet to meet their daily requirements. Much of the forages and grain grown in certain areas of the U.S. are at levels which allow those areas to be classified as low (where 80% of all forage and grain contains less than 0.05 ppm of Se). The Southeast (like Kentucky) is classified as low to variable. However, beef cattle operations in this region seem to have a high percentage of Se-deficient (less than 0.08 ppm Se in whole blood) animals. An important factor affecting Se content of forages is soil ph. In general, plants grown in acid soil will absorb less Se than plants grown in alkaline soils. Another factor is the concentration of sulfur (S) in the soil. Se and S are chemically similar and compete for absorption by the plant. Thus, high levels of S in the soil may lower the Se content of the forage. Sulfate fertilizers can decrease the Se content of plants, which may not hurt the plants but can have a detrimental effect on cattle that graze them. How do we overcome low dietary levels of Se? Cattle require 0.1 ppm Se in their diet to meet their daily requirement, so supplemental Se is needed for diets grown on low-se soils. Supplemental Se is generally supplied to cattle in a free-choice salt/mineral supplement. The FDA allows for up to 120 ppm Se, regardless of source, to be added to the mineral supplement for freechoice feeding to provide a maximum of 3 mg per head daily. Feedtags on mineral supplements will generally indicate the expected level of consumption and Se is added to provide 3 mg at that level of intake. For example, at an indicated level of intake of 3 oz per head per day, the mineral supplement may contain 35 ppm Se. At 4 oz intake the Se level would be reduced to 26 ppm to stay for the 3 mg per head daily level. What about the form of Se? Se is usually added to the feed in inorganic forms as sodium selenite or selenate. Se is usually found in plants combined with amino acids selenomethionine and selenocysteine so it is logical to wonder if these organic forms of Se might not be more available to the animal than the inorganic (like sodium selenite) form. Recently, Se enriched yeast, in which selenomethionine is the predominant form of Se, has become available and has been approved for use by the FDA. Sodium selenite is used primarily because it is less expensive. Organic forms of Se need to be more available and/or effective in order to be an economic alternative to sodium selenite.

6 BEEF CATTLE CONTINUED... Are there any advantages for Organic Se? Researchers at the Kentucky station conducted a trial with individually-fed beef heifers which received no Se, inorganic Se (sodium selenite) or organic Se (Sel-Plex ) at the 3 mg/hd/day rate. More Se was found in jugular whole blood, red blood cells and biopsied liver tissue of the heifers receiving either form of Se than in the unsupplemented heifers. However, organic Se animals had more Se in these tissues than calves which were receiving sodium selenite. Analyses of liver tissue gene expression revealed that the content of at least 80 mrna was affected by the form of Se. Three Se supplementdependent gene groups were identified: ISe-dependent, OSe-dependent and Se form-independent. Since the form of Se affects genetic expression differently, it made sense to look at a mixture of the two forms with 50% of the 3 mg per day coming from each source. Also, all forms of Se were associated with unique liver gene expression profiles. A long-term trial (224 days) was conducted with growing beef heifers to see what effect an equal blend of ISe:OSe would have on Se tissue concentrations. Calves received no Se, Inorganic Se, Organic Se or 1:1 Mixture of OSe and ISe. More Se was found in whole blood and liver of the calves receiving the mix or the organic Se than those receiving the inorganic Se and all were greater than the controls. Sincerely, Adam Probst, County Extension Agent for Agriculture and Natural Resources adam.probst@uky.edu Additional trials have been conducted including a three year study with cows on pasture with free individual access to one of the following treatments containing 35 ppm of Se inorganic (sodium Selenite), organic (Sel- Plex ) or a 1:1 mixture of the two. Cow Se treatment differentially affected both cow and suckling calf Se blood concentrations resulting in adequate concentrations for all cows but inadequate concentrations for the calves of cows which received the inorganic Se (sodium selenite). So what is your recommendation to low Se levels? First keep a good mineral mix available to all cattle at all times. In Se-deficient areas, I recommend that we feed Se at the 3 mg level (max. allowed by FDA). Based on our research, I would prefer that Se be 50 percent sodium selenite and 50 percent organically-derived (e.g., Sel- Plex ). So if your cows consume 3 to 4 ounces of a good mineral supplement daily it should contain 26 to 35 ppm Se with half from organic and half from inorganic forms of Se since both forms elicit different responses in growth and immunity. The UK Beef IRM mineral is formulated to contain this amount and this ratio of the two forms. This will be a little higher priced but based on the latest research, should be more effective. Intensive research has been conducted at the University of Kentucky both in confinement and on pasture to study selenium supplementation to beef cattle diets. You can view this newsletter on our county website. Visit us at: Follow us on Facebook Join Our Distribution List! You may subscribe on our website on the Ag & Natural Resources Page WC CONSERVATION DISTRICT The Woodford County Conservation District has equipment for rent this spring! Please contact the location of equipment for availability. Equipment Location (4) No-till drills Southern States (2) Tubeline bale wrappers Woodford Feed Chain Harrow Woodford Feed Free Soil Testing Free soil test vouchers are available at the Woodford County Conservation Office to be redeemed when soil samples are submitted through the Woodford County Extension Service. Up to 20 free soil tests are available per farm or homeowner. This program runs through June 30, 2016, or until the funds are depleted. To Do List: Save Time - Make an Appointment with FSA Update Your Producer Records Consult Before Breaking New Ground for Crops Livestock Indemnity Program - Report Livestock Losses For More Information Contact: Kara L. McIntosh, County Executive Director USDA Farm Service Agency Anderson/Frankfort/Woodford Counties 182 Beasley Drive, Versailles, KY (859) Ext. 100 (859)

7

8