Cooperative Extension Service

Campbell County

3500 Alexandria Pike

Highland Heights, KY 41076

(859) 572-2600

Fax: (859) 572-2619

http://ces.ca.uky.edu/campbell

AGRICULTURE NEWS April & May 2016

Campbell County Cattle Association

The Campbell County Cattle Association (CCCA) Board of Directors meets the second Tuesday of each

month at 6:30 p.m. at the Environmental Education Center to do the business of the Association. These meet-

ings are open to any Cattle Association member. During the summers they will likely host a few of their

meetings at different farms in Campbell County. Last year Rick Simon and Tom Hounshell hosted mini-field

days in conjunction with CCCA Board meetings. A good number of farmers attended these two programs

and were able to see a variety of production practices that Rick and Tom had implemented. Since January the

Board has been developing a list of beef and forage topics that they feel need to be addressed. Once this list

is prioritized, they will develop programs and activities to help address these needs. One of the Cattle Associ-

ation’s first field days of the year will be on April 30 at Eden Shale Farm in Owen County. See the enclosed

flyer for more details on this program.

Front Row, left to right: Larry Schadler, Chad Bezold and Keith Bezold

Back Row, left to right: Jim Krift, treasurer; Ron Steffen, president; Rick Simon, secretary; and Harold Dawn

Don Sorrell

Campbell County Extension Agent for

Agriculture and Natural Resources

Beef Reproductive Efficiency Program –

What Have We Learned?

In December of 2012 we kicked off a multi-year pro-

gram focusing on beef cattle reproductive efficiency.

We have used numerous classroom programs, field

days, demonstrations and farm cooperators to high-

light the importance of managing reproduction in the

cow herd. Based on over three years of work, what

have we learned?

1. Reproductive efficiency is the difference be-

tween profit and loss in beef cattle opera-

tions.

2. There is a lot of potential to improve the re-

productive efficiency of beef herds in Camp-

bell County.

3. Reproductive efficiency is impacted by and

improved by: nutrition (energy, protein, vita-

mins and minerals), herd health (vaccination

program), body condition (especially at

breeding), genetics (purebred versus cross-

bred cows, age of puberty and milking abil-

ity), age of animal (replacement heifer, first

calf heifer or mature cow), controlled breed-

ing season, breeding soundness exam of

bulls, forage quantity and quality (grass ver-

sus grass legume and endophyte fescue),

weather and much more. You can add your

own reasons.

4. It is a combination of the above mentioned

production practices that, when implemented,

have the greatest potential to improve repro-

ductive efficiency.

5. Reproductive efficiency (for the most part)

can be managed by the producer.

With this said, what do I see as the biggest changes

that producers have implemented in the past three

years in the area of reproductive efficiency?

1. Using CIDR’s and MGA to synchronize es-

trus in replacement heifers, first calf heifers

and late calving cows really works. We have

seen excellent results in this area. For exam-

ple, many late calving cows have been

moved up in the calving season from one

year to the next by an average of 32 days and

as many as 50 days. Older calves equal high-

er weaning weights and more money in pro-

ducers’ pockets.

2. Utilization of blood testing to check pregnan-

cy of beef females. At least 20 producers are

using this technology. In many cases, open

cows were culled or moved into another

breeding season (spring or fall).

3. Focus on herd health: pre-breeding vaccina-

tion programs, improved feeding programs,

and improved body condition.

I have truly enjoyed working with this program and

the many producers who have called upon me for

assistance. We will continue to include educational

programs focusing on reproductive efficiency, but we

will change the focus of our beef cattle production

programs starting this fall. The Campbell County

Cattle Association Board will help make these

changes.

TIPS TO IMPROVE FARM TRACTOR SAFETY

Tractors and tractor overturns continue to be a major source of farm deaths in Kentucky. What can we do to im-prove tractor safety and reduce the risk of tractor-related deaths on Kentucky farms and public roads? Equip older tractors with roll-over protective struc-tures, commonly called “roll bars.” ROPS can be installed on

many older tractors for $600 to $1,200. It will be more expensive to put ROPS, if you can find them, on tractors manufac-tured before the late 1960s. If you have ROPS or a safety cab, make it a habit to use a seatbelt. While ROPS provide basic protection, a seatbelt ensures you will remain inside this zone of protection in

case of an overturn. Using a seatbelt also keeps you from being thrown off the tractor if you hit an obstacle or barrier. If you operate a farm tractor on public roads and highways, be sure this equipment has a slow-moving vehicle emblem on the back. Replace the emblem’s reflective mate-rials if they have faded from exposure to the sign. Also check that equipment lighting is operating satisfactorily. This should include headlights, taillights and flashing lights, if available. Don’t forget to inspect reflectors or reflective tape on the front and rear extremities of towed equipment. Use am-ber or yellow on the front and red on the rear. Front reflec-tors or tape are especially important if the edges of towed equipment extend beyond the left side of the tractor. These safety devices alert oncoming traffic to protruding equipment.

Page 2

Timely Tips Dr. Roy Burris, University of Kentucky Beef Specialist

Spring-Calving Cows The spring calving season should be in full swing now; top priority should be to get a live calf and keep cows in suffi-cient body condition to rebreed early.

Calving areas should be accessible and as clean and as free of mud as possible. Pastures which have good

sod and are close to facilities work best.

Check cows at least twice daily and first-calf heifers more frequently than that. Be ready to assist those not making progress after 1 to 2 hours of hard labor. Chilled calves should be dried and warmed as soon as

possible.

See that each calf gets colostrum within an hour of birth, or administer colostrum (or a commercial colos-

trum replacement) with an esophageal feeder.

Identify calves with eartags and/or tattoos while calves are young and easy to handle and record birthdate and dam ID. Commercial male calves should be castrated and implanted as soon as possible. Registered calves

should be weighed in the first 24 hours.

Separate cows that have calved and increase their feed. Energy supplementation to cows receiving hay is necessary to prepare them for rebreeding. For exam-ple, a 1250 lb cow giving 25 lb/day of milk would need about 25 lb of fescue hay and 5 lb of concentrate daily to maintain condition. Cows must be in good condition

to conceive early in the upcoming breeding season.

Watch for calf scours! If scours become a problem, move cows which have not calved to a clean pasture. Be prepared to give fluids to scouring calves that be-come dehydrated. Consult your veterinarian for advice and send fecal samples to a diagnostic lab to determine which drug therapy will be most effective. Try to avoid feeding hay in excessively muddy areas to avoid con-

tamination of the dams’ udders.

Continue grass tetany prevention. Be sure that the min-eral mix contains magnesium and that cows consume

adequate amounts.

Vaccinate calves for clostridial diseases (Blackleg, Ma-lignant Edema) as soon as possible. You might choose to do this at the prebreeding working in late April or early

May.

Prepare bulls for the breeding season. Increase feed if necessary to have bulls in adequate condition for breed-

ing.

Finalize plans for your spring breeding program. Pur-chase new bulls at least 30 days before the breeding season—demand performance records and check health history including immunizations. Use visual evaluation and expected progeny differences (EPD’s) to select a

bull that fits your program.

(Don’s thoughts)

For years, I have pushed soil sampling and the recommendations that follow as the guideline for establishing a fertility program for any agriculture crop. We know that a good fertility program should be a part of your management tool box. Under or even over fertili-zation can have a serious economic impact upon your farming operation. The following is my recommendations for fertilizing pasture and hay fields. Soils test and apply lime, phosphorus and potassium

(preferably in the fall) to maintain production levels. Maintain soil fertility levels in at least the “medium range” so yield and plant persistence is not compromised. Use legumes (alfalfa and clover) in hay and pasture fields to eliminate or at least reduce the need for nitrogen fertilizers. If legumes are not present (25% or greater of the stand) you can apply nitrogen to grass hay field and pasture fields in the early spring (usually mid March to early April) when increased production is desired. Apply nitrogen to grass pasture/hay fields in the fall (August 15-September 15) to improve fall growth such as for stockpil-

ing fescue.

Three point hitch

spreader is avail-

able for your use.

Contact Southern

States for more

information.

Page 3

Lessons Learned from the 2014 and 2015

Cattle Markets Dr. Kenny Burdine and Dr. Greg Halich, University of

Kentucky Department of Agricultural Economics

The last couple of years have been nothing short of

a roller coaster ride for beef cattle producers. We

saw prices rise to record levels and then fall as

sharply as we have ever seen. A combination of

factors such as cattle inventory, production of

competing meats, increasing slaughter weights,

and international trade were all at play in the mar-

ket. At the same time, producers were making

management decisions in a rapidly changing envi-

ronment. If the old adage is right and history re-

peats itself, it’s worth taking a look back to reflect

on some things that can be learned.

1) If Calf Prices Seem too Good to be True,

They Probably Are

There is a long time adage by agricultural econo-

mists that the cure to high prices is high prices.

The implication is that

producers respond to high

prices by increasing pro-

duction, which then

brings down prices. As

basic as this may seem, it

is easy to get caught up in

the euphoria of historical-

ly high calf prices and try

to find reasons why it is

different this time. Per-

haps it may have been dif-

ferent in terms of how

high prices rose, but it

was no different in terms of how producers re-

sponded to high profits and how quickly these

prices came crashing back down. Don’t expect

prices that seem too good to be true to last, they

never do.

2) The Cattle Cycle Isn’t Dead

Over the last 10 years, many “experts” stated that

the cattle cycle is dead or no longer exists. We

have never agreed with this logic, and feel part of

that reason is that we may define the cattle cycle

differently that most people. To us, the cattle cycle

is primarily about cow-calf operators responding to

profits by expanding their cow herds and the time

lag between this decision and the associated supply

impact. Two major external events in the last half-

dozen years impacted the current cattle cycle, and

changed its dynamics. First, historically high grain

prices from 2008-2013 caused significant conversion

of pasture and hay-ground to row crops.

The combined effect was that cow numbers continued

to drop during a time period when they normally

would have been expected to start increasing. By

2012, calf prices (and cow-calf profits) were likely

high enough to justify heifer retention. However, the

combination of severe drought and pasture conversion

led to cow-herd liquidation at a time when calf prices

would have suggested expansion. As weather im-

proved and cow profits soared in 2014 and 2015, ex-

pansion took a firm foothold. This cow herd is cur-

rently growing, and doing so at a swift pace as beef

cow numbers are up over 4% over the last two years.

3) Expansion Isn’t Just About Heifers

Traditional cattle cycle mentality is that expansion

comes from heifer retention and this

is true from a long-term perspective.

However, the age of the cow herd

cannot be ignored in the short-run. A

factor that drove beef cow numbers

so low from 2011-2013 was ex-

tremely high cow slaughter. Most of

this came from the Southern Plains

as they dealt with widespread severe

drought. When increased moisture

was overlaid with strong calf prices

in 2014 and 2015, most of the initial

increase in cow inventory came from

reduced beef cow slaughter. The

overall age of the herd was younger, fewer cows were

near the end of their productive lives, and profit was

there. It made logical sense to cull fewer cows during

these two years and this worked to jump-start the ex-

pansion phase of this cycle.

4) The Impact of Competing Meats

In the US, beef, chicken, and pork are the primary

consumer meats and 2014 was a banner year for prof-

itability in all three. So, it is no surprise that expan-

sion occurred in all of these markets. However, the

pace at which growth can occur in these markets is

different. Due to shorter gestation periods and young-

er age at harvest, pork and poultry producers can in-

Page 4

crease production much faster than beef producers.

It is likely that 2016 will be the first year that we ac-

tually see increased beef production (boxed beef),

while significant increases have already been seen in

the pork and poultry markets. Since these proteins

compete in the meat case, beef prices were pressured

in late 2015 from increased pork and poultry sup-

plies before beef supply increased significantly.

5) Exports are a Double-Edged Sword

There is no doubt that increased exports have a posi-

tive impact on price, holding everything else con-

stant. Increased exports reduce domestic consumer

supply, which drives prices upward at home. How-

ever, over time we respond to these higher price lev-

els with increased production. Then, as shocks occur

in international markets that lead to decreased ex-

ports, all that extra supply is left on the domestic

market, and prices fall. Last year, 2015, was a good

example of how this can play out. Exports were

down drastically due to increased price levels, a

stronger US dollar, and weakening economies for

some of our trading partners. The decrease in ex-

ports piled onto an already decreasing market, with

the net effect being a price implosion. This is not to

say that we should stop exporting beef. We just need

to be aware that exports can cut both ways.

6) Don’t Take a Short-Term Perspective on

Long-Term Decisions

While we don’t think many people expected calf

prices to stay in the $2.50 per lb range forever, most

of us were surprised how sharply prices came down

in 2015. The folks hit hardest by this drop will be the

ones who made decisions in the last couple years as

though calf prices were going to stay at $2.50 for

years to come. As was discussed in lesson #1, if

there is one certainty about agricultural markets it is

that abnormally large profits won’t exist for long.

Supply will increase until profits reach more normal

levels. Long term investments in land, breeding

stock, equipment, facilities, etc. need to be made

from a long term perspective. It appears that a lot of

producers made investments over the last couple of

years based on the assumption that those incredibly

high prices were here to stay.

First-Calf Beef Heifers Can Benefit from a

Little TLC It is a fact that first-calf heifers require spe-

cial management strategies to help them wean a big-

ger calf, breed back sooner, and improve her chances

of staying in your herd longer.

While calving can often be a major stressor

on your heifers, more subtle stress may take its toll

on them. Two

year olds calve

in at approxi-

mately 85% of

their mature

weight. Her en-

tire first lactation

requires her to

continue grow-

ing, go through the stress of calving, produce milk,

and raise a calf all while being at the bottom of the

pecking order in the herd. Monitoring Body Condi-

tion Score (BCS) in first-calf heifers is critical to her

success. Ideally you would like to keep your heifers

at a BCS of 5-6. Animals with excess body condition

(>7) have lower reproductive performance. Here are

some strategies to keeping first-calf heifers in ideal

condition:

* Consider inserting a CIDR into first calf heifers for

several days or feeding MGA for seven days before

exposing them to the bull.

* Feed/Graze first-calf heifers and mature cows sep-

arately.

* Always give heifers the best quality hay/pasture

available.

* Supplement first-calf heifers (especially after calv-

ing) with grains (energy) like corn, or commodity

feeds (usually 4 to 5 pounds a day) so they don’t lose

body condition.

* Wean calves off heifers at 5 - 6 months of age.

* If heifers are thin at calving, calves may need to be

weaned extra early.

* Keep a high quality complete mineral available for

first-calf heifers.

* Use strategic deworming programs for young

cows.

* Control external parasites.

Careful management of first-calf heifers will benefit

you in the long-run. Closely monitoring BCS and

supplementing nutrition will help your heifers raise

healthy calves and breed back to stay in your herd

for years to come. Page 5

A Breeding Soundness Exam: Insurance for

Your Breeding Season Dr. Les Anderson, Beef Extension Specialist, University of

Kentucky

I received the call on a Monday. I seem to receive this call 6-8 times each year. This particular farmer had just finished getting his cows diagnosed for pregnancy. He had 43 fall calving cows. The previous fall, those cows were synchronized for artificial in-semination and were exposed to his herd bull for an additional 13 weeks. Only 22 cows conceived and all of them conceived to the AI. The first question I asked this rancher was the obvious one; did you get a breeding soundness exam (BSE) performed on your bull? His response; the bull had one when he bought him but he had not had one done since (2-3 years). The bull was checked and, sure enough, he was infertile. What is a BSE? A BSE is a fertility exam performed on bulls by a veterinarian. A BSE has three components; scrotal cir-cumference, a physical exam, and a semen evaluation. Scrotal circumference is highly correlated with semen output and serving capacity. It is recommended that a 12-13 month old bull have a scrotal circumference of at least 30 cm. The physical exam is per-formed to simply ensure that a bull is physically up to the challenge of the breeding season. Are his feet and legs structurally correct? Is he free from injury and/or infection? The veterinarian then exam-ines the bull's semen to determine if the sperm cells are normal. The bull is then graded as satisfactory, unsatisfactory, or deferred. Bulls classified as unsatisfactory are considered infertile and it is not recommended that they be used for breeding. Bulls that receive the deferred classification had some irregularities in their ejaculate and a second collection is required to determine his fertility. A BSE is a highly reliable tool to use to identify bulls that are infertile. Results from surveys nationally and in Kentucky indicate that fewer than 30% of cattlemen routinely subject their bulls to a BSE. I am amazed by how few people obtain a BSE in their herd bull before each breeding season. We purchase car, health, life, and crop insurance why wouldn't we purchase a little breeding-season insurance? We protect ourselves against most disasters but we don't protect our cow herd from the ultimate disaster? A BSE will cost $50-150 (actually $25 for Campbell County Cattle Association members at the April 23 bull testing program in Kenton County) so it is very inexpensive, easy form of risk man-agement. I'm fairly certain that the cattleman that called me wished he had gotten a BSE on his bulls before he found out that he had 21 open cows. The $150 investment in breeding insurance (BSE) seems small compared to the lost income from 21 cows ($15-20,000). So protect your investment. Obtain a BSE on all your bulls 30 days before every breeding season.

Based on the past several years of BSE testing in

Kenton County about 10% of all bulls fail the test

each year. I (Don) know of 2 producers in Campbell

County who have had calf crop failures due to

infertile bulls. See the enclosed flyer for information

on getting a BSE test done on your herd bull(s).

If a recent soil test suggests you need fertilizer or lime on hay and pasture land, then don't think for a minute it's anything but voodoo economics if you think you're better off to avoid it. This is especially the case with hay fields. After all, an "average" annual hay yield of 3 tons per acre removes the same amount of potash from the soil as a SIX HUNDRED (yes, that's 600) bushel corn crop! Optimum hay production

requires adequate fertility.

At a minimum, if fertilizer prices dictate that you simply can't fertilize all the hay and pasture land that a soil test indicates need be, take the resources available and use them strategically where they are most needed. Practicing efficient pasture grazing management over the years distrib-utes and recycles manure nutrients very nicely. Your soil test may indicate that applying P & K is likely your lowest fertilizer

priority on pasture land.

If limited resources dictate you only apply nitrogen fertilizer one time during the year, consider doing it after the

first growth flush is over in late May or June, or wait until Fall when you begin to stockpile. However at the same time, re-member that research sug-

gests that each of the first 40 pounds of nitrogen applied to a grass field returns up to an additional 54 pounds of dry mat-ter. When high quality forages are valued at 5 to 8 cents per pound, that would indicate the breakeven price you could pay for up to 40 pounds of nitrogen per acre exceeds $2.70 per pound of N! Or, looking at it another other way, an investment of 40 pounds of nitrogen at 70 cents per pound (total cost per acre= $28.00) strategically timed on a grass hay field will re-

turn more than a ton of extra forage.

Strategically fertilizing hay ground needs to be a long term priority, especially replacing P and K. Each ton of hay (especially legume hay crops) which is removed from a hay field takes with it 14 pounds of actual phosphorous and 50-55 pounds of actual potash/potassium. At a minimum, replacing the soil nutrients removed by hay harvest must remain the highest priority to maintain long term stand health and

productivity of perennial hay fields.

Stan Smith, Fairfield County, OSU Extension

Page 6

Preparing Cows for Breeding Dr. Les Anderson, Beef Extension Specialist, University of

Kentucky

A successful breeding season actually begins with management decisions made at calving. Cattlemen can im-pact rebreeding efficiency by focusing on body condition score (BCS), early assistance during calving difficulty, sched-uling a breeding soundness exam for the herd sires, planning their herd reproductive health program, and developing a plan to regulate estrus in their first-calf heifers and late-calving cows. Rebreeding performance of cows is greatly influenced by BCS at calving. Cows that are thin (BCS < 5) at calving take longer to resume estrous cycles and therefore are de-layed in their ability to rebreed. Re-search has clearly demonstrated that as precalving BCS decreases, the number of days from one calving to the next (calving interval) increases in beef cows. Females with a precalving BCS of less than 5 tend to have calv-ing interval of approximately 400 days while a cow with a precalving BCS of 5 or more have a calving inter-val of approximately 360 days. Thin cows need a longer breeding season, which results in more open cows in the fall. They may most likely have lighter calves to sell the next year because the calves from these thin cows will be born later in the calving season. Management of BCS after calving also impacts re-breeding efficiency. Maintenance requirements for energy and protein increase 25-30% for most beef cows after calv-ing. Producers need to plan their supplementation to match or exceed this increased nutrient requirement. Rebreeding effi-ciency is enhanced in cows that calved thin if their energy intake is increased. Although the best management plan is to calve cows in a BCS of 5+, increasing the energy to cows that are thin at calving can boost reproductive performance. Dystocia (calving problems) can severely delay the onset of estrus after calving. Research shows that for every hour a female is in stage 2 active labor there is a 4 day delay in the resumption of estrous cycles after calving. Early inter-vention helps; 16% more cows conceived when cows were assisted within 90 minutes of the start of calving. The best method is to reduce the incidence of dystocia via selection but early calving assistance will increase the opportunity of cows to rebreed. One often overlooked management tool that can im-prove reproductive performance is breeding soundness ex-ams in bulls. Ranchers need to think of breeding soundness exams as breeding season insurance. These exams are a

low-cost method of insuring that your bull is not infertile. Bulls should be examined for breeding soundness about 30 days before they are turned out. I have worked in reproductive management for nearly 20 years and it amazes me how many cattlemen still do not vac-cinate their cow herd against reproductive diseases. Several diseases are associated with reproductive loss (lepto, BVD, vibrio, trich, etc). The main problem is that most reproductive loss due to disease is subtle and producers don’t notice the loss unless they have a massive failure. Most cattlemen are not aware of their losses due to abortion. See the enclosed article on a basic vaccination program for cows. Lastly, beef producers need to develop a plan to enhance the rebreeding potential of their first-calf heifers and late-calving cows. Young cows and late-calving cows have one characteris-

tic in common that will greatly impact their reproductive success; anestrus. After each calving, cows undergo a peri-od of time when they do not come into estrus/heat. This anestrus period can be as short as 17 days but can also last as long as 150 days depending upon a number of factors. Typically, mature cows in good BCS will be in anestrus for 45-90 days (avg about 60 days) while first-calf heifers will be in anestrus for 75-120 days. If bull turnout is May 20 and the length of anestrus for mature cows is

60 days and for young cows is 90 days. A mature cow that calves on March 1 will begin to cycle on May 1 and is highly likely to conceive early. However, the mature cow that calves on April 20 won’t cycle until June 20 and her opportunity to con-ceive early is very limited. A first-calf heifer that calves on April 20 won’t begin to cycle until July 20 and will have limited oppor-tunities to conceive. Cattlemen can reduce the anestrous peri-od by fenceline exposure to a mature bull or by treating the cows with progesterone for 7 days prior to bull exposure. Sources of progesterone include the feed additive melengestrol acetate (MGA) or an EAZI-Breed CIDRÒ insert (Zoetis Animal Health). Both sources have been shown to induce estrus in anestrous cows and exposure of anestrous cows to progester-one for 7 days before bull exposure will not reduce fertility. Pregnancy rates will actually be increased in these females be-cause inducing estrus will increase the number of opportunities these cows have to conceive in the breeding season. Managing for reproductive success actually begins at calving. Cows need to calve with a minimum BCS of 5 and with little assistance. Effective planning for reproductive health and management plan for limiting the impact of anestrus will ensure that cattlemen are happy, happy, happy at the end of the breed-ing season.

Page 7

Vaccination Guidelines for

Spring Calving Cows Dr. Michelle Arnold, Large Ruminant Extension Veterinarian,

University of Kentucky

One of the most common questions

in cow/calf production is what vac-

cines are necessary on an annual

basis in Kentucky to keep the herd

healthy. The guidelines set forth in

this article are designed to help an-

swer that question but the details of

what products to use and when to

administer them are best decided by

the producer and his or her veteri-

narian or Extension agent. Technol-

ogy is constantly changing and up-

dating science to make today’s vac-

cines safer and more effective than any time in the histo-

ry of cattle production. However, the sheer number and

types of vaccines and dewormers available today can

make the correct selection of products challenging at the

very least. Every farm is different with regards to the

disease risk the cattle face and the challenges of labor

and facilities needed to work the cattle.

Vaccinating cows with modified live viral vaccines

four weeks prior to bull turnout is very important if

the cows or heifers were not vaccinated the previous

year. Modified live vaccines can disrupt the heat cy-

cle of unvaccinated cows, making for lower concep-

tion rates on the first heat cycle. If cows/heifers

WERE vaccinated with a modified live virus the pre-

vious year, their heat cycles will not be impacted even

if they are revaccinated as little as one week prior to

the breeding season.

Cows and Bulls 4 weeks Prior to Breeding (very soon

for spring calving cows)

1. Viral respiratory vaccine (IBR, BVD, PI3, BRSV)

with Campylobacter fetus (Vibriosis) and 5-way

Leptospirosis Fetal Protection (FP) product pre-

ferred. If the cow is pregnant at the time of

vaccination, use a killed vaccine product to

reduce the risk of accidental abortion. Certain

modified live vaccines can be used in pregnant

animals but only if used strictly according to label

directions.

2. 7 way Clostridial (Blackleg)-necessary if under 2

years of age. Optional after that depending on the

exposure risk of the herd.

3. Deworm-perform at least twice per year (spring

and summer). If only once is possible, deworm in

late June or July. Deworming in the fall is a good

practice to reduce the number of worms that over

winter in the cow but is not as important as the

spring and summer when larvae are active in the

pasture.

4. Tag cattle for identification and/or re-tag those

that have lost tags.

5. Breeding Soundness Exams are highly recom-

mended for herd bulls.

Heifers 6 weeks Prior to Breeding

1. Viral respiratory vaccine (IBR, BVD, PI3, BRSV)

with Campylobacter fetus (Vibriosis) and 5-way

Leptospirosis-Modified live or killed product.

Fetal Protection (FP) product is preferred. Fol-

low label directions; some vaccines require a

booster and some do not.

2. 7 way Clostridial (Blackleg)

3. Deworm with a branded (not generic) product. A

heifer is under increased nutritional demand be-

cause she is still growing herself and trying to re-

produce. Young animals do not have the immunity

to parasites that adult cattle possess; therefore it is

important to use effective dewormers.

Calves 1-3 months of age:

1. Identify with tag

2. Vaccinate with 7 way Clostridial (Blackleg) vac

cine. Although the calves are too young to mount a

good immune response, this dose of vaccine will

initiate the immune process.

3. Dehorn, Castrate-the earlier these practices are

completed, the better.

4. Optional Practices:

A. Implant steers at the time of castration (unless

you plan to sell calves in an organic or natural

market)

B. Viral Respiratory Vaccine-Killed, MLV *, or

intranasal (preferred for young animals)

C. Pinkeye vaccine (administer in late spring/

summer just before fly season)

D. Deworm-Begin deworming calves at 4-8

weeks old depending on time of year and ex-

pected level of pasture contamination with

parasite larvae.

E. Test for BVD-PI (ear notch)-Consult your vet-

erinarian if this is something to consider. If

BVD has been diagnosed in an animal from

your farm or there is a history of unexplained

abortions in the herd, testing all calves is the

proven first step to find persistently infected

(PI) animals.

.

Page 8

Managing Spring Grass Growth and Selective Grazing

Rory Lewandowski, Ohio Extension Educator

For most beef cattle farmers who are managing their pas-tures in a rotational grazing system two of the biggest spring challenges are the flush of rapid growth that will oc-cur and selective grazing. While there are no easy man-agement answers, if we review some basic plant growth biology and grazing principles, they may suggest some management strategies. We know that as spring progresses, grass growth will speed up. Our cool season pasture grasses produce about 60% of their total dry matter production by early July. If your farm has a stocking rate that is matched to summer pasture production there is no way your cattle will be able to consume enough pas-ture forage to keep up with the flush of grass growth that will occur in late April through May. Coupled with this explo-sion in grass growth is a physiological response to the shorter nights and longer days that triggers seed head production generally starting at some point in early May. So not only is there more forage than can be consumed, but now the quality is steadily declining as a seed head is produced. It is very hard to fight this biology. Fast grazing rotations where hopefully the cattle just top the grass, com-bined with clipping the pastures to keep seed heads off are some standard management practices that are tried. In reality, these are not great solutions because cattle are not grazing uniformly and are not just topping the grass. In-stead they are picking and choosing. They are grazing some places harder than others, and leaving other places alone. The result is a patchy, uneven growth pasture field. The solution is typically to reset that field to an even height, while clipping seed heads. Clipping pastures can be very time consuming, not to mention the fuel and machinery costs that are incurred. Instead of fighting the biology of spring grass growth, work with it. If your stocking rate is matched for summer produc-tion all of the pasture fields are not needed during the spring and early summer period. Some fields should be dropped out of the spring rotation, and doing so will make it

easier to manage the spring flush of growth. The end result might be as much as 50% of your grazing acres dropped out of the spring rotation. If you are willing to change your management and drop paddocks, then the next thing that should be done is to divide those remaining pas-tures in half. Use temporary fence, such as polywire, to make these divisions. So, when fields are dropped out of the rota-tion, there is now the opportunity to graze more animal units, more pounds of animal per acre. This will accomplish a cou-ple of things. First, with more animal pounds on a smaller field acreage, a faster rotation is necessary. Cattle will need to be moved more often. Depending upon field size and cattle number, the goal is to move every 2 to 3 days. This will help keep plants in the pasure in a vegetative growth stage. It will also prevent

any desirable plants that may start regrowth after being grazed from being grazed again too soon. Second, when stocking at more pounds per acre, cattle tend to be much less selective. They get down to the business of eating what is in front of them. Pastures are grazed more uniformly, re-ducing the need to clip. Pasture forage utilization is increased. Keep practicing good grazing principles, do not graze below a 3 inch height, and do not enter a paddock with less than 8 inches of growth. Re-member, if you have to err on when to pull cattle out of a paddock, it is better to leave more resid-

ual growth as compared to grazing lower. When grass growth begins to slow down and you can no longer pull cattle out of a paddock with 3-4 inches of residual and move to a paddock with 8 inches of growth, it is time to begin adding some of those dropped paddocks back in to the rotation to maintain these grazing principles. The question will come up about what to do with those pad-docks that are dropped out of the spring rotation. Options include taking a hay crop from them, clip them before they are worked back into the rotation, or just let them grow. The advantage of taking a hay crop is that it might be used later as a management tool, and fed in the late summer to protect paddocks from being overgrazed, particularly if a drought situation develops. The disadvantage is that there is some significant nutrient removal associated with a hay crop.

Page 10

2016 KENTUCKY GRAZING SCHOOL

PLANNED FOR MAY

The Kentucky Grazing School will be held on May 17-18, 2016 at the Woodford County Extension office and the Oran C. Little Research Center in Versailles, KY. This two-day program includes hands-on exercises, such as build-ing temporary paddocks and watering systems, and as-sessing pasture production. Classroom discussions will cover topics including forages, animal manage-ment, and grazing sys-tems. Emphasis will be on spring and summer grazing management for

ruminant species.

Enrollment is limited, so apply early. Past partici-pants range from new to experienced grazers and all have gained new infor-mation and skills to imple-ment on their operations. All past participants have indicated that attending motivated them to make changes to their grazing

systems to improve their operations.

Pre-register for the grazing school as enrollment is limited to the first 45 who register. The $50.00 registration fee includes all materials, grazing manuals, breaks, and lunch both days. This program is partially funded through the Governor’s Office of Agricultural Policy. To register, con-tact Austin Sexten, Master Grazer Coordinator, at (859) 257-7512 or austin.sexten@uky.edu. A program and addi-tional information can be found at the following link: http://www2.ca.uky.edu/grazer/Documents/2016-Grazing-

School-flyer-final.pdf.

Grazing school attendees learn

through hands on exercises

about using temporary fence

and waterers in a grazing

system.

Photo Courtesy: Donna Am-

aral Phillips

Timely Garden Tips By David Koester, former Campbell County Horticulture Agent

There are probably more gardeners outside in May than during any other time of year. People can’t wait to get outside in the nice spring weather and plant their gardens knowing that sever-al months of frost-free weather are ahead. Time spent in the spring garden, will yield big payoffs with beautiful fruits and veg-etables and an abundant harvest.

◊ May 5 is the earliest date that’s somewhat “safe” for planting tomatoes, but be ready to cover them with boxes through mid-May, just in case we have an unusually late freeze. Good tomato varieties include 'Big Beef', 'Better Boy', 'Celebrity', 'Jet Star', 'Heavy Weight', 'Pink Girl', 'Mountain Fresh', and 'Roma VF'.

◊ May 10 is the earliest somewhat "safe date" for setting out pepper transplants. Good sweet peppers include 'North Star', 'Merlin', 'King Arthur', 'Boynton Bell', 'Gypsy Hybrid', 'Mandarin' (orange color), 'Purple Beauty', and 'Banana Supreme'.

◊ Other "earliest semi-safe planting dates" include May 1 for lima beans and cucumbers; May 5 for watermelons, and Southern peas; and May 10 for eggplant, muskmelons, okra, sweet pota-toes and squash.

◊ For staggered harvest of sweet corn, make plantings every 2 or 3 weeks through July 10.

◊ Make plantings of green beans in mid-May through mid-June.

◊ When setting out vegetable transplants, pour one cup of starter solution in the hole around the plant. To prepare this solution, mix fertilizer with 15-30-15, 10-53-17, or 20-20-20 analysis at the rate of 2 tablespoons per gallon of water.

◊ DON'T fertilize beets, carrots, lettuce, parsnips, squash, sweet potatoes, turnips, or watermelons during the growing season, since additional nitrogen after plant establishment may reduce the yield or lower the quality.

These somewhat safe planning dates will be one to two weeks later for gardens in low lying areas that are more susceptible to a late frost.

Page 11

Rotational grazing can help producers increase forage productiv-ity, which can increase the profitability of an operation. Additional benefits to implementing a rotational grazing system include: reduced supplemental feed costs, improved animal distribution and forage utilization, improved manure distribution and nutrient use, and many more. While many producers want to achieve these benefits, many struggle with implementing a system to achieve their grazing goals. Thoughtfully planning out a system that works for your operation is a critical first step toward imple-menting a successful grazing system. Know What You Have- The development of any grazing system starts with an inventory of what the operation already has and then developing a plan of how to best use those resources going forward. The best way to start this process is by obtaining aerial maps of the farm from your local NRCS office or using a comput-er program such as Google™ Earth. The larger the scale of these maps, the easier it will be to see landscape details. Mak-ing several copies of these maps allows one to draw on them and adjust their plan as needed. Another useful map in planning a grazing system is a soils map. When used along with a list of soil descriptions, producers can get an idea of forage yield po-tential of their farm. Forage- The next area needing consideration is the forage base of a farm. Producers need to understand when forage is going to be available and identify gaps in forage availability. The typical Kentucky farm is going to have a cool-season forage base con-sisting of tall fescue, bluegrass, clovers and possibly or-chardgrass. Depending on the goals of the operation, the forage base could be further developed to include inter-seeding leg-umes and establishing warm season perennial grasses or annu-al forages to fill gaps. Water- One of the biggest challenges in developing a grazing system is water availability. Wherever animals are grazing, water must be available. Research shows that if water is within 800 feet of cattle, pastures are grazed more uniformly and manure is distributed more evenly over a pasture. When water is farther away than 800 feet, pasture use decreases and overgrazing of areas closer to water occurs. All potential water sources should be considered when developing a grazing system. Ponds, springs, streams, municipal water and wells are options and can all contribute to providing water. If it is possible to utilize portable water systems, like the one shown in Figure 1, while developing a grazing system, producers can evaluate waterer locations and make better decisions about where to place permanent water-ers. Fencing- Fencing is another big part of any grazing system. Most grazing systems use both permanent and temporary fenc-ing. When looking at farm maps, make sure to draw in bounda-ries and permanent fences. Once all current fences are drawn, stop to evaluate the current layout’s benefits and deficiencies. Next, subdivide pastures into smaller more uniformly sized pad-

docks. Square shaped paddocks use less fence when compared to other shapes like rectangles or triangles. Try different temporary fencing components and decide what works best. Using temporary fences for internal divisions provides flexibility to the system that can be changed and improved. For more information on fencing for grazing systems follow the link to the UK publication “Planning Fencing Systems for Intensive Grazing Management”: http://www2.ca.uky.edu/agc/pubs/id/id74/id74.pdf. Animals- Understanding the needs of the animals to be grazed is im-portant in developing a grazing sys-tem. Producers must account for livestock’s nutrient requirements and how requirements are affected by species, breed, stage of produc-tion, and age of animals, as well as environmental conditions. Produc-ers need to understand if the ani-mals’ requirements will be met with the pasture provided. The im-portance of providing shade for ani-mals is often overlooked. Cows pro-vided with shade spend more time grazing and less time standing than those without shade. Produc-ers need to evaluate pastures based on available natural shade and determine if artificial shade should be added. The combination of an animals’ changing nutritional needs and changing pasture conditions require greater management on the part of the produc-er to maximize production. Time/Labor- One final component to a grazing system is the time or labor associated with managing it. There are operations with highly developed grazing systems, in which animals are moved multiple times each day to fresh pastures. On the other end of the scale are operations that move once every week. The grazing system must work with the schedule of the individual who is actu-ally moving the animals, temporary fencing, and managing other components of the system. However, cattle are quickly trained and often moving to a new paddock takes just minutes. If designed correctly, a grazing system can make management easy and effi-cient. Developing a grazing system can be intimidating. By understand-ing and managing what is already available and adding new com-ponents to a system, like new watering sites or subdividing pas-tures with temporary fencing, soon the system will begin to take shape and producers will reap the rewards of their hard work. For more information on developing a grazing system follow the link to the UK publication “Rotational Grazing” at: http://www2.ca.uky.edu/agc/pubs/id/id143/id143.pdf or contact your Local Extension Agent or NRCS Grazing Specialist to assist you.

Figure 1: Cattle drinking from a portable water tank in rota-tional grazing system. Photo Courtesy: Kevin Laurent.

Page 12

Over the last 20 years there has been a growing trend

for more and more alfalfa and clover seed to be coat-

ed. I am often asked “Is it worth buying coated

seed?” I almost always answer yes to this question,

especially in the case of alfalfa and clover seed. This

question is usually followed by another question

“Since the coating means that there’s less seed in the

bag, should I plant at a higher seeding rate?” My

normal answer is no, you should plant at the same

rate as recommended by the forage establishment

publication in your state. In Kentucky we normally

recommend planting alfalfa at 20 lbs./acre for both

coated and uncoated seed. Simply put, the reason to

plant coated seed is to improve the establishment

process. Most seed coating is done to improve the

number of seeds that germinate, produce healthy

roots and young shoots, and then go on to produce

established plants. In other words, seed coating im-

proves establishment success by improving estab-

lishment percentage.

The majority of improved varieties of alfalfa and

clover seed are now coated. The standard coating

involves pre-inoculating the seed with rhizobia inoc-

ulum to improve the rate and success of nodulation

and N-fixation. This is followed by a thin coating to

protect the live rhizobia bacteria in the inoculum,

then a layer of fungicide is added to reduce the

chances of “damping off” and similar seedling dis-

eases. The fungicide is then protected by a second

layer of coating. Additional components are added to

modern coated seed, but with legume seed the most

important are the inoculum and a fungicide.

Recent studies show that coated legume seed has a

higher percentage of plants that survive to become

an established stand. In other words, planted at the

same rate, there is no difference in the final stand

using coated vs. uncoated seed. Why go to the trou-

ble to coat the seed if there is no difference in the

final stand? Two main reasons: 1) coated seed of im-

proved varieties is usually the same price per pound

as uncoated seed, and 2) more importantly, coated

seed provides a better microenvironment around the

seed for germination and growth. This is especially

important when planting under less than favorable

conditions like cool, wet soils or soils with inadequate

moisture conditions.

In grass seed, the primary advantage of coating is to

insure easier and more uniform seeding. This is espe-

cially true when planting warm season grasses like ber-

mudagrass, crabgrass and teff that have very small,

light seed and therefore low seeding rates. Seeding

these grasses with a broadcast spreader becomes almost

impossible without coated seed. Even with a drill, the

coated seed makes it easier to set the desired seeding

rate because the coating in essence “bulks up” the size

of the seed. Unlike legumes, most recommendations

call for seeding at higher seedling (lbs. /acre) with

coated vs. uncoated seed.

Establishment of coated (Rhizo-Kote XL) vs. uncoated pre-

inoculated alfalfa seed five to six months after seeding.

Uncoated Coated

Number of seed planted per sq. ft.* 84.5 56.1

Number of plants per sq. ft.** 27.8 26.6

Percent survival of seed planted 32.9 47.4

13 locations in Alabama, Kentucky and Tennessee-1993-2000.

*Average seeding rate, uncoated 18.4 lb. /A, Rhizo-Kote XL

18.5 lb. /A. 200,000 seed per pound.

**130 measurements per treatment.

Burns, et al., 2002

Coated Alfalfa seed. Photo courtesy Austin Sexten

Page 13

Pelletized lime is made by granulating

finely ground agricultural (ag) lime. The fine lime

particles are bonded together with lignosulfonates

during the pelletizing process. In general, the

pelletized lime contains about 9% lignosulfonates.

With the loss of our local agriculture lime source

(Butler ag lime), pelletized lime is being considered

as a liming source especially when a small acreage or

a small amount of lime is need-

ed. The price of the material on

a per ton basis is considerably

higher than bulk ag lime. Some

questions that have been raised

about recommended rates of

pelletized lime and the speed at

which it reacts compared to

standard ag lime.

How Much Can the Rates be

Reduced for Pelletized Lime? The recommended rates and

the effect on soil pH of any

agriculture lime product is re-

lated to the neutralizing value of the lime, which is a

combination of the purity (calcium carbonate equiva-

lent) and the fineness of grind (particle size). As

these two properties of lime change, so does the rec-

ommended rate of lime and its effect on soil pH. The

finer the lime particles and the higher the calcium

carbonate equivalent, the more effective the lime and

the lower the rate of lime needed to make the desired

pH change.

Bulk ag lime sold in Kentucky has an average neu-

tralizing value around 65%. The RNV of pelletized

lime can be as much as 85, making it a much higher

quality/neutralizing valve than most ag lime. If this is

the case, the lime rate can be reduced to 78% of what

would be recommended for bulk ag lime. In other

words, 1560 lbs/ac of pelletized would equal one ton

of the average ag lime.

How Fast Will Pelletized Lime React? The speed of reaction (rate at which the lime will

change the soil pH) is mainly a function of surface

area of the lime particles and their contact with the

soil. The finer the grind of lime, the more the surface

area, and the faster the reaction. Since pelletized

lime is pelleted from finely ground lime, it is easy

to assume that it will be faster reacting than bulk

spread ag lime which has some larger, non-reactive

particles as a part of its composition. However, this

is not true. Based on research from several states, it

appears that the pelletized lime reacts no faster to

raise the soil pH than good quality ag lime applied

at recommended rates. In fact, incubation studies at

Michigan State University found the pelletized lime

to have a slower rate of reaction. Field research

from other states indicate the rate of reaction is

about equal to ag lime.

The slower than expected

reaction of pelletized lime

is probably due to two

things: 1) the lignosulfonate

binding, and 2) the distribu-

tion pattern. The lignosul-

fonate binding must break

down by solubilization or

microbial action before the

lime is released to neutral-

ize the soil acidity, which

would delay the speed of

reaction. When the

pelletized lime is spread, it is distributed on the soil

in pellets and results in small concentrated zones

(spots) of lime after the binder dissolves. The fine,

reactive particles of ag lime, in contrast, are spread

as more of a dust so that the lime is better distribut-

ed and not in concentrated spots. The bulk spread-

ing method will allow the ag lime to contact a larg-

er amount of the soil.

Summary Pelletized lime is an excellent source of high quali-

ty lime. Its use in agriculture has been limited due

to the price. The recommended rate of pelletized

lime should be based on the neutralizing value of

the lime and will probably be about 75 to 80% of

that for average-quality bulk ag lime. Contrary to

popular belief, the speed of reaction of pelletized

lime is no faster than that of bulk ag lime. Thus,

when comparing the two materials, less pelletized

lime is needed to raise the soil pH to the desired

level, but the increase in pH is no faster than with

ag lime if both are applied on the basis of their neu-

tralizing values.

Page 14

Local Lime Sources

COUNTY QUARRY NAME RNV* Value DISTANCE FROM

Price Per Ton 1. Grants Lick

January 2016 2. California Marketplace

Pendleton Hill Top Basic Resources 35**/$7.60 1. 6.6 Miles

1405 State Route 177 E (lime sand) 2. 11.7 Miles

Butler KY 41006

Phone: (859) 472-5591

Bourbon Bourbon Limestone Co 59/$7.60 1. 51.1 Miles

2470 Fords Mill Road 2. 56.3 Miles

Paris, KY 40361

Phone: (859) 987-4425

Fleming Hanson Aggregates Midwest 59/$10.35 1. 59.9 Miles

KY Hwy 11 2. 54.2 Miles

Flemingsburg, KY 41041

Phone: (606) 845-2411

Scott Nally & Gibson Georgetown 62/$8.50 1. 56.4 Miles

1267 E. Main St 2. 61.5 Miles

Georgetown, KY 40324

Phone: (502) 863-1771

*RNV stands for relative neutralization value. The higher the RNV value the higher the lime quality. The

KY Department of Agriculture test lime twice a year and assigns it a RNV value. Lime materials such as

the lime sand at Hill Top Basic Resources in Butler has a RNV value of 35, making it a much lower quality

lime primarily due to the coarseness of the material. Higher quality RNV lime is often due to the fineness of

the material.

Role of Lime in Agriculture Crops One of the keys to productive soils is having the right soil pH. With most of our crops this is a soil pH be-tween 6.2 and 6.8. The following are reasons why a correct soil pH level is important to agriculture crops.

Best yields/plant growth

Plant establishment and persistence

Improves nitrogen fixation of legumes

Increases availability of essential nutrients. Phosphorus, Potassium, Calcium and Magnesium are most

available at a pH greater than 6.0. At the same time these essential nutrients are less available as the pH

drops below 6.0.

At a soil pH values less than 5.0 nutrients such as aluminum, iron and manganese are more available for

uptake and can be toxic to the growth of some plants.

Supports beneficial microbes involved in nutrient cycling

Maintains herbicide and fertilizer efficacy

Improves soil physical conditions

If lime is needed in a given field/soil sample, UK soil test results will list this as a recommended (rec) rate

of tons of 100 % effective lime The chart below shows the difference between a 2 and 3 ton recommend-

ed (rec) rate of 100 % effective lime and the cost of that material from different quarries. This cost does

not include transportation or taxes.

Lime Source (RNV)

(Cost Per Ton)

2 tons Rec.

Rate

$ Cost per

Acre

3 tons

Rec. Rate

$ Cost per

Acre

Butler (35 RNV)

$7.60/ton 5.7 $43.32 8.6 $65.36

Bourbon (59 RNV)

$7.60/ton 3.4 $25.84 5.1 $38.76

Scott (53 RNV)

Scott (62 RNV)

$8.50

3.7

3.2

$31.45

$27.20

5.6

4.8

$47.60

$40.80

Fleming (59 RNV)

$10.35 3.4 $35.19 5.1 $52.78