Cattle Country - June 2025 by ManitobaBeefProducers

AgriStability Changes Provide Better Protection for Producers

BY ANGELA LOVELL

If there has ever been a year for beef producers to consider enrolling in the AgriStability program, it’s this year, given the high-risk environment and uncertainty around the potential threat of 25 per cent tariffs on beef and livestock exports into the United States.

The federal government has made changes to AgriStability to reflect some of these trade risks and make it more responsive, including increasing the compensation rate from 70 to 80 per cent (which is a permanent change, not just for this year). The government is also discussing increasing the compensation rate further to 90 per cent, and increasing the program cap from its current $3 million to $6 million for 2025, but none of those changes have been approved at time of writing.

“For cow-calf producers, the change in compensation rate is quite meaningful,” says Tyler Fulton, Manitoba Beef Producers Director and President of the Canadian Cattle Association. “It’s a significant increase

that, if producers trigger a payment, will cover more of their loss. Margins are excellent in the cow-calf business today and even if producers don’t think they would trigger a payment this year, it’s an opportunity to start building their reference margin that will make it easier to trigger in future years if there is a downturn, or they are exposed to a big risk.”

Easier to apply and cash options

The deadline to register has also been extended to July 31, making it easier for producers to sign up, and they can also choose whether they want to opt to report on a cash or accrual basis. If they choose the cash option, they won’t need to provide the five years of inventory information that is required for the accrual option, but will just need to submit their allowable income and expenses for 2025 (although first-time participants will need to submit inventory information for 2025 at the end of the year).

For some producers, though, the decision about whether to opt for the cash or accrual program option is not an easy one and takes some work to figure out.

“Everyone has to make that calculation and see if they would be better to go on a cash basis or not,” says Ben Hamm, a farm management specialist (forage and livestock) with Manitoba Agriculture. “In some cases, accruals help increase their reference margin, and for others if they decide go on a cash basis it could reduce their margins if they have had positive accrual adjustments in those reference years.”

It’s definitely an easier decision for producers who are already enrolled in the program and have a few years of data to consult.

“If they are in the program already, they receive a calculation of program benefits that spells out the answer for them,” Hamm says. “They can look at their cash margin on the five-year program view sheet and that will tell them what their cash margin is and what their accrual margin is. If it is higher on the cash, then certainly they could opt in for the cash option, but they need to take a look at it.”

11 

Running a SMALL BUSINESS means staying agile, and when opportunities arise, timing is everything.

Whether you’re expanding operations, purchasing inventory, or covering unexpected costs, we put the power of quick funding in your hands.

Strike a pose! This cow-calf pair were photographed soaking up the spring sun. (Photo courtesy Julie W.)

A Look at Interprovincial Trade Challenges

Needless to say, the past few months have been rife with trade uncertainty, with the threats of tariffs coming to fruition only to be rolled back on multiple occasions. The situation has definitely raised a lot of blood pressures in the cattle sector. Hopefully some of that is behind us, but with ongoing trade uncertainly, combined with an upcoming Canada-US-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) review, we can expect it to remain front of mind.

Taking the optimistic approach that we should never waste a good disaster, there is opportunity here to investigate further trade diversification with other nations and to address some of the tariff and non-tariff trade barriers that are slowing those relationships. It also forces us to look inwards at what hurdles and limitations we have here in Canada.

That brings us to the big flavour of the day most people have seen and heard a lot about: interprovincial trade. In the beef industry this is something we really weigh in on with a few different perspectives. First off, we see a lot of live cattle move all across the country and, being in Manitoba, we know cattle from our sales end up destined to move to locations either to the east or the west of us.

While most of this flow can happen quite freely, there is room for improvement. The transport rules in Canada that are federal in origin are then provincially enforced to different standards. And then there are a number of transport-related matters that fall under provincial jurisdiction all together. For example, we don’t have stan-

MATTHEW ATKINSON President’s Column

dardization for truck configurations, such as number of axles, lift axles, drive axles or high-capacity steer axles. We also have higher speed limits in some provinces that exceed the maximum speed allowed by speed limiting devices in other provinces. This means it’s hard to make some of this transport as efficient as it could be when doing specifications and outfitting trucks to travel across the country. There have been a few different proposed solutions for this, from working on national standards to making a standardized national transportation corridor, such as on our Trans Canada Highway. Area such as these, in transportation, are ones where we continue to work towards uniformity and consistency.

Having uniformity and consistency in standards is important in other areas too when it comes to interprovincial trade. One of the topics of conversation that came up at times during our recent federal election discussion was around interprovincial trade in meat. There is considerable complexity around this. A large volume of Canadian beef is destined for export markets around the world. It must meet the standards our customers require as part of trade agreements, which means this meat must be processed in federally-inspected plants.

By comparison, a small amount of all beef processed in Canada is done at provincially-inspected abattoirs, with each province and territory independently setting the meat inspection standards for these facilities. At this time the provincial standards for these types of plants are not uniform and do not necessarily meat the same standards required for federally-inspected processing facilities. It is essential that Canadian meat destined for export meets the trade obligations as we would not want to see a situation arise where meat from a provincially-inspected plant inadvertently get into a shipment destined for export, creating possible trade-related challenges. As such, until there is continuity of standards among the plants, interprovincial meat trade is not something that we are pursuing. If there was an appetite among the provinces to set an agreed upon highest-common denominator for provincial inspection standards, that might change our opinion. As it sits right now, with the quite low percentage of provincially-inspected meat, combined with the inequities in inspection, we have questions about whether the potential risks associated with interprovincial trade are greater than the potential reward. We believe more analysis and discussion is needed before there is movement on this file.

Here’s to a successful summer and we hope to see some of you at our producer-focused succession planning event in Dauphin on July 10.

Burger It Forward Campaign Sees Significant Growth in Year Three

Canada Beef’s national Burger it Forward campaign, held during the month of February, tracked an increase of 30% in participating restaurants, with more burgers sold to help raise funds to support the efforts of food banks across the country. This year tracked $61,399 contributions for both regional food banks and Food Banks Canada.

Executive Director for Canada Beef Consumer Marketing Joyce Parslow noted that this year’s campaign saw increased restaurant participation in some key regions like British Columbia and donations from the restaurants themselves.

“All participants were enthusiastic about the program, with all but two restaurants signing up for the program in 2026 already,” she said.

DISTRIC T 1 TYLER FEWINGS

Boissevain-Morton, Brenda-Waskada, Grassland, Deloraine-Winchester, and Two Borders

DISTRIC T 2

MARK SCHRAM

Argyle, Cartwright-Roblin, KillarneyTurtle Mountain, Lorne, Louise, Pembina, and Prairie Lakes

DISTRIC T 3 ANDRE STEPPLER

Cartier, Du erin, Grey, MacDonald, Portage la Prairie, Rhineland, Roland, Stanley, Thompson, Montcalm, Morris, and Ritchot

DISTRIC T 4

2ND VICE-PRESIDENT

BYRON FALK De Salaberry, Emerson-Franklin, Hanover, La Broquerie, Piney and Stuartburn, Montcalm, Morris, Ritchot, Spring eld, Ste. Anne, Taché, R.M. of Piney and Reynolds

DISTRIC T 5 STEVEN MANNS Cornwallis, Elton, Norfolk-Treherne, North Norfolk, Oakland-Wawanesa, Glenboro-South Cypress, and Victoria

DISTRIC T 6 BRIAN ENGLISH Pipestone, Riverdale, Sifton, Souris-Glenwood, Wallace-Woodworth, and Whitehead

DISTRIC T 7 T YLER FULTON

Restaurants from six regions including British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, PEI and Atlantic Canada, including Nova Scotia, New Brunswick and Newfoundland, signed up for the campaign this year—a 30% increase over last year, with 262 restaurants participating.

Each participating restaurant served a special local burger featuring 100% Canadian beef. For every campaign-featured burger purchase, Canada Beef contributed the equivalent of one meal to Food Banks Canada, up to a maximum of 20,000 meals (based on Food Banks Canada’s meal metric: $1 = two meals).

DISTRIC T 9 TREVOR SUND Alexander, Brokenhead, East St. Paul, Lac Du Bonnet, Rockwood, Rosser, St. Andrews, St. Clements, St. Francois Xavier, West St. Paul, Whitemouth, Woodlands, LGD of Pinawa, Reynolds, Spring eld, Ste. Anne, and Taché

DISTRIC T 10

MIKE DUGUID

SECRETARY Armstrong, Bifrost-Riverton, Fisher, and Gimli

Ellice-Archie, Hamiota, Prairie-View, Riding Mountain West, Rossburn, Russell-Binscarth, and Yellowhead

DISTRIC T 8 MATTHEW ATKINSON Clanwilliam-Erickson, Glenella-Lansdowne, Harrison-Park, Minto-Odanah, Oakview, North Cypress-Langford, Rosedale, and West Lake-Gladstone

DISTRIC T 11

ARVID NOTT VEIT Coldwell, Grahamdale, St. Laurent, and West Interlake

DISTRIC T 12

MARK GOOD TREASURER Alonsa, Lakeshore, McCreary, and Ste. Rose

An estimated 62,431 burgers were sold—211 burgers on average for each location. A special shoutout to Irving Big Stop — by including all burgers purchased at their restaurants in the Atlantic region, they sold 10,896 burgers for the campaign.

This Canada Beef giveback campaign aimed to raise funds to support food security efforts nationally across nine provinces. The goals supported foodservice recovery at the local level while promoting the local beef supply.

The campaign created an emotional connection with restaurants, consumers, farmers and ranchers, and media. To add to the fundraising effort, nine provincial beef organizations – including Manitoba Beef Producers with a $2,000 donation to Harvest Manitoba ‒ came to the table with generous support for the food banks in their region/province. The Dairy Farmers of New Brunswick and the Dairy Farmers of Nova Scotia participated by contributing donations based on milkshake sales added to burger orders in their regions. Atlantic Beef Products and Flanagan Foodservice also participated in the campaign with generous donations to food banks.

In Manitoba, 32 restaurants served 4,069 burgers, including Winnipeg’s Dreamland Diner that led the way with 703 burgers sold. The leading restaurant donation was MJ’s Kafe in Steinbach with a $240 donation.

Maureen Cousins POLI C

In support of Canada Beef’s Burger it Forward initiative, Manitoba Beef Producers presented Harvest Manitoba with $2,000 to help alleviate food insecurity. Pictured: Susan Robertson, Director of Finance and Administration with Harvest Manitoba and David Hultin, Manager, Communications and Marketing with MBP.

Explore Tools to Help Mitigate Against Risks to Your Operations

Greetings friends,

At the time of writing in May, it’s good to see some areas of the province get needed rain. My heart goes out to everyone impacted by the fires, but hopefully they get these under control, and we continue to get timely rains to keep the risk of future fires down.

As I sit here writing this column, I am amazed by what the markets have been doing. Some of the online sales I have seen lately have been recording record prices for many weight classes of cattle. Since starting with MBP in 2019, I wasn’t confident we would see the prices we are seeing today. Hopefully they will maintain, but I also hope the margins for the feeding sector allow for growth there as well. There is a tight supply right now in the cattle cycle, so time will tell how things shake out.

With these prices, the effects of a market drop are greater, whether that’s from drought, disease, or trade issues. That’s why utilizing available tools like Livestock Price Insurance (LPI) is really important. There are often misconceptions about this program, but with the right support to understand it, I think you will find it is quite useful.

MBP and MASC staff recently hosted a webinar

CARSON CALLUM General Manager’s Column

discussing the LPI program, and I strongly encourage folks to check out the recording of this webinar posted on our website https://mbbeef.ca/events/navigating-livestock-price-insurance/. MBP has been strongly advocating for cost-shared premiums for this program, similar to those offered for crop insurance, thereby helping to level the playing field with that sector. If we can achieve this, it would make the program even more beneficial for producers here in Manitoba. To put a floor price in the market we are seeing today, this could guarantee a positive profit margin. The deadline to purchase an LPI policy is June 12th, so I hope many of you are considering this program, as we never know what’s on the horizon that could impact market prices.

LPI is just one business risk management tool that producers can utilize. Forage insurance is another important tool that can help mitigate risk related to

challenging growing conditions like floods or droughts. MBP is advocating for improvements to these programs, as well as looking at other offerings such as moisture deficiency index insurance like other provinces have to provide needed support. AgriStability is another tool that can be a positive program if utilized properly. Ben Hamm, Farm Management Specialist with Manitoba Agriculture, is a phenomenal resource to talk to about these programs and how they can work for your individual operation. I strongly encourage you to reach out to him for advice.

Looking ahead, I hope the summer has great growing conditions, and feed availability is abundant. MBP continues to advocate on many files, including livestock predation, the need for surveys of elk populations in agro-Manitoba, livestock inspection, and many more.

Finally, if you have time on Thursday, July 10th , please join us in Dauphin at the Watson Art Centre for an afternoon workshop on succession planning in the beef sector. The outlook in the sector is very positive, so succession is top of mind for many farms and ranches. Check out details on the workshop on our website, e-newsletter, social media, as well as in Cattle Country

Applications for The Environmental Stewardship Award Due to MBP by December 12, 2025

Manitoba Beef Producers (MBP) is accepting applications until Friday, December 12, 2025 for consideration for the local awarding of The Environmental Stewardship Award (TESA).

Since 1996, TESA has recognized producers who go above and beyond standard industry conservation practices and set positive examples for other cattle producers and the general public. As stewards of a vast portion of the Canadian landscape, Canada’s beef cattle producers play a significant role in protecting and enhancing the environment. They continuously strive to improve existing stewardship conservation practices to create a sustainable future – always farming for tomorrow.

At the local level, a producer receives provincial recognition for their outstanding environmental contributions. In Manitoba, this occurs in conjunction with MBP’s annual general meeting held in February. All provincial award recipients then move forward to compete for national recognition from the Canadian Cattle Association (CCA). The national TESA recipient is announced during the CCA’s semi-annual meeting held in late summer or early fall. Each nominee exemplifies significant innovation and attention to a wide range of environmental stewardship aspects in their farm or ranch operation. Such innovations extend beneficially to areas far beyond their land, including water, wildlife and air.

How to Nominate: All beef cattle operations in Canada are eligible to apply for consideration for TESA. Interested producers can either nominate themselves, or be nominated by another individual or an organization. All methods are equally encouraged. More details and the application form can be found at: https://www.cattle.ca/sustainability/tesa

Note: If you are a producer who is considering self-nomination, MBP can provide you with guidance and suggestions on completing the application process. The completed application form, along with all supporting documentation (such as letters of support, photos and/or videos), is to be submitted to Manitoba Beef Producers by email to info@mbbeef.ca no later than Friday, December 12, 2025. If you have questions, please contact the MBP office at 204-772-4542.

Livestock Markets Association of Canada Holds Successful AGM and Convention, New Records Set

Over 250 auctioneers, market operators, order buyers and industry partners from across Canada came to Brandon, Manitoba May 7-11 to attend the Livestock Markets Association of Canada’s Annual Meeting and Convention. Included in the convention agenda was the Canadian Livestock Auctioneering Championships. The convention host was the Manitoba Livestock Marketing Association, and the host market was Heartland Livestock, Virden.

Livestock auctioneers from British Columbia to Quebec participated in the 26th annual livestock auctioneering championships. Entries from Manitoba included Richard Bramley, Heartland Livestock Virden; Jesse Campbell, Heartland Livestock Brandon; Scott Campbell, Fraser Auction Services Brandon; Robin Hill, JGL Livestock; Virden; Kyle Howarth, Killarney Auction Mart; Blaine Huston, Gladstone Auction Mart; Brad Kehler, Grunthal Auction Mart; Allan Munroe, Killarney Auction Mart; Tyler Slawinski, Gladstone Auction Mart; Johnathon Stratuliak, Ashern Auction Mart; Austin and Brock Taylor, Taylor Auctions, Melita; Josh Unrau, Gladstone Auction Mart; and, Kelly Wright, Wright’s Auction, Boissevain. Rhett Parks and Ty Cutler from Whitewood also participated.

At the sale, there were 5,110 cattle and Heartland in Virden established a new modern-day Manitoba record, for a one-day sale. Buyers from Alberta to Ontario were in attendance, and the bidding was fierce. Producers witnessed record prices paid for large lots of top-quality feeder cattle. Producers from all over Manitoba consigned cattle to this sale to take advantage of the opportunity to sell at the Canadian Auctioneering Championships. They were not disappointed! The total

RICK WRIGHT

The Bottom Line

sale grossed $16.8 million dollars.

When the smoke cleared, Casey Lawes from the Provost Livestock Exchange was declared the 2025 Canadian Champion. Tyler Slawinski from Gladstone was named the Reserve Champion. First runner-up was Rob Bergevin, Foothills Auctioneers Inc., Stavely, Alberta. Kirk Goldsmith from VJV Ponoka was second runner-up and third runner-up was John Baier from HLS in Swift Current, Saskatchewan. The remaining Top Ten were Rhett Parks, Whitewood Livestock; Kevin McArter, Brussels Livestock, Ontario; Russel Allison, B.C. Co-op, Kamloops; Ryan Kuepfer, Parks Livestock Group, Milverton, Ontario; and Tyler Rosehill from Olds Auction Mart in Alberta.

Other award winners included:

• Man/Sask Auctioneering Champion: Allan Munroe, Killarney Auction Mart. Man/Sask Rookie of the Year: Walker Murphy, Whitewood Livestock;

• LMAC Rookie of the Year was Russell Allison, B.C. Livestock Co-op, Kamloops;

• LMAC Most Improved Auctioneer: Kody Lakevold, Vermilion Livestock Exchange;

• High Point Interview: Rob Bergevin, Foothills Auctioneers Inc. Stavely; and

• People’s Choice Award: Blaine Huston, Gladstone Auction Mart.

LMAC inducted Jim Blackshaw from the Virden Auction Mart and Larry Schweitzer from the Hamiota Feedlot to the Memorial Honour Roll. The Memorial Honour Roll was established to remember industry personnel who have passed on and who made positive contributions to the livestock marketing industry or the overall industry. Blackshaw was the first inductee who was not a market owner/operator, auctioneer or order buyer. He was part of the support staff at Virden. For over 40 years, his work ethic set standards for dedication, customer service and reliability at the Virden Auction Mart. Larry Schweitzer served on many boards and committees both nationally and provincially, donating much of his personal time to improving the Canadian cattle industry. Larry was truly an industry leader!

Jim Abel from Stettler, Alberta was inducted into the LMAC Hall of Fame. Abel was co-owner of the Stettler Auction Mart. He served as President of both LMAC and Alberta Auction Markets Association. He has dedicated his life to the livestock marketing industry, serving on numerous boards. After his family, Jim’s customers are most important to him.

Rick Wright was presented with a custom-made leather belt from MLMA for his work promoting and protecting the Canadian cattle industry.

Some of the highlights of the convention included a tour of Norman Anderson’s feedlot near Souris for the out-of-province conventioneers and a stock dog demonstration and cattle handling competition for all participants to enjoy. Conventioneers attended the Auctioneering Competition at the Heartland Livestock Market in Virden.

At the annual meeting, there was discussion on the proposed traceability regulations. Ashely Scott, the general manager of Canadian Cattle Identification Agency explained the responsibilities of each sector of the livestock industry. Canadian Cattle Association (CCA) President Tyler Fulton addressed the attendees and welcomed the Livestock Markets Association of Canada to the CCA as a full voting member. Fulton expressed the importance of industry groups working together to strengthen the Canadian cattle industry. He also gave an update on trade with the United States and the possibility of tariffs in the future.

The keynote speaker of the event was Brenna Grant from Canfax. She spoke on the current cattle cycle, the reasons for the current record cattle prices, and how long she expected the prices to last. Her presentation gave a very positive outlook for the cattle producers for the next three to five years. Market operators Allan Munroe from the Killarney Auction Mart, Rhett Parks from Whitewood Livestock Sales and Ken Perlich from Perlich Bros. in Lethbridge, Alberta led a panel discussion on auction platforms, scanning cattle at the auction markets and commission structures.

Casey Lawes from Provost, Mark Ferraro from Bussels, Ontario and Brent Brooks from Lloydminster were elected to the LMAC board of directors. They join President Craig Jacklin, Mark Canart, Patrick Cassidy, Tyler Cronkhite, Rick Wright, Allan Munroe, Danny Skeels and Larry Witzel on the LMAC board of directors.

LMAC announced that the 2026 convention host would be the SALE – Cowtown market in Maple Creek, Saskatchewan. The dates will be announced later this summer.

Tyler Slawinski and Blaine Huston from the Gladstone Auction Mart. Slawinski was the Reserve Canadian Champion Auctioneer and Huston was the winner of the People's Choice award. (Photo credit: Rick Wright)

Polycrops: Challenges, Triumphs and Valuable

BY: BEEF CATTLE RESEARCH COUNCIL (WWW.BEEFRESEARCH.CA)

Polycrop forage blends have become a popular tool among beef producers to increase soil health, manage grazing, improve cow performance and enhance resilience to changing weather conditions. However, as with any farming practice, the results can vary based on location, weather and management strategies.

The practice of using polycrops, also known as cover crops, forage mixtures or cocktail crops, is intended to increase the diversity of plant species in a pasture. Increased plant diversity can enhance soil health, increase water infiltration, reduce fertilizer needs and provide higher quality forages for cattle.

One of the objectives of the Living Lab Central Prairies has been growing polycrops on producer operations and evaluating both the long- and short-term impacts.

The Living Labs program allows producers like Erika Stewart, John Griffin and Carmen Jackson to use polycrops on their operations, and they have encountered both successes and challenges with the practice. Their experiences, combined with insights from agricultural research, highlight the complexity of adopting polycrops and offer valuable lessons for others considering this practice.

Carmen Jackson:

Choosing the Right Crop to Meet your Goals

Carmen Jackson, who operates a farm southeast of Regina, Saskatchewan, takes a measured approach to polycrops.

“You can’t just jump in without understanding the risks,” she advises. Carmen and her family manage 3,500 acres, including 900 acres of rented land, most of which is native grass, with a small portion (approximately 400 acres) seeded to forages for winter feeding.

When it comes to polycrops, Carmen emphasizes the importance of making small, deliberate steps when implementing new practices. “Even if things don’t go perfectly, you have to keep moving forward,” she says.

Carmen and her family have been using polycrops for the last five years. They started after attending a workshop in Manitoba and have been experimenting with them since.

“The most important thing I have learned, and that we did wrong the first year, is you need to understand the context that you are using polycrops for,” she says. She has seeded polycrops in multiple locations on her farm but points out that there are different goals, and each goal requires different grazing strategies.

For example, on one pasture the goal was to increase pasture biomass. Carmen noted it was a saline, low-yielding piece of ground they were trying to improve. For that pasture they seeded a polycrop blend and then did some late fall grazing, turning a group of cows out to allow them to both trample and graze the forage. The residual forage left behind was targeting added organic matter with the long-term goal of improving soil conditions.

In another pasture, the goal was a high-quality feed on which to background their bulls. This piece was cross-fenced, and bulls were moved through paddocks in late summer. This year Carmen hopes to be able to graze in both summer and regrowth in the fall.

Carmen works with a professional agrologist to build forage blends that meet the needs of operation, and chooses different blends based on the goals for the pasture and if they intend to graze or make silage.

“It’s probably more advantageous to come up with something that you think will work on the soil you have.”

Carmen notes that she is more comfortable using a premade blend on good land but on land that requires soil improvements, she finds value in choosing crops that are tailored to their specific goals.

When choosing forage blends for silage Carmen points out that “First and foremost, we have to feed our cows, so tonnage is my number one priority. I try to add in something to help with soil health, but it can’t take too much away from the total volume – it’s a bit of a dance, and you just need to adjust as you go.”

Economics, and knowing how her land performs also play a role in what Carmen chooses for a forage blend. She points out that in some of the poorer soil areas, yield is limited, and she needs to be conscious of what she spends on a mixture to make economic sense. With this mindset Carmen points out that even in the saline or other problem areas they may be able to spend a bit more on polycrops than a monoculture as they don’t use any fertilizer and there may be long term benefits.

Carmen acknowledges that polycrops may not always deliver immediate or dramatic results. However, she stresses that soil health benefits accumulate over time. “Sometimes, you just have to adjust it as you go,” she notes, indicating that experimentation is part of the learning process.

Erika Stewart: The Importance of Adaptation and Pivoting

Erika Stewart and her family farm near Morse, Saskatchewan, and have recently started integrating polycrops as cooperators in the Living Lab Central Prairies. Their farm consists of primarily native grass with some cultivated land they use to put up winter feed for cattle. She notes the challenges that come with unpredictable weather, especially when drought conditions persist.

“If moisture doesn’t come, it’s really hard to make cover crops work,” Erika explains. She also mentions the trial-and-error nature of polycrops management.

Erika is still working out how polycrops fit into their operation. In 2021, they experimented by growing small amounts of two different blends marketed by separate companies. In late May they seeded a combined 230 acres side by side and found that both did well despite drought conditions.

With that success, the next year they seeded 240 acres to a polycrop blend for silage. Once again it performed well.

“We had gotten two-and-a-half, maybe three, inches of rain and had enough silage to make it through, so we were thrilled,” Erika says.

Unfortunately, they were not as successful the following year, despite having similar rainfall.

“We had planned to swath graze it that year, but it wasn’t even worth driving the swather over. Instead, we fenced it into four paddocks, and I think we got about a week’s worth of grazing off it.”

Despite trying a drought-tolerant blend last year, they had similar results, as well as issues with weeds.

“Weeds weren’t an issue when things were growing, but now, after two years of crop failure, it is a big problem,” she says.

For Erika, nitrates have also been an issue.

“The brassicas that we used to improve soil health were great, but due to drought, when we did our feed test, the nitrates came back super high.” They were still able to salvage the feed by allowing the pasture to rest, then grazing in a small paddock with gates open to a perennial pasture with water.

Saskatchewan beef producer Carmen Jackson examines cover crop blend.

Carmen Jackson’s cattle swath grazing

The Stewart Family on their farm near Morse, Saskatchewan.

Complex polycrop mix with sunflowers on the Stewart farm

Valuable Lessons from Beef Producers

“That way the cows could go in and graze, but they didn’t stay in there since there was no water, and it forced them to come out and eat something else as well,” she says.

Even with having issues in the past couple of years, Erika thinks polycrops could still play a role in their operation.

“We added some winter triticale to last year’s blend, so hopefully we will see that pop up for some early spring grazing to allow us to rest our perennials longer.” She also wants to try grazing the polycrops earlier in the season and using them as a high-quality forage during the breeding season.

Erika remains committed to experimenting with polycrops. She emphasizes that understanding the local conditions and being flexible with the approach is key.

“You have to tweak things as you go,” she reflects, acknowledging the learning curve associated with integrating new practices into an operation. “Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t, but it’s all part of the journey.”

John Griffin:

The Importance of Context and Flexibility

John Griffin and his family have both irrigated and dryland near Central Butte and Bridgeford, Saskatchewan. Over the years they have transitioned from a purebred herd calving in winter to a commercial herd that calves in May. With the adjustment of their calving season, they have come to rely on swath grazing for winter feed. John has been experimenting with how to add polycrops into their system and has had both success and learning experiences.

Drought and grasshoppers resulted in complete crop failure the first year they tried polycrops, but being a part of the Living Lab Central Prairies gave John the opportunity to try seeding them again.

John has been experimenting with both a commercially available complex mixture as well as a simple mixture with peas and a cereal. He uses a hoe drill with a two-sided gravity wagon to seed both mixtures.

“The two sides work great,” John says. “I put the peas in one side and the oats or barley in the other side, then just hand dribble in the complex mix on top of the barley for those fields.” He points out that the box drill is nice, as the seed cups can open to allow bigger seeds like the peas to get through.

Last year both grew well, but he noticed in the complex mixture most of the biomass was coming from the peas and oats. Based on that, and the higher cost of the complex mixture, John plans to proceed with a simple cereal-pea mix in the future.

Like Erika, John wants to use polycrops as a high-quality forage during the breeding season to improve his conception rates.

“We have very productive spring pastures because we get snowmelt, but then it dries up and turns brown, so we don’t have a high-quality feed when we need it in August when the bulls go out.” This past year he turned the cows and bulls out onto the polycrops to graze during the breeding season.

In addition, John points out that research staff through the living lab are taking measurements on soil health which may have long term benefits for his pastures.

“Maybe over time we will see benefits that I am not noticing yet, but, from a beef production standpoint, if I can get a few more cows bred at that time of year then they would be benefiting us.”

Talking to other producers who have used polycrops has been helpful but John highlights that taking your own climate into account is important. For example, he knows other farmers who have had a lot of success including turnips and other brassicas in their polycrop blends but, on their place, flea beetles decimate the plants before they can get going.

John has appreciated being a part of the Living Lab Central Prairies as it has given him an opportunity to test out research results on his own farm. He believes that while research provides valuable insights, it’s essential to understand the local context and conditions. What works well in one area may not necessarily be successful in another.

Research Insights:

Starting Small and Choosing the Right Mix

Aklilu Alemu, a researcher with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada and research lead for the Living Lab Central Prairies, recommends that producers looking to integrate polycrops into their operations should “start small and simple until you’re familiar with the practice.”

Selecting the right mix of polycrops is important, especially when moisture is limited.

“If the moisture is not coming, the cereal component of the polycrop mix can still provide some biomass,” Aklilu explains. This strategy helps ensure that, even in dry conditions, producers can still benefit from the polycrop’s contribution to soil health and grazing.

Aklilu cautions that “field conditions are highly variable, and what works in one place may not work in another.”

This aligns with the experiences shared by producers like John Griffin, who have found that what works in research trials doesn’t always translate directly to real-world farm conditions.

Aklilu says there are three things producers should think about when implementing polycrops:

Moisture is the number one factor that will influence success.

Start simple, and start small.

Start with at least 40% cereal in your first year, that way if other crops fail you should still have some biomass to salvage.

The Takeaway: Trial, Error and Adaptation

The experiences of producers like Carmen, Erika and John illustrate the unpredictable nature of integrating polycrops into a beef operation. While some years may yield impressive results, others may bring challenges such as pests, poor weather or suboptimal crop growth. The key to success lies in adaptability, local knowledge and a willingness to experiment.

An oat and pea polycrop mix on the Griffins’ farm

The Role of Cattle in Sustainable Food Systems

BY PETER FROHLICH NATIONAL CENTRE FOR LIVESTOCK AND THE ENVIRONMENT, UNIVERSITY OF MANITOBA

Sara Place from Colorado State University was the featured speaker at the Annual T.K. Lecture hosted by the Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences where she shared her expertise in livestock systems sustainability. The T.K. Cheung lecture is held annually at the University of Manitoba (UM) in honor of Dr. Tsang Kay Cheung, an alumnus who has made numerous contributions to education and research at UM.

Place grew up on a dairy farm in upstate New York and received her Bachelor of Science in Animal Science from Cornell University and a PhD in Animal Biology from the University of California. She is a part of AgNext, a research collaborative at Colorado State University that is focused on exploring sustainable animal agriculture including feedlot and dairy production, with an emphasis on the environmental and economic benefits.

According to Place, all economic, social and environmental domains within the value chain need to be considered to create a sustainable food system; one that provides food security and meets present needs without sacrificing needs of future generations. The food system must consider producers, consumers and the entire food production value chain.

How do cattle fit into sustainable food systems?

Place highlighted the role of cattle production as an integral component of sustainable food systems. Cattle have the unique ability to utilize human inedible ingredients including perennial forages and by-products while producing high quality protein, as well as

producing many non-edible products that we use in our everyday lives. Their research team is working to build and strengthen the connections cattle have in a circular bioeconomy, including manure management and its impact on soil health as well as crop yield and quality.

Mitigating inefficiencies in our food system

According to Place, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions including methane from cattle production are considered “leakage” or an inefficiency of the food system. To mitigate this inefficiency, Place and the AgNext team are studying methane emissions from enteric fermentation, the single largest source of emissions from cattle resulting from microbial fermentation of feed in the rumen.

The AgNext team uses innovative feeding technology to capture individual feed intake data and to measure methane, hydrogen and oxygen emissions from cattle in order to understand factors that effect enteric methane production. These factors can include type of feed, feed additives, cattle genetics and production-enhancing technologies like implants. By collecting large amounts of data, the team is establishing emission baselines for use in modeling software.

Exploring the rumen microbiome to improve efficiency and sustainability

Future research at AgNext will explore the effect of rumen microbiome manipulation on enteric methane production. The research aligns well with a new project at the UM led by Hooman Derakhshani, a researcher at the Department of Animal Science and a team of scientists from universities of British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Guelph, and from Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC).

R7A 5Y1

h: 204-728-3058

c: 204-573-5192 f: 204-727-7744 marmacfarms1@gmail.com

This research team has launched a groundbreaking project that will address enteric methane emissions from cattle by developing a database to characterize microbes in the rumen that are linked to low methane emissions

and by exploring novel microbial feed additives that reduce methane emissions. The team will also use genomic research technology to identify heritable traits in cattle linked to methane emissions and feed efficiency. The outcomes of this research will assist in the development of Precision Management Strategies focused on the “3R” approach - Right genetics, Right feed, and Right production systems.

More information on this project can be found in the February 2025 issue of Cattle Country

Unique role of cattle in utilizing by-products from feed and food processing

As described by Place, the microbial community in the rumen give cattle a distinct advantage to utilize human-inedible ingredients, as well as those that may not meet consumer standards or are discarded after processing. Researchers at the UM are continuing to strengthen the connection of cattle to a circular bioeconomy by studying the use of food processing by-products and food waste. Although livestock operations may already use these by-products to meet nutrient requirements and reduce waste, there has been limited work conducted to explore the environmental sustainability of this practice.

Janine Hansen, a graduate student at the Department of Animal Science has completed a research project that further demonstrates benefits of using these by-products in backgrounding and finishing cattle diets. Hansen, along with a team including UM researchers Kim Ominski and Marcos Cordeiro and researchers from AAFC and the University of Lethbridge (UL) have used data from a study in which a by-product from the bakery industry was substituted for corn in feedlot diets to examine the environmental footprint of cattle.

Using modeling software, Hansen examined the environmental benefits of adding bread waste to cattle feed. Using these by-products reduced land, water and fertilizer resources needed to grow feed crops. When bread waste was included in backgrounding diets, land use was reduced by 45%, water use was reduced by 37% and GHG and ammonia emissions were both reduced by 14% and 4%, respectively.

In finishing diets land use was reduced by 63%, water use was reduced by 61% and GHG emissions were reduced by 19%. Since the bread waste was diverted away from the landfill, GHG emissions into the environment were also reduced by 24% when the bread waste was used in the backgrounding diet and by 53% when used in the finishing diet, further improving the sustainability of the food system and reducing the environmental footprint of cattle.

Imperfect potatoes are perfect for cattle feed

Researchers including Ominski, Cordeiro, Genet Mengistu and their partners at AAFC and UL have also examined the environmental benefits of using cull potatoes in feedlot diets. Cull potatoes may be discarded during storage or processing and if diverted to a landfill they provide no additional value and decompose, resulting in GHG emissions. Previous research has shown that cull potatoes are palatable, of high nutritive value and can partially replace cereal grains in cattle feed. Results from this project have shown that the use of cull potatoes also reduced land requirements (to grow feed crops) and GHG emissions into the environment by diverting the potatoes away from the landfill, by up to 30% and 22%, respectively.

In addition to nutritive, environmental and economic benefits of adding these materials to feed, bread waste and cull potatoes can also serve as alternative feedstuffs during feed shortages resulting from flood or drought.

The T.K. Cheung Lecture featuring Sara Place together with podcasts and infographics highlighting research at the Faculty of Agricultural and Food Sciences can be found on the Manitoba Agriculture Knowledge Exchange website, an information sharing initiative between University of Manitoba and Manitoba Agriculture. Manitoba Agriculture and Food Knowledge

and

Photo credit: NCLE

Livestock Price Insurance (LPI) is an insurance program that provides price risk management to beef producers when market prices are volatile.

• Get forward price coverage for calves you plan to market between September and February 2026 with the LPI – Calf program.

Coverage options are available to choose from every Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday from 3 p.m. - 12 a.m. (CT).

• The last day to purchase LPI – Calf policies is June 12

Visit LPI.ca or phone 1-844-782-5747 for program details.

and full-page advertising opportunities also available.

and full-page advertising opportunities also available. Contact Jennifer for more information.

Contact Jennifer for more information.

for more information.

and full-page advertising opportunities also available. Contact Jennifer for more information.

StockTalk Q&A Feature Brought to you by Manitoba Agriculture

Cindy Jack Livestock Specialist-Beef Manitoba Agriculture

Cindy.Jack@gov.mb.ca

Question: I’ve noticed a few weeds out on my pastures. What are some of the poisonous plants I should watch out for and how do I manage them?

Answer: Healthy and productive pastures are crucial for a successful beef cattle operation. Pastures can often contain weeds that are potentially dangerous to livestock. Some weeds reduce pasture yield while others are poisonous and can cause a health risk to livestock. A few poisonous plants commonly found in Manitoba include western water hemlock, chokecherry, seaside arrowgrass, narrow leaved milkvetch, lupines, and bracken.

It’s important to know which ones could be a problem in your pasture and where they might be located. For example, some species of plants such as water hemlock thrive in wet areas near streams, dugouts or sloughs.

Losses caused by poisonous plants are typically associated with one of the following conditions:

• Lack of range readiness. Some of the most poisonous plants such as water hemlock grow and mature the earliest. Turning cattle out too early on spring pasture increases the likelihood of poisonous plants being grazed if there is a lack of available forage. If you need to turn cattle out before the pasture is ready, provide extra feed to minimize the chance of cattle consuming a poisonous plant.

• Moving hungry cattle. To decrease the risk of consuming poisonous plants, ensure cattle are full before moving them to a new pasture. Grazing habits are disturbed when animals are moved so if they are hungry, they will eat large amounts of available forage and could ingest poisonous species.

• Overgrazing pastures. Grazing management plays a critical role when dealing with poisonous plants on pasture. Avoiding overgrazing will help maintain an abundance of desirable forage plants that are able to compete with weeds and reduce the risk of livestock eating poisonous plants because of no other available forage. Since cattle are selective species, they tend to graze the preferred forage species first which causes them to decrease and the poisonous species to increase. Leaving cattle out too late in the fall might increase the risk of cattle consuming toxic plants when the more preferred plants are dry or in short supply.

• Drought. During dry periods, grazing pressure should be reduced as lack of feed will result in less selectivity of animals making it more likely that they will graze poisonous plants.

• Irregular occurrences. Some years, poisonous plants are just more abundant than normal. Maintain good pasture management practices to reduce losses. If possible, fence off infested areas or remove your livestock from that area to avoid any chance of cattle grazing it or watch the herd carefully and treat affected animals immediately. Avoiding grazing pastures when plants are most toxic will greatly reduce the chances of livestock being harmed. Two control methods for managing weeds are mowing and utilizing herbicide. As with all weed control, competitive desirable plants should be seeded as quickly as possible after weed removal to prevent reinfestation of the area with other weed species. Mowing will reduce the likelihood of seed development and spreading; spot spraying can reduce weed populations.

Applying herbicides is one way to reduce weed pressure; however, it is important to take caution when spraying to avoid over spraying and minimize drift. Poisonous weeds can also become more palatable after herbicide application. Applying herbicide could affect the growth and metabolism of some plants that are normally not toxic and cause them to be toxic. For the most part, pastures should not be grazed for at least three weeks post spraying when poisonous species are present.

Western water hemlock is one of the most poisonous plants in North America. All parts of the plant are extremely poisonous but the bulk of the poisonous oil, cicutoxin, is concentrated in the tuberous roots; a single root is enough to be lethal. The stems and leaves are less poisonous; however, the seeds and seedheads can have higher concentrations of the toxin. If cattle are grazing on wet ground, it is possible they could pull the entire plant up and consume the root. Symptoms of toxicity include frothing at the mouth, uneasiness, pain, violent convulsions and sudden mortality.

Share your Voice

In the next issue of Cattle Country, a Manitoba Agriculture forage and livestock specialist will answer a selected question. Send your questions to Elizabeth.Nernberg@gov.mb.ca.

StockTalk for Cattle Country is brought to you by Manitoba Agriculture. We encourage you to email your questions to our department’s forage and livestock team. We are here to help make your cattle operation successful. Contact us today.

Kristen Bouchard-Teasdale Beausejour 431-337-1688 Kristen.BouchardTeasdale@gov.mb.ca

Pam Iwanchysko Dauphin 204-648-3965 Pamela.Iwanchysko@gov.mb.ca

Cindy Jack Arborg 204-768-0534 Cindy.Jack@gov.mb.ca

Juanita Kopp Beausejour 204-825-4302 Juanita.Kopp@gov.mb.ca

Elizabeth Nernberg Roblin 204-247-0087 Elizabeth.Nernberg@gov.mb.ca

Water hemlock can be easily confused with water parsnip as water parsnip is very similar, but the leaves are smaller with less serrated margins, and has a fibrous root system. In water hemlock, the veins in the leaves end in the notch, or valley, whereas in water parsnip the veins are less prominent and tend to run to the tip of the leaf (think veins to tip = water parsnip) While water parsnip is less poisonous than water hemlock, it is still toxic and should be avoided.

Chokecherry contains prussic acid in its leaves and is poisonous at all stages of growth. It is typically unpalatable to stock and consumed only when there is nothing else available. Symptoms include uneasiness, staggering, convulsions and difficulty in breathing. Death follows bloating usually within one hour of consumption.

Seaside arrowgrass is a grass like perennial marsh herb that grows 6-30 inches tall. It is found in salt marshes and alkaline sloughs throughout Western Canada. Seaside arrowgrass contains prussic acid and has very early spring growth and rapid regrowth. Some stock might select this plant for its high salt content, so it is important to provide salt and mineral out on pasture not only to meet nutritional requirements, but also so they avoid this plant. Both green forage and hay are toxic. Symptoms include rapid or deep breathing, muscular spasms, and convulsions at short intervals. Death results from asphyxia or respiratory paralysis. Intraperitoneal injections of sodium nitrate and sodium thiosulphate have shown good results as treatment if administered soon enough.

Narrow leaved milkvetch absorbs inorganic selenium and may contain as much as 8000 ppm of this mineral in their tissues. Poisoning occurs most often in the late summer or fall time. There are two forms of selenium poisoning. The acute form known as “blind staggers” occurs when animals are suddenly exposed to the plant in high concentration. Symptoms include loss of muscle coordination and animals move about restlessly, bumping into fences and corrals. Chronic form symptoms include appetite and weight loss, hoof deformation, loss of hair, sore development, and sterility.

Lupines, also known as blue bonnet, can cause deformities in calves if eaten during early pregnancy, such as crooked legs, fused joints and cleft palate, from the alkaloids in the plant. Young plants and the lupine seeds are most toxic.

Bracken fern is found only in eastern Manitoba, Riding Mountain and British Columbia. The plant is equally poisonous in green forage or in dry hay. Poisoning is caused by ptaquiloside. Cattle that eat the plant often develop internal hemorrhaging and other complications such as becoming anemic and suppressing bone marrow. Death is caused by hemorrhaging or secondary infections that result. Typically, cattle won’t eat bracken fern but if pastures are overgrazed they might.

Providing cattle access to healthy, vigorous pastures reduces risk of poisoning as cattle will usually avoid poisonous plants if there is enough preferred forage available. It’s important to manage pastures so cattle are never short on feed; however, in situations where feed is short, provide extra feed or fence off wet or wooded areas where toxic plants are likely to grow to minimize chances of cattle consuming poisonous plants. Scan this QR code to listen to our Stock Talk episode on poisonous plants and learn more about how to keep your cattle safe

RETENTION MATTERS

Page 1

Agristability Changes

Important to understand how the program works What’s important is that producers fully understand the program and what it can do for them before making a determination about whether – and how – to enroll, Hamm adds.

Retention Matters—usING the right tools

Tag retention starts with proper application. Each manufacturer designs its tags and applicators as a matched set, working like a key and lock—only the correct combination ensures proper function. A bent applicator pin will misalign with the stud tip, while an incorrect pin diameter can also cause issues: too small, and the stud may fall off; too large, and it may not release properly, increasing the risk of ear tearing.

PROPER PAIRING AND FIT

PIN COMPARISON

• All pins are different. Use the pin for the applicator it was made for.

Differences can be found in length, diameter, tip and attachment design.

All pins are different. Use the pin for the applicator it was made Differences can be found in length, diameter, tip and

Stud base is flush with base of the applicator pin for support.

• Applicator pin tip seated in stud tip for optimal application of force to penetrate the ear and not exit out the side of the shaft.

PIN LENGTH INCORRECT

“They shouldn’t just sign up for AgriStability because people are saying it’s a good idea, they need to know why it’s a good idea,” he says. “They need to understand that they are covering their own personal margin, and what the calculation of program benefits mean when it’s sent out to them. How do they read it, what’s their coverage, how do they identify what exactly is happening on their farm and why they didn’t get paid. Don’t just say, ‘I didn’t get paid, the program is garbage’ because that’s not how it works. If they didn’t get paid out, that’s good, that means their margin increased, or didn’t decrease far enough to trigger a payment. Which means they are building for the next year.”

PIN DOESN’T FIT STUD TIP

It’s also one of the cheapest insurance options that producers can buy when compared to other programs like AgriInsurance and Livestock Price Insurance (LPI), in some cases about a tenth of the cost.

• Applicator pin is not seated into the base of the stud. Stud will be unstable and/or fall off the pin. tip of the tag. The pin will slip off and protrude through the shaft of the stud and the malefemale portions will fail to lock.

Applicator pin is not seated into the base of the stud. Stud will Applicator pin is not seated into the tip of the tag. The pin will slip off and protrude through the shaft of the stud and the male-

• Although the pin partially seats into the tip, it isn’t stable and will slip out through the shaft as pressure is applied.

• The stud may penetrate the ear but it may slip off and exit through the shaft. The pin doesn’t fit properly: no support at the base. The pin becomes stuck in the stud.

UNIQUE STUD TIP DESIGN

• The Y-Tex stud design is a mirror image of other approved tag studs.

The Y-Tex stud design is a mirror image of other

• The applicator pin is hollow, allowing it to act as a stable sleeve over the stud tip. Y-Tex pin + Y-Tex stud

The applicator pin is hollow, allowing it to act as a stable sleeve over the stud tip.

Don’t forget to check the manufacturer recommendations and best practices for the applicator and indicators that you are using. Proper indicator placement is key to increasing retention.

“AgriStability is significantly cheaper and the protection is broad, on everything from allowable income to allowable expenses and whatever happens on the other side,” Hamm says. “If you have a reduction in income, no matter the cause, you are covered, whereas LPI is only on price reduction, and AgriInsurance is only on production, so AgriStability is a nice gap filler.”

Hamm notes that the AgriStability program still suffers from an image problem in the minds of some producers who remember past issues with the program such as overpayments, which are all perfectly explainable, Hamm says.

“A lot of that had to do with inventories,” he says. “And that is crucial for this program. Producers do need to take a look at last year’s inventory and compare it to the current year’s inventory and make sure they can understand why there’s an increase or decrease in bulls, cows, calves, or forage inventories, because if AgriStability is red flagging a reduction or missing income, they are going to ask questions.”

As an example, producers need to have information on hand about things like cattle fatalities because the program doesn’t know about them unless producers report them.

Hamm encourages producers to enroll in AgriStability because he believes it offers excellent protection against risk to their bottom line.

Don’t forget to check the manufacturer recommendations and best practices for the applicator and indicators that you are using. Proper indicator placement is key to increasing retention. CCIA is led by industry to help you make informed

CCIA is led by industry to help you make informed decisions toward traceability to better protect your investment.

Retention Matters—usING the right tools

“I don’t think people understand the power of AgriStability and making this insurance their own and totally understanding it,” Hamm says. “It is a bit complex, and it does take some time, but it is a well-rounded program, and takes everything into account. Cattle prices are high right now, but those are the times that you want to get enrolled in the program so that you are protecting future years.”

Destron pin + Destron stud

Allflex pin + ComfortEar stud

Destron pin + Destron stud

Allflex pin + Y-Tex stud

Allflex pin + ComfortEar stud

A Recipe Is Born: Honey Gochujang Grilled Flank

BY: ANNA HYMERS

A favourite ingredient of mine over the past couple of years has been gochujang. This funky, fermented Korean red chili paste brings a unique flair to any dish with its sweet, spicy, and umami-rich profile. It’s one of those condiments that permanently lives in our fridge—and for good reason.

I wasn’t entirely sure which direction this recipe would take, even as I stood in the grocery store, wandering through the aisles. To be honest, that’s how a lot of my dishes come together when I’m in “recipe development” mode—I let the grocery store guide my inspiration.

As a recipe developer and chef, my process usually begins with a flavor profile. In this case, I knew I wanted to use gochujang, which naturally steered me toward Asian—more specifically, Korean—influences. I typically have staples like rice vinegar, soy sauce, sesame oil, garlic, and ginger on hand, so I had a solid base for a marinade or sauce.

A flank steak in my freezer and the unseasonably warm weather nudged me toward grilling. I wanted to avoid turning on the oven and heating up the house.

Next, I headed to the produce section—this is where I find inspiration for texture and color. I always consider what I already have at home first. Carrots, red bell peppers, green onions, and cucumber stood out as ingredients that would add crunchy freshness and beautiful pops of color. Then I spotted Boston lettuce and thought: lettuce wraps!

For a little extra substance, I picked up some thin egg noodles—purely a preference, as I like their texture more than rice noodles. I planned to toss the cold, cooked noodles in a quick dressing made of soy sauce, rice vinegar, sugar, sesame oil, and a pinch of cayenne.

And just like that, an almost-complete dish was coming together.

Keeping it local, the addition of honey was inspired by the fact that we’re in Manitoba—we have the best honey in the world—and because sweet and spicy are a perfect match. I used a portion of the sauce as a marinade for the steak and kept the rest as a dipping sauce for the wraps.

On a hot, sunny day, this light, fresh, and summery dish was exactly what we were craving—and it hit all the right notes.

Enjoy!

(Makes 2 servings)

¼ Cup Honey

¼ Cup Gochujang Paste

1 Tbsp Garlic, minced

¼ Cup Canola Oil

¼ Cup Seasoned Rice Vinegar

1 Tbsp Ginger, minced

2 Tbsp Green Onion, chopped

½ tsp Kosher Salt

1 Flank Steak

To Garnish – Sesame Seeds

METHOD:

1. Add all ingredients for sauce to a food processor and process until mixture is smooth. Should yield about 1 Cup of sauce.

2. Add ¼ Cup of sauce to a large sealing plastic bag along with flank steak. Marinate overnight.

3. Preheat grill on high heat (about 500F). Lightly grease grills with oil or spray.

4. Place flank on hot grill for 2:00 minutes, then turn 90 degrees and cook for another 2:00 minutes. Flip steak and repeat.

5. Remove steak, place steak on a cooling rack and allow to rest for 10 minutes before slicing very thin slices against the grain.

Suggested Recipe: Trying using the above recipe for Honey Gochujang Steak Lettuce Wraps! Use butter lettuce as your wrap and try any topping you like such as julienne red peppers, carrots, green or red onion, purple cabbage, or cucumber. Use the extra sauce to dip or spoon on top of each wrap.

Photo credit: Anna Hymers