Page 1

DECEMBER 2016

Opening Day

SPRINGFIELD, MO Permit #96 P O Box 634 Carthage, MO 64836

PAID

PRSRT STD U.S. POSTAGE

www.joplinstockyards.com

\VOLUME 20 | ISSUE 5

August 1931 DECEMBER 2016

1


Now St Wire ocking Fence T-Pos & ts

est of l w t s Ju giona e R n i Jopl kyards Stoc www.superiorsteelsales.com

HEAVY DUTY ADJUSTABLE ALLEYWAYS & CROWDING TUBS

PIPE FENCING MATERIALS

Sucker Rod

SUPERIOR GATES

New & Used Pipe 5, Hea 6, & 7 vy Ba Cust Duty G r a t Latc om S izes es hes , or H inge s

PIPE BUNKS

OK Brand • Sheffield Stay Tuff • Bekaert Red Brand • W.Silver Chicago Heights

WIRE FENCE & T-POSTS

Precut Posts

ALSO STOCKING

DELIVERY AVAILABLE

Top Rail - New & Used Continuous Fence Cable Fence Supplies Caps, Clips, Hardware

Cattle Guards Structural Steel Culverts Rebar & More

417.358.5555 EXIT 22 OFF I-44

2

DECEMBER 2016

www.joplinstockyards.com


Field Representatives

VIEW FROM THE BLOCK

T

his year has been a roller coast ride! We started off the year in kind of a downturn, then gained some momentum in the spring as fat cattle traded in the $130s. Everyone had a little optimism. The market went backwards again this fall before rebounding in recent weeks with slaughter cattle trading back around $115. Recent Cattle on Feed Reports showed a decrease in feedyard placements because of the depressed market and good moisture conditions in much of the country. Now, we see the market trending higher and the fat cattle trade is what has pulled us out of the slump. Exports have been huge as well in recent weeks. If we can maintain some momentum in the fat cattle market now through spring, we’ll see prices trade just slightly sideways. When we don’t market cattle in a timely manner, marketings all add up at once. If that happens, I suppose we could see

the slaughter cattle market get pretty tough again next summer. Overall, we’re still looking at a down trending market with more cattle on hand than we had a year ago. Bottom line is we need to keep selling cattle when the market is good. As we start a new year, we need to be aware of everything out there on the horizon from politics to the weather. Those factors can change the whole structure of the market, and we have no control over either one them. Despite the market, we have had a good year with ample rainfall and plenty of available feed. I’ve been blessed to get to do what I like to do every day. From all of us at Joplin Regional Stockyards, Merry Christmas and Happy New Year. Good luck and God bless.

Jackie

Bailey Moore: Granby, MO M(417)540-4343

Skyler Moore: Mount Vernon, MO M(417)737-2615

ARKANSAS Dolf Marrs: Hindsville, AR H(479)789-2798, M(479)790-2697

MISSOURI Dan Haase: Pierce City, MO M(417)476-2132

Billy Ray Mainer: Branch, AR M(479)518-6931

Jim Hacker: Bolivar, MO H(417)326-2905, M(417)328-8905

Jr. Smith: Melbourne, AR M(870-373-1150

Bruce Hall: Mount Vernon, MO M(417)466-5170

Kent Swinney: Gentry, AR H(479)736-4621, M(479)524-7024

Mark Harmon: Mount Vernon, MO M(417)316-0101

KANSAS Chris Martin (Video Rep): Alma, KS M(785)499-3011

Bryon Haskins: Lamar, MO M(417)850-4382

Alice Myrick: Mapleton, KS H(620)743-3681, M(620)363-0740 Bob Shanks: Columbus, KS H(620)674-3259, M(620)674-1675

Doc Haskins: Diamond, MO H(417)325-4136, M(417)437-2191 J.W. Henson: Conway, MO H(417)589-2586, M(417)343-9488 CATTLE RECEIVING STATION

LOUISIANA James Kennedy: DeRidder, LA M(337)274-7406 CATTLE RECEIVING STATION

Joe David Hudson: Jenkins, MO H(417)574-6944, M(417)-342-4916

OKLAHOMA Russell Boles: Watson, OK M(903)276-1544

Larry Jackson: Carthage, MO H(417)358-7931, M(417)850-3492

Chester Palmer: Miami, OK H(918)542-6801, M(918)540-4929 John Simmons: Westville, OK M(918)519-9129, M(417)310-6348 Shane Stierwalt: Shidler, OK M(918)688-5774 Troy Yoder: Chouteau, OK M(918)640-8219 MISSOURI Rick Aspegren: Mountain Grove, MO M(417)547-2098 Clay Barnhouse: Bolivar, MO M(417)777-1855

Steve Hunter: Jasper, MO H(417)525-4405, M(417)439-1168

Jim Jones: Crane, MO H(417)723-8856, M(417)844-9225 Chris Keeling: Purdy, MO M(417)860-8941 Kelly Kissire: Anderson, MO H(417)845-3777, M(417)437-7622 Larry Mallory: Miller, MO H(417)452-2660, M(417)461-2275 Kenny Ogden: Lockwood, MO H(417)537-4777, M(417)466-8176 Jason Pendleton: Stotts City, MO M(417)437-4552 Charlie Prough: El Dorado Springs, MO H(417)876-4189, M(417)876-7765

Sherman Brown: Marionville, MO H(417)723-0245, M(417)693-1701

Dennis Raucher M(417)316-0023

John Bussey: Neosho, MO M(417)592-4891

Russ Ritchart: Jasper, MO M(417)483-3295

Joel Chaffin: Ozark, MO M(417)299-4727

Lonnie Robertson: Galena, MO M(417)844-1138

Rick Chaffin: Ozark, MO H(417)485-7055, M(417)849-1230

Alvie Sartin: Seymour, MO M(417)840-3272 CATTLE RECEIVING STATION

Jack Chastain: Bois D’Arc, MO H(417)751-9580, M(417)849-5748 Ted Dahlstrom, DVM: Staff Vet Stockyards (417)548-3074 Office (417)235-4088

Jim Schiltz: Lamar, MO H(417)884-5229, M(417)850-7850 David Stump: Jasper, MO H(417)537-4358, M(417)434-5420

Tim Durman: Seneca, MO H(417) 776-2906, M(417)438-3541

Matt Sukovaty: Bolivar, MO H(417)326-4618, M(417)399-3600

Jerome Falls: Sarcoxie, MO H(417)548-2233, M(417)793-5752

Brandon Tichenor: Fairview, MO M(417)540-4717

Skyler Fisher: Collins, MO M(417) 298-9051 CATTLE RECEIVING STATION

Mike Theurer: Lockwood, MO H(417)232-4358, M(417)827-3117

Nick Flannigan: Fair Grove, MO M(417)316-0048 Kenneth & Mary Ann Friese: Friedheim, MO H(573)788-2143, M(573)225-7932 CATTLE RECEIVING STATION Fred Gates: Seneca, MO H(417)776-3412, M(417)437-5055

Tim Varner: Washburn, MO H(417)826-5645, M(417)847-7831 OFFICE: (417)548-2333 Sara Engler VIDEO CATTLE PRODUCTION Matt Oschlaeger: Mount Vernon, MO M(417)466-8438

Brent Gundy: Walker, MO H(417)465-2246, M(417)321-0958 www.joplinstockyards.com

DECEMBER 2016

3


inside this issue

ALL �r::L .::.�:�GS ��::!t:::t L • Custom Built to Size &�

s

s

About the Cover

• One Continuous Roof Sheet up to 50' wide CONSTRUCTION • All Welded, No Bolts Lockwood, MO • Post Concreted in Ground 4-5' Deep

Size Description Price 40'x60'x14' ............ 2 Ends, 1 Side ...............$18,995 40'x80'x14' ............. 1 End, 1 Side ............... $23,900 50'x80'x16' ............. 1 End, 1 Side ................$27,995 50'x100'x16' ............ 1 End, 1 Side ............... $33,900 60'x80'x16' ............. 1 End, 1 Side ............... $32,500 60'x100'x16' ............ 1 End, 1 Side ............... $39,995

Chris Lowak 417·682·1488 We Build Equipment Sheds, Hay Barns, Shops & More! I] Finduson,

• Prices subject to change "Travel required outside 100 mile radius

facebook.

Discover the history of Joplin Regional Stockyards through a documentary unveiled last month in Joplin, Missouri. Read the film’s prelude on page 14. — Cover design by Joann Pipkin.

Features 12 14 16 18 20 23 24 25 27 28 30

Stockers: Wading Through Winter Stockyards Documentary Debuts Money in the Bank 5 Steps to Better Cow Nutrition Finding Value in Forage Analysis Boost Next Fall’s Income Now Fat and Body Condition BVD: Beef’s Problem Child Managing Through Market Uncertainty Riding Out the Rewards Opportunity Knocks as Door Closes on 2016

In Every Issue 3 5 6 8 10 32 34

View from the Block Beef in Brief On Target with Justin Sexten Health Watch with K-State’s Dr. David Rethorst Next Generation with Darren Frye Market Watch Event Roundup

Contact Us

Publisher/Advertising: Mark Harmon | Email: markh@joplinstockyards.com Phone: 417-548-2333 | Mobile: 417-316-0101 Fax: 417-548-2370 Editor/Design/Layout: Joann Pipkin | Email: editor@joplinstockyards.com Ad Deadline: 2nd Monday of Each Month for Next Month’s Issue Cattlemen’s News, PO Box 634, Carthage, MO 64836 www.joplinstockyards.com Subcription questions can be answered by calling 417-548-2333. Although we strive to maintain the highest journalistic ethics, Joplin Regional Stockyards limits its responsibilities for any errors, inaccuracies or misprints in advertisements or editorial copy. Advertisers and advertising agencies assume liability for all content of advertisements printed, and also assume responsibility for any claims arising from such advertisement made against the Stockyards and/or its publication.

If you wish to discontinue a subscription to Cattlemen’s News, please send request or address label to: Cattlemen’s News - PO Box 634, Carthage, MO 64836

Cattlemen’s News, published by Joplin Regional Stockyards, is a nutsand-bolts news magazine dedicated to helping cattle producers add value to their operations. From “how-to” articles to economics and industry trends, our mission is to put today’s producers in touch with the information and products that will make them profitable for tomorrow. Published monthly. Circulation 10,000.

Scan Me or Visit

joplinstockyards.com 4

DECEMBER 2016

www.joplinstockyards.com


beef in brief Show-Me-Select Sale in Tune With the Times The 35th Show-Me-Select Bred Heifer Sale had a $1,651 average on 364 heifers Nov. 18 at Joplin Regional Stockyards in Carthage, Missouri. University of Missouri Extension Livestock Specialist Eldon Cole said the price range varied from $1,100 to $2,050. The most active bidding was done on 55 head of Red Angus heifers consigned by Circle S Chicks, Stark City, Missouri. They had a cotop of $2,050 with an average of $1,970.

M

ay your homes be filled with peace and joy as we remember the reason for the season. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year from all of us at Joplin Regional Stockyards.

Also at $2,050 was six head of black baldies sold by John Wheeler, Marionville, Missouri, and purchased by Scott Casey, El Dorado Springs, Missouri. The top lot from Circle S Chicks sold to Billy Ray Mainer, Branch, Arkansas. The breed and color makeup of the sale included 47 percent blacks with many Angus crosses, 27 percent were black baldy and mottlefaced. Twenty-four percent were red and red baldies with two percent white or grays. Sixty percent of the heifers were called as being pregnant to the artificial insemination service. They sold for an average of $1,704. The balance of the heifers averaged $1,573, which was $131 behind the AI-breds. —Source: University of Missouri Extension release.

Effective, Year Long External Parasite Treatment.

620.408.6387 888.256.5544

www.usalewiscattleoilers.com

“WE SERVICE WHAT WE SELL”

www.joplinstockyards.com

DECEMBER 2016

5


On Target

Is Docility a Performance or Convenience Trait? Measuring docility in cowherd management Story By Justin Sexten

A

s calving season approaches, many ranchers look forward to the newborns that represent hours of studying sire summaries and bull catalogs. For all the optimism, however, one source of lingering dread exists: the cow or cows that you know should have been culled due to attitude. You hoped she’d be open at pregnancy check, after that one-last-tour across the pasture she led when you thought the herd was corralled. And, you know that tagging tool makes a poor defense mechanism when you try to work her calf. You tell yourself she is fine after she calves and “mothering ability” is important. We know docility is moderately heritable, calculated at

6

DECEMBER 2016

an average coefficient of 0.37, so the trait can be moved in a positive or negative direction through selection. Historically, removing the outliers has been the approach to improving docility in most herds. Recent research published in the Journal of Animal Science by Kelsey Bruno and coworkers at the University of Kentucky looks at measuring systems and the effect of docility on calves during the receiving period. It offers a different approach to the impact of docility with that focus on receiving, and penning cattle by their various docility rankings. Previous research has shown less docile cattle tend to eat less, a problem compounded with the stress from wean-

ing and shipping to feedyards that can lead to nutrient deficiencies. Penning cattle by docility score, the researchers hypothesized, could allow for diets modified to accommodate lower feed intake. Docility was determined in two ways at initial processing. The first quantified the variation in weight indicated by the chute scales for each animal. For 10 seconds after the head was caught, the variation in scale weights was calculated; increased variation indicated greater movement in the chute, and these animals were considered less docile. When this docility scoring system was compared to the traditional chute score developed by Temple Grandin, where handlers observe the animal and assign a subjective score (1=calm, 2=restless, 3=squirming/shaking, 4=continuous shaking, 5=rearing, twisting, violent struggling), only slight correlation existed. That, along with unexpected performance results suggest this new measurement system needs further study. The second scoring system used in

this and many other studies was exit velocity, where faster exit is related to less docile cattle. The downside to this measure in actual practice is that it’s taken as the animal leaves the chute, thus requiring a later sort for culling. In the Kentucky study, cattle were penned in four groups: calm in the chute and slow to exit, calm in chute and fast to exit, excited in the chute and slow to exit, and exited in the chute and fast to exit. If you’ve spent much time as monitor at the receiving pen, you can imagine the joy of checking those “less docile” groups. This experiment offered the chance to see if the less docile cattle exhibit performance differences because of their interaction with tame cattle, or because they are inherently less docile themselves. No interactions existed between the two scoring systems so the team was able to look at exit velocity independently. The fast-exiting cattle gained 0.18 lb./day less during the 58-day receiving period CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE

www.joplinstockyards.com


TRENDING NOW

Show-Me-Select Program Turns 20 Quality replacement heifers valuable to Missouri economy

T

he Missouri Show-MeSelect Heifer Development Program was begun in the fall of 1996 under the guidance of Dr. Dave Patterson. Patterson came to Missouri in August that year as the state extension beef cattle reproduction specialist. Shortly after arriving in Missouri he set the wheels in motion to have a pilot program in the southwest and northeast regions of the state. The emphasis was to have cowcalf producers use technology tools available to improve heifer selection and development. Meetings were held with producers, veterinarians, extension specialists and others who had an interest in a beef heifer development program. Plans were made to begin the actual program early in 1997 ahead of the spring breeding season. This involved training veterinarians on reproductive tract scoring, pelvic area measuring and early pregnancy checking to project an expected calving date. The possibility of a sale was envisioned but not a major idea until enough interest was determined. The interest developed and sales were scheduled for November and early December, 1997.

www.joplinstockyards.com

Since the beginning 826 Missouri farms have participated in the program with 125,000 heifers enrolled. To date 32,043 heifers have been sold around the state with $45.8 million in gross sales. Buyers have come from 19 states and 108 Missouri counties. Agriculture economists have estimated the SMS program has added $120 million to Missouri’s economy during this 20-year span. Since 2002 two sales per year have been held, one in May for fall calvers and the other in November sells heifers that will calve after Jan. 1 and before May 1. Surveys and verbal comments from buyers and sellers reveal the following: • Buyers feel they can buy SMS heifers for less expense than it takes to raise them. • Calving ease is great with an average assist rate under 10 percent. • I’ve improved the genetic quality of my herd since I’ve bought SMS heifers. • The SMS program has made me better at planning ahead. • I’ve learned a lot about making genetic selections based

on expected progeny differences EPDs. • Due to adoption of heat synchronization, I can get 50 to 60 percent of my heifers to calve in a 15 to 18 day period. • I’m a commercial producer and Show-Me-Select selling has made me a better marketer. —Source: University of Missouri Extension.

CONVENIENCE TRAIT FROM PREVIOUS PAGE than the slow (docile) counterparts. Feed intake was 1.1 lb./day more for slow-exiting cattle, an expected result that was the basic rationale for feeding different diets based on docility classification. However, the increased nutrient-density diet for less-docile cattle in this experiment had no effect on the group’s

performance regardless of the scoring method. That suggests the higher dietary protein levels used were either not high enough to overcome lower feed intake, or docile cattle are more efficient at nutrient use. While this work didn’t report carcass merit, we know in Tri-County Steer Carcass Futurity data, calves that were calm or simply swished their tail while in the chute consistently returned more dollars to the feeding enterprise through improved quality grade while maintaining better health. How we identify docile cattle will continue to evolve, depending on where you are in the supply chain, but there are clear benefits to maintaining focus on improved docility from ranch through harvest. —Justin Sexten is director of supply development for Certified Angus Beef.

YOUR ANJIMAL H]EALl'fa PROf[SSIOltf ALS Keepinq ijou11 He11d Health11 & £Hicient Best Quality Products Shipped or Delivered to Your Door at the Lowest Prices • Antibiotics • Electronic ID • Implants • Pest Control • Vaccines • Animal Health • Supplies

II

Exit 70, Springfield, MO 417-863-8446

417-235-6226 • 1-888-360-9588

I/

Mac's VET SUPPLY

DECEMBER 2016

7


nancy rates were usually in the 95 to 97 percent range.

HEALTH WATCH

Nutrition: the Herd’s Foundation How fetal programming impacts herd health Story By David Rethorst for Cattlemen’s News

A

s I have dealt with the reproductive and health issues in cow herds during my 38 years of beef cattle practice, I have asked myself why does one herd have problems year after year, while a neighboring herd with seemingly similar cattle and health protocols have very few problems. As I delved into this question, I usually found differences in the way animal husbandry practices were managed in the herds. At times, lack of timely parasite

control created problems, and times when buying used bulls created biosecurity issues that resulted in reproductive problems but invariably the majority of the problems have been related to nutrition. As an example, let’s look at two herds. Herd 1 did an excellent job of supplementing protein on corn stalks after the grain was cleaned up as well as providing a good trace mineral package year-around. The cows

were offered plenty of forage pre- and post-calving as well as supplemental feed to meet protein and energy requirements. The cows were usually in a 5.5 to 6 body condition score. Very few neonatal calves were treated for scours or respiratory disease in this herd. At weaning, usually less than 1 percent of the calves were treated for respiratory disease. Death loss from weaning to slaughter was also less than 1 percent. Preg-

Herd 2, on the other hand, did not supplement protein when the corn was cleaned up on the stalk fields nor was mineral provided while the cows were on corn stalks. The cows went into calving in a condition score of 4.5 to 5. This ranch tried to play catch up nutritionally by feeding a complete ration beginning about three weeks prior to calving. Each year 15 to 20 percent of the neonatal calves were treated for scours and/or respiratory disease. Additionally, 5 to 7 percent of the calves were treated for respiratory disease at weaning. Pregnancy rates in this herd were typically in the 92 to 93 percent range with the cows in a 5 to 5.5 body condition score. This ranch spent a great deal of time and money treating the neonatal calves. Additionally, they spent a considerable amount of money trying to figure out what they had in their herd so they could vaccinate for it. These two herds provide a good example of the difference that gestational nutrition, or fetal programming, makes in the lifetime health and performance of calves. The management in herd 2 was convinced that nutrition during pregnancy did not impact calf health as long as the cows were in moderate flesh. They had respectable production numbers that could have been better if they had taken the money they spent on diagnostics over the years and put it towards supplemental protein and trace minerals. This comparison of two herds also provides a real-life scenario that reinforces the fetal programming work that has been done by the University of Wyoming, the University of Nebraska, New Mexico State University and Oregon State University. If your herd is one of those that follows the recommended health protocols but still has more health and performance issues than you think it should, I encourage you to take a critical look at your animal husbandry practices, especially your nutrition program. Your problems might have relatively easy fix. —Source: Dr. David Rethorst is outreach veterinarian, Kansas State University Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory.

8

DECEMBER 2016

www.joplinstockyards.com


MANAGEMENT MATTERS

of the results of feeding concentrates in addition to a basal diet of forage looks something like this:

Should You Feed Corn Over Hay to Cows this Winter? Weigh your options carefully Story By Chris Reinhardt

A

lthough some areas received abundant rain this summer and have ample hay supplies, other regions received only marginal rains, resulting in a sub-par hay crop. On the other hand, most of the corn-growing regions of the Midwest and High Plains had excellent growing conditions, which have contributed to abundant grain supplies, resulting in relatively low corn prices this fall.

CONTINUED ON PAGE 11

This combination of coinciding circumstances has raised the question: Can I feed corn to cows instead of hay? Well, the answer is an ‘emphatic, yes,’ but with caveats. Nutritionists look at a cow as essentially a rumen with legs, a mouth and an udder. The cow has a mouth to feed the rumen — more specifically, the rumen microbes, and the job of the rumen microbes is to feed the cow. Most of a cow’s life she has fed these microbes a diet primarily of cellulose — from grass, hay, corn stalks and wheat straw. What little concentrate — grain, by-product feeds and protein supplements — she’s received has been in the form of a bit of supplement on top of the forages that have been her main diet. The rumen microbes digest the cellulose in forages best when the rumen pH remains in the range of 6.0 to 6.5; this is one, although not the only, reason cows chew their cud: the saliva produced and injected into the cud during rumination contains buffers to keep the pH above 6.0. The more grain or other concentrate feeds we provide, the more likely the rumen pH is to decline below 6.0. The other extreme would be finishing feedlot cattle consuming a highgrain diet have a rumen pH in the low 5’s to even the high 4’s — very acidic. This acidic pH makes for an environment unfavorable for forage digestion. So when we begin to consider feeding more than a small amount of concentrate to cows, we need to consider that the pH will likely fall below the pH, which is optimum for forage digestion. For this reason, it is advised that we consider feeding a diet that is either less than 25 to 30 percent concentrate — on a dry-matter basis — or greater than 70 to 75 percent concentrate — avoid feeding in between these levels. Why? As we exceed 30 percent of the diet as concentrate, the rumen pH will decline and the feeding value of the forages in the diet decline. Note, this effect becomes more pronounced with increasingly lower-quality forages than with high-quality forages. A schematic www.joplinstockyards.com

DECEMBER 2016

9


here. If that’s a strong priority for you, now is the time for you and your family members to learn more about each other’s personalities and how everyone can best work together.

NEXT GENERATION

Build Family Communication Now — for Farm’s Future Get to know family personality differences Story By Darren Frye for Cattlemen’s News

C

elebrations are plentiful at the end of the year, especially if you’re part of a family that has the opportunity to farm together. The holiday season moves us to think of what we’re most grateful for in our lives. For many in ag, blessings come from working together with family members to create and maintain a successful farm business. Here’s another thing to think about, especially if your operation will soon transition to the next generation, or even if that transition won’t come for a decade or more. How well do the family members in your operation work together? The way you answer this question now can impact your farm later, when discussions are happening about how own-

10

DECEMBER 2016

ership and leadership will be transferred to the next generation.

Understanding people I know this for sure about people: we are all created differently. No two people are the same, not only in terms of the way we look physically, but also in our personalities and how we approach and relate to the world. These differences can be amazing and beneficial. They allow for us to have different strengths, even within the same family, which can be extremely helpful in a farm business — or any business — for that matter. But personality and style differences can also create confusion. Challenges can exist in working together, depending

on how our styles interact with each other. Understanding and knowing our own personality style and tendencies — assessments are available that provide this information — and then learning how our styles typically interact with the styles of others we work with can lead to better outcomes. Ultimately, that can mean more success for the farm operation and the potential for it to continue smoothly into the future.

Otherwise, when these things aren’t addressed, they tend to get worse rather than better. If family members who work together on the farm aren’t communicating openly and honestly right now, then it’s probably not going to suddenly be resolved when discussions around the farm’s transition begin.

Developing more awareness

Transition discussions can be emotional for families, and for good reason. The operation is important to the family — both on-farm and off-farm family — but in different ways. Stakes are high, and emotions are often running high as well. It can be very emotional to think about the older generation no longer being involved on the farm.

Members of the older generation on the farm often say that their main priority for the transition of their operation is that everyone still gets along with each other when the transition is over, when they’re no longer

Having a clear understanding of one another’s personality styles can be helpful when the stakes are high. The stakes are pretty high when you’re talking about the future of your farm, CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE

www.joplinstockyards.com


FEED CORN OVER HAY FROM PAGE 9 With that out of the way, one way to capture the value of low-cost grains and concentrate feeds this fall and winter, without placing cows, heifers, and weaned calves on a “finishing” diet, is to consider limit-feeding a high-grain diet. By high-grain, we typically mean 70 to 75 percent concentrate with sufficient forage to prevent acidosis in aggressive eaters. By limit-feeding, we typically mean providing a level of intake of the high-energy diet that supplies a similar total daily amount of energy and protein, in a smaller intake package, as we would normally expect when fullfeeding a forage-based diet. For example, you might feed a conventional, forage-based winter cow diet of 25 pounds of prairie hay — 0.45 Mcal NEM/lb., dry matter basis — with 6 lbs. of dried distiller’s grains — 0.99 Mcal NEM/lb, dry matter basis — providing a total of 17.3 Mcal NEM per day. This same 17.3 Mcal NEM per animal per day could be supplied from 8 pounds. cracked corn (1.02 Mcal/lb.), 7 pounds dried distiller’s grains, and 5 pounds of prairie hay. If you’ve done the math, that’s a conventional diet fed at 31 pounds, dry matter basis, vs. the limit-fed high-energy diet fed at 20 pounds. If the cows weigh an average of 1,320 pounds, that’s 2.4 percent of body weight versus 1.5 percent of body weight. FULL DISCLOSURE: the limit-fed cows are going to be hungry every morning. Even though they’re receiving the exact same amount of daily energy supply, the fact that they’re not physically full, they will be more than ready come breakfast time. You’ll need stout fences and at least 36 inches of bunk space per animal in the pen.

corn gluten feed, since these all have energy values close to — although not equal to — that of corn. —Source: Chris Reinhardt is feedlot specialist with Kansas State University. For more information, contact Reinhardt at cdr3@ ksu.edu.

FARM’S FUTURE FROM PREVIOUS PAGE how that’s going to play out and what the future will be like.

Share the vision When family members have the chance to learn and practice relating to each other more effectively during day-to-day operations, then they’re much better equipped to discuss cru-

cial topics like the farm’s future together. More opportunity exists to really understand each other. A better focus occurs on the common shared goals of bringing the farm into the future — a shared vision — rather than individual goals or visions. Are your family members communicating well? Are they on the same page with each other? Better communication and understanding can allow for the building of an even stronger shared vision as the family prepares the farm to make that important transitional leap into the future. Read the current issue of the Smart Series publication, bringing business ideas for today’s

farm leader. This issue features the story of a farm family who is working on a legacy plan to keep the farm in the family while maintaining family harmony, items to consider as you select an estate planning attorney for your legacy plan, and how to work toward increasing your operation’s efficiency. Your free issue is available at: www.waterstreet.org/ smartseries. —Source: Darren Frye is President and CEO of Water Street Solutions, a farm consulting firm that helps farmers with the challenges they face in growing and improving their farms — including the challenge of transitioning the farming operation to the next generation. Contact them at waterstreet@waterstreet. org or call (866) 249-2528.

limit-feeding cows certainly has its challenges, most of them pertaining to logistics, facilities and equipment. But two reasons to consider the limit-fed program are: (1) potential per-head feed cost savings; and (2) the chance to reduce the drain on your hay stores. In addition, depending on local spot market prices in your area, you might consider inserting other byproduct feeds into the highenergy, limit-fed diet, such as soy hulls, wheat midds and www.joplinstockyards.com

DECEMBER 2016

11


MANAGEMENT MATTERS

Stockers: Wading Through Winter Cold, wet weather can have big consequences for calf health and weight gain Story By Rebecca Mettler for Cattlemen’s News

W

ith winter on tap, stocker calves have hit the wheat pastures and stockpiled forage pastures in full force. A successful winter run with stocker cattle requires keeping up-to-date with the weather forecast and a nutrition management strategy to fit many scenarios. The first critical element of winter stocker calf nutritional management is for the producer to understand his or her competitive advantage. What feeds are readily available? Whether it is a supply of inexpensive forage, hay, silage or grain byproducts, find what works best, according to Chris Reinhardt, extension feedlot specialist with Kansas State University. “What can they use to their advantage to take their lightweight calves to a heavier weight,” Reinhardt said. The next step for the producer is to determine what his or her goals are for the calves. If it’s a heavy weight gain, producers need to plan their feeding management accordingly. Wintering on wheat pasture can account for daily gains of 2.5 to 3 pounds, while low

quality dormant fescue can struggle to produce 1 pound of gain. High quality forage such as wheat can provide all of the energy, protein and mineral needs to obtain sufficient weight gain. Low-quality forages will require a protein supplement of some kind. While many different protein supplement options are available, Reinhardt first thinks of sources that are easily accessible. “First worry about availability,” he said. “Are you are close to a ready supply of soybean meal, cottonseed or distillers grain to provide additional protein?” If the forage has some green re-growth, the calves will bypass the low quality sections and select the best forage. But if most or all of the forage is brown and dormant, the protein is most likely limited. As an example in this case producers could expect to feed calves up to 4 to 5 pounds per day of distillers grain. Because of the current market environment, producers might be looking for ways to

minimize input costs. While it’s never a good idea to skimp on nutrition, cost-effective management strategies are available to put into place when wintering stocker cattle. “The question always comes up if the producer can supplement every other day or twice a week instead of daily,” Reinhardt said. “Especially if somebody is offering protein supplement, cattle supplemented twice to three times a week will perform equally as well as those supplemented every day.” When it comes to cost-savings, beef industry experts have been preaching forage testing for years. A forage analysis is a wise investment that is worth the effort and the lab fee. “If you are feeding a hay supply or silage, make sure to have it tested for energy, protein and fiber levels, as well as mineral content, to determine those levels in order to reduce the need for supplementation,” Reinhardt said. Running stocker cattle in the winter also means that producers must be prepared for inclement weather. Cold and wet weather can have a negative impact on calf health and weight gain if not managed properly. “For every 10 degrees that the environmental temperature is below the lower critical temperature, the energy requirements go up by 10 percent,” Reinhardt said.

Cattle have the ability to ramp up their metabolism to keep warm, but it’s the cattle producer’s job to provide the extra feed in order for that to happen, according to Reinhardt. In severe weather, producers need to move to a full feeding of good-quality hay and make sure there is adequate dry bedding and wind protection for the cattle to prevent cold stress. The point of cold stress, or lower critical temperature, depends on a handful of environmental factors including actual temperature, moisture in the air, and wind speed. Genetics, hair coat, body condition also play a part in determining the animal’s lower critical temperature. “The main concern with receiving cattle in inclement weather is a cold freezing rain. The energy requirements drastically increase as does the susceptibility to disease,” Reinhardt said. “The better we protect the animals from that environment, the better the animals will be able to manage the transition into the stocker operation.” Other health considerations for stocker animals during the winter and early spring include prevention of bloat and grass tetany. Bloat can quickly become a problem in stocker cattle grazing wheat pastures with just the right combination of rapid plant growth and good grazing conditions. Poloxalene, a bloat preventative, can be supplemented in a block or in a mineral program before a bloat outbreak occurs. Grass tetany occurs when a deficiency in or an antagonism with the magnesium supply exists. “This primarily happens in the springtime on lush, growing forage but can also happen on wheat pasture if we have rapid growing conditions,” Reinhardt said. With the right management strategies, forage base and supplementation, a stocker operator can handle most of what winter can bring. But really, let’s just cross our fingers for bearable weather!

12

DECEMBER 2016

www.joplinstockyards.com


www.joplinstockyards.com

DECEMBER 2016

13


TRENDING NOW

Stockyards Documentary Debuts Celebrating eight decades of agriculture through Joplin Regional Stockyards From Our Staff

E

ditor’s Note: The following was read by Brad Belk, director of the Joplin Museum Complex, at Missouri Southern State University in Joplin during last month’s unveiling of an historic film of Joplin Stockyards.

ficial dedication ceremony occurred on Aug. 27, 1931, with the first day of livestock sales four days later on Aug. 31. However, much more to the story occurred than just the dedication ceremony on Aug. 27, 1931.

O

The Joplin Stockyards continued to prosper during the 1930s, and by 1940 the business generated a daily average of $15,000 during the 255 trading days it was

ur film tonight will cover (Lucius P.) Buchanan’s vision of planning the yards and the exciting dedication, which occurred 85 years ago. The of-

open. One year later, the livestock trade generated $6 million in business transactions. An-

other outstanding component of the stockyards was the junior beef show. The show was one of the largest in the Midwest, offering $1,000 in cash prizes. From nearly the beginning and still today, the stockyards works with and sponsors local 4-H clubs, as well as the Future Farmers of America (National FFA Organization) program. In 1945 the stockyards were sold to Hal R. Patterson and Allen McReynolds. Patterson, the new stockyard president, was formerly the general livestock agent for the Frisco Railroad Company. McReynolds became the vice president of operations. He was a widely known Carthage attorney and state senator. In 1946 more than $10 million worth of livestock changed hands through the Joplin livestock exchange. The sales breakdown that year included 72,000 cattle; 44,000 calves; 64,000 hogs; 26,000 sheep; and 3,000 mules and horses. By 1950, the grounds had expanded to 200 acres. Fifteen years later, business was still going strong as sales drew between 1,000 and 1,500 people on sales days. For the three days of operation in the middle of the week, the number of farmers and others doing business with the stockyards ranged from 250 to 500. At that time nearly 125 people were employed just to handle and move the livestock. Jackie Moore and Steve Owens, along with other family members, purchased the Joplin Stockyards in 1986. At the time of the sale 90,000 head of cattle were sold annually. Within a short time, the commission compaCONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE

14

DECEMBER 2016

www.joplinstockyards.com


Today, feeder and video sales occur on Mondays, while cow and bull sales are featured on Wednesdays. After 85 years the names of Joplin and the Stockyards continue to be linked together. And, when the Stockyards were moved to the new site 13 miles from Joplin, the name Joplin remained, further clarifying the alliance that occurred in 1931. To this day, agriculture continues to be the No. 1 economic producer in the state of Missouri, and the Joplin Regional Stockyards is a significant part of that agricultural community. Sales of cattle and calves alone generate cash receipts in excess of $1.4 billion dollars. That revenue, in turn, generates additional dollars as farm-level spending on goods and services equals $2.7 billion worth of economic activity — a good reason why the Goddess of Agriculture stands prominently on top of the Missouri State Capitol building. Agriculture in Missouri reigns as an economic powerhouse and is an essential ingredient to the state’s growing economy. THE STOCKYARDS FROM PREVIOUS PAGE nies were phased out, and the operation was completely handled by the Joplin Regional Stockyards, Inc. Stockyard representatives in 1994 purchased land at the northwest corner of Interstate 44, at exit 22 and County Road No. 100, and began constructing a new stockyard. One year later the new stockyard opened for business.

BULLS for sale!

The new century brought annual sales topping $200 million. In 2001 Moore and Owens became sole owners of the yards. They also purchased the Four State Stockyards in Diamond, Missouri and the Southwest Regional Stockyards in Springfield, Missouri. One year later the stockyards enhanced its business plan with a new innovative sales program by offering Internet and video auction services. During that year the yards employed 112 with a payroll that exceeded $2 million. The sale of livestock continued to increase as 411,000 head of livestock were sold, while a half million dollars was spent buying feed and hay for the animals delivered to the yards in advance of sales days. In 2015, the Joplin Regional Stockyards sold 381,832 head — valued at more than $538 million dollars. Currently, the Joplin Regional Stockyards is the second largest cattle market in the United States. Its geographical area covers Missouri, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Kentucky and Tennessee. Always accommodating its customers, the business is basically run non-stop, 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Even on Christmas Day, a representative is merely a phone call away. The Stockyards publishes its own news magazine called Cattlemen’s News. The large formatted monthly magazine has a circulation of 10,000. The publication is dedicated to helping cattle producers add value to their operations and offers howto articles and information on economics and industry trends. www.joplinstockyards.com

20 RED ANGUS • 2 ANGUS • 10 SIM ANGUS 35 BRANGUS • 3 HEREFORD • 12 CHAROLAIS EPDs & Delivery available

K&T Cattle Company 8505 County Rd 60 Reeds, MO 64859 417-850-5470 www.ktcattleco.com Like us on Facebook DECEMBER 2016

15


TRENDING NOW

hay from the ground. A snow fence can also guard hay from weather elements that can affect usage. For producers who are better equipped to handle small bales, they are a good option for limit feeding. Farney said the key is to know how much hay is needed and how much is fed. This will help determine if waste is a problem.

3. High-Quality Forage.

Money in the Bank Testing forages helps save on feed costs

Consider forage testing hay and silage to ensure cows receive the right amount of nutrients.

Story By Austin Black for Cattlemen’s News

F

eed is often the No. 1 cost of an operation. Regardless of the cattle market, keeping feed cost to a minimum is necessary to be profitable.

Dr. Jaymelynn Farney, Kansas State University extension specialist, said three tips might help producers save money on feed this winter.

1. Genetics and Technology. The easiest approach is to improve feed-efficiency through genetics and technology. Farney said ionophores are a great way to do this. “Ionophores change the rumen microbial population to be more efficient energy producers,” she said. Manipulating the bugs in the rumen helps cattle absorb more nutrients without needing more feed. Farney said ionophores allow cows to eat 10 percent less hay and still maintain their body condition score. At an estimated cost of $.02 per head per day, she said it might work in anyone’s operation. Rumensin is the only ionophore approved for lactating cows. It should be fed with one pound of feed each day. “Nearly every feed manufacturer will gladly mix it together for you,” Farney said. Using this approach offers the chance to provide a vitamin

16

DECEMBER 2016

and mineral pack through the feed as well. Farney said this helps control mineral consumption by managing intake.

2. Limit Feeding. The second tip in keeping feed costs low is through limit feeding. “Instead of putting hay out and giving access to it all the time, you can offer hay to the cows for 8 to 10 hours each day and then lock them off of the hay,” Farney said. Research shows cows generally spend an equal amount of time eating, sleeping and ruminating. In a 24-hour period, this means eight hours in each area. If cattle only have access to hay for 8 to 10 hours, it encourages them to eat their fill during that time. As a result they have more efficient consumption. Limited feeding also reduces waste by keeping hay in storage when cows aren’t eating. Farney said to remember limit feeding requires plenty of hay and eating space. “If you limit feeding hay, you can’t just put one bale out for 50 cows,” she said. “They’re going to hit it hard. If you’re only giving them six hours to eat, you will want to increase your bunk or ring space up to 35 inches per cow.” Providing at least 20 inches of bunk or ring space per cow is enough if they have access for 10 hours.

This practice works well for producers who work off-farm, also. “Most of the time, cattle are actually grazing from 4 in the morning to about 10 or 11,” Farney said. “Then they go back to grazing from four to eight in the evening,” Farney said. Producers can give cattle access to hay before they go to work in the morning and pull them off in the evening. To further maximize hay usage, it’s important to reduce waste. Farney said a couple of options should be considered. The easiest method is using an efficient hay feeder. “The ones that work best have a solid bottom with a cone as the top portion,” Farney said. This keeps the hay from getting scattered and touching the ground, both of which result in hay loss. Making sure the bottom of the feeder is bigger than the cone can save hay also. Feeders with a larger bottom circumference offer a place for hay to land if it falls. “Some cows grab hay and back up to eat. Whatever falls ends up on the solid side bottom,” she said. The bottom part of the feeder only needs to be six inches bigger at the most. If these types of hay feeders aren’t available, creativity might come in handy. Farney said placing a tarp on the bottom of the feeder protects

The third key for saving money on feed is using high-quality forage or supplements. It’s important to know the nutrient value of available feedstuffs. Producers should also know the nutrient requirements of their herd. Comparing the cost of protein and energy when pricing feed should take place. “If you’re needing to provide a protein source, take the cost divided by the protein offered, and compare the dollars per protein across different feedstuffs,” Farney said. Be aware of moisture content as well. “If you’re looking for protein, you don’t necessarily want to buy a lot of water. Always compare on per pound of dry matter protein basis,” she said. Feeding a high-moisture diet requires more feed to ensure the cows receive enough nutrients.  A forage analysis test is crucial to ensure cows receive the right amount of nutrients. This applies to hay and silage both. “Look at energy, protein and dry matter,” Farney said. Cows need at least 8 percent protein in their diets. For more information on forage analysis tests, see Finding Value in Forage Analysis on page 20 in this issue. Knowing the quality of available forage helps determine if protein supplement is needed.  Farney has calculated the cost of a forage test versus feeding extra supplement. “If you have underestimated how much crude protein is in your fescue hay and think you need to feed extra supplement, by the time you fed 100 cows the extra supplement, you would have paid for a forage test 80 times over,” she said. “Testing and knowing the quality of your forage should be a must before your winter feeding every year.” 

www.joplinstockyards.com


www.joplinstockyards.com

DECEMBER 2016

17


TRENDING NOW

5 Steps to Better Cow Nutrition Be sure your cows get what they need for optimum performance this winter Story By Austin Black for Cattlemen’s News

C

ows need the proper nutrition to maintain body weight and perform. Several variables exist when considering how to manage nutrition. Some include available feedstuffs, cow requirements and supplement cost. Here are five ways you can ensure your cows get the proper nutrition during the winter.

1. Know your situation. To manage nutrition, you need to know what they need and what they have. Know the nutrient requirements of each cow and what feedstuffs are available. MFA, Inc., Director of Ruminant Nutrition, Dr. Jim White, said the National Academy of Science sets baseline standards for nutrient requirements in cattle. Standards are based on cow size and production stage. “We compare what’s in the diet with what we need to feed to achieve the desired performance,” he said. If there’s a gap, cows will need a form of supplement. Since a cow’s requirements remain standard, variation comes from feedstuffs. You should know the quality of the forage or grain your cows eat. This information is available through feed manufacturers and forage analysis tests. A nutritionist or county extension agent can help with these decisions.

2. Watch protein and energy.

“Assuming there is plenty of available forage, protein is the greatest nutrient requirement,” said Dr. Clint Krehbiel, Oklahoma State University professor of beef cattle nutrition. During the winter when grass is dormant, protein is limited. If harvested forage is also low in protein, cows might need a supplement. A cow’s protein requirement varies depending on her size, environment and production phase. “If the cow is in good condition and pregnant for spring calving, has adequate

18

DECEMBER 2016

shelter to get out of the wind and isn’t wet, she’s going to need 2 pounds of protein and 1 pound of TDN for every pound of bodyweight,” White said. “That’s the minimum.” TDN, total digestible nutrients, measures the amount of protein, carbs and fat a cow will absorb from the diet. When buying or mixing feed, a 9 percent protein ration accomplishes this goal. If a cow is cold or wet, her energy requirement goes up. This is where fiber comes into

CLINT KREHBIEL OKLAHOMA STATE UNIV.

play. “If it gets colder, caloric intake becomes more important because fermentation provides body heat,” Krehbiel said. If quality forage is available, this isn’t a problem. For fall calving cows, it’s a different situation. In the winter, she’s nursing a calf while trying to maintain weight and body heat during the winter. Thus, her nutrient requirements increase. Younger cows often need more attention than mature females. White said feeding 2.8 to 3 pounds of protein is ideal. This equates to an 11 to 12 percent ration. “From an energy perspective, we all love TDN so we want that at about 60 percent,” he said. But just because cows get fed the correct ration doesn’t mean they each consume the right amount. White said cows often get fed in a bunk or on the ground and producers hope each one gets what it needs. The easiest way to make sure each cow gets enough nutri-

Just because cows get the right ration doesn’t mean they each consume the right amount. Monitor body condition of the cows and manage thinner animals accordingly. — Photo by Joann Pipkin.

ents is to watch body condition score (BCS). In some cases, the entire herd might get an excessive or limited amount of nutrients. “Evaluate them as a group to determine if they’re in good flesh or not,” White said. Other times, producers may need to look at each cow. “Sometimes you can pull younger or thinner animals and handle them separately,” he said. It’s important cows stay at a BCS of 5 and heifers at 6. This ensures they have enough condition to breed, milk and maintain weight. If enough nutrients aren’t available, you have to supplement. It’s important to choose which option will be the most cost-effective to buy and feed. “We usually look at what type of supplement we need,” White said. If cows need protein, cotton and soybean meal or urea are good options. If fiber is missing, soybean hulls, distillers grains and corn gluten work well. White said this is often the case when grazing marginal pastures or low-quality hay. “Low fiber means low-digestible feed,” he said. “The advantage of using fermentable carbohydrate by-products is it improves digestibility.” White said these products also improve intake. “It’s a winwin deal,” he said. “A lot of times when I improve intake, I reduce digestibility, but this has the opposite effect.” Producers should also consider how to feed the supplement. Krehbiel said supplementing three times per week

might deliver the same results as daily feeding. For some operations, feeding cows a total mixed ration (TMR) might be the solution. But if labor is an issue, White said a lick tub might be the way to go. “Decide what nutrients you need and what delivery system gets you there at the best value,” he said. It’s important to remember that intake variation is different with each feeding method. “If I feed TMR with a feed wagon, the cows are supposed to eat 55 pounds,” White said. “But they’ll actually eat anywhere from 40 to 70 pounds.” While this variation is only 10 percent, feeding cubes as a supplement could result in a 25 percent intake variation. “If I’m a control freak nutritionist, I would prefer feeding using the TMR situation because I get to dictate policy,” he said.   Ionophores are another way to improve consumption. “If I give a cow 150 mg of Rumensin, I improve her energy absorption by 5 to 8 percent,” White said. This improvement is the equivalent of feeding a pound of corn. “If I’m going to supplement anyway, I might as well put the ionophore in the supplement I have,” he said.

3. Monitor mineral supply. The big mineral you should monitor is salt. White said cattle need salt, but it’s not CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE www.joplinstockyards.com


BETTER COW NUTRITION FROM PREVIOUS PAGE

much or too little, or the cost is too high.

readily available through forage. Other minerals often in limited natural supply are selenium, iodine, copper and zinc. If grass is dormant, phosphorus and calcium might be in short supply too. “Legumes will have adequate calcium and younger forage will have adequate phosphorus,” White said.  

Phosphorus and chelated trace minerals are what increase the cost of mineral. But White said these are minerals that create a positive response in cattle performance. “Chelated trace minerals are better used by the animal and result in a better reproductive response,” he said.

A forage test is the best way to determine if minerals are deficient. “A quick and dirty way of looking at a forage analysis is to make the assumption that cows will eat 10 kg of dry matter,” White said. “That’s 22 pounds.” If a forage test shows 0.22 percent for a mineral, a cow that eats 10 kg of forage will get 22 grams of that mineral. Intake requirements vary for each kind of mineral. Producers should consult their nutritionist for exact numbers. Unless mineral is mixed with feed, free choice is the only way to deliver. White said producers often complain that cows either eat too

www.joplinstockyards.com

Still to achieve the response, consumption is key. Intake can vary from 100 to 200 percent. “If you need to increase intake, put the mineral closer to water and shade or add stuff to it to make it tasty,” White said. Additives can include grain, yeast culture or seaweed. Producers can decrease intake by adding magnesium. “Magnesium is unpalatable,” he said. “That and phosphorus will make cattle back off.” You should check mineral on a weekly basis rather than daily. This will give a more accurate measure of consumption. 

4. Manage forage quality. “God gave us grass and gave us cows to utilize that,” said

Krehbiel. Quality forage is the best way for cows to get the nutrients they need. Rotating pastures or stockpiling grass allows winter grazing for cattle. “If you can manage forage with your cows to provide year-round grazing, that’s cheaper than putting up and delivering hay,” he said. But year-round grazing might not be an option. In that case, hay management is important to maintain quality through the winter. Storage is key. White said the best way to store hay is under a roof and off the ground with a rock base underneath. Keeping bales off the soil is crucial to maintaining hay quality. Soil contact causes the bale to absorb moisture and deteriorate. If a covered building isn’t available, good drainage is important for outside storage. White said a 2 percent slope with a rock base works well. Another storage option is plastic wrap. This avoids soil contact and keeps bales protected from moisture. White said between three and eight layers of wrap is ideal. 

5. Have a plan for nutrition. You can find yourself in trouble if you aren’t prepared. The biggest mistake in managing nutrition is not having a plan for each situation. If cows get too thin, it’s difficult to add weight in the winter. This is especially true for spring-calving cows. At the same time, you should know if your cows are overfed. This can result in breeding problems. It’s important to know what cows need and what is available before winter arrives. White said if you don’t watch your cows closely, they can end up behind on nutrition. “Then we have to play catch up,” he said. “At that point it’s tough to get enough intake.” Be prepared and shop for quality feedstuff early. In a rush, it’s tempting to buy whatever is on sale rather than what you really need. “It’s about managing the environment and resources you have with your cows to manage their body condition score and weight,” Krehbiel said.

DECEMBER 2016

19


MANAGEMENT MATTERS

Finding Value in Forage Analysis Test forages to ensure cows get what they need Story By Austin Black for Cattlemen’s News

W

inter is an especially critical time for providing proper nutrition to your cows. But, do you know what you’re feeding your cattle? It’s hard to give cows what they need without first knowing if your forages are at optimal quality for meeting the nutrient demand of your livestock. A forage analysis test can provide the information you need to get cows the right nutrition during cold weather. A variety of test options exist, but the basic test looks at fiber and protein levels. Energy is derived from fiber. “Protein and energy are the primary expenses in a budget to maintain a beef cow,” explained Dr. David Lalman, Oklahoma State University animal scientist. Providing the needed

DAVID LALMAN OKLAHOMA STATE UNIV.

requirements could cost $200 to $400 per year for each cow. Ensuring the right levels of nutrients are available in forage is one way to reduce the need for supplement and keep costs down. Common categories of forage quality measurement include digestible energy, relative feed value (RFV) and total digestible nutrients (TDN). Relative feed value compares forages of the same species. It’s based on data collected from feeding alfalfa hay to dairy cattle. RFV should not be used to compare grasses to legumes or different species of legumes to each other. Digestible energy (DE) is the energy in the feed minus the energy an animal will lose

20 DECEMBER 2016

through manure excretion. This measurement shows how much energy the animal actually absorbs. Lalman said DE might range from 0.3 in very low-quality forage to 0.9 in steam-flaked corn. “Total digestible nutrients estimates the proportion of feed that is digestible and available for energy metabolism by the animal,” Lalman said. Protein, carbohydrates, fat, minerals and water are the five main components of feed. However, minerals and water don’t provide energy. TDN calculates the amount of digestible protein, carbohydrates and fat available for the animal.

The Science Behind. The two biggest factors that influence forage quality are plant maturity and species. “As long as the plant isn’t in the reproductive stage, it should have pretty good digestible fiber,” said Dr. Craig Roberts, University of Missouri plant sciences professor. Once seedheads and stems develop, most of the fiber is nondigestible. And most of it ends up in the manure. Grass hay is the best quality when cut during the boot stage. “When you cut at that stage, you’re getting a compromise between quality and yield. You can let it grow for more yield, but you can starve cattle by not having necessary nutrients,” Roberts said. Getting a forage sample for testing is simple. “Most of the forage samples submitted to a lab come from cored bales,” Roberts said. Drilling into the side of a bale is the best way to collect a core sample. It’s important to sample hay as a lot to provide uniform and accurate results. A lot can be a set quantity of bales purchased at one time or the total number harvested from a single field cutting. Lalman said producers should collect samples on at least 10 percent of the hay bales in a lot. “Put the cores in a big

bucket and mix them together,” he said. “Then put them in a sealed container and label it for that lot or harvest.” If producers harvest a field more than once, each cutting should be tested. Roberts said, “Across a harvest day, there’s a lot of similarity. Forage quality will be stable across the entire field. But it’ll be different a month later.” Testing should occur before winter-feeding, but not immediately after harvest. Roberts said to store hay after harvest and let it sit for a few months. Silage should remain in storage for at least a month after harvest before testing. “With silage, you have to let it go through a complete fermentation phase,” he said. Producers should submit samples to a lab certified by the national forage testing association. Contact information for labs is available at www. foragetesting.org. Labs in the four-state area include Gold-

en City, Missouri; Hutchinson, Kansas; Fayetteville, Arkansas; and Stillwater, Oklahoma. Tests range from about $12 for a basic analysis to $75 for more complex results. Most labs test forage using a wet lab or near infrared (NIR) method. Once samples arrive at the lab, technicians grind them into powder. To test using a wet lab, the sample is divided according to the number of tests required. Each portion is heated to remove moisture and goes through a chemical analysis. One sample undergoes extreme heat to convert results to a dry matter basis. NIR tests use reflected light to analyze samples. As light bounces off the sample, technicians measure reflected energy. This tells how much protein, fiber and other nutrients are in the forage. Roberts said it’s a very fast and safe test that doesn’t use chemicals. CONTINUED ON PAGE 22 www.joplinstockyards.com


4USED INVENTORY REDUCTION SALE3 157677 159428 159796 159818 158113 158786 159337 159526 159677 159746 159798 159819 159822 159889 159902 159948 159959 159980 159981 159987 159991 159193 159258 159441

Rogersville 2005 JOHN DEERE 3320 1988 JOHN DEERE 2155 KIOTI C52410 2000 JOHN DEERE 4300 1999 JOHN DEERE 4200 2010 JOHN DEERE 5105M 2014 MAHINDRA 85 P 1997 KUBOTA L3600 2011 JOHN DEERE 3038E 2013 BRANSON 3510H 1994 JOHN DEERE 7200 2015 JOHN DEERE 5085M 2001 NEW HOLLAND TS100 2013 JOHN DEERE 5085E 2013 JOHN DEERE 1023E 2010 JOHN DEERE 5065E 2002 CASE IH MX110 1982 HESSTON/FIAT 880-5 2008 NEW HOLLAND TD80D 1965 JOHN DEERE 2020 2014 JOHN DEERE 5065E 2013 JOHN DEERE 3720 2006 JOHN DEERE 5425 1978 MASSEY-FERGUSON 285

MFWD, LOADER, BUCKET 2WD, LOADER, MFWD, 24 HP MFWD, LOADER, 30 HP, MFWD, CANOPY, BELLY MOWER, MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 3662 HRS MFWD, CAB, LOADER, MFWD, BELLY MOWER, 38 HP MFWD, LOADER, 38 HP MFWD, LOADER, 35 HP MFWD, CAB, 102 HP 2WD, LOADER, BUCKET 85 HP 2WD, CAB, LOADER, 100 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 85 HP MFWD, LOADER, 23 HP 2WD, CANOPY, LOADER, 65 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 110 HP 2WD, CAB, 80 HP MFWD, LOADER, 80 HP 2WD, GAS, 59 HP 2WD, CANOPY, LOADER, 65 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 44 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 81 HP 2WD, CANOPY, 85 HP

Price $15,500.00 $12,300.00 $6,500.00 $8,500.00 $8,500.00 $50,000.00 $42,000.00 $12,000.00 $16,000.00 $15,000.00 $28,000.00 $37,900.00 $28,000.00 $45,000.00 $11,750.00 $24,900.00 $52,000.00 $6,000.00 $27,500.00 $4,500.00 $25,750.00 $29,995.00 $39,500.00 $8,500.00

Payment* 256 203 107 141 141 827 694 198 265 248 463 627 463 744 194 412 860 99 455 74 426 496 653 141

158987 159131 159500 159792 159928 159567 157899 159965

Nixa 2015 JOHN DEERE 1025R 2011 NH BOOMER 40 JOHN DEERE 1120 2014 JOHN DEERE 1025R 2016 JOHN DEERE 1025R 2014 JOHN DEERE Z950M 2015 JOHN DEERE Z 920M 2012 JOHN DEERE 550 XUV

MFWD, LOADER, 25 HP MFWD, LOADER, BUCKET, 40 HP 2WD, OPEN STATION, 51 HP MFWD, LOADER, 25 HP MFWD, LOADER, BELLY MOWER COMMERCIAL 60” DECK, 27 HP COMMERCIAL 54” DECK, 23 HP GATOR, 4X4, GAS

$15,200.00 $19,900.00 $6,000.00 $13,900.00 $15,299.00 $7,999.00 $7,500.00 $6,975.00

251 329 99 230 253 133 124 116

157248 157639 157650 158407 158494 158765 158934 159046 159194 159278 159280 159282 159302 159314 159351 159352 159384 159511 159639 159650 159762 159789 159790 159791 159797 159808 159835 159857 159859 159865 159958 158315 159305

Harrison 2000 JOHN DEERE 6410 2013 JOHN DEERE 6105D 2006 DEUTZ AGROPLUS 87 2015 KUBOTA M110GX 2013 JOHN DEERE 5101E 2010 JOHN DEERE 5075M 2001 JOHN DEERE 990 2015 JOHN DEERE 5085E 2013 JOHN DEERE 6105D 2005 JOHN DEERE 7320 2014 JOHN DEERE 6115M 1984 JOHN DEERE 2550 2013 JOHN DEERE 5100E 1993 JOHN DEERE 5200 2015 JOHN DEERE 5075E 2013 JOHN DEERE 6125M 2014 JOHN DEERE 5075E 2012 KUBOTA M9960 1999 NEW HOLLAND 4835 2006 KUBOTA L2800 2012 JOHN DEERE 5083E 2014 JOHN DEERE 5100E 1982 FORD 3910 2015 JOHN DEERE 5085E 1989 FORD 1920 2015 JOHN DEERE 5100E 2000 NEW HOLLAND TS110 2007 NEW HOLLAND TL100A 2015 JOHN DEERE 5085E 2014 KUBOTA M9960 2015 KUBOTA M9960 2008 JOHN DEERE 5093E 2014 JOHN DEERE 5075E

MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 104 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 105 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER 87 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 110 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 101 HP 2WD, CAB, LOADER, 75 HP 2WD, OPEN STATION, 40 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 85 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 105 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 125 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 115 HP 2WD, CANOPY, LOADER, 72 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 100 HP 2WD, OPEN STATION, 47 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 75 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 125 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 75 HP MFWD, LOADER, 100 HP 2WD, CAB, LOADER, 65 HP MFWD, LOADER, 30 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 83 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 100 HP 2WD, OPEN STATION, 50 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 85 HP MFWD, LOADER, 32 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 100 HP 2WD, CAB, LOADER, 110 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 100 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 85 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 99 HP MFWD, LOADER, 99 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 93 HP 2WD, CAB, LOADER, 75 HP

$44,500.00 $57,500.00 $35,500.00 $62,500.00 $48,900.00 $42,000.00 $7,500.00 $48,900.00 $58,000.00 $56,000.00 $75,000.00 $12,000.00 $53,000.00 $10,000.00 $42,500.00 $89,500.00 $42,000.00 $33,000.00 $25,000.00 $14,600.00 $41,500.00 $55,000.00 $4,250.00 $53,000.00 $7,000.00 $52,500.00 $21,000.00 $31,000.00 $53,000.00 $50,000.00 $39,500.00 $45,000.00 $38,500.00

736 951 587 1033 809 694 124 809 959 926 1240 198 876 165 703 1480 694 546 413 241 686 909

156365 157873 159102 159267 159304 159325 159369 159482 159838 159893 159905 159918 159968 159969

West Plains 2004 JOHN DEERE 7320 2011 JOHN DEERE 2720 1973 JOHN DEERE 830L 2005 JOHN DEERE 7220 2001 JOHN DEERE 7210 1997 MASSEY-FERGUSON 4255 2011 MAHINDRA 6530 2013 JOHN DEERE 5101E 2009 NEW HOLLAND TD5050 INTERNATION HARVESTER 786 2004 JOHN DEERE 4210 2011 JOHN DEERE 5083E 2007 MASSEY-FERGUSON 6465 1999 JOHN DEERE 6410

MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 105 HP MFWD, LOADER, 31 HP 2WD, OPEN STATION, 32 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 110 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 110 HP 2WD, CAB, LOADER, 95 HP MFWD, LOADER, 65 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 101 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 95 HP 2WD, OPEN STATION, 80 HP MFWD, LOADER, 27 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 83 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 105 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 104 HP

$61,900.00 $15,000.00 $5,900.00 $47,000.00 $54,000.00 $22,500.00 $24,900.00 $53,900.00 $32,900.00 $5,900.00 $11,500.00 $43,900.00 $49,900.00 $39,000.00

876 116 868 347 513 876 827 653 744 837 1023 248 777 893 372 412 891 544 190 726 825 645

157916 158563 159420 159438 159743 157742 158942

Freistatt 2002 JOHN DEERE 6420 1989 CASE IH 585 2014 KUBOTA BX2670 1999 JOHN DEERE 7410 2014 JOHN DEERE 1025R 2013 JOHN DEERE 5085E 2013 JOHN DEERE 5100E

MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 110 HP 2WD, LOADER, 60 HP MFWD, LOADER, 25.5 HP CAB, MFWD, LOADER, 120 HP MFWD, LOADER, 25 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 85 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 100 HP

Price Payment* $49,500.00 818 $8,500.00 141 $14,000.00 231 $65,000.00 1075 $13,050.00 216 $48,500.00 802 $56,500.00 934

156965 157428 157815 157962 158239 158359 158380 158488 158562 158587 158688 158719 158774 158776 158988 159135 159154 159293 159329 159347 159404 159449 159453 159493 159502 159626 159665 159682 159878 159888 159898 159954 159970 159972

Anderson 2011 JOHN DEERE 5093E 2007 NEW HOLLAND T6030 2001 JOHN DEERE 5105 2008 JOHN DEERE 2520 2015 KUBOTA L2501 2015 JOHN DEERE 1025R 2007 MAHINDRA 7010 2012 NEW HOLLAND T5060 2005 MASSEY-FERGUSON 5455 2014 KUBOTA B2650HSD 2014 MAHINDRA 5530 2014 JOHN DEERE 1023E 2014 MAHINDRA 4530 2013 CASE IH 105UT4 2008 CASE DX55 1984 JOHN DEERE 2350 2009 MCCORMICK MTX120 2015 MAHINDRA M105P 1986 JOHN DEERE 755 2015 JOHN DEERE 3032E 2006 NEW HOLLAND TD75D 2015 JOHN DEERE 5075E 2012 KUBOTA L4240 2016 JOHN DEERE 5055E 2014 JOHN DEERE 1023E 1998 WHITE 6055 2015 JOHN DEERE 5055E 2007 NEW HOLLAND TD80D 2014 JOHN DEERE 5075E 2015 JOHN DEERE 5045E 2011 LS P7030 1952 FORD 8N 2013 JOHN DEERE 3520 2014 TYM T1003

MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 93 HP $45,500.00 2WD, CAB, LOADER, 115 HP $42,500.00 MFWD, LOADER, 45 HP $21,500.00 MFWD, LOADER, 60” DECK, 26 HP $16,500.00 MFWD, LOADER, 25HP $15,600.00 MFWD, OPEN STATION $11,500.00 MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 72 HP $33,500.00 MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 105 HP $54,500.00 2WD, CAB, LOADER, 95 HP $37,500.00 MFWD, LOADER, 26 HP $17,350.00 MFWD, LOADER, 55 HP $26,500.00 MFWD, LOADER, 23 HP $13,500.00 MFWD, LOADER, 45 HP $21,200.00 MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 105 HP $54,950.00 MFWD, LOADER, 55 HP $22,900.00 2WD, CAB, LOADER, 67 HP $16,900.00 MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 118 HP $57,950.00 MFWD, CAB, LOADER $56,500.00 2WD, OPEN STATION, 20 HP $5,950.00 MFWD, LOADER, 32 HP $17,950.00 MFWD, CANOPY, LOADER, 75 HP $23,950.00 MFWD, CANOPY, 75 HP $33,500.00 MFWD, LOADER, 42 HP $22,500.00 MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 55 HP $41,500.00 MFWD, OPEN STATION, 23 HP $11,000.00 MFWD, LOADER, 65 HP $16,000.00 MFWD, LOADER, 55 HP $33,500.00 2WD, LOADER, 72 HP $32,500.00 MFWD, LOADER, 75 HP $33,000.00 MFWD, LOADER, 45 HP $26,995.00 MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 88 HP $31,000.00 2WD, OPEN STATION, GAS, 30 HP $2,500.00 MFWD, CANOPY, LOADER, MOWER, 37 HP $25,900.00 MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 100 HP $48,500.00

157417 158102 158540 158556 158646 158864 158921 159050 159339 159375 159489 159569 159711 159896 159924 159975

Lebanon 2006 JOHN DEERE 2305 1967 DAVID BROWN 990 2014 JOHN DEERE 2032R 2007 MASSEY-FERGUSON 3645 1965 FORD 3000 1970 FASSEY-FERGUSON 165 1989 JOHN DEERE 2955 2015 JOHN DEERE 1025R 2008 JOHN DEERE 6330 1978 FORD 1600 1975 INTERNATIONAL 574 2013 CASE MAXXUM 125 1953 FORD JUBILEE 2010 JOHN DEERE 5093 1988 JOHN DEERE 2355 1956 FORD 640

MFWD, BELLY MOWER, 24 HP 2WD, LOADER, 55 HP MFWD, LOADER, BACK HOE, 32 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 91 HP 2WD, NEW PAINT & RUBBER, 47 HP 2WD, LOADER, 58 HP 2WD, CAB, 97 HP MFWD, LOADER, 24 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 100 HP 2WD, DIESEL, 25 HP 2WD, CAB, LOADER, 67 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 125 HP 2WD, GAS, 30 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 93 HP 2WD, CAB, LOADER, 67 HP 2WD, GAS, 30 HP

$7,500.00 $8,500.00 $25,500.00 $32,500.00 $6,250.00 $9,900.00 $27,900.00 $15,900.00 $69,900.00 $3,900.00 $10,500.00 $80,900.00 $2,500.00 $45,900.00 $19,900.00 $2,500.00

124 141 422 537 103 164 461 263 1156

158334 158665 159424 159670 159891

Rolla 2014 JOHN DEERE 5055E 2009 JOHN DEERE 3038E 2003 FARM PRO 2425 2015 JOHN DEERE 5100E 2004 MCCORMICK MTX 120

MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 55 HP MFWD, LOADER, 38 HP MFWD, CANOPY, LOADER, 25 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 100 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 120 HP

$29,900.00 $15,900.00 $6,000.00 $56,500.00 $48,950.00

494 263 99 934 809

157788 158145 158779 158948 159191 159392 159606 159847 159853 159877 159933 159951

Jeff City 2011 JOHN DEERE 2720 2011 JOHN DEERE 1023E 2013 CASE FARMALL 75C 2015 KUBOTA BX2370-1 2007 JOHN DEERE 3520 1970 JOHN DEERE 3020 1977 FORD 6600 2004 JOHN DEERE 6420 2015 JOHN DEERE 5085E 2007 JOHN DEERE 2305 1978 JOHN DEERE 2840 1998 CASE CX50

MFWD, MOWER, FRONT BLADE, 34 HP MFWD, BELLY MOWER, 23 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 75 HP MFWD, LOADER, 23 HP MFWD, LOADER, 37 HP 2WD, LOADER, 70 HP 2WD, CAB, 77 HP MFWD, CAB, LDR READY, 110 HP MFWD, CAB, LOADER, 85 HP MFWD, BELLY MOWER, 23 HP 2WD, OPEN STATION, 89 HP 2WD, CAB, LOADER, 50 HP

$15,500.00 $10,500.00 $42,500.00 $14,500.00 $15,450.00 $10,500.00 $6,900.00 $47,000.00 $47,500.00 $8,500.00 $8,750.00 $18,500.00

256 174 703 240 255 174 114 777 785 141 145 306

752 703 355 273 258 190 554 901 620 287 438 223 351 909 379 280 958 934 297 396 554 372 686 182 265 554 537 546 446 513 428 802

174 1338 759 329

* All payments are based on 10% down payment 3.9% for 60 months with appoved credit. Terms and conditions may apply.

NOTE: 60 AND 72 MONTH FINANCING AVAILABLE WITH APPROVED CREDIT.

417.612.8303 • larsonjd.com

www.joplinstockyards.com

DECEMBER 2016

21


FINDING VALUE IN FORAGE ANALYSIS FROM PAGE 20 “The only trick is infrared tests give a number,” he said. “So the key thing is to remember to always monitor and calibrate the machine to get the right numbers.” Since an NIR test conducts several measurements at once, it’s not necessary to divide the sample. This allows an NIR test to complete as many as 60 samples in less than two hours. Wet lab tests can take up to three days.

Applying the Results. When producers look at a forage analysis, the most important area is fiber. “Fiber is the often the most limiting factor,” Roberts said. It’s important to take note of the DE measurement for accurate analysis. Roberts said too much non-digestible fiber can have a negative affect on nutrition. Cows will eat a lot of hay but not get the nutrients they need.

If hay is harvested at the right time, protein levels are often good. But producers should still take note and compare to their cows’ needs. “That’s the point where producers need to do homework on the requirements of their animals,” Lalman said. “When you’re talking about protein, energy, calcium and selenium, you need to get enough data that you have confidence in and be able to compare available feed material to the requirements of your animals.” This is the real benefit of a forage analysis. Lalman said a cow in mid-gestation needs 8 percent crude protein and 52 percent TDN in her diet. “If you send a sample and it comes back as 9 percent protein and 54 percent TDN, you wouldn’t need anything,” he said. The hay would provide enough nutrients, and protein supplement wouldn’t be necessary. But as that cow approaches calving, her requirements go up. “She might need 11 percent crude protein and 57 percent TDN,” Lalman said. Protein supplement or higher quality forage would be necessary to provide enough nutrients. He said a forage analysis helps compare cows’ requirements to the available nutrients. This determines if and where there is a gap in nutrition.

Confidence RUNS IN THE FAMILY NORFENICOL® Injection Injection NORFENICOL O O O

(f lorfenicol 300 mg/mL) Available in 100 mL, 250 mL and 500 mL Bottles New Plastic Bottles Eliminate Breakage and Product Loss Same Active Ingredient as Nuf lor® Injectable Solution

Lalman said producers who harvest their own hay benefit from testing on a yearly basis. Testing hay fields every year allows producers to keep records of their agronomic performance. Some fields might consistently provide ample nutrients while other always fall short.

ENROFLOX® 100 100 Injection Injection ENROFLOX (enrof loxacin 100 mg/mL) Available in 100 mL and 250 mL Bottles O Same Active Ingredient as Baytril® 100 Injection O

NOROMYCIN® 300 300 LA LA NOROMYCIN O

Roberts’ research shows a huge financial benefit to testing forage. When he first started forage testing, his clients saved about $35 per animal each year in feed cost. “They were saving primarily by not purchasing proteins,” he said. “Or they were purchasing energy supplements and only the amount they needed to get their cows rebred or maintain them through the winter.”

(oxytetracycline 300 mg/mL) Available in 100 mL, 250 mL and 500 mL Bottles

Hexasol® Injection Injection Hexasol O O

If producers buy hay, a forage test ensures they get what they pay for. It’s possible that hay might be worth more after it’s tested. But it’s good to know that up front. “The difference in dollars per ton value can be pretty dramatic,” Lalman said. “At the end of the season, you would be in the same financial situation because you didn’t have to feed supplements to make up for the nutrient quality of the hay.”

(oxytetracycline 300 mg and f lunixin 20 mg/mL) Unique Combination Available in 250 mL and 500 mL Bottles

Now, Lalman said the savings could equal up to $40 per cow each year. “You can have the confidence that you are minimizing costs while getting close to optimal herd efficiency,” he said. “You’re not over or underfeeding cows and not spending more money than you need to.”

Get the JRS Mobile App

www.norbrookinc.com

Download it today from

For full prescribing information, including important safety information, warnings and contradictions, see the product insert available at Norbrook.com. Read product insert carefully prior to use. The Norbrook logos, Enroflox, Hexasol, Norfenicol and Noromycin are registered trademarks of Norbrook Laboratories Limited.Nuflor is a registered trademark of Merck Animal Health. Baytril is a registered trademark of Bayer Animal Health. 1016-000-M04A

FOR VETERINARY USE ONLY

22J-NCBADECEMBER NORBROOK2016 FAMILY.indd

1

9/29/16 2:18 PM

www.joplinstockyards.com


MANAGEMENT MATTERS

Boost Next Fall’s Income Now Be sure cows fit environment, forage base Story By Lisa Henderson for Cattlemen’s News

T

he most expensive component of maintaining a cowherd is winter-feeding, and harvested hay or harvesting, storing and feeding harvested hay are a large portion of those costs.

pregnant cow in the third trimester. When feeding the same hay to a cow in early lactation — within 3 months post-calving — it would take 5 pounds of supplemental feed to meet the cow’s requirements.”

Stored feeds such as hay normally cost producers three to five times as much as grazing a summer pasture or stockpiled feed in a paddock, when cost is calculated, according to beef industry experts. And, winterfeeding can become even more expensive when the hay available to be fed is poor-quality.

Beef nutritionists say cows can be under nourished even though they are eating all they can eat. Feeding the correct quantity of hay is important, but feeding the correct quality of the hay during each production stage is the key. Poor quality forage does not pass through the rumen as quickly as high quality forage, so the cow is full but still lacks the nutrients she needs to maintain productivity.

“Poor cow nutrition can be economically crippling to your operation,” said Dan Thomson, D.V.M., Kansas State University. “A cow’s energy status is important to her remaining productive. Protein, minerals and vitamins are all important, but if a cow is starving, the right mineral balance is not going to help. Energy is the first priority.” A cow goes through many physiological changes during a year, and the winter and early spring feeding period is one of the most critical times in her life to provide adequate nutrition because of her needs at calving time. Producers are encouraged to maintain their cow’s dietary needs if strong, healthy calves are to be produced and also to get cows rebred in a timely manner to maintain calving intervals. University of Arkansas Extension Beef Specialist Paul Beck says cattlemen should supplement cows when the forage nutritive quality does not meet their needs. That low nutritive quality might be due to low crude protein and digestibility because of forage maturity, or high nutrient requirements of the animal, such as early-lactation cows or growing calves that require more nutrients. “The level of supplementation required changes with cow nutrient requirements,” Beck said. “An average quality hay with 10 percent crude protein and 54 percent total digestible nutrients would require no supplementation when fed to a dry www.joplinstockyards.com

at least sorting cows based on stage of production increases efficiency,” he said. “Hay should be tested, which allows producers to fit the hay quality with the livestock nutrient requirements; lactating cows and growing calves should be fed the best quality hay, and dry pregnant cows and bulls can be fed the lower quality hay.” Heading into winter, Thomson said a useful measure for your cow herd is body condition scoring. “Cows headed into winter in poor condition means their chances of rebreeding next spring are dramatically reduced,” he said. “That’s because it is difficult and expensive to add condition to cows during the winter, and thin cows

next spring will have difficulty producing enough milk to adequately care for new calves and re-breed.” Adding condition to cows can’t be done overnight. “Realistically, adding a pound a day to a bred cow over the winter will require some extra energy, a cost that may prove worthwhile if she weans a big, healthy calf next fall,” Thomson said. “Supplementation with by-products, distillers grains, gluten feed and other fibrous by-product feeds are an excellent energy source.” Failing to provide adequate nutrition and energy to your cows, Thomson said, will have a negative impact on immune status, neonatal calf scours and colostrum quality, all factors that will reduce your income next fall.

“We often use the figures 2.5 to 3 percent of a cow’s body weight as the amount of dry matter (DM) a beef animal needs per day,” Thomson said. “So, a 1,300-pound cow would require approximately 33-39 pounds of dry matter each day, which amounts to between 37 and 43 pounds of hay that is 90 percent dry matter.” Extension specialists encourage producers to have a laboratory forage analysis conducted to determine the nutrient quality of their hay. Armed with that information, producers can make determinations about supplements. “Supplement type depends on what is deficient and the feeding management of the producer,” Beck said. “In many cases, self-fed block type supplements are perfectly adequate, but often they do not provide high enough supplement levels to meet the cow’s deficiency. That is why I usually suggest handfeeding supplements when producers are able to.” Beyond supplementation, Beck suggests producers examine how their operation fits within their environment and their forage base. “Because a cow’s requirements are so different based on stage of production, I suggest producers use a defined calving season that fits the forage base of the ranch, if not that, then DECEMBER 2016

23


MANAGEMENT MATTERS

Fat and Body Condition What body condition scoring tells about your cowherd Story By Elizabeth Walker for Cattlemen’s News

A

s I drive the country roads on my commute to and from the community of Dadeville to Springfield, I check out the fields, pastures and livestock I see. I know where new poultry houses are going up, where someone just bought goats and another farm has more sheep this year than last. Along the trip, I frequently practice my estimations of body condition scoring on livestock as I cruise past. Often a person’s field will give a hint

of the condition of the livestock living there. If the grass in the field is short, often the livestock are thin. On the other hand, if the field is lush, the stock appear healthy and well. Maintaining a healthy condition in livestock says a lot about your management. Granted, some “poor doers” exist out there, but I question if those animals are ones we should keep? If they cannot maintain their flesh like the rest of your

four-legged employees, perhaps they need to find a new job and a new boss. Body condition scores are useful in tracking an estimated condition of your animals. Weight only tells part of the story. Often, a 7-frame cow will weigh more than a 5-frame, but will be in a poorer condition under similar management. Body condition scores vary between 1 and 10, depending upon frame score. And, between 100 and 150 pounds changes the body condition score by a value of 1. Maintaining a cow’s condition is much more economical than putting that condition back on them. Condition scores are an estimation of the fat just under the skin called subcutaneous fat. Subcutaneous fat is “laid down” only after internal fat is stored. However, internal fat is broken and used for energy by the animal more quickly than subcutaneous fat. If an animal begins to lose noticeable subcutaneous fat, she is probably also losing fat around her organs, and that fat is pretty important to her. Of course, if a heifer gets too fat, too soon, fat can be laid down in excess around the udder and decrease lifetime milk supply. Excessive fat around the scrotum can also impair sperm production due to improper temperature regulation. A cow that is sporting fat around her tail head and brisket probably didn’t raise a calf that year. A quick read of any beef cattle guide or book should give you the basics of the techniques used in estimating body condition. Often, it is good to have a partner who scores them at the same time you do so values can be compared and adjusted as needed. I tend to be a bit hard on animals and will call about a half score lower than other folks so it is good to have a partner with whom you can confirm your scores. After a bit of study and prac-

24 DECEMBER 2016

tice, a quick look at the ribs — start with those right after the front leg and work your way back with your eyes — then look over the topline, the hooks and pins and the brisket. I look at brisket last because even though the animal tends to lay fat down from front to back, the brisket is sort of the odd man out, and subcutaneous fat gets laid down there last. An animal with excessive fat around the tail head and brisket is often a good contender for the 9 and 10 scores, and I suspect is ready to be stored in your freezer or someone else’s for that matter. Fat is an amazing organ! Fat, or adipose tissue, communicates to the animal the overall nutritional status of the body. Hormones produced in the fat are released that communicate with the brain letting it know if the animal is in good enough condition to reproduce and lactate. Fat is a reservoir of energy and the fat-soluble vitamins — A, D, E and K. Fat also helps insulate the animal against the cold and protects some of the vital organs. In the embryo, fat is produced and stored around the future kidneys at about the same time the brain begins to develop. Fat is definitely a multi-tasker. Body condition scoring is one of those management tools that is probably under-appreciated and most likely, underutilized. Stockmen should estimate body condition on their livestock at least once or twice per year, prior to breeding and at weaning. Ideally, you would record these values and then look back over them to see if you notice a pattern. Does one cow or cow family maintain flesh better than another? Is there a pattern by sire? Do they lose weight at certain times of the year? The answers will most likely be yes because just as in humans, some animals are just more efficient at maintaining condition than others, and it likely is due to genetics. Bulls shouldn’t be forgotten either, and some bulls lose weight after the breeding season. Although, if you really think about it, is what that bull doing really considered work? A bull should be in good condition rather than fat prior to the breeding season. —Source: Elizabeth Walker is associate professor of animal science at Missouri State University.

www.joplinstockyards.com


MANAGEMENT MATTERS

BVD: Beef’s Problem Child Testing for BVD identifies persistently infected animals Story By Joann Pipkin, Editor

Y

ou could call it the AIDS of the cattle industry.

While first characterized in the 1940s as a disease that caused profuse, watery diarrhea in cattle, research has since found Bovine Viral Diarrhea (BVD) to mimic AIDS in its immunosuppression abilities. “It allows calves to get sick from other things such as pneumonia, arthritis and many other infections,” explained Dr. Shaun Sweiger. “It just sets them up for a variety of different conditions.” Sweiger, a D.V.M. and president of Cattle Stats, LLC, spoke last month at the Newton-McDonald County Cattlemen’s Association Annual Meeting in Neosho, Missouri. Calling it a “problem child,” Sweiger said the BVD virus acts a lot like the flu in people in how it’s transmitted. Because BVD can be passed from animal to animal, commingling within a group is a given, but also fenceline contact with neighboring cattle can become an issue.

too late, because if you do find (a PI), now you’ve run the risk of exposing several females in that pasture management group that will possibly be carrying PIs. Because no test is available to determine if a cow is carrying a PI calf, waiting until the calf is born is the only alternative. “The critical time is from birth to breeding,” he said. “That’s when you need to notch the calf.” So, what happens when you have a calf test positive for BVD-PI? Sweiger said isolation is the best option to prevent spreading the disease through commingling. Then, euthanize it or send it to slaughter. The dam of a PI positive calf should also be tested to make sure she is not a PI as well, he said. More than 90 percent of the time, cows with PI calves are not PI positive and might not need to be culled. They were just exposed to BVD vi-

rus during that critical time in pregnancy. While managing BVD is an industry-wide responsibility, it begins with the cow-calf producer. “Unfortunately, as it goes down the chain, we can’t correct the problem, but we are still exposed to the problem,” Sweiger said. “So, we have increased death loss, increased treatment cost, increased morbidity, and the silent killer or silent problem is reduced performance.” In a review on the financial impact of BVD, Dr. Julia Ridpath estimated BVD costs between $35 and $56 per calf, leaving a $2.3-billion-dollar-a-year imprint on the cattle industry. Sweiger noted feedlot research shows the disease costs $47 to $67 per head in pens with PI exposure. In studies looking at the negative impact of BVD on reproduction, the estimated loss is $10 to $24 per breeding animal, he said. Sweiger outlined these takehome applications for cattlemen when it comes to BVD-PI: • If you’re a cow-calf producer, then make sure you CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE

Sweiger says persistently infected (PI) animals are the primary reason the disease continues to be a problem. PIs occur when a fetus becomes exposed to BVD between day 40 and 125 of gestation. Once born, the calf then sheds the BVD virus its whole life. “In our testing of persistently infected animals, we see about half a percent – or about 1 out of every 200 animals tested,” Sweiger said. To help combat the spread of BVD-PI, Sweiger encourages cattlemen to collect an ear notch from calves when they’re young for testing. “By testing the calf crop, you now know that your calf is negative and its dam is negative as well,” Sweiger said. “Key point: Test calves prior to breeding their dams, prior to putting bulls in.” Waiting until weaning time to test for BVD-PI puts you behind the eight-ball, he said. “You are www.joplinstockyards.com

DECEMBER 2016

25


MANAGING THE PROBLEM CHILD FROM PREVIOUS PAGE don’t have BVD and keep it out. Meet with your veterinarian to determine exposure risks and your goals for managing BVD. • Introduce only PI negative animals into your herd. If bringing pregnant animals into the herd, keep them separate until calving. Then, test to determine if PIs are present. • Prior to breeding season you should:

> test all calves;

> test all non-pregnant females without calves;

> isolate pregnant females until they calve and then test their calves;

> test all replacement females; and

> test all bulls.

“If you’ve tested a calf and it is PI negative, there’s no need to retest,” Sweiger said. Seedstock producers should test cattle before selling them, Sweiger said.

Testing for BVD should be done by ear notching calves prior to turning bulls out with cows for the breeding season. Testing the calf crop helps determine the BVD status of both the calf and its dam. — Photo by Joann Pipkin.

Stocker operators should also be vigilant in keeping PI out of their operations. “PI cattle are a major source of BVD infection and stocker animals can become temporarily infected resulting in increased pull rates, treatment costs, chronic rates and death loss,” Sweiger said. BVD also affects cattle performance with losses on average daily gain as much as 0.75 pounds per head per day. “Vaccinations are a tool to manage BVD,” Sweiger said, “but don’t rely on them solely.”

Merry Christmas and

Happy New Year

26 DECEMBER 2016

Tan is 7505c (0c, 70m, 30y, 55k) Red is Pantone 186 (0c,100m, 81y, 4k) Joplin Regional is Knomen Stockyards is Playbill Tagline is BaskertonSW-Italic

www.joplinstockyards.com


TRENDING NOW

Managing Market Uncertainty What lies ahead for beef prices? Story By Austin Black for Cattlemen’s News

M

uch has changed in the cattle markets the last couple of years. Producers have experienced both record highs and drastic drops in prices in a short amount of time. Dr. Glynn Tonsor, Kansas State University agriculture economics professor, said several factors have contributed to the recent roller coaster. The excitement started with Great Britain leaving the European Union. This created a lot of market uncertainty, and prices dropped fast. But, Tonsor said the bigger issues have been pending trade deals and last month’s election. The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) could boost prices by increasing trade with multiple countries. For now though, the agreements are uncertain, which makes Tonsor nervous. “I have some serious concern on U.S. beef export products,” he said. “There’s a lot of stuff we export because we don’t eat it domestically.” While global markets are uncertain, domestic demand should pick up in the future. Tonsor said recent employment reports show an increase in the workforce. “More people working means more money for beef,” he said. But demand might not increase as soon as producers would like. Depressed

markets

www.joplinstockyards.com

have

affected each sector of the cattle industry in a different way. Feedlots have the toughest struggle. Tonsor said the break-even price isn’t as bad, but feedlots still find it challenging to make money. As markets continue to fall, any feedlots that didn’t hedge on the future’s market will likely experience a more than $200 per head loss. Tonsor said some feedlots feel serious pressure and are going out of business. Western Feedlots Ltd., the largest feedlot operation in Canada, is one of the first.   Cow-calf producers face a slow herd expansion that will continue to bring prices down. Combining this with demand uncertainties makes the longterm trend less profitable for cow-calf operators. “If you’re an average-cost producer, you’re probably not going to be getting rich,” he explained. “You will probably just breakeven.”

ket fluctuation has increased and current prices might not last for weeks or months. “Today, I can’t add $200 of profit to a calf when I buy it from the salebarn,” Tonsor said. Instead, producers should use the future’s market to calculate VOG and make marketing decisions. Over a 10-year study of price comparison, this approach proved more accurate 67 percent of the time. When using the future’s market, producers need to be flexible on when they sell. This is especially true to stocker operators who purchase cattle in the fall. Tonsor said a study by Henry Ott looked at price comparisons on stocker cattle for nine years. In his study, he compared four phases of stocker cattle ownership. One of these phases included buying cattle in early fall with plans to sell in early spring. His study showed that markets encouraged selling early 55 percent of the time in this phase. Tonsor said producers should also know what production route provides the highest VOG. “There are multiple ways to get an animal to 1,300 pounds,” he said. “After weaning, produc-

Dr. Glynn Tonsor with Kansas State University says stocker operators have opportunity to make a profit, but management is key. — Photo by Austin Black.

ers can precondition or background calves before sending them to the feedlot. They can also graze calves in between these stages.” Each production route has a different timeframe, cost and VOG. Knowing the return on each route will help producers make the best marketing decision. For more information on calculating VOG, visit www. beefbasis.com/VOG.aspx.

Stocker operators have plenty of opportunity, but management is key to making a profit. Tonsor said the market looks positive for stocker production. But, he cautioned that the future might not be as bright as the current cash market suggests. The value of gain (VOG) on cattle, compared to cost of gain, determines stocker profitability. Most producers use current cash markets to make marketing decisions. But mar-

DECEMBER 2016

27


TRENDING NOW

Riding Out the Rewards Cattlewomen find their passions riding horseback at JRS Story By Jillian Campbell for Cattlemen’s News

W

hen Paul Harvey delivered his “So God Made a Farmer” speech in 1978, it is almost certain that he was talking about cattlewomen. True cattlewomen are a rare breed. True cattlewomen are strongwilled, passionate dream chasers who don’t let miles prevent them from achieving their goals. Sage Adams and Brittany Rose are true cattlewomen with an even truer passion for the equine and cattle industries.

I am one of them. They have always done a good job of treating me as an equal.”

“I actually came down for college,” she said. “I was on the rodeo team at Fort Scott Community College.” Rodeo has been a lifelong passion for Rose, the stockyards affords her a chance to live out her passion every day.

Adams said her position at the stockyards is an opportunity she believes will lead her down the right path.

“I grew up riding horses and competing in rodeos,” she said. “I roped and ran barrels my entire life, and here at the stockyards I pen back, so I ride my horse all day and when the cattle get sold, I pen them to their number that the buyer has.”

“Someone once told me that if you love what you do, you’ll never work a day in your life,” she said. “Getting this job gives me the opportunity to meet dif-

Rose enjoys working horse-top at the stockyards because it helps her prepare both herself and her husband for other business opportunities at home.

something her position allows her to prepare for. “A really rewarding moment for me is when you are riding a colt down the alley, and they finally get it — how to track the cattle, how to pen the cattle, and just how to move and come back while having a sound mind about it,” Rose said. Rose has been a JRS employee since Jan. 2015, and she uses one word to describe her experience so far. “Rewarding,” she said. “The reason I chose that word is because I get to be on my horse all day and drive cattle. I really enjoy it. We are under the roof enough that we are out of the elements, but we are still able

Both Adams and Rose have traveled their fair share of miles to gain employment at Joplin Regional Stockyards, but to them it is just one more day in life. Adams grew up in southern Florida, helping her father and grandfather on their family ranch, one of the largest cowcalf operations in that state. Although the cattle in southwest Missouri are more hairy and tighter-hided, Adams takes pride in working with them while on horseback during her long and often unpredictable days at the stockyards. “I’m still not really sure what my role here is yet,” Adams said. “As of now, I am back and forth between penning traps and helping Bruce (Hall) unload the trailers during presale prep.” Adams said she is still in the settling and training period at the stockyards, having been living in southwest Missouri for only about one month. Still, she is enjoying the fast-paced, fluctuating environment JRS has to offer. “It’s exciting at the stockyards,” Adams said. “You never know what’s going to happen during the day. It’s always something different.” Confident in her cattle knowledge and horsemanship skills, Adams isn’t uncomfortable taking on a role that some might consider one for the boys. “I don’t face any challenges as a woman here,” she said. “Even at home, I have always been treated as an equal by the guys.

28 DECEMBER 2016

Sage Adams (l) and Brittany Rose (r) work behind the scenes at Joplin Regional Stockyards. Passionate about horses and cattle, both women find their work at the stockyards rewarding. — Photo by Jillian Campbell.

ferent people and work with different people, and this will lead to other job opportunities I hope.” Adams finds common ground with co-workers by discussing rodeos, something her entire family has always been active in. She said that although her family has not yet made time to visit her, she looks forward to finding local rodeos to attend with them in the future. Although Rose grew up in central Wisconsin, has much in common with the Florida native. Unlike Adams, Rose made her way to Kansas before she began working at the stockyards.

“My husband is a cattleman, and we work together a lot,” she said. “The cattle here are a great tool to use training horses. I can train horses here and run barrels at home. It’s also great for the barrel horses to do something different besides just running barrels.” Rose typically trains colts from 2 to 8 years of age through penback work during her stockyard shifts before she begins barrel or rope training at home. Aside from training horses prior to sale, Rose said she often assists friends with cattle at home during the working and vaccination process, which is

to enjoy it. Being on top of my horse all day is my office. At the beginning of the day I see my husband, and at the end of the day I see my husband, so that’s also a plus.” Rose said that to gain and maintain a position at the stockyards, it is necessary to have a positive attitude, good work ethic and good horsemanship skills. Good horses underneath you are also a plus, she said. Adams and Rose are proof that when it comes to getting a job at J-R-S it doesn’t matter where you come from or what your gender is. All that matters is that you possess the same drive and passion that comes with being a cattlewoman. www.joplinstockyards.com


www.joplinstockyards.com

DECEMBER 2016

29


TRENDING NOW

Opportunity Knocks as Door Closes on 2016 Lower feed costs on tap for backgrounders, feeders Story By Lisa Henderson for Cattlemen’s News

W

hile cattle prices might have tumbled significantly lower than last year, one fundamental input providing support going forward is the abundance of corn and feed grains. Lower grain prices reduce overall costs for backgrounding and finishing cattle, and this year’s crop looks to provide opportunities for cattlemen. USDA’s November World Agricultural Supply & Demand Estimates (WASDE) report suggests the 2016 U.S. corn and soybean crops will be the largest on record. USDA’s corn yield estimate was revised upward to 175.3 bushels per acre, which increased production to 15.226 billion bushels, up 12 percent from last year. U.S. soybean production was forecast at 4.36 billion bushels, up 2 percent from October and up 11 percent from last year. The national average soybean yield is pegged at 52.5 bu. per acre, up 4.5 bushels from 2015. Analysts say the increase in America’s corn production since the 2012 drought-limited crop has been impressive. Carryover stocks for the 2016-2017 marketing year are estimated at 2.4 billion bushels, the largest in more than a quarter-century. “Low grain prices are helping usage,” said Dan O’Brien, professor of agricultural economics at Kansas State University. “There is plenty of corn and an abundance of feed grains. The November report saw an

30 DECEMBER 2016

increase in non-ethanol corn usage.” Jerry Gulke, president of the Gulke Group, says while USDA has increased production for both corn and soybeans this year, demand increases were also reported. However, he believes demand has softened based on the November report. “What we feared was at some point in time you run out of demand,” Gulke said. That means corn supplies are rising faster than use, and USDA raised corn ending stocks to 83 million bushels. Gulke said, “most of the new production” was translated into ending stocks. “Which in essence is saying we can’t really find a home for all of it,” he said. Brian Grete, editor of ProFarmer, a Cedar Falls, Iowa-based agricultural market advisory service, said record production will exceed demand, “causing corn ending stocks to climb to the highest level in more than a decade.” Demand for feed grain has also been reduced by unseasonably mild weather throughout most of the U.S. Ranchers have seen abundant fall grazing, which has slowed feed consumption. That’s contributed to the glut of grain that has pushed prices to the lowest levels in several years. U.S. livestock feeders have also seen an increase in the avail-

ability of distillers grains, a byproduct of corn-based ethanol production. Shipments of distillers grains to China declined after it imposed anti-dumping duties on imports from the United States last month. That left more of the product available for domestic use. Increasing corn production has lowered corn prices about 40 cents per bushel since last year, helping cattle feeders lower their cost of gain. The average cost of gain during November was about $71 per hundredweight, according to Kansas State University’s monthly survey of Kansas feedyards. That’s about $7 per hundredweight lower than during Nov. 2015. Survey respondents expect their cost of gain the next three months to average about $70 per hundredweight. Lower prices have corn farmers struggling as their cost of production exceeds prices this fall in most areas. That’s why analysts expect to see fewer acres planted to corn next year and reduced production without any weather impact. O’Brien said the key next year will be to watch planted corn versus soybean acres. “I project we will see more soybean acres,” he said. As for corn, O’Brien expects strong usage to continue. “How many years can we have such outstanding yields is the question for prices going forward,” he said.

Continued large crops will keep farmers struggling with lower prices. Going forward, O’Brien said farmers will need to cut back on seed and fertilizer expenses if grain prices remain under pressure. “With the current supplies of grain we have now, it would be a surprise to see a rally in the grain markets before March or April,” O’Brien said. “If farmers need cash flow and they could market more of their stored crop, which could further depress prices. Many producers are already under duress. If this continues for several years we may see more fringe acres and maybe some Conservation Reserve Program acres go into wheat production. But, that doesn’t mean we’ll necessarily see fewer corn and soybean acres.” Grain markets are influenced by South American production, and O’Brien said soybean acres could strain prices next year. “If we plant more soybeans and South America does the same, and we both have good crops, then there is a significant risk of weaker soybean prices in the fall of 2017,” he said. Prospects for drier weather on the High Plains suggests an increase in grain sorghum acres, and O’Brien expects grain sorghum will displace some dryland corn acres.

www.joplinstockyards.com


Value-Added Feeder Calf Sale

Jan. 5, 2016

www.joplinstockyards.com

DECEMBER 2016

31


MARKET WATCH

Joplin Regional Stockyards Market Recap | Feeder Cattle & Calf Auction

JRS Sale Day Market Phone: (417) 548-2012 Mondays (Rick Huffman) | Wednesdays (Don Kleiboeker) Market Information Provided By Tony Hancock Mo. Department of Agriculture Market News Service Market News Hotline (573) 522-9244 Sale Day Market Reporter (417) 548-2012

Nov. 2016 • Total Receipts 41,054 | Last Month 32,680 | Last Year 37,058

Special Value Added Feeder Cattle Auction Report for 12/1/2016 Receipts: 5,977 Last Reported:

Year ago: 4,203

No recent Value Added sale for a price comparison, compared to Monday’s sale, steers under 650 lbs 5.00 to 10.00 higher and heifers under 700 lbs 2.00 to 7.00 higher , steers over 650 lbs steady to 2.00 higher, and heifers over 700 lbs steady. Demand good, supply moderate. Feeder cattle have been trading higher the last three weeks as cattle futures turned higher. Fed Cattle traded at the feedlots 1.00 to 2.00 higher at 113.00 to 114.00. Most consignments in the offering were reputation calves with good genetics and management programs. All calves on a wean-vac program and heifers are guaranteed open. Feedersupply included 63 percent Steers, 36 percent Heifers, and 0 percent Bulls. Feeder Supply over 600 lbs was 55 percent. Please Note: The below USDA LPGMN price report is reflective of the majority of classes and grades of livestock offered for sale. There may be instances where some sales do not fit within reporting guidelines and therefore will not be included in the report. Prices are reported on a per cwt basis, unless otherwise noted.

Feeder Steers: Medium and Large 1 250-300 lbs 187.50; 400-450 lbs 165.00-180.00; 450-500 lbs 157.00-170.00; 500-550 lbs 150.00163.00, Thin Fleshed 173.00; 550-600 lbs 138.00-152.00; 600-650 lbs 134.00-147.00; 650-700 lbs 130.00-140.75; 700-750 lbs 130.00140.00, Fleshy 131.00; 750-800 lbs 128.00-137.60; 800-850 lbs 129.75-135.75; 850-900 lbs 134.00; 900-950 lbs 125.50; 950-1000 lbs 122.00. Medium and Large 1-2 300-350 lbs Thin Fleshed 180.00; 350-400 lbs 162.00-165.00, Thin Fleshed 175.00; 400-450 lbs 151.00-177.00, Thin Fleshed 170.00-178.00; 450-500 lbs 145.00-160.00 Thin Fleshed 170.00; 500-550 lbs 142.00-160.00; 550-600 lbs 132.00-147.00, Thin Fleshed 150.00; 600-650 lbs 131.00-140.00; 650-700 lbs 130.00-138.00, Thin Fleshed 137.00; 700-750 lbs 123.00133.50; 750-800 lbs 126.00-132.00; 800-850 lbs 121.00-131.00; 850-900 lbs 132.00. Medium and Large 2 300-350 lbs Thin Fleshed 160.00; 350-400 lbs Thin Fleshed 167.50; 400-450 lbs 126.00, Thin Fleshed 170.00; 550-600 lbs 123.00, Thin Fleshed 140.00; 600-650 lbs 125.00-128.00; 650-700 lbs 126.00-127.00; 700-750 lbs 125.00. Large 1 600-650 lbs 135.00; 700-750 lbs 131.00. Medium 1-2 500550 lbs 144.00-148.00. Medium 2 450-500 lbs 132.00. Feeder Heifers:

Medium and Large 1 350-400 lbs 153.00; 400-450 lbs 146.00-151.00; 450-500 lbs 132.00-143.00; 500-550 lbs 128.00135.00; 550-600 lbs 125.00-135.00; 600-650 lbs 125.00-135.00; 650-700 lbs 123.50-133.00; 700-750 lbs 125.00-126.00; 750-800 lbs 125.50-129.00. Medium and Large 1-2 300-350 lbs Thin Fleshed 153.00-155.00; 350-400 lbs 140.00- 145.00; 400-450 lbs 130.00150.00, Thin Fleshed 147.00-152.00; 450-500 lbs 124.00-142.00; 500-550 lbs 122.00-132.00; 550-600 lbs 123.00-131.00; 600- 650 lbs 120.00-129.00; 650-700 lbs 122.00-125.50, Thin Fleshed 126.00; 700-750 lbs 125.00-125.50; 750-800 lbs 120.00-125.00. Medium and Large 2 350-400 lbs Thin Fleshed 145.00; 400-450 lbs 123.00; 450-500 lbs 124.00; 500-550 lbs 127.00, Thin Fleshed 126.00; 550-600 lbs 122.00; 600-650 lbs 123.00. Large 1 600-650 lbs 126.00. Medium 1-2 400-450 lbs 134.00.

Feeder Bulls:

Medium and Large 2 350-400 lbs Thin Fleshed 162.00; 450-500 lbs Thin Fleshed 144.00; 550-600 lbs Thin Fleshed 130.00; 650-700 lbs. Thin Fleshed 102.00.

Video Market from 12/01/16

32 DECEMBER 2016

www.joplinstockyards.com


TRENDING NOW

Looking Ahead What will you do different in your operation next year? “I won’t be feeding medicated feed, and I plan to do a better job of vaccinating. Also, I’ll be working more closely with a veterinarian because of the new VFD (veterinary feed directive) regs.” — Sam Jack - Diamond, Missouri

“I’m going to AI my commercial cowherd, a first for the entire herd. I’ve been doing it on my replacement and SMS (Show-MeSelect) heifers. Now, I’m trying to improve the entire herd for my customers and my own use.”

Replacement Cow & Bull Sale

4:30 p.m. | Friday | Dec. 16, 2016

Joplin Regional Stockyards | I-44 & Exit 22 | Carthage, Missouri Expecting 800 head with these early listings: • 30 RED BALANCER COW/CALF PAIRS—Mixed ages. Selling with Simmental or Red Angus sired calves at side. Offered due to drought in Alabama. FIELD REP: BAILEY MOORE. PHONE: 417-540-4343. • 86 ANGUS CROSS HEIFERS—2 years old. Bred to Circle A Angus bulls. Start calving mid-Feb. Pelvic measured. Herd health by Dr. Ted Dahlstrom. FIELD REP: TIM DURMAN. PHONE: (417)438-3541. • 100 MIXED COWS—Complete Dispersal. Running ages. Some pairs, some bred cows. All bred to black bulls. FIELD REP: FRED GATES. PHONE: 417.437-5055. • 30 COW/CALF PAIRS—Mixed ages. Selling with Angus & Hereford calves at side. FIELD REP: JIM HACKER. PHONE: 417-328-8905.

— Jason Hudson - Aurora, Missouri

• 20 ULTRA BLACK HEIFERS—Bred AI to Angus bull to calve in Feb. FIELD REP: LARRY MALLORY. PHONE: 417-461-2275. “I plan to spend less.” — Jerry Crownover - Everton, Missouri

• 30 F1 TIGER STRIPE COWS—6 yrs. to short and solid. Bred to Cavender Ranch Charolais bulls. Start calving in Feb. FIELD REP: CLAY BARNHOUSE. PHONE: 417-777-1855. • 50 BLACK ANGUS COW/CALF PAIRS—Cows are 2 years old weighing 1,1001,200 lbs. with 150-300 lb. calves at side. Running back with Angus bulls. FIELD REP: JW HENSON. PHONE: 417-343-9488.

“I plan to put in a grazing system. I believe it will benefit my operation both economically and environmentally. I am confident less feed input dollars per head will be one result along with reduced requirements for fertilizers in the long run. We will be fencing off creek area and this should help reduce the downstream impact livestock produce besides just being easier to find my cows!” — Bud Brown - Republic, Missouri

Kallee Williams Commercial Product Specialist ADM Animal NutritionTM A division of Archer Daniels Midland Phone: 479-227-0590  kallee.williams@adm.com www.ADMAnimalNutrition.com For inquiries about ADM products, contact Commercial Product Specialist, Kallee Williams, serving the northwest quarter of Arkansas and the eastern edge of Oklahoma. Specializing in beef cattle production, Kallee has a vast knowledge of the livestock industry and would love to work with you to develop the ideal nutrition plan for your herd. 

Visit the JRS Booth at the Tulsa Farm Show! Dec. 10, 11, 12 | Booth 123 www.joplinstockyards.com

50 BLACK COW/CALF PAIRS—3-6 years old with 150-250 lb. calves. Running back with Jacs Ranch Angus bulls. FIELD REP: TIM DURMAN. PHONE: 417-438-3541. 100 ANGUS HEIFERS—50 will calve Feb. 20-March 10; 50 due in April. All are half sisters out of Montana. Bred to LBW Traveler Angus bull. Weighing 1,100 lbs.+. FIELD REP: FIELD REP: JOHN SIMMONS. PHONE: 918-519-9129. ADAMS SAC RIVER RANCH: 90 FIRST-CALF HEIFERS—40 blacks, 20 BWF, 20 Brangus, and 10 Red Angus. All bred to LBW Angus bulls. Start calving mid-Feb. FIELD REP: BRYON HASKINS. PHONE: 417-850-4382. CLEARWATER FARM • 10 ANGUS BULLS— 22-26 months old. AI sired. FIELD REP: MARK HARMON. PHONE: 417-316-0101. • 2 ANGUS BULLS— Jindra Ranch origin. 20 months old. FIELD REP: JIM HACKER. PHONE: 417-328-8905. • 23 ANGUS BULLS— 8 are breeding bulls 18 mos.-2 1/2 years old. Bloodlines by HARB Denali 788 JH and New Design 878. 15 are yearlings with bloodlines by SAV Final Answer 0035, HARB Denali 788 JH and New Design 878. FIELD REP: JOHN SIMMONS. PHONE: 918-519-9129. ALL BULLS MUST BE SEMEN AND TRICH TESTED.

www.joplinstockyards.com Bailey Moore 417.540.4343

Jackie Moore 417.825.0948

Skyler Moore 417.737.2615

JRS Office 417.548.2333 Tan is 7505c (0c, 70m, 30y, 55k) Red is Pantone 186 (0c,100m, 81y, 4k) Joplin Regional is Knomen Stockyards is Playbill Tagline is BaskertonSW-Italic

DECEMBER 2016

33


construction

SPRAYING

December 14-16 16 22-31

EVENT ROUNDUP

Missouri Governor’s Conference on Agriculture Tan-Tar-A, Osage Beach, Missouri FMI: www.mda.mo.gov Monthly Cow & Bull Sale Joplin Regional Stockyards, Carthage, Missouri FMI: 417-548-2333 JRS Closed for the Holidays

January 2017

Trailers

FEED & HAY AC-DC Hay Company Specializing in your hay needs

Need Hay?

Your New Gooseneck Dealer Is:

B & B Sales & Service Bolivar, Missouri 65613

417-326-6221

Prairie ~ Alfalfa ~ Straw ~ Brome Tony Carpenter 208 North NN Hwy Lamar, MO 64726 Call: 417.448.7883

1 2 5 6-8

February 28

March 17

cattle

JRS Open to Receive Cattle JRS Regular Feeder Cattle Auction Value-Added Feeder Cattle Sale Joplin Regional Stockyards, Carthage, Missouri FMI: 417-548-2333 Missouri Beef Industry Convention & Trade Show Tan-Tar-A Resort, Osage Beach, Missouri FMI: 573-499-9162 Southwest Missouri Spring Forage Conference Springfield, Missouri FMI: 417-532-6305 Ext.3 Sunflower Cattle Co. Annual Production Sale Maple Hill, Kansas FMI: 785-256-6461

FENCING

Tune in to the JRS Market Report

OGDEN ANGUS RANCH brandon 417.813.0958 trevon 417.366.0363 kenny 417.466.8176 lockwood, mo 65682

Monday & Wednesday 11:30 a.m. & 12:30 p.m.

ogdenangus.com ogdenangus@gmail.com

Monday 12:40 p.m. Wednesday 12:40 p.m. Monday 12:15 p.m. Wednesday 12:15 p.m.

BEEFMASTER BULLS – THE ZELLERS – “Our Gates are Always Open” Jackson, Missouri Glen 573-243-5580

Greg 573-450-6587

Monday 11:30 a.m. Wednesday 11:30 a.m.

BULLS

SIMANGUS • BALANCER Top of the breed genetics Guaranteed • Longevity Forage-developed • 20 mos. old Many heterosis benefits

Harriman Santa Fe (Bob) | Montrose, MO 660/492-2504 | bharriman39@hotmail.com

Monday 11:45 a.m. Wednesday 11:45 a.m.

M-F 9:55-10:05 a.m. (during break before AgriTalk) M/W/F Noon Hour (during Farming in the Four States) T/Th Noon Hour (after news block)

Monday 11:38 a.m. Wednesday 11:38 a.m.

Monday 12:50 p.m. & 4:45 p.m. Wednesday 12:50 p.m. & 4:45 p.m.

Your Ad Could Be Here

Advertise in

34 DECEMBER 2016

INSURANCE

Contact Mark Harmon at

417-548-2333

www.joplinstockyards.com


www.joplinstockyards.com

DECEMBER 2016

35


36 DECEMBER 2016

www.joplinstockyards.com

December 2016  

December 2016 Issue of Cattlemen's News Published by Joplin Regional Stockyards

Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you