2015 march & april anr newsletter

Cooperative Extension Service Nelson County 317 S. Third Street Bardstown, KY 40004 (502) 348-9204 Fax: (502) 348-9270 http://nelson.ca.uky.edu

RON’S RUMBLES Is everyone as sick of winter as I am? I looked back to last year’s March Ron’s Rumbles and that was my opening line. Bill Murray was in a movie a few years back called “Groundhog Day”.

He kept waking up every morning and it was still ground hogs day. That’s kind of the way I feel now with winter.

It’s still here. The snow from this last round is almost gone but there’s a possibility of more this week. I’m not bragging but I was in Florida last week for a few days and it was over 80 degrees for 5 days straight. I’m ready for that to come here.

We need to be watching our newborn calves. The weather is requiring us to manage more than normal. There’s an article inside about how long to wait before helping the calving process. We also need to watch the condition of our cows. This cold weather, and the mud we will soon have, requires a lot of energy to maintain the cows. This can cause rebreeding problems later this spring if we don’t get the cows back in good condition. A few pounds of grain will go a long way in keeping cows (Continued on page 2)

Upcoming Events March 9 6:30-7:30 Nelson County Close Up, Population Growth in Nelson County, Nelson County Extension office Mar 16 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m Marketing Locally Grown Meat Workshop Fayette County Extension Office $15 Registration Mar 28 Ohio River Valley Woodlands and Wildlife Workshop Sharonville, Convention Center, Cincinnati, OH April 9th 7:00p.m.Nelson County Beef Cattle Association Nelson County Extension Office

Ron Bowman County Extension Agent for Agriculture/Natural Resources

going.

As soon as the snow gets off and the ground dries a little it would be a good time to soil test. Remember tests are $5 this year but can save you a lot of money. We also either have on the shelves or can print off all of the new variety tests and the Weed and Insect Control Recommendations books. If you need them, let us know or you can pick them up.

We had a good turn out last week for Feed America. Thank you to each of the folks that volunteered and gave their time to help promote agriculture and help some folks less fortunate than most of us.

If I can be of help call me at 348-9204.

Volatile Burley Tobacco Outlook Ahead The tobacco buyout celebrated its ten year anniversary this past year. Of course, that means tobacco buyout checks are history and the remaining tobacco growers face a market without any safety net measures to protect against market volatility.

As anticipated, the buyout did bring about massive consolidation, increasing scale of production, and geographical shifts in production. But volatility in burley prices and production has not evolved in the post-buyout era as expected … until now.

In reality, tight domestic and global supplies of burley enabled a seller’s market to evolve for most of the post buyout era. This resulted in relatively strong prices for lower quality leaf, a home for non-contract tobacco, and a viable auction market. However, a 30-35% increase in global burley production over the past two years, coupled with blended cigarette sales falling 5% or more in many traditional U.S. cigarette markets, abruptly changed the favorable supply/demand balance this past marketing season. Internationally, export demand for U.S. leaf is off by more than 20%; due not only to lower blended cigarette sales, but also in response to an abundance of lower priced leaf and an increasing value of the U.S. dollar. Collectively, these factors threaten to generate lower U.S. tobacco prices and contract volume for 2015.

One factor that could disrupt this projection has been the recent devastating flooding in Malawi; the world’s largest burley producer. While being a low quality burley producer, Malawi’s leaf output certainly impacts the overall global burley supply. A sizable loss of the 2015 Malawi crop, which is still much unknown at this time, could constrain the anticipated reduction in U.S. burley contract volume for 2015. If Malawi losses are minimal, the industry will need much less burley from U.S. growers in 2015; inducing double-digit percentage reductions in burley contract volume for the coming 2

year, and significantly increasing the marketing risk of any non-contract burley production in 2015.

The demand for U.S. burley beyond 2015 remains very uncertain. One factor that may play a noticeable role will be the rapidly emerging ecigarette/vaping market. Currently, the e-cig/vaping market is only around 2.5% of total U.S. tobacco product sales, but some analysts anticipate that it will continue to grow, and could overtake domestic cigarette sales within the next decade. Most of these “alternative� nicotine delivery products are presently derived from non-U.S. leaf sources; primarily China. While research and production efforts are evolving to see if U.S. tobacco growers can be a part of this market, it remains unclear if U.S. tobacco growers can supply the liquid nicotine at a costcompetitive/profitable level.

Currently, the e-cigarette/vaping market faces limited regulation and taxation. However, this is likely to change in the near future as policymakers, regulators, and public health officials debate the health issues surrounding these new products, and as governments face declining tax revenues from a loss in cigarette sales. Interestingly enough, it took domestic cigarette companies a couple of decades of watching increasing snuff sales before they entered the smokeless industry. However, the major cigarette manufacturers entered the growing e-cigarette/vaping market quickly, and continue to test consumer acceptance of new nicotine delivery products.

It appears that U.S. cigarette companies have greater economic incentives to expand alternative tobacco product markets, at the expense of traditional cigarette sales, in response to reportedly higher per unit profit margins, limited regulation/taxation, and lower Master Settlement Agreement (MSA) payments; since the latter is volume adjusted based on cigarette and not e-cig/vaping sales. If this market continues to grow, displacing traditional cigarette sales, it will most likely induce further reductions in U.S. tobacco acres unless domestic growers become a part of this emerging market. ~ Will Snell

Cash vs. Accrual Income There are two basic methods of accounting, cash and accrual. The cash method records income and expenses at the time of payment, while the accrual method records income and expenses when they are earned or incurred. Both of these methods are valuable to a farmer, but they serve a different purpose and should be used properly.

Farmers are allowed to use the cash method of accounting when filing tax returns and this can provide a valuable tax management tool. The cash method allows the farmer to hold grain, livestock, accounts receivable, and other income items in inventory without counting that income until the money is actually received. It also allows them to prepay cer3

tain crop expenses in the year before they will be used. The cash method allows farmers to lower their current tax bill by deferring income and/ or increasing expenses unlike the accrual method. Contrary to what many farmers believe, the tax return will not always give a true picture of whether or not a profit is made in the current year.

The accrual method of accounting should be used when providing information to lenders, and it provides a more accurate picture of the farming operation than does the cash method. The goal of the accrual method is to show the whole picture of the farming operation by including income and expenses that were incurred during the year (inventories, accounts receivables, accounts payable, and accrued interest), and by excluding expenses that have not been incurred yet (end of year prepaid expenses). A farmer’s income should be based on each crop year; the accrual method is the only way this can be done properly.

Lenders who do not have all the information needed to create an accrual income statement will usually use 3-5 years of tax returns to “create” an accrual statement. There is still potential that this may not show the true picture of the farming operation. Schedule F income may also be skewed by the use of Section 179 accelerated depreciation, whereas an accrual income statement will use economic (book) depreciation. A study conducted by Professor Freddie Barnard of Purdue University showed that there was a 52% difference between using an accrual income statement and a 3-5 year average from the Schedule F income.

This study shows how important it is to collect all the data necessary to construct an actual accrual income statement instead of trying to construct one from just using schedule F incomes.

Lenders will want to make sure they use true accrual income statements rather than Schedule F income for 2014 income. There is a very good chance that Schedule F incomes will be higher in 2014 due to selling the more valuable 2013 crop in 2014. At the same time, accrual incomes will probably be lower due to low grain prices for the 2014 crop.

It is very important for everyone involved to understand the need and purpose of both cash and accrual methods of accounting. They serve very different purposes and, if used incorrectly, can cost the farmer money or the opportunity for more money. ~ Michael Forsythe

When to Intervene in Delivery of the Calf Dr. Michelle Arnold, Ruminant Extension Veterinarian, University of Kentucky

Perinatal Mortality (PM) generally refers to death of full-term calves shortly before, during, or within 24-48 hours after parturition (calving).

This includes “stillbirth”, a term commonly used when calves never take the first breath. Many genetic and non-genetic factors have been identified but dystocia (a difficult or abnormal calving) is consistently identified as the primary cause of perinatal mortality. In addition, dystocia may contribute to death of a calf up to 4 months of age due to internal injuries 4

sustained at birth, lack of oxygen to the brain during delivery, or failure of passive transfer. Dystocia rates vary among cattle populations; considerable differences exist among the cattle breeds as well as among individual herds. Maternal, fetal, environmental, and management factors influence PM. Many of these factors are beyond the control of a producer such as parity (number of calves the cow has already had), presence of twins, and abnormal fetal presentation such as a backwards or breech calf. However, many risk factors can be controlled by the farm manager to decrease the incidence of weak or stillborn calves. Newborn vitality is essential to the health, survival and welfare of the calf. If the calf is not strong at birth, it may be unable or unwilling to get up and suckle colostrum in a timely manner. Early colostrum intake is essential for efficient transfer of immunoglobulins, energy, and regulation of body temperature.

Not receiving enough colostrum shortly after birth may affect its long term health status (greater risk of disease and death) and lifetime productivity (decreased overall average daily gain).

Calving management, including supervision and intervention, is critical to minimize or prevent calf losses. Perhaps the most critical factor is the timing of intervention during Stage 2 (active labor) of calving. It has generally been recommended to intervene in the birth process when the feet of the fetus have been visible for two hours (“two feet-two hours rule”) but some have challenged this rule because of the uncertainty or confusion of when to start the clock ticking. The onset of Stage 2 labor has multiple definitions including: 1) appearance of the amniotic sac (“water bag”) at the vulva, 2) rupture of the allantoic/amniotic sac (the water bag breaks), or 3) appearance of feet at the vulva. Numerous studies have proven that the total time allowed for Stage 2 should be 2 hours or less provided the fetus is in a normal position. A recent (2011) study demonstrated that assisting cows at 80 minutes after the appearance of the water bag clearly decreased the risk of stillbirth. The recommendation to intervene in calf delivery from the specialists at the University of Kentucky is: 

In the case of mature cows, intervene if either the water bag or feet have been evident for 2 hours with little or no progress. Or, if the cow has pushed hard for 30 minutes but the calf has not moved, assistance is needed.



In the case of heifers, intervene one hour after appearance of the water bag.



If a cow or heifer has been in Stage 1 (restless, kicking at belly, wringing tail, seeking isolation) for 2-6 hours but does not progress to active straining, intervention is indicated. Cows should progress to Stage 2 more quickly than heifers.

After the cow or heifer is checked vaginally, then a decision for further action such as forced extraction or caesarean section can be made with a reasonable chance of delivering a live calf.

According to the NAHMS 2007-2008 beef study, nearly 50 percent of operations allowed cows to labor 3 or more hours before assistance was 5

given, and almost 40 percent of operations allowed heifers to labor an average of 3 or more hours. Interestingly, the same study reported calves born dead accounted for 44% of all calf death loss during the first 6 months of 2008. An additional 13% died in the first 24 hours after birth. This information highlights how critical the birthing process and early post-partum peri-

od is for calf survival.

Frequent monitoring of the calving process is important in order to identify calving problems early. Since the time from appearance/rupture of the sac to appearance of the feet is variable and sometimes may not even occur, it is essential to check cows frequently to identify those experiencing extended or difficult labor. Checking cows every 3 hours is recommended to help early identification of dystocia. Realistically, checking cows twice daily and three times per day for heifers may be a more workable schedule. One simple way to make this task easier is to feed cows daily at dusk. A study in Iowa found that 85% of the calves were born during daylight hours when cows were fed in the evening rather than morning.

In addition to length of time in labor, the quality of contractions should also be monitored as it may indicate malposition of the fetus, a twin birth, or a metabolic problem. Poor contractions are due to primary or secondary uterine inertia. Primary causes include conditions such as low blood concentrations of calcium and magnesium, old age, or preterm delivery. Secondary uterine inertia is seen with fatigue of the uterine muscles such as in a prolonged attempt to deliver a malpositioned calf or twins. When a calf is presenting correctly, you should observe two hooves facing down and a nose on top of the legs. If the nose is not visible (head turned back) or a nose with one or no hooves (leg or legs back), immediate intervention is necessary. If the calf is presenting backwards (two hooves with the pads up), pulling the calf will increase its chances of survival as these calves take a longer time to be delivered naturally. A breech birth (tail first) or uterine torsion is difficult to visually diagnose; if there are no active contractions or no visualization of the feet, she should be checked for a problem.

6

Many calf losses are attributed to a delay in receiving assistance or the amount of difficulty and time required to remove the calf. Knowing when intervention is required and when to call for professional veterinary assistance can greatly increase the calf’s chance of survival. If you don’t know what the problem is call a veterinarian. If you know the problem but you have been unsuccessful correcting it after 30 minutes of trying, call a veterinarian. Losses can be prevented by good supervision and quick intervention when needed. Signs of reduced vitality in the neonate include peripheral edema (swelling of the head and tongue), scleral hemorrhages (bloodshot eyes), yellow staining of the hair coat, cyanosis of the mucous membranes (blue color to gums), or reduced responsiveness to stimulation. When observed, these are strong indicators that intervention is required. Early intervention is the key; not only does it increase the chance of survival for the calf, but it also greatly increases the pregnancy rate of the cow in the following breeding season.

Beef Herd Expansion Appears to be Underway Dr. Kenny Burdine, Livestock Marketing Specialist, University of Kentucky

USDA released their annual cattle inventory estimates in late January.

This report was especially significant this year as many were looking for confirmation that beef herd expansion had begun. Overall, the report indicated that expansion was underway, and perhaps at a faster pace than many expected. Also, the report confirmed that the cow herd was larger coming into 2015, likely as a result of decreased cow slaughter during 2014. Total cattle and calves were estimated up by about 1% from 2014. Estimates are shown in the table at the end of this article and include both 2014 and 2015.

The number that will likely have the most immediate impact on beef producers is the estimated size of the beef cow herd. The January 2015 estimate was just under 29.7 million, which was an increase of a little more than 2% from 2014. Sizeable increases were seen in Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas. Increases in herd size in the southeast were more moderate for the most part. Cow slaughter had been running well below year ago levels for virtually all of 2014 and I think this was the primary driver of the increase in cow numbers. Deep culling in much of the US during 2011-2013 resulted in beef producers coming into 2014 with a younger cow herd. The combination of a younger herd, favorable weather, and attractive calf prices likely resulted in producers simply culling fewer cows in 2014. The impact will be a larger calf crop being marketed in the US for 2015, which will have an impact on calf prices this fall.

The other number that has gotten a lot of attention was a 4% increase in the number of heifers held for beef cow replacement. Heifer retention was also slightly above year ago levels last year, but by a smaller percentage. Further, I felt that some of the increase in heifer retention last year was partially in response to deceasing cow numbers. Conversely, 7

the heifer retention seen this year occurred when total beef cow numbers had actually increased. To put this 4% in perspective, it amounts to an additional 226,000 more heifers being held for beef cow replacements. As a percentage of the 29.7 million US beef cow herd, this would be slightly less than 1%. Heifer development estimates for July will also be of importance as we start thinking about how quickly this cow-herd will grow.

Of course, so will weather conditions in the coming years and how well the calf market holds as production starts to increase and the beef market sees increased pressure from competing meats.

The Kentucky numbers told a story similar to what most would have expected – the Kentucky beef cow herd has grown, but at a more moderate pace than the Southern Plains. The estimated size of Kentucky’s beef cow herd came in 2% higher than January 2014, but that was after a 2% reduction in the 2014 estimate. So, the Kentucky beef cow herd is about where it was estimated to be last year – just over one million cows.

USDA January 1, 2014 Cattle Inventory Report 2015 as % of 2014

2014

2015

(1,000 hd)

(1,000 hd)

Total Cattle and Calves

88,526.0

89,800.0

101

Cows and Heifers That Have Calved Beef Cows

38,293.0

39,000.0

102

29,085.4

29,693.1

102

9,207.6

9,306.9

101

18,969.4

19,240.2

101

For Beef Cow Replacement

5,551.3

5,777.4

104

For Milk Cow Replacement

4,548.7

4,615.4

101

Other Heifers

8,869.4

8,847.4

100

15,667.9

15,778.5

101

2,037.8

2,104.4

103

Calves Under 500 Pounds

13,557.9

13,676.9

101

Cattle on Feed

13,018.3

13,093.0

101

2013

2014

Milk Cows Heifers 500 Pounds and Over

Steers 500 Pounds and Over Bulls 500 Pounds and Over

33,730.0

Calf Crop

33,900

101

While this report confirms that beef cow herd expansion is underway, many of the fundamentals remain positive for the beef sector in 2015. I fully expect calf prices to respond positively to grass this spring and think we are likely to see the strongest spring calf market that we have seen.

While I do look for fall calf prices to be softer in fall 2015, I also fully expect 8

the fall 2015 market to another strong one, second only to the fall of 2014. Cow-calf operators should take advantage of the increased income they enjoyed in 2014 and are likely to enjoy in 2015 to get their beef herds where they want them to be in the next few years.

LEGAL NOTICE The Kentucky Transportation Cabinet

In accordance with KRS 176.051, Kentucky’s noxious weed law, the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet will control noxious weeds on state-owned right of way at the request of the adjoining property owner. The noxious weeds named in this law are Johnsongrass, Giant foxtail, Canada thistle, Nodding thistle, Common teasel, Multiflora rose, Amur honeysuckle, Poison hemlock, Marestail, Japanese knotweed, and Kudzu.

Persons who own property adjacent to state right of way and who are involved in eradication efforts on their property can submit a written application to the highway district office in their area. Applications and addresses of each district office will be located at state highway garages.

Buttercups in pastures Source: Garry Lacefield, extension forage specialist

One of the signs that spring has arrived is when yellow buttercups begin to appear, but it’s during the winter months that the vegetative growth of buttercup actually takes place. As a cool-season weed, this plant often flourishes in over-grazed pasture with poor stands of desirable forages.

In fact, many fields that have dense buttercup populations are fields heavily grazed by animals during the fall through the early spring months.

Buttercups are sometimes classified as short-lived perennials, but often grow as winter annuals. Plants typically produce five, shiny yellow petals in the early spring. There are four different species of buttercups that may be found in Kentucky: bulbous buttercup (Ranunculus bulbosus), creeping buttercup (Ranunculus repens), tall buttercup (Ranunculus acris) and small flower buttercup (Ranunculus arbortivus). Although each of these plants may have somewhat similar flower heads, each of these buttercup species differs somewhat in their vegetative leaf characteris9

tics. New seeds are produced during the time petals are showy. If you wait until after flowers appear, it can be too late to implement control tactics. This is one reason buttercups can survive year to year and new plants emerge each year.

Most buttercup plants emerge from seed during the fall or late winter months. Therefore, pasture management practices that improve and promote growth of desirable plants during these months are the best methods to help compete against the emergence and growth of this plant.

Whereas, livestock overgrazing fields during the fall and winter months is one of the main factors that contribute to buttercup problems. You can mow fields or clip plants close to the ground in the early spring before buttercup plants can produce flowers and that may help reduce the amount of new seed produced, but mowing alone will not totally eliminate seed production.

For chemical control, herbicides registered for use on grass pastures that contain 2,4-D will effectively control buttercup. Depending on other weeds present products that contain dicamba and 2,4-D (eg. Weedmaster), aminopyralid (eg. ForeFront, Milestone), triclopyr (eg. PastureGard, Crossbow) or metsulfuron (eg. Cimarron) can also be used. However, legumes such as clovers interseeded with grass pastures can be severely injured or killed by these herbicide products. For optimum results apply a herbicide in the early spring (February - March) before flowers are observed, when buttercup plants are still small and actively growing. For best herbicide activity, wait until daytime air temperatures are greater than 50 degrees for two to three consecutive days. Consult the herbicide label for further information on grazing restrictions, precautions or other possible limitations.

For fields heavily infested with buttercup, you may need a variety of control tactics. Apply a herbicide to help reduce the population of buttercup plants in the spring, plus use good pasture management techniques throughout the year to help improve and thicken the stand of desirable forages.

Time to control poison hemlock Controlling poison hemlock in pastures in early spring could help keep pastures and livestock healthy, said J.D. Green, extension weeds specialist with the University of Kentucky College of Agriculture .

“Poison hemlock is potentially poisonous to livestock, particularly when animals may graze poison hemlock plants when other forages are limited, or if large quantities of hay containing poison hemlock are consumed by animals,” Green said. “In addition, poison hemlock can crowd out desirable plants in areas where it becomes established.”

Introduced to the United States as an ornamental in the 1800s, poison hemlock is widespread throughout most of the state and much of North America. In the past, it was typically found along roadways, abandoned lots, fencerows and other non-cropland sites. But in recent years, its population has exploded across Kentucky, and it is now in many pastures and hayfields.

10

Poison hemlock can be toxic if ingested by livestock or humans. Cattle, goats and horses are considered to be the most susceptible animals but other animals can consume it. If ingested, poisoning symptoms appear within 30 minutes to two hours, depending on several factors including the animal species and quantity consumed. Lethal doses for cattle range between 0.2 and 0.5 percent of the animal’s weight. Poisoning symptoms include nervousness, trembling, muscle weakness, loss of coordination, pupil dilation, coma and eventually death from respiratory failure. If ingested by a pregnant animal, it can cause fetal deformities.

The best time of the year to effectively control poison hemlock using herbicides is in the early spring when plants are smaller and in the rosette growth stage, particularly when applying herbicides that contain 2,4 -D. In the rosette growth stage, plants can be more difficult to find since poison hemlock is growing close to the ground, but producers can easily recognize it in fields due to its parsley-like leaves that are shiny green and triangular. Producers should look in field areas where the plant was present last year; larger plants may be up to 12 to 18 inches tall. When full grown, this invasive, noxious weed can reach 6 to 8 feet tall.

Poison hemlock is often confused with Queen Anne's lace, which also is called wild carrot and is a non-toxic weed. Both plants produce leaves and clusters of small, white flowers that look similar. However, poison hemlock has smooth stems with purple spots throughout while Queen Anne's lace has hair along its stem and leaf bases. During poison hemlock’s peak bloom period in late May and early June; Queen Anne's lace is just beginning active growth for the season.

If producers find poison hemlock later in the season, they should mow it over before it flowers to prevent further seed production. If it is found while making hay, Green recommends mowing around the plant to keep it out of the animals’ food supply.

USDA NRCS in Kentucky Announces Application CutOff Period for the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) will be March 20, 2015 The USDA-Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) in Kentucky is encouraging landowners, farmers and producers to visit their local NRCS office now to receive information and apply for conservation technical assistance and possible financial funding opportunities.

EQIP is a conservation program that provides financial and technical assistance to farmers and ranchers who face threats to soil, water, air, and related natural resources on their land. Through EQIP, NRCS develops contracts with agricultural producers to voluntarily implement conservation practices. Persons engaged in livestock or agricultural production 11

and owners of non-industrial private forestland are eligible for this program. Eligible land includes cropland, pastureland, private non-industrial forestland, and other farm or ranch lands.

EQIP offers several National and State Initiatives which include the Seasonal High Tunnel Initiative, Organic Initiative, On-Farm Energy Initiative, Wildlife Initiative, and Forestry Initiative. Interested land users should visit their local NRCS Office to find out what opportunities are available through each of these EQIP Initiatives.

“We’re getting an earlier start on EQIP contracts this year to give farmers more time to install practices,” said Deena Wheby, assistant state conservationist for programs.

All recipients of assistance are required to develop a conservation plan.

Conservation planning is an integral part of the conservation process.

Landowners should work with a conservation planner to develop the plan based on the landowner’s operational goals to improve the productivity, sustainability and profitability of their operation.

“Good conservation planning helps us identify the practices that will best address a landuser’s resource concerns,” Wheby said. The conservation plan will serve as a roadmap to a variety of technical assistance and financial assistance through EQIP as well as other options available to the landowner.

For more information visit NRCS on the web at www.ky.nrcs.usda.gov or contact your local NRCS service center at 502/348-3363. http:// offices.sc.egov.usda.gov/locator/app.

12

13

USDA Provides One-Time Extension of Deadline to Update Base Acres or Yield History for ARC/ PLC Programs Farmers Now Have Until March 31 to Update Yields and Reallocate Base Acres; Deadline for Choosing Between ARC and PLC also Remains March 31 WASHINGTON, Feb. 27, 2015 — Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack announced today that a one-time extension will be provided to producers for the new safety-net programs established by the 2014 Farm Bill, known as Agriculture Risk Coverage (ARC) and Price Loss Coverage (PLC). The final day to update yield history or reallocate base acres has been extended one additional month, from Feb. 27, 2015 until March 31, 2015. The final day for farm owners and producers to choose ARC or PLC coverage also remains March 31, 2015.

EQIPMENT MANAGER The Nelson County Conservation District is pleased to announce that P.J. Milburn is their new Equipment Manager. Please call P.J. at 502-507-5786, if interested in renting one of their No-till Drills, Aerator or Hay Bale Wrapper.

14

15 Phone: 859-257-2853, email: jeff.lehmkuhler.@uky.edu

For more information, contact Jeff Lehmkuhler,

KY 40546-0215

Building University of Kentucky, Lexington,

Kentucky Forage and Grassland Council and send to Jeff Lehmkuhler, 804 W.P. Garrigus

Make checks payable to:

the same exit to take to come to the Grazing School

exit off I-64 (Versailles/Frankfort, exit 58). This is

Lodging: There are several hotels at the Hwy 60

Registration fee must be paid to hold a place in the grazing school. Enrollment in this grazing school is limited to the first 45 who register.

Registration Fee: $50.00 which includes all materials, grazing manual, breaks, and lunch both days.

Registration Information

RETURN SERVICE REQUESTED

Bardstown, KY 40004

317 South Third Street

Nelson County

University of Kentucky

Cooperative Extension Service NONPROFIT ORG US POSTAGE PAID BARDSTOWN, KY PERMIT #028