Greetings!

The parts of the state which are not submerged under several feet of water look as green as I can remember. The pastures and hay crop appear to be coming along nicely. We will be moving rapidly into haying season as you receive this month's issue of the Ranch Hand. Getting top quality hay put up this year may be a challenge if we continue to receive moisture at the rate we have in May. Hopefully, June will bring good hay making conditions.

Thanks to Randy Gaebe and Chip Poland for contributing articles this month. Please note this is a combined June/July issue. Your next Ranch Hand will arrive in August.

Preference for Hay Varies With Time of Cutting

Fisher et al., 1999, J. Anim. Sci. 77:762:768.

The concentrations of nonstructural carbohydrates (NSC; starches and sugars) in plants varies throughout the day. Highest concentrations of NSC in growing plants occur in the afternoon.

Table 1 shows the effect of time of cutting on nutritive quality of the hay fed to cattle. Hay cut at sundown was lower in fiber and higher in monosaccharides, disaccarhides, fructans, and crude protein than hay cut the following morning at sunup.

Table 1. Effect of time of cutting on hay composition.¹

Table 2 shows the effect of time of cutting on dry matter intake in sheep, goats, and cattle. All species consumed larger meals when offered hay cut at sundown compared to hay cut in the morning.

Table 2. Effect of time of cutting on dry matter intake in sheep, goats, and cattle.₁

The results of this trial are certainly interesting. The researchers did not investigate any performance differences which might result from cutting hay in this manner, so the bottom line net return to this management practice cannot be determined based on this data. However, it does appear that cutting hay late in the day compared to early in the morning is a viable method of increasing the nutritive quality of the hay and this hay is preferred over hay harvested at sunup.

Foot Rot

Greg Lardy

If wet conditions persist in many areas of the state, foot rot problems may develop in cattle. Foot rot is reportedly caused by the organism Fusobacterium necrophorum, although conclusive evidence is hard to find. Other organisms also commonly isolated from infected animals include streptococci, staphylococci, corynebacterium, and various fungi. These organisms are common in our environment and infections can take place when the foot is cut, bruised, punctured, or when hoof abrasion has taken place. These injuries allow the organisms to enter and infect the foot. Foot rot symptoms are seen during conditions of extreme moisture, severe drought, or when muddy yards are suddenly frozen. It may also occur when cattle are drinking from streams, ponds, or creeks which contain rocky areas which can damage the foot or hoof allowing bacteria to enter.

Lameness is usually the first symptom observed in cattle with foot rot. Foot rot can effect one animal or a high percentage of animals in a herd or pen. If only one animal is exhibiting symptoms, it may be useful to examine the foot for nails, wire, or bruising which may be causing the lameness.

Acute cases of foot rot show a swelling of the foot, spreading of the toes, and a reddening of tissue above the hoof. In severe cases, abscesses may develop above the hoof with a foul smelling discharge. Elevated temperature and loss of appetite may also result. Prolonged infection without treatment may result in invasion of the infection into the deeper tissues of the foot and joint, resulting in chronic arthritis.

Prevention

Foot rot may be prevented using management practices which avoid bruising and reduce hoof damage. With bulls or extremely large cows it may be useful to trim the hooves to reduce the stress on the soft tissue of the hoof. This is generally NOT practical on a large number of animals, however.

Where cattle are penned, it is useful to improve drainage around the lots and water tanks to prevent mud buildup. In winter, when rough areas around water tanks freeze, attempting to smooth these areas with a blade or covering the area with straw may lower the incidence of foot rot which occurs due to bruising the foot. Cement slabs around water tanks and aprons around feed bunks will also reduce bruising problems associated with frozen ground. Use of mounds in feedlots may also improve drainage and reduce foot rot problems.

Foot baths may be used in some instances as a preventative measure. Copper sulfate (2 pounds in 5 gallons of water) may be used. The foot bath can be placed in the alley or entrance to the barn where cattle travel. Foot baths work in dairies, but are not very practical for beef cattle operations.

Ethylene diamine dihydriodide (EDDI, tamed iodine) mixed in the feed or salt to provide 50 mg per head per day can be used as a preventative measure. Foot rot control with EDDI is not always satisfactory, however. In addition, over consumption can lead to irritation of the respiratory tract resulting in pneumonia, hacking cough, depressed appetite, and watery eyes.

Good nutrition is important in preventing foot rot. Pay particular attention to calcium, phosphorus, vitamin A, and zinc in the diet. Zinc can be used as a preventative measure at 30 to 40 ppm of the diet.

Treating Foot Rot

Systemic sulfonamides and/or antibiotics usually promote rapid healing in early acute cases of foot rot. Long-acting tetracycline or procaine penicillin are effective treatments. Sulfa drugs, such as sulfadimethoxine, are also effective in treatment of acute cases. Feeds containing chlortetracycline may be used for treatment on a herd basis. Failure to respond to treatment and chronic infection of the joints may require surgical removal of the claw to correct the condition until the animal can be salvaged at slaughter.

1999 NDSU Field Days

At NDSU Research Extension Centers Scheduled

The field days listed below showcase the latest research being carried out by scientists with the North Dakota Agricultural Experiment Station and the NDSU Extension Service. Each station has various tours planned, so call to find out the days' events.

Central Grasslands Station, Streeter
June 16 - 6 pm, 701-424-3606

Agronomy Seed Farm, Casselton
June 30, 8:30 am, 701-347-4743

Research Extension Center, Hettinger
July 6 - 3 pm MDT, 701-567-4323

Research Extension Center, Dickinson
July 7 - All day, 701-483-2348

Research Extension Center, Williston
July 8 - 8:30 am, 701-774-4315

Research Extension Center, Carrington
July 13 - 9 am, 701-857-7679

North Central R&E Center, Minot
July 14 - 9 am, 701-857-7679

Research Extension Center, Langdon
July 15 - 8:30 am, 701-256-2582

Eastern Ag Research Center, Sidney, MT
July 21 - 9 am MDT, 406-482-2208

Irrigation Research Site, Oakes
August 17 - 9:30 am, 701-742-2189

Reducing Hay Waste During Haying Season

Randy Gaebe, Bowman County Agent

Hay harvest involves losses in dry matter and in quality. These losses occur during all phases of getting the hay from the field to the livestock - harvest, storage, and feeding.

Hay is harvested, stored, and fed under a wide variety of conditions that influence both its yield and feed value. High quality hay is required by dairy cattle, growing and finishing beef cattle and lambs, and race horses. Excellent hay management is required to produce the hay needed by these livestock. High quality hay can also be used as a supplement for lower-quality forages, such as straw. Hay of lower quality is nutritionally valuable, but should be used for livestock that have lower nutrient requirements, such as wintering beef cows. Hay that is of very low quality will not only need supplementation when fed, but will be subject to more refusal when feeding.

Harvesting High Quality Hay - For Dairy and Performance Horses

High in protein, easily digested and very palatable - these three characteristics are necessary for hay fed to high performance animals. As plants grow and mature, the concentration of fiber increases while digestibility and protein content decrease.

Alfalfa and Legumes - Begin harvesting at bud and complete harvest before alfalfa reaches 1/10th bloom.

Cool Season Grasses - Harvest before heading (boot stage) to get the best compromise between high yield and high feed value.

Native Warm?Season Grasses - Hay harvested at the boot or early head stage of these grasses provides moderate nutrient levels.

Harvesting for Maximum Hay Yield - For Wintering Beef Cattle

Alfalfa - Cut at one?tenth to one?half bloom and other legumes at one?half to full bloom for high yields of hay that is nutritionally adequate to winter beef cows and similar livestock.

Warm?Season Grasses - Harvest at heading or sooner if hay is to be fed to beef cows with little or no protein and/or mineral supplements. Maximum yield will occur if harvest is delayed until seeds are in the dough stage; however, supplements will usually be necessary to adequately maintain beef cows with this hay.

Cool?Season Grasses (brome and wheat grasses) - These grasses can yield large quantities of hay if harvested when heads shed pollen. Later harvest usually produces hay too low in protein to winter beef cows without supplements.

Reduce Hay Losses

Hay Preparation For Large Round Balers

Following are management tips to reduce losses and improve quality for large round bale systems:

• Cutting - Hay is usually cut with a sickle or drum-type mower, a windrower, or swather. Cut after the dew is gone and when the topsoil is dry to reduce soil compaction and to hasten hay drying. A long stubble keeps the windrow off the soil surface to aid drying and will improve subsequent pickup performance.
• Conditioning - Conditioning speeds drying, especially of the stem, by opening the waxy layer surrounding the stem.
• Raking - When possible, eliminate raking by using a windrower. Windrowed hay will dry slower than hay in a wide swath. More leaf loss can be caused by raking dry alfalfa than by any other harvest operation. Avoid raking when the forage moisture is less than 40 percent.
• Windrow formation - The ideal windrow width for round balers is between one?half and near full width of the baler pickup.
  

Respiration Losses

After cutting, plant cells respire until moisture content falls below 35 to 40%. Hay that dries quickly will lose 2 to 6 percent DM due to respiration. Hay that dries very slowly may lose 15% DM due to respiration. Cutting hay when good drying weather is expected will reduce respiration losses considerably.

Weather Related Losses - Rain (leaching) can cause up to 20% nutrient loss. Carbohydrates, B vitamins, and some soluble minerals are readily leached from dry hay.

Reduce Baler Losses

Field losses of one to five percent have been measured for small rectangular balers operating in typical conditions for alfalfa hay. Under these same conditions, field losses of three to 30% have been measured for large round balers. Minimize this potentially high loss when using large round balers by controlling losses due to: 1) moisture content of the hay, 2) the baler pickup, and 3) the bale chamber.

Hay Moisture Content

Hay moisture content is the largest single factor contributing to leaf loss. Hay baled at a moisture content above 15% has much less leaf loss than hay baled below 15% moisture.

The upper limit for moisture for large round alfalfa bales is typically 18 to 22%. Hay baled above 25% moisture will usually spoil unless chemical preservatives are added to the hay.

When the hay becomes too dry and brittle and losses become excessive, stop baling and resume in the evening or morning when the leaf moisture level increases. This dew?moistened hay can be baled at a slightly higher moisture level than when it was drying down because dew moisture in the hay is more easily released during curing than internal moisture.


Baler Pickup

The pickup mechanism of large round balers may cause losses as high as 12%, although losses more typically range from one to three percent. Field speed, size of windrow, hay moisture content and mechanical condition of the pickup influence this loss.

Higher moisture content reduces pickup loss. Lower field speed in general, and synchronizing field speed to pickup rotational speed in particular, reduces pickup loss.

Heavy windrows reduce pickup loss by reducing field speed and contact with pickup components.

Bale Chamber

Bale chamber losses have been measured as high as 18% for large round balers. Bale chamber losses are normally two or three times higher in a large round baler than a rectangular baler. Windrow size, field speed, hay moisture content, bale rotating speed and wrapping of twine contribute to chamber losses.

To minimize bale chamber losses, the moisture content should be as high as possible that will permit safe storage, and the feed rate should be as high as possible to minimize the number of turns within the bale chamber. A high feed rate can be attained by using large windrows and high field speeds. Where windrows are small or field speeds must be low, use a lower PTO speed. This results in fewer revolutions to form a bale.

When wrapping twine, do not rotate the bale more times than necessary to secure the twine. The fines, primarily leaves, which fall from the bale chamber during twine wrapping are an indication of bale chamber loss.

Table 1. Feed value of selected hays.

Table 2. Recommended stages of maturity for hay for high quality hay or maximum yield.

Cull Beans as a Protein Supplement for Beef Cows

Chip Poland, Area Livestock Specialist
Dickinson R/E Center

Dietary supplementation is a common practice for beef producers in the Northern Great Plains to minimize body weight and condition losses in cows consuming lower-quality forages. Protein supplementation has been shown to increase forage intake and digestibility of lower-quality forages. The production responses to protein supplementation tend to diminish as forage quality increases. Determining when and how much supplemental protein is needed, and identifying and procuring low-cost supplements are critical to the economic viability of beef production systems.

A two-year performance study conducted in eastern Colorado evaluated the effects of various protein sources on beef cows grazing dormant, native winter range (JAS, 1999. 77:750-755). Protein sources included raw cull beans (Great Northern beans, GNB; Phaseolus vulgaris), canola meal (CM), sunflower meal (SM), and a combination of GNB and SM. When supplements were offered at equal amounts of CP per day, no differences due to protein sources were detected in cow weight or condition change, calf birth weight, first service conception rate to A.I. or overall pregnancy rate. Although calves from cows supplemented with CM or SM were heavier than calves from cows supplemented with GNB at approximately one month of age, no differences in calf weight were present at weaning.

Consumption of raw cull beans by cows was lower because of problems with palatability. Mixing beans with sunflower meal seemed to eliminate this problem.

Despite obvious palatability problems with cull beans, using raw cull beans, canola meal, or a combination of beans and sunflower meal is comparable to sunflower meal as a protein supplement for beef cows consuming lower-quality forages. In years when alternative protein sources are relatively inexpensive compared to traditional supplements, their incorporation into supplement formulations may be biologically and economically viable.

Limit-feeding High Concentrate Diets as an Alternative to Hay-Based Diets for Beef Cows

Chip Poland

Beef producers need to begin contemplating winter feeding strategies this summer. They should not wait for the beginning of the feeding season. With the potential of relatively low forage production in some areas of the state, producers may need to consider alternative feeding strategies to help manage the cow herd through the upcoming winter in a cost-efficient manner. Diets based on small-grain straw and wheat middlings have shown considerable promise at the Carrington R/E Center (Dr. Vern Anderson, 701-652-2951). Another alternative strategy would be limit-feeding high-concentrate diets. This type of strategy has been researched at The Ohio State University for a number of years and successfully implemented by several ranchers in western North Dakota during years of low forage availability.

With limit-feeding, nutrient concentrations of protein, vitamins and minerals are typically enhanced to cover daily requirements in high-concentrate diets and dry matter intake regulated to control energy intake. This feeding strategy using a whole shell corn diet has successfully met the energy requirements of gestating beef cows at approximately half the feed costs of a harvested forage-based diet, without detrimental effects on cow or calf performance in Ohio. Limit-fed, corn-based diets have also been shown to be an effective replacement for traditional forage-based diets for growing beef steers, gestating and lactating ewes and replacement ewe lambs.

One potential concern for using this system in North Dakota has been a lack of data on supplement formulation. Soybean meal has been the standard protein source used in the Ohio studies. Recent work (Journal of Animal Science, 1999; 77:960-966) compared protein concentration and source on nutrient digestibility in limit-fed high-concentrate diets. For mature cattle, the primary requirement for dietary protein was to meet the needs of the ruminal microbial population to allow for effective dry matter digestion. Supplementation with a natural protein resulted in a 5% improvement in diet digestibility compared to an equal amount of protein provided from a combination of natural protein and urea. Increasing dietary protein concentration to offset the effects of restricted feed intake did not enhance diet digestibility. Presumably animal performance would also not be affected by increased dietary protein supply if microbial protein supply to the animal was sufficient to meet metabolizable protein requirements. It appears that source and concentration of protein supplement may be of little consequence for mature cattle being limit-fed a corn-based diet at a maintenance level. Thus at least in dry cows and ewes, producers should be able to utilize local-available protein sources in supplement formulations for limit-fed diets, as long as attention is paid to matching ruminal protein supply to diet digestibility.

Additional research, cited in the Journal of Animal Science (77:967-972), suggests that limit-feeding of high-concentrate diets to cows and ewes decreases fecal excretion of dry

matter and organic matter compared with ad libitum feeding high-forage diets. Furthermore, limit-feeding increased nitrogen and phosphorus digestion and decreased their daily excretion. The implementation of a limit-feeding strategy should help reduce the potential of environmental accumulation of excreted nitrogen and phosphorus from confinement fed beef cows.

Little work has evaluated the potential of barley in this type of feeding situation. However, faced with relatively high priced forage and cheap corn, producers should at least consider the possibility of utilizing a limit-fed high-concentrate feeding strategy for beef cows and ewes. Level of feeding management will need to increase when moving from a high-forage to a limit-fed high-concentrate strategy. Producers should begin evaluating winter feeding alternatives in late summer, long before the beginning of the winter feeding season. This additional time will allow for serious consideration of feasible feeding scenarios. Given a set of feasible scenarios, producers can then apply least-cost analysis to help identify an optimal winter feeding strategy.