Land and Livestock Post

January 2019 – Issue II

BACON SNACKING

Ohio State offers bacon in vending machine.

PAGE 5

PESTICIDE ADVICE

It is important to use the right one in right amount.

PAGE 6

DATA MINING

Pioneering model can predict forage success.

PAGE 13

MARKER RESEARCH

A&M researchers discover important diabetes link.

PAGE 19

PRSRT STD US POSTAGE PAID BRYAN, TX 77802 PERMIT # 23

NUTRITION PLANNING How to develop the best plan for feeding your herd PAGE 10

FREE DELIVERY! TRADE-INS WELCOME UP TO 6 YR WARRANTY †† OVER 8 ACRES of TRACTORS RTV’S, ATV’S and MOWERS to CHOOSE FROM

NEW KUBOTA

L2501DT 24.8HP† 4WD TracTor

NEW KUBOTA

L3301DT 33HP† 4WD TracTor

WiTH FronT EnD LoaDEr

WiTH FronT EnD LoaDEr

Cash PriCe

Cash PriCe

NEW KUBOTA

L3901DT 37.5HP† 4WD TracTor WiTH FronT EnD LoaDEr

$19,099

$15,799

Cash PriCe

$20,399

NEW KUBOTA

L4701DT 47.3HP† 4WD TracTor WiTH FronT EnD LoaDEr

Cash PriCe

$25,199

NormaNgee TracTor & ImplemeNT co.

Corner of Hwy 39 @ OSR • Normangee, TX

www.normangeetractor.com 1.800.396.3101 • 936.396.3101 †For complete warranty, safety and product information, consult your local Kubota dealer and the product operator’s manual.

Power (HP/KW) and other specifications are based on various standards or recommended practices. ††Only terms and conditions of Kubota’s standard Limited Warranty apply. For warranty terms, see us or go to KubotaUSA.com.

2

January 2019 — Issue II



The Land & Livestock Post

News From the General Manager

Soil tests should determine fertilization of winter pastures

By Vanessa Corriher-olson Texas A&M AgriLife Extension

Fertilization of winter pasture should be based on a soil test to maximize forage production and prevent applying more fertilizer than is needed.

Nitrogen fertilization of small grain and small grain-ryegrass mixtures can be split in two to four equal applications during the growing season. Two applications often are sufficient in Central Texas with lower rainfall and heavier textured soils.

Three or four applications are required on the sandy soils in East Texas because of low nutrient holding capacity and high rainfall.

Phosphorus and potassium can be applied at planting. If more than 75 to 80 pounds/acre of potassium are needed on sandy soils in East Texas, it is recommended to split into an autumn and late winter application because of leaching.

Nitrogen fertilization of overseeded ryegrass

See PASTURES, Page 14

I

guess you can say the holidays officially are now over. I’d like to say I did a good job at restraining myself against the temptations of the season — candy and cookies and all the good things that come out of the oven and go into my belly — but I really can’t say that. I feel like I’ve been eating since Thanksgiving JESSE WRIGHT — well, before that actually but there was a short break in mid-November when the kids’ Halloween candy ran out.

I plan on starting to eat better this year, not because I’m afraid of breaking a resolution, but more so because I’m afraid of breaking all the buttons

on my pants.

By the time you read this, I will have just turned 40. I know it’s hard to believe, given my boyish good looks and my uncanny connection with the groovy hep cats that are today’s youth. But, it is true. I guess I’m a middle-aged man now. And, if I want to get to be an old man, I maybe should stick to this healthy eating thing, at least until next Halloween when I’ll have to eat my kids’ candy to make sure they don’t eat unhealthy. That’s just proper parenting.

In this issue we take a look at a different kind of healthy eating: Healthy eating for your cattle. In our cover story we cover how to develop a nutrition plan for your herd and what steps you need to take to make it work well. We also have news and

information from around the ag industry, including a story about a bacon-vending machine. Now, if they install a bacon-vending machine in my office, I may just have to break down and buy new pants.

Hope you enjoy the issue and, as always, thanks for reading. ’Til next time,

z For more information about content or advertising, contact Jesse Wright at jesse. wright@theeagle.com.

w.wctractor.com ww

WCTRACTOR 7 5 Ye ars of Service

BRYAN - NAVASOTA - SEALY - BRENHAM- TEMPLE

1-888-8TRACTOR YOUR AWARD WINNING DEALER WCTractor- Winner of the 2017 Kubota Circle of Excellence Award -Awarded to the top 15 dealers in the country-

The Land & Livestock Post



January 2019 — Issue II

3

News Continued demand for Texas barbecue fueling beef consumption

By Blair Fannin Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service

Continued strong demand for Texas barbecue will help fuel the need for steady supplies of beef in 2019, according to a Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service livestock economist.

“I definitely think barbecue demand is driving the demand for beef,” said David Anderson, who gave an outlook presentation on a variety of meats on barbecue restaurant menus at the Fifth Annual Texas Barbecue Town Hall Meeting recently at Texas A&M University in College Station.

Anderson said the overarching themes going into 2019 are increased consumer demand and growing beef supplies from an expanding cow herd.

“I think we will have more beef cow production next year with growing beef supplies, yet continued demand,” he said.

U.S. cow inventory was at 31.7 million head for 2018, up 1.6 percent for the year, he said. Steer dressed weights did not show increases as they have in years past.

“Animals aren’t staying in feedlots longer and getting heavier, they are being pulled on through,” he said. “What it means is demand for beef is there and those cattle are moving, not standing there adding more gain in the feedlot.”

Another trend Anderson said is fewer cattle grading USDA choice.

“There were fewer graded choice in about the June period of this year,” he said. “Fewer are grading choice compared to this time a year ago. There’s a relationship between weights and grade.”

The faster they bring those animals through, the less time they have to put on weight, Anderson said.

“We’ve actually had larger supplies of prime meat than choice

4

Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service photos by Blair Fannin Above, the fifth annual Texas Barbecue Town Hall Meeting was held recently at Texas A&M University in College Station. Right, Russell Roegels, owner of Roegels Barbecue in Houston, slices beef steak at the event. from a year ago. I think over the long term, we’ve got a lot of consumers wanting a higher quality product. Not only are we producing that, we are producing what people want at the same time.”

Daniel Vaughn, Texas Monthly magazine barbecue editor, discussed several ways for barbecue restaurant owners to market their menu items through social media. Vaughn has traveled extensively throughout Texas, visiting barbecue restaurants to compile the magazine’s annual top restaurants in the Lone Star State.

During those travels, he has sampled countless slices of barbecue brisket, ribs and side dishes. From serving barbecue sandwiches on Texas toast to offering customers a specialty line of in-house smoked sausage, Vaughn offered several suggestions to help restaurant owners make customers want to drive hundreds of miles to experience their food.

A beef grading and pork cutout demonstration was led by Davey Griffin, AgriLife Extension meat specialist, and Ray Riley, manag-

er of the Rosenthal Meat Center at Texas A&M. The meeting was sponsored by the E.M. “Manny” Rosenthal Chair in the department of animal science at Texas A&M University. Jeff Savell, Rosenthal Chair, served as host with assistance from students Brogan Horton, Eric Hamilton, Jason Shamburger, Ty Robertson, Devon King, Steven Mancillas, Holly Sanders, Kenna Turner and Wilsey Windler.

Lunch was cooked onsite by John Brotherton, Brotherton’s Black Iron Barbecue, and Russell and Misty Roegels, Roegels Barbecue. The group prepared beef steaks, pork chops, sides and dessert for the participants.

“We greatly appreciate everyone who helped prepare and serve the lunch for the town hall meeting,” Savell said. “We thank everyone who came to the town hall meeting, and we look forward to working with the great folks who prepare Texas barbecue.”

For more on Texas A&M barbecue educational programs, go to bbq.tamu.edu/.

CALDWELL LIVESTOCK COMMISSION REGULAR SALE EVERY

WEDNESDAY, 1:00 PM Carl Herrmann 979.820.5349 Hank Herrmann 979.820.5277 Hwy 36 South, P.O. Box 542, Caldwell, TX 77836 Sale Barn Phone: (979) 567-4119

January 2019 — Issue II



The Land & Livestock Post

News A Cowman’s Best Friend at Calving Time!

Now available with digital scale!

Easy and Safe Catching!

Designed for Processing Safety...

- Enables quick and safe calf catching!

- Convenient, step in access of producer!

- Holder secures calf for easy processing!

- User-friendly inside release of calf to cow!

- Move calves easier with cow following!

- Less cow stress, mother can see and smell calf!

- Reduces danger while working new calves!

- Quick Mount/Dismount on both ATV & UTVs! The Columbus Dispatch via AP The Ohio State University sophomore Nick Vales buys a package of bacon slices from a vending machine available on the Columbus campus. The machine offers cooked bacon strips and bacon bits for $1. The Ohio Pork Council sponsors the machine, and it receives bacon donations from Smithfield, Hormel and Sugardale. Proceeds from the machine go toward Ohio State’s meat science program.

Ohio State offers bacon slices, bits from a vending machine Asssociated Press

COLUMBUS, Ohio — Many Ohio State University students took a break from studying for final exams by making a bacon run.

Senior Sarah Page, who studies meat science, says the bacon vending machine at the College of Food, Agricultural, and Environmental Sciences has turned out to be even more popular than expected. It has to be restocked four or five times a day. It offers cooked bacon strips and bacon bits for $1.

Proceeds benefit the meat science program. Members of the

program are responsible for the bacon machine operation on the Columbus campus.

The Ohio Pork Council sponsored the machine, with bacon donations from Smithfield, Hormel and Sugardale.

Pre-dental student Shay Merritte loves “the overall Ohioness of it.”

And the bacon.

The Land & Livestock Post

Safe Processing!

Fits ATV’s and UTV’s!

ONE PERSON

can now SAFELY and EASILY process calves without concern of the protective mother cow!

Dennis Courtright, LA - “After putting the catcher together one morning, I needed to use it that afternoon with a very aggressive 3-yearold. Needless to say, it worked like a dream.

Thanks for a great product.”

Pat Realing, WY - “From a 67-year-old guy in Wyoming the calf catcher is a life saver. Catch all calves by my self. Doctor and band. Now my wife is much safer. Works great. Calves and cows are much calmer.”

Bar 4 Ranch, TX - “We love our Calf Catcher!

No people or animals have been hurt. The cows are more calm because they can see & smell the calves going to the pairs pasture. It is really a one-man job now!!”

Moving Pairs is Easy!

Watch action video at www.SafetyZoneCalfCatchers.com For local dealers or to order, call 877-505-0914 today!

DEALER INQUIRY INVITED



January 2019 — Issue II

5

News Use the correct pesticides in the right amounts for your region

By Kay LedBetter Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service

AMARILLO — While producers may find newer corn herbicides on the market, it is important to look at herbicide performance under regional environmental conditions before making any large purchases, said a Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service specialist.

There are many good herbicides on the market, but producers often find that some herbicides perform poorly under stressful Texas High Plains conditions, said Jourdan Bell, AgriLife Extension agronomist in Amarillo.

Bell said there were many good tank-mix options providing very good control, based on results from this year’s corn herbicide trials near Bushland.

However, she reminded producers that coverage is a key component. For corn herbicides, treatments were applied at a rate of 15 gallons per acre.

“In our corn herbicide trials at

Published by Bryan-College Station Communications, Inc. (979) 776-4444 or (800) 299-7355

President — Crystal Dupré....................................................Ext. 4613 Publisher and Editor — Darren Benson..................................Ext. 4653 Sales Manager — Linda Brinkman ....................................... Ext. 4740 Advertising Sales/General Manager — Jesse Wright ..............Ext. 4721 Finance Director — Kathy Brewer .........................................Ext. 4605 Production Director — Jerry Buck .........................................Ext. 4671 Circulation Director — Greg Parker ......................................Ext. 4752

Published by Bryan-College Station Communications, Inc., P.O. Box 3000, Bryan,Texas 77805.

E-mail: thepost@theeagle.com All offices are located at 1729 Briarcrest Drive Bryan,Texas 77802.

POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Eagle, P.O. Box 3000, Bryan,Texas 77805-3000 The Post is printed in part on recycled paper and is fully recyclable.

6

Bushland, application volume in addition to proper herbicide selection was the key to success,” she said.

“If we dropped the label guidelines of 15 gallons per acre; we often dropped success.”

The herbicide resistance seen across the High Plains states in both kochia and pigweed is, in part, due to less than maximum coverage over the years that left behind some weeds that built up the resistance, Bell said.

Another important consideration is the activation requirement of soil-applied herbicides, Bell said.

Some chemicals need to be activated with a half-inch rain or irrigation while other herbicides may need up to 1 inch of rain or irrigation; the exact amount of water needed is a function of the herbicide’s water solubility.

“While this is not a problem on irrigated acres, this can be a problem under limited irrigation and on dryland acres if precipitation is not received in a timely manner,” she said.

Palmer amaranth, tumble pigweed, kochia and Russian thistle are some of the weeds evaluated in the study, where multiple products with multiple modes of action are being tested, Bell said.

“Herbicides can be extremely expensive, so it is important that AgriLife Extension has the opportunity to evaluate newer herbicides under our environmental conditions and then be able to share that data with you,” she said.

While herbicides can be a significant production expense, it is important for producers to recognize the economic return on their herbicide investment, Bell said.

“Producers continually hear that weeds are using water and nutrients,” she said.

“In our corn herbicide trials, we have evaluated yields between different treatments.

We’ve seen up to an 80-bushel-

Texas A&M AgriLife photo by Kay Ledbetter Uncontrolled weeds in corn can use water and nutrients and negatively affect yields.

It is important to use the right pesticide for your region and in the correct amount to be effective. per-acre difference between a plot with well-controlled weeds and an untreated control plot due to the resources being wasted by weeds.

“That is significant, especially at lower corn prices and in a limited water environment.”

There’s not just one solution for a successful herbicide program in the High Plains, Bell said.

“A successful program generally includes herbicides with residual activities in addition to post-emergence herbicides with several modes of action,” she said.

“Having several modes of action along with good coverage allows producers to be more proactive against herbicide-resistant and hard-to-control weeds.”

The entire list of products tested, control levels and rotational intervals can be found at tinyurl. com/cornherbicides.

metal Roofing metal Building supply HAYBARNS CARPORTS STORAGE SHEDS AND MuCH MORE. FOR All YOuR RESIDENTIAl AND AGRICulTRuAl NEEDS lET uS HElP YOu CuSTOMIZE YOuR NEXT METAl PROJECT. DElIVERY AVAIlABlE

30X60X12 EAVE 1-10X10 FO All GAlVAluME

SAVE MONEY MANuFACTuRER DIRECT

1 2 5 0 3 H W Y 6 N AVA S O TA , T X 7 7 8 6 8 • 9 3 6 . 8 2 5 . 0 5 0 0 w w w. h i l c o s u p p ly . c o m • F O l l O W u S O N

January 2019 — Issue II



The Land & Livestock Post

News Does grazing cattle for years allow claim of adverse possession?

By tiffany dowell lashmet Texas A&M AgrLlife Extension Service

A

recent case from the 10th Court of Appeals in Waco deals with a question I am often asked: If a fence is built off the property line but has been there for decades and the non-title holding owner grazes the property as his own, does the property ownership change? The court’s opinion offers a great analysis of the various arguments landowners may make in this type of case and how such arguments are analyzed.

Background In 2014, Jay and Lindsey Parker purchased two pieces of property from Dick Taylor: a 102-acre property tract and a 20-acre property, which were separated by a fence. It is the 20 acres at issue in this case.

Glenn Weber owned 560 acres on the north, east and west sides of the 20 acres purchased by the Parkers. The boundary line between the disputed property and Mr. Weber was a creek, which forms the north, east, and west boundary of the 20 acres. There was a fence along the south side of the 20 acres. When Weber’s father bought the land, and when Weber bought it from him, they assumed they were buying everything under fence, including the 20 acres. Mr. Weber believes the fence was originally built in 1903, although he “rebuilt” it in 1959.

For decades, Weber used the 20 acres as pasture for grazing goats and cattle. When the Parkers began to work on the 20 acres, Mr. Weber sued, claiming ownership to the 20 acres based upon adverse possession.

At trial, the court awarded

Weber title to the property, finding that he satisfied the elements of proving adverse possession under Texas law. The Parkers filed this appeal.

Adverse possession requirements

The doctrine of adverse possession allows a person to claim and obtain title to real property presently owned by another. It commonly is known as “squatter’s rights.” Essentially, it allows a person who possesses and uses another’s land without permission eventually to become owner if a number of requirements are met. Keep in mind, succeeding on a claim of adverse possession is difficult.

In order to obtain title to land by adverse possession, the party claiming adverse possession must show “actual and visible appropriation of real property, commenced and continued under a claim of right that is inconsistent with and is hostile to the claim of another person” for a certain length of time provided by statute. See Texas Civil Practices and Remedies Code Section 16.021(1).

In order to prove adverse possession under the 10-year statute of limitations period (which was the one at issue in this case), the claimant must prove: “property held in peaceable and adverse possession by another who cultivates, uses, or enjoys the property” and “actual and visible appropriation must exist during the entire 10-year period.” See Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code Section 16.026. Put another way, a claimant must prove (1) he adversely possessed the property under “claim of right” (meaning with intent to claim ownership); (2) peaceable (meaning continuous possession not interrupted by suit to recover the property); (3) open and no-

The Land & Livestock Post



torious “use, cultivation or enjoyment” of the property such that an owner would be put on notice; and (4) continuous throughout the 10-year limitations period.

Although not at issue in this case, there are a couple of important points to note: First, it is important to note that a person who uses property with permission cannot obtain title by adverse possession, as the claim must be hostile to the actual owner. Second, possession must be continuous during the limitations period. For example, a farmer who used land for more than 20 years, but allowed it to lie fallow every fourth year could not establish adverse possession. See Parker v. McGinnes, 842 S.W.2d 357

(Tex. Ct. App. – Houston 1992).

Third, under the 10-year statute of limitations, the payment of property taxes for the 10-year period is not sufficient to prove adverse possession. See Rhodes v. Cahill, 802 S.W.2d 643 (Tex. 1990).

Appellate court opinion The 10th Court of Appeals in Waco reversed the trial court, finding that Weber failed to prove adverse possession. Thus, the 20 acres remains the property of the Parkers.

First, the court held that the fence on the southern edge of the 20 acres was a causal fence.

Adverse possession recognizes two kinds of fences: casual fences and designed enclosures.

A person who argues that they grazed their cattle within the fenced property must prove that the fencing was designated enclosure in order to succeed on an adverse possession claim.

“When a claimant relied on grazing to acquire limitation title, the land must be enclosed to give evidence that it was designedly enclosed and that the claimant is asserting a claim hostile to the true owner.” See Parker v. Gaines, 842 S.W.2d 357 (Tex. Ct. App. – Houston 1992).

If the disputed tract of land has been enclosed with other land, especially when the other land is owned by the claimant, the enclosure is casual.

Further, if a fence existed be-

See FENCE, Page 8

Improve your herd’s productivity

DA L N I T M A R H OW S DS FEE

E

WIX E TL C AT R & OILE R AL E MIN ERS D FEE ONE T R O VIG ER ALS MIN ND A TUB S DER FEE

January 2019 — Issue II

LIMOUSIN CATTLE

WILL GUARANTEE HALF OF YOUR CALF CROP WITH: s Angu ow N Bulls able Avail

• Calfing Ease - Gentle • Growth and Muscle Means $$$ de • Virgin - Red or Black Bulls A Wi tion c e l • Replacement Heifers Se hoose to C rom!

• All w/E.P. D. Papers F • Certified Bangs & TB Free • LimFlex - Limousin Angus Hybrid

C.F.L.X. Ranch 21314 O.S.R. Madisonville, TX 77864

(903) 344-2331

Cell 281-808-5511 or (281) 808-3473

7

News Fence, from Page 7 fore the party seeking adverse possession took possession of the land, and the party fails to prove the purpose for which the fence was built, it is a casual fence. A casual fence may be converted into a designed enclosure if there is evidence of substantial modification. Merely repairing or maintaining casual fences — even for the purposes of keeping animals in — does not convert a casual fence to an enclosure.

For example, where a party converted a 3-strand barbed wire fence into a net fence and put in all new posts to ensure it would hold sheep, substantial modification occurred and the fence became a designed enclosure. See McDonald v.

Weinacht, 465 S.W.2d 136, 144 (Tex. 1971). Conversely, where a party replaced the barbed wire and posts of the original fence, the nature was not completely changed and it remained a casual fence. See Mendoza v.

Ramirez, 336 S.W.3d 321, 329 (Tex. Ct. App. – El Paso 2010).

Here, Weber offered no proof as to who built the fence or for what purpose it was built in 1903.

Although Weber claimed to have “rebuilt” the fence in 1959, the court held there was insufficient evidence to convert the casual fence to a designed enclosure.

He did not testify as to why he rebuilt the fence, what the fence was made of prior to the rebuilding, or what the new fence was built with. Thus, the court held the fence was not substantially changed and remained a casual enclosure.

Further, in this case, the property was not entirely enclosed — it was fenced only on the south side of the property and it did not go up the bluff or down the river in order to attach to any other fence.

There was also testimony that animals may have been able to leave the 20 acres through a gap

8

between the bluff and the fence.

Thus, no designated enclosure existed.

Continuous grazing Second, Weber argued the fact that his cattle used the property for grazing was sufficient use to prove adverse possession. Again, without a fence, mere grazing alone likely would not satisfy adverse possession. For example, in Parker v. McGinnes, the plaintiff had grazed the land some years, cultivated it some years, and did not enclose for grazing. This was found insufficient to put the owner on notice.

In this case, Weber testified to running 60 cows on the total of the property under fence–his 560 acres and the 20 disputed acres.

The court held that the mere fact that his livestock could have crossed onto the 20 acres to graze was insufficient. He did not offer any evidence of how often the cows or goats were on the 20 acres versus the remainder of his property. The fact that livestock could have crossed onto disputed property from an adjoining tract of land is insufficient to be notice of a hostile claim.

Casual use Third, Weber argued that he made sufficient “casual use” of the property that a title-holder should have known a hostile claim was being asserted. He claims to have cut brush, ridden horses, and otherwise maintained the 20 acres.

The court held that such casual activities did not constitute adverse possession, and cited a litany of cases supporting that determination.

For example, courts have found that grazing, occasional hunting, and constructing deer blinds and deer feeders was insufficient to prove adverse possession. See Harlow v. Giles, 132 S.W.3d 641 (Tex. Ct. App. – Eastland 2004).

Building and maintaining roads Fourth, Weber claimed that he built and maintained roads on the property. Weber offered no testimony that he had built any of the roads on the property, what they were made of, what they were used for, or whether they were maintained

by Weber. Without evidence of these roads being a permanent improvement, adverse possession was not proven.

Note, Weber has filed a Motion to Reconsider with the court.

Take aways First, keep in mind that it is extremely difficult for a claimant to prove successfully the elements of adverse possession.

As you see here, there are numerous elements that must be proven, and courts very strictly apply each of these requirements.

Second, if you own land and the fences are not on the property line, it is important to be aware of these rules and consider taking action to avoid an adverse possession claim. This may involve putting something in the deed records either stating that despite the fence, the landowner continues to use the property or granting permission to the claimant to use the land, as adverse possession cannot be maintained if permission exists.

Third, if you are person utilizing someone else’s land with the intent to claim adverse possession, it is important to understand the requirements that must be met in order to successfully make that claim, such as the designated enclosure. As many of the cases cited above, as well as the Wells v. Johnson case from the Amarillo Court of Appeals back in 2014 indicate, succeeding in proving adverse possession when relying on grazing or hunting as the use is very difficult.

41st Annual

Cattleman Bull & Female

Sale

January 19, 2019 12 Noon

El Campo Livestock Auction ExpEcting 100 Bulls

Charolais - Sim-Angus Brangus - Angus Hereford - Brahman Limousin - Charbray Braford - Brahmousin consignors:

Bayvue Farms • West Charolais Bar J Charolais Rocky Bottom Cattle Co. Nieveen Farms • Mary A Ranch Placid Land & Cattle Co. Caney Creek Ranch La Fonda Ranch • 4K Limousin Illeen Mickens • Donna Mickens John Zamazal • Anthony Goss

www.cattlemansale.com For More information:

Adrian Knight (TX Lic 11102) • 903-452-7591 Kelly Conley (TX Lic 9558) • 903-850-3449

January 2019 — Issue II



The Land & Livestock Post

News Caprock Crop Production Conference set Jan. 25 in Floyd County

By Kay LedBetter Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service

FLOYDADA — The annual Caprock Crop Production Conference, hosted by the Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service offices in Floyd and Crosby counties, will be Jan. 25 at the Floyd County Friends Unity Center.

The center is located six miles west of Floydada and four miles east of Lockney on U.S. 70.

The conference is open to all area producers as well as anyone interested in crop production, according to AgriLife Extension agriculture and natural resources agents Caitlin Jackson of Crosby County and Cristen Brooks of Floyd County.

Registration will begin at 7 a.m., with the program beginning at 8 a.m. and concluding by 5:30 p.m. The cost is $35 for those preregistered by Jan. 18, and $45 at the door. Lunch will be provided, as well as

a conference cap, door prizes and program materials.

Among the door prizes will be an iPad from Vista Bank and a .22 rifle from Plains Land Bank.

To register or get more information, call the AgriLife Extension offices in Floyd County at 806-983-4912 or Crosby County at 806-675-2347.

Ten Texas Department of Agriculture continuing education units — five general, two integrated pest management, two laws and regulations, and one drift minimization — will be offered. The program also is approved for 10 certified crop adviser credits: two soil and management, three IPM, two crop management and three professional development.

Topics and speakers will be: • Cotton Planting Strategies — Murilo Maeda, AgriLife Extension cotton specialist in Lubbock.

• Weed Management Strategies —

Peter Dotray, AgriLife Extension weed specialist in Lubbock.

• Legislative Updates for 2019 — Joe Outlaw, AgriLife Extension economist and co-director of the Agricultural and Food Policy Center at Texas A&M University in College Station.

• Pest Control in Cotton — Suhas Vyavhare, AgriLife Extension cotton entomologist in Lubbock.

• Laws and Regulations — Praveen Sapkota, TDA inspector in Lubbock.

• Agriculture Law Update — Tiffany Lashmet, AgriLife Extension agricultural law specialist in Amarillo.

• Drift Minimization — Jacob Reed, BASF field biologist in Lubbock.

• Irrigation Applications — Rick Kellison, Texas Alliance for Water Conservation director in Lockney.

• Diseases Affecting Cotton and Corn Producers — Terry Wheeler, Texas A&M AgriLife Research plant pathologist in

Lubbock.

• Cotton Fiber Quality — Brendan Kelly, AgriLife Research cotton research assistant professor in Lubbock.

The conference also will include a trade show with vendors displaying their latest products and equipment.

Brien Water Wells Experts in Water Well Drilling & Irrigation Systems Serving your water needs for 4 generations.

PUMP SALES & SERVICE • Pressure Tanks • Home & Farm Pumps & Parts • Submersible & Lineshaft Turbines for Irrigation & Public Systems WATER WELL DRILLING • Agricultural • Residential • Commercial

Brien Water Wells circa 1940s.

Brien Water Wells present day.

Hwy 6 South, Hearne, TX

979-279-2427

Brien Water Wells has the experience and know-how to assist you in all your water needs, call today!

The Land & Livestock Post



January 2019 — Issue II

9

News

Eating right

Developing a herd nutrition plan

By RoBeRt FeaRs Special to The Post

F

eed costs are one the biggest expenses in a cow-calf operation and an effective way to increase profits is to develop and follow a herd nutrition plan. Building a complete nutritional program for the cow herd was addressed at the 2018 School for Successful Ranching by Stephen Blezinger of ABC Nutrition Services in Sulphur Springs.

Information in this article was taken from Blezinger’s presentation, unless noted otherwise.

Nutritional programs vary greatly in scope and detail. Some are simple, involving only grass and hay from which cattle must get their required nutrients or do without. Other programs, however, are very complex and built around multiple forage types and supplements. Some of these more complicated plans are designed carefully and others utilize the shotgun approach.

Unfortunately, both of these approaches have faults. The simple program compromises animal performance such as breeding, health and growth. Money is lost by the operation because animals are not performing optimally. The overly complex program with an extensive array of supplements probably is costing too much money and wasting nutrients. Also, it is possible that the oversupply of specific nutrients

10

Photo by Robert Fears Know the nutrient levels in pasture forage. Nutritional programs can vary from simple — grasses and hay — to complex, involving multiple forage types and supplements.

depress performance.

Many producers only consider the herd’s nutritional needs at the time nutrient deficiencies occur. As the fall and winter-feeding season approaches and a forage source is needed, these producers decide they need to provide a mineral or protein source without a lot of advance

planning. This action reduces or eliminates the opportunity to evaluate feeding and supplementation options. Because of lack of planning, the main purchasing consideration often becomes the feed or supplement unit price without any thought to their nutrient content.

In the cow-calf industry, there

January 2019 — Issue II



is a constant unwavering need to maximize efficiency and revenues.

This need does not necessarily call for maximizing production. Cost of increasing calving percentage, for instance, actually may decrease net revenues.

See NUTRITION, Page 11

The Land & Livestock Post

News vary with animal size, reproduction stage, age and amount of milk production.

Ed Rayburn of West Virginia University Extension Service addressed nutrient requirements for beef cattle in his September 2013 publication: extension.wvu.edu/ files/d/4095370d-9c6c-4448a092-862a676b2713/beef-cattle-nutrient-requirements. pdf

Nutrition, from Page 10 Since nutrition is the single highest annual expense for most operations, it makes sense to plan the feeding program as completely as possible and understand that it is a dynamic plan that requires constant monitoring and forward thinking.

Nutrition plan basics

There are several basic concepts to incorporate into a herd nutrition plan. Suc-

cessful cow-calf operations are built on a forage base that is grazed pastures and harvested forage such as hay, haylage or silage. The largest amount of dry matter and nutrients required by a cow should come from these sources of forage.

When drought or other adverse weather conditions reduce ranch forage supply, then hay is purchased or cattle are moved to rented pastures — which increases feed costs.

Pasture nutrient values, especially crude protein,

The Land & Livestock Post



are dynamic — they move up and down throughout the year. With proper grazing and management practices plus sufficient rainfall, crude protein values usually are adequate from March through October in coastal bermudagrass pastures. In November through February, crude protein levels are too low to meet animal requirements. Good quality hay or some other source of crude protein should be fed to grazing cattle during this period.

Nutrient requirements

January 2019 — Issue II

Tables 1,and 2 contain a portion of the data submitted by Rayburn. Nutrient requirements for different sizes of a mature cow nursing a calf are shown in Table 1. Average daily gain is usually not expected during this reproductive stage. The goal is to maintain body condition, perhaps allowing a slight decrease. Data in this table show that an increase of approximately 1.5 pounds in dry matter intake is required for every additional 100 pounds of body weight.

Crude protein and total digestible nutrient requirements also increase as body weight increases. Animal size has little to no effect on calcium and phosphorus requirements.

Nutrient requirements of a 900-pound cow in various reproductive stages are shown in Table 2. The lowest nutrient requirements are for a dry cow and the highest amounts are required by lactating cows. Listed dry matter intake and required crude protein and total digestible nutrients increase with increased body size.

Table 3 shows nutrient requirements for 800-pound bred heifers. Average daily gain in good condition mature cattle usually is not

desired, however it is necessary in growing heifers. As in mature cows, the greatest nutrient needs is for lactating 2-year-old heifers.

Another consideration in developing a herd nutrition plan is management of the breeding/calving seasons.

With year-round breeding/ calving seasons, developing and managing an accurate program is challenging because you have multiple production classes at any given point. In calculating average nutrient requirements for the cow herd, there is a great deal of variability meaning a number of animals are overfed and others are underfed.

This results in a much lower degree of operational efficiency.

With a managed and limited breeding season, the nutritional program will have considerably less variability.

Breeding animals grouped in pastures according to reproduction stage offer the opportunity to supplement more accurately.

Creating the plan

Forage sampling and analysis provides important data for creating and managing a nutrition plan. Begin sampling pastures and harvested forages on a regular basis. Keep records of the analyses over time and track average nutrient values for specific forages during specific periods of time. An example is nutrient values of hay cut and baled in June of each year. Sample and test each hay cutting and record the results along with information such as fertilization, moisture conditions and

See HERD, Page 12

11

News it with salt and don’t use mineral blocks. Remember that “off the shelf” products may not fit your needs. Compared to other supplements, minerals are fairly expensive. A quality product can cost from $20 to $40 per bag.

The next component to consider is protein, a primary required nutrient.

Protein is composed of amino acids that are required in some form or level in virtually every functioning process in an animal’s body.

Deficiency in protein readily will show its effects. There are many ways that a producer can provide needed protein levels to cattle. Some of the choices are cottonseed, soybean and peanut meals; grain; breeder/range cubes; protein blocks and liquids; syrup blocks and tubs; and good quality hay.

Protein supplements also

supply energy, minerals and vitamins. As long as the analysis is correct, the form of protein is not that important for meeting nutritional needs. Base selection choices on costs, required labor for feeding, necessary feeding equipment and necessary storage.

The primary purpose of following a well-designed nutrition plan is to supply the herd with their required nutrients in an economically manner. Understand the ebb and flow of nutrients in your forage base and prepare to supplement only when necessary.

Consider establishing a breeding/calving season so cattle are in the same reproductive stage during a given period of time. A defined feeding program is a big step toward increasing ranch profits.

Brazos Valley Livestock Brazos Valley Livestock Commission, Inc. Commission, Inc.

Photo by Robert Fears Good quality hay can furnish required nutrients during fall and winter. Hay can be part of a simple nutritional plan for your herd.

Herd, from Page 11 crop maturity estimates. Develop a relationship with a good forage laboratory that delivers accurate analyses and helps interpret results.

Identify your cattle reproduction groups and determine their nutrients over the production year. Develop a relationship with a qualified nutritionist. This person may work for a national or local feed company or as an independent. A consultant can assist in developing and tracking information and in

12

building a complete nutritional program.

Develop a nutrient requirement calendar, which is done fairly quickly and easily on a computer spreadsheet. It also can be done just as effectively with paper and pencil. The primary goal is to put the calendar in writing so it is available for tracking and planning.

A nutrient requirement calendar is used to schedule forage nutrient availabilities over a given period of time.

Ensure all nutrients (crude protein, total digestible

nutrients, minerals and vitamins) are on the schedule.

Even a shortage of one nutrient can affect animal performance negatively. Do not expect calendar accuracy from the very beginning. It is work in progress to help plan nutrient purchases.

There are multiple requirements required at a given time. Generally, the nutrient group that requires supplementation year-round are minerals and vitamins.

Start your mineral program with a good, loose, freechoice product. Don’t cut

Sales: Tuesdays @ 12 Noon 6097 East Hwy. 21 • Bryan, TX

(979) 778-0904

Rural Land Loans Country Home Loans Farm & Ranch Loans

CAPITAL

FARM CREDIT

Livestock Loans Equipment Loans

Bryan Credit Office 3000 Briarcrest Dr., Ste. 101 979.775.0404 | 877.775.0404 CapitalFarmCredit.com

Operating Capital Leasing

Texas’ LargesT ruraL Lender

January 2019 — Issue II



The Land & Livestock Post

News New computer model

Decades of data to help producers predict wheat forage success

By AdAm Russell Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service

OVERTON — A new pioneering forage wheat model could provide a valuable technique to researchers exploring the potential of biomass production for cool-season annual forage grasses, according to model developers.

Researchers at the Texas A&M AgriLife Research and Extension Center in Overton — Monte Rouquette, Texas A&M AgriLife Research plant physiologist, and Prem Woli, AgriLife Research crop modeler — recently published a paper i n Agronomy Journal titled “Simulating Winter Wheat Forage Production in the Southern U.S. Using a Forage Wheat Model.”

It focuses on annual forage grass modeling with the Decision Support System for Agrotechnology Transfer, or DSSAT, suite of crop computer models.

Research by Charles Long, AgriLife Research animal breeder and center director; Ray Smith, AgriLife Research plant breeder, and Lloyd Nelson, AgriLife Research plant breeder and professor emeritus, all in Overton, also contributed to the publication.

“This model using DSSAT provides an application of decades of field data from Texas A&M AgriLife Research at Overton to be used to guide future decisions on forage wheat production,” Long said. “Simulating alternative outcomes for forage wheat production management options will ultimately aid producers in making decisions.”

DSSAT is a software application program that includes dynamic crop growth simulation models for more than 40 crops, according to the DSSAT website.

The program is supported by a range of utilities and applications for weather, soil, genetics,

Texas A&M AgriLife photo by Jourdan Bell Winter wheat is an important forage crop forTexas beef cattle producers.A new computerized crop model created by researchers at the Texas A&M AgriLife Research and Extension Center in Overton will allow researchers around the world simulate biomass production to help producers make science-based decisions regarding winter wheat forage growth. crop management and observational experimental data. It also includes example data sets for all the crop models included in the suite.

Crop simulation models, including the forage wheat model, simulate growth, development and biomass production as a function of the soil-plant-atmosphere dynamics and management.

The soil-plant-atmosphere system covers environmental factors such as soil type, weather — temperatures, solar radiation, wind and precipitation — and production management variables including cultivars, planting/harvesting dates and inputs such as nitrogen fertilizer, Rouquette said.

As other crop models, the forage wheat model may be used by researchers, educators or students to understand the mechanisms underlying forage wheat biomass production — or by growers or extension agents as a tool for optimizing forage wheat production, Woli said. Users can analyze “what-if” scenarios by manipulating the various factors that impact biomass production.

“The techniques and algorithms used while developing this model may be tremendously useful to other researchers interested in this field,” he said. “That is a significant contribution to annual forage grass modeling. A first annual forage grass model has been incorporated into the

See SUCCESS, Page 14

The Land & Livestock Post



January 2019 — Issue II

13

News Success, from Page 13 DSSAT suite.”

Over eight months, Woli input an incredible amount of data and calibrated the model parameters for evaluation. Woli “tinkered” with the equations and codes to create the new DSSAT forage model, Rouquette said.

Rouquette said around 30 growing seasons of winter wheat forage trial results data and 74 years of weather data from Overton and Henderson were used to

calibrate and evaluate the forage wheat model.

“We have a lot of history of small grain plantings for forage from Nelson’s variety trials here in Overton,” Rouquette said.

“The field data ensure simulations are accurate and verifiable based on realistic conditions producers face season to season.”

The forage wheat model was used by the researchers to study winter wheat biomass responses to nitrogen, as influenced by two soil types. One was Lilbert, a sandy loam soil with more or-

ganic matter and water-holding capacity. Another was Darco, a sandy soil with low organic matter and water-holding capacity.

Three planting dates were set between September and December and the ENSO — El Niño, La Niña and neutral — weather patterns, Woli said.

“By changing production factors, a model can simulate thousands of scenarios in minutes or hours compared to decades of field trials,” he said. “This is significant for forage production because it tells us what the variabilities mean in the form of biomass for livestock. It’s significant to researchers because until now we have only had the option of knowing what the outcome was under natural climate conditions each growing season.”

Of the various factors studied, Rouquette said nitrogen played the most important role in biomass production.

“If you’re not fertilizing in the Southern U.S., you’re not growing,” he said. “The ENSO was not a significant factor for winter wheat forage production in this region because wheat is drought tolerant and a cool-season forage that isn’t very susceptible to drought.”

For instance, the simulation results showed winter wheat biomass was optimized at 120 pounds of nitrogen fertilizer per acre on the Lilbert soil, whereas the Darco soil required 240 pounds of nitrogen per acre, Rouquette said.

Rouquette said the research was focused on modeling winter wheat forage production for various scenarios without consideration of whether management calibrations, such as nitrogen and irrigation, were cost-effective or prohibitive.

However, he noted, forag e modeling with market conditions

and input cost calibrations also considered could be possible in the future to help guide producer decision-making from season to season.

Woli and Rouquette are excited about the model and its continued application and improvement within the global DSSAT community, which includes thousands of scientists from more than 160 countries involved in modeling for a wide range of crops.

“You have to know something about the soil type, its fertility, the typical water availability and temperature when g rowing anything from winter wheat to tomatoes and pecans,” Woli said. “Those are the controlling factors. The model simulations let us look at the efficiency of all the factors while trying to maximize the biomass of forage winter wheat, but we hope to expand their use to other forage crops with other calibrations.”

Subscribe to the award-winning and receive 24 issues of the latest ag news and information about the issues that affect you!

Texas A&M AgriLife Extension photo Cattle grazing winter forages. Fertilization of winter pastures should be based on soil tests.

Pastures, from Page 3 usually is split in two to three applications. Phosphorus and potassium, if needed, can be applied at planting. The initial nitrogen application should be delayed until after the ryegrass is established to reduce nitrogen utilization by the warm season grass and possible leaching in sandy soils. Additional nitrogen can be applied in mid-winter and early spring.

Overseeded clover-ryegrass may not require any nitrogen or up to two applications, depending on the amount of early forage needed. Without nitrogen, suf-

14

ficient forage for grazing likely will not be available until February or early March, depending on location. The most common program is a single application in December to enhance ryeg rass production during the winter when there is very little clover growth. Maximum forage production is obtained with two applications of nitrogen, one after the ryegrass and clover are up and a second in mid-winter.

Nitrogen should not be applied in the spring if there is a good clover stand.

Phosphorus and potassium can be applied at planting or shortly after planting.

For only $19.95

q q

mail or register Online:

New Subscription Address Change

c/o Land & Livestock Post P.O. Box 3000 • Bryan, TX 77805 Or www.landandlivestockpost.com and click “subscribe”.

Name: Address: City:_____________________ St: ________ Zip: Phone #: Old Address (if applicable): City: _____________________St: _______Zip: Email Address: PAymENt INfOrmAtION

q Check Enclosed (Please make checks payable to The Eagle) q Please Bill my: q Mastercard q VISA q American Express

Account#:_____________________________CIV#:_____________ Name on Card: Amount: _________________________Expiration Date: Signature: Date:

January 2019 — Issue II



The Land & Livestock Post

News Pesticide collection in Wharton County leads to $228,000 savings

By Blair Fannin Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service

WHARTON — With half-empty containers of pesticide stacking up in barns, farmers in the Wharton County area had been waiting for the opportunity for responsible disposal as part of being good land stewards, according to A&M AgriLife experts.

Pesticide applicators generate and accumulate a significant amount of pesticide waste in the form of empty containers and unused pesticides. Pesticides become unused when they are either unregistered for use by the Environmental Protection Agency or become unidentifiable when product labels deteriorate or separate from containers.

The opportunity for appropriate disposal came recently as the Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service led an effort under the direction of its Wharton County Leadership Advisory Board.

They were joined by the Texas Department of Agriculture and Texas Commission on Environmental Quality for a daylong pesticide collection event at the Wharton County Fairgrounds.

It marked the first such event after a 10-year absence and featured representatives of the multiple agencies helping design, facilitate and coordinate the removal of unwanted pesticides and pesticide containers.

“Pesticide collection activities were once commonplace in counties across our state, as AgriLife Extension agents, along with their counterparts in the TDA and TCEQ would host waste collection days for ag producers to dispose of unused pesticides and pesticide containers,” said Philip Shackelford, AgriLife Extension regional program leader in College Station.

“However, due to a shift in priorities and a perpetual lack of funding, these pesticide collec-

tion events were discontinued,” Shackelford said. “Subsequently, many producers were forced to store unused pesticides and pesticide containers, oftentimes for many years without a method of disposing of them that was costeffective.”

Following the devastation caused by Hurricane Harvey, and the subsequent flooding that ensued, leftover products posed a huge contamination risk to groundwater and surface water as hundreds of farmsteads in Southeast Texas were flooded, Shackelford said.

“In the aftermath of the flooding, it was apparent that these unwanted and unused pesticides needed to be disposed of properly and in a safe manner,” he said.

Area producers serving on the Wharton County Leadership Advisory Board further identified the need for collection activities.

Corrie Bowen, AgriLife Extension agent for ag and natural resources, worked with Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Agricultural and Environmental Safety, agency partners in the Texas Department of Agriculture, local state Rep. Phil Stephenson, R-Wharton, and industry partners to establish a pesticide waste collection activity.”

The event was held at the Wharton County Fairgrounds.

More than 121,836 pounds of pesticide waste was collected, which included 21,305 pounds of solid pesticide/herbicide waste, 35,041 pounds of pesticide liquids bulked into either totes or various sized drums, and 61,023 pounds of pesticide and herbicide liquid in small jugs less than 5 gallons.

“This waste was transported in three semi-trucks back for disposal to a facility in Houston,” Shackelford said. “The average cost for the 114 vehicles that dropped off product would have been roughly $1,582.12 for disposal. In all, total savings were es-

The Land & Livestock Post



Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service photo The Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service led an effort under the direction of its Wharton County Leadership Advisory Board, joined by the Texas Department of Agriculture and Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, for a daylong pesticide collection event at theWharton County Fairgrounds. timated at $180,361.68. This does not include any transportation or labor charges, so the total average per vehicle would be close to $2,000, making the estimated total savings for producers in the seven-county area that was targeted about $228,000.”

“This was AgriLife Extension programming at its best,” Bowen said. “We have been and will continue to educate ag producers on the proper use and disposal of pesticides and pesticide waste products, however without events such as this, proper disposal can become an expensive and cumbersome task.”

Shackelford said with the support of the TDA and AgriLife Extension, “We are hoping that this activity will lay the groundwork for future pesticide waste collection activities that could be conducted across our state.”

Bowen said surveys completed by producers while they dropped off their waste pesticides show that 47 percent (55 of 117) had been storing their unused pesticides for over eight years, waiting for proper disposal; 44 percent for five to eight years; 8 percent for one to three years.

“There is a tremendous need for statewide collections as pesticide waste products stack up,” he said. “The success of this pesticide collection event verifies the tremendous need of coordinated collection activities in Texas.”

January 2019 — Issue II

15

News Antimicrobial stewardship for cow-calf producers explained

By Myriah Johnson Noble Research Institute

What is antimicrobial stewardship? Is it different from antibiotic stewardship, or judicious use of antibiotics? All of these words seem to be popping up frequently in the media, but what do they actually mean to cow-calf producers?

About antimicrobials

An antimicrobial is something that destroys or inhibits the growth of microorganisms but causes little or no damage to the host. The term “antimicrobial” is broad and encompasses microbes such as bacteria, parasites, viruses and fungi.

Antibiotics are a subset of antimicrobials used to address bacterial infections. A major concern is that most microorganisms have the ability to adapt, making the antimicrobials designed to kill them ineffective. Once these infectious organisms become resistant to treatments, they can cause many issues, including increased length or severity of sickness and, potentially, death.

Antimicrobial stewardship Being good stewards of, or judiciously using, antimicrobials is one way to ensure the drugs currently being used remain effective.

More broadly, most define antimicrobial stewardship with elements including: • Appropriate use.

• Improving patient outcomes.

• Reducing or slowing the spread of antimicrobial-resistant organisms (because some level of resistance will occur).

• Decreasing environmental contamination and exposure to antimicrobial waste in the environment.

16

• Decreasing environmental contamination and exposure is important because resistance genes can pass from one infectious organism to another. For instance, a resistant respiratory organism potentially can contribute to resistant salmonella or E. coli, which has a much greater threat to human health.

Looking for sciencebased solutions In June 2018, I was fortunate to attend a meeting at Hy-Plains Feedyard in Montezuma, Kansas, on science-based solutions to reduce antibiotic resistance in food animal production.

Dawn Sievert with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shared that in the U.S., 2 million people get infected with antibiotic-resistant bacteria each year and 23,000 die. Antibiotic resistance is expected to grow and eclipse cancer as a cause of death. It also was noted that human and companion animal misuse is part of the problem, and the CDC is working on that as well.

Dr. Ingrid Trevino-Garrison, state public health veterinarian for the Kansas Department of Health and Environment, related that 60 percent of the roughly 1,400 species of organisms are zoonotic, able to spread between animals and humans. So, what we do as cattle producers impacts not only our animals but our fellow human beings.

Apply waste to the soil

Tim LaPara, University of Minnesota BioTechnology Institute associate professor, shared that fecal material is often rich with antibiotic-resistant organisms and even fecal matter from healthy humans and animals is a concern.

LaPara said we need to hunt

Photo courtesy of Noble Research Institute An antimicrobial is something that destroys or inhibits the growth of microorganisms but causes little or no damage to the host. and kill the places where antibiotic resistance exists, and an easy target is animal waste and municipal wastewater. As producers, one of the best things we can do is apply animal waste to the soil rather than let it accumulate or run off. Resistance declines over time when the waste is applied to soil. So, consider cleaning your weaning lots and rotating pastures.

only 1.5 percent of antibiotic use in beef production is in the cowcalf sector. Based on that, it’s easy to shrug off antimicrobial resistance and say, “We’re not the issue.” But we learned from these specialists that animal waste is

an issue, even from healthy animals. So, if 60 percent of organisms are zoonotic and antibiotic resistance is expected to eclipse cancer, it is an issue and begins

See TERMS, Page 17

Use all tools available to prevent sickness We learned from Dr. Mike Apley, Kansas State University production medicine professor, that any new antibiotic is probably a remix of an old antibiotic. The last new group was added in 1978, and it is unlikely that any new group of antibiotic (if approved) would become available for food animals. To me, this says we have to be good stewards of what we have, and we need to use all the tools possible in preventing sickness in our animals.

Management practices matter

SALE EACH SATURDAY

Dr. Randall Spare noted that

January 2019 — Issue II



The Land & Livestock Post

REAL ESTATE

News

AUCTION

75.224 ACRES | BURLESON CO, TX | 1 TRACT

Photo by Noble Research Institute A rancher prepares a microbial injection for his cattle.

Terms, from Page 16 with us as cow-calf producers.

Spare said management practices determine the use of antibiotics later in production. Everything we do as cow-calf producers is critical and matters. We naturally reduce the use of antibiotics with defined management practices, including: • Proper vaccination (timing and product).

• Biosecurity.

• Nutritional management, specifically during gestation and post-weaning.

• Colostrum management.

• Cow body condition score immediately before and after calving.

All of these should be considered as part of good health management and antimicrobial stewardship.

Collaboration needed to understand issues As cattle producers, everything we do is influential in the life of each of our animals. That’s why it is critical to have a management plan in place and to follow best management practices. It’s our

responsibility to do all we can to reduce our animals’ need for antibiotics on our ranches and beyond.

However, even when best management practices are applied, animals still get sick, begging the question, “Why?” As producers we need to understand what we can tweak and how we can continue to improve our management.

Addressing this issue will require collaboration among cowcalf producers, stocker producers, feedlots and the rest of the beef cattle industry.

We will have to follow animals through the entirety of their lives in a commercial setting to begin to understand these issues better.

Here at Noble, we are keen on being involved in these conversations and hope you are too.

Yes, there are things that other sectors can do better, and they are working on it — but we must do our part, too.

So, the next time you use an antibiotic, think about if it is the proper dose, the best antibiotic to use, or if it’s just what you have on hand.

Antimicrobial stewardship matters to us all, and it’s our responsibility to tackle it.

The Land & Livestock Post



We are pleased to offer this gorgeous recreational ranchette, just 4 miles west of downtown Caldwell off Highway 21. The property boasts native grass pastures, gently rolling hills, a thick creek bottom and a 2-acre pond. Fenced and cross fenced with multiple pastures lending itself well to rotational grazing. Roughly 30 miles to College Station, this property is for those looking for a country property with city convenience.

AUCTION DATE: FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 2019, NOON CST AUCTION LOCATION: Caldwell Civic Center 103 Texas Highway 21, Caldwell, TX PROPERTY LOCATION: CR 108 Caldwell, TX BLAIR MATTHEWS | Agent | (281) 924-8821 blair.matthews@whitetailproperties.com

whitetailproperties.com | 217.285.9000

williamsauction.com | 918.362.7329

Whitetail Properties Real Estate, LLC | DBA Whitetail Properties | Nebraska & North Dakota DBA Whitetail Trophy Properties Real Estate LLC. | Whitetail Properties Broker: Joey Bellington TX Lic No. 584527 | Williams & Williams Broker: Daniel Scott Nelson Lic No. 618260 | Auctioneer: Thomas E. Barnes III Lic No. 6457 | 5% Buyer’s Premium w/ $2500 minimum per parcel.

January 2019 — Issue II

17

Solid Rock Ranch

Green Meadows

3 year old bulls.

One breeding season guarantee.

Registered Angus

Angus Bulls

To advertise contact: Jesse Wright 979.731.4721 or jesse.wright@theeagle.com Cleere Earthworks L.L.C. Texas a&M Class of ‘02

Bryan Credit Office 3000 Briarcrest Ste 101 979.775.0404 | 877.775.0404 CapitalFarm Credit.com

Bulls Angus ChArolAis hereford sim/Angus

A large selection of two year olds, performance records, range raised and range ready, fertility tested, all virgin. Quality to compare anywhere!

PAt griswold CAttle Co Goldthwaite, Texas Mobile: 817.946.8320

Land Clearing • Ponds • Roads • Pads Dozer • Excavator • Scraper • Dump Truck

979-324-8746 Travis Cleere www.cleereearthworks.com

Agricultural

Insurance Agency, Inc. All Your Agri- Insurance Needs

979.776.2697

Cattle & Domestic Hog Processing Theiss Sausage Company Normangee, TX 936-396-9300

www.theisssausageco.com

Farmers market

lIVEstocK WaNtED

horsEs-cattlE ANGUS BULLS: 3 year old bulls. Solid Rock Ranch, Matt Jones, Franklin, TX. 979-777-7571 www.solidrockranch.com CHAROLAIS A+ BULLS: Reg Top Qualilty, Gentle, Polled, Tested. LBW, Fancy Charolais Heifers. Ranch Bred & Raised.

(254)729-8644, (254)747-2701

Space Deadline: Wednesdsy by 5pm

Call 776-SELL

18

Buddy Micklitz

Matt Jones. Franklin, TX. 979.777.7571 www.solidrockranch.com

BULLS • Heifers Breeding Bulls Madisonville, TX

936-349-1955

Karl (Buddy) Micklitz Jr. Bryan, TX micklitz@verizon.net (C) 979.218.8674 (H) 979.779.0420

Specializing in Deer Commercial Ranch Exotics Fencing, Barns, Project Design, Game Fence, Welding, Stalls, Selective Brush Clearing, Commercial Chain Link, Custom Projects

SPILLMAN & SONS RANCH Tommy and Ruth Spillman Registered Line One Herefords

All types of structurAl steel & pipe Steel Buildings

979-589-2333 1-866-959-2333 pioneerboys.com

Angus & BrAngus

Bull For sAle

Charolais Bulls, Heifers, and Cows Available!

BULLS FOR SALE Ranch phone- 903-626-5785 Tommy Spillman (cell) 979-331-8660 9995 County Road 353  Gause, TX 77857

Ranch located 2 1/2 miles northwest of Jewett, TX on CR 336

merCHaNDIse MIsc For salE

Jordan Trailer Sales

San Saba, TX “Authorized Dealer” • A Large Selection of Trailers in Stock • Custom Ordering Avail.

Call (325) 372-5159 www.jordancattle.com

Dr. Roy W Hann Jr.  (979) 255 - 5709 Tyson Hann  (979) 324 - 6659

Steve Schultz • 979-218-8680 Charles Schultz • 979-219-0930

tyson@svrtx.com

Celebrating 20+ years of Registered Charolais

The most up to date local news you will find.

STEEL CULVERTS

Saturday Open Houses

Only $19.95!

AI Sires: Basin Payweight 1682, Connealy Thunder, Connealy Packer 547, C C A Emblazon 702, Koupal Advance 28 and Cole Creek Cedar Ridge 1V.

RANCH

PastUrEs-stalls PASTURE LEASE(S) Needed, Matt Jones, Franklin, Tx 979-777-7571 www.solidrockranch.com

5 ft, 7 ft, 8ft, 9ft & 10ft diameter, veritable lengths, Delivery Available. Call 713-822-8778.

Saturday Open Houses Only $19.95!

Call 776-SELL (7355) January 2019 — Issue II



The Land & Livestock Post

News A&M researchers discover important biomarker for diabetes

By Paul SchattenBerg Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service

A recent study led by researchers in Texas A&M University’s department of nutrition and food science shows how a novel regulatory mechanism serves as an important biomarker for the development of diabetes, as well as a potential therapeutic target for its prevention.

The study can be found online in the November edition of the diabetes journal of the American Diabetes Association at diabetes.diabetesjournals.org/ content/67/11/2167 or PubMed. gov at www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ pubmed/30201683.

“Glucagon and insulin are the most important pancreatic hormones in target tissues, such as the liver, in control of proper glucose levels in response to food intake,” said Shaodong Guo, Texas A&M AgriLife Research scientist in the department of nutrition and food science at Texas A&M. Guo was primary investigator and corresponding author for the study, which involved several other researchers from the department. Additional participation in the study came from the department of endocrinology at Third Military Medical University in Chongqing, China; the division of endocrinology, department of medicine at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland; and the department of chemistry at Cleveland State University in Cleveland, Ohio.

During fasting, Guo said, glucagon is secreted from pancreatic a-cells to elevate blood glucose, protecting the body from hypoglycemia. Glucagon also has been tied to the development of diabetic hyperglycemia, mainly through enhancing hepatic glucose production, or HGP. Transcription factor Foxo1, a protein that plays an important role in regulating the expression

of genes, promotes HGP through increasing expression of genes encoding the rate-limiting enzymes responsible for glucose production, he said.

“Glucagon exerts its function through binding to a G-proteincoupled receptor or GCGR,” Guo explained. “When the receptor binds with glucagon it stimulates the cell membrane, which in turn activates protein kinase A, or PKA, signaling for metabolic enzymes or gene expression to increase blood glucose.”

Guo said an excess blood glucagon level is present in animals and humans with diabetes, stimulating excessive HGP and contributing to diabetic hyperglycemia.

“Disruption of proper hepatic glucose production serves as a major underlying mechanism for the development of Type 2 diabetes,” he said. “The pancreatic hormone glucagon increases HGP and insulin decreases it. Together, they control blood glucose homeostasis.”

Guo said glucose production is suppressed by insulin involved in the gene transcriptional regulation in the nucleus of liver cells, and Foxo1 is an important component of insulin-signaling cascades that regulate cellular growth, differentiation and metabolism.

“The purpose of this study was to learn what role Foxo1 plays in how glucagon regulates HGP,” he said. “We investigated the molecular and physiological mechanism of Foxo1 regulation through phosphorylation with the aim of better understanding the fundamentals of blood glucose homeostasis and the pathogenesis of diabetes.”

Phosphorylation, the attachment of a phosphoryl group, is important for protein function as this alteration activates or deactivates almost half of the body’s enzymes, regulating their function.

The Land & Livestock Post



Photo courtesy Texas A&M College of Agriculture and Life Sciences Shaodong Guo, right, with Texas A&M University undergraduate trainee and study coauthor Caitlyn Hornsby, who is supported by an American Diabetes Association undergraduate internship award.

To establish how this Foxo1 phosphorylation would work in

January 2019 — Issue II

an animal model, the researchers used CRISPR/CAS9 technol-

ogy in the generation of Foxo1 “knock-in” mice to use in their investigation.

“Foxo1 is stabilized in the liver of fasting mice when insulin is decreased and glucagon is increased in the blood circulation,” he said.

Guo said the study showed hepatic Foxo1 deletion in the mice significantly reduced hepatic glucose production and blood glucose.

“This result, along with what we learned from some the previous research done in conjunction with the department, showed we had identified a novel molecular, cellular and physiological mechanism by which Foxo1 mediates glucagon signaling via phosphorylation to control hepatic gluconeogenesis and blood glucose.”

19

HOUSTON LIVESTOCK SHOW AND RODEO

TM

held in conjunction with Cattlemen’s Appreciation Day

REGISTERED RANGE BULL SALE 10 a.m.

COMMERCIAL FEMALE SALE 1 p.m.

For consignment information contact the Cattle Sales Manager: Gulf Tex Livestock Marketing • gulftexlivestock.com • gulftexlivestock@gmail.com P.O. Box 540, Anderson, Texas 77830 • 979.482.2018

For more information visit rodeohouston.com JOIN US FOR THE 2019 SHOW FEB. 25 - MARCH 17, 2019

20

January 2019 — Issue II



The Land & Livestock Post