Feedyard News

Rust in the Ration: How to Combat Southern Rust’s Impact on Corn Silage

Thu, 04 Sep 2025 14:04:48 GMT

With the warm and wet conditions this season, southern rust is on the rise in Midwest corn crops. It may be time to start considering the impact that could have on corn silage and preparing to adjust rations accordingly. While southern rust is not a direct threat to herd health, it has been shown to lower the nutritional value of silage and can compromise feed quality.

Southern rust, a fast-developing fungal disease caused by Puccinia polysora, does not itself produce toxins, but it weakens the plant and provides the opportunity for other diseases to move in. These opportunists include various Furasium species, which produce mycotoxins (fumonisin and deoxynivalenol) that can be harmful in feed.

Southern Rust and Corn Silage Quality

Southern rust is known to impact corn silage quality. A study from the University of Florida showed increasing rust infestation resulted in increased dry matter and fiber fractions, but that dry matter digestibility decreased by 13%. Further, high rust silages had lower neutral detergent fiber digestibilities than medium and no rust silages. Southern rust also affected the concentrations of lactate and volatile fatty acids, causing both to decrease with increasing infestation. These results indicate decreased nutritive value.

The observed increased dry matter also reduced silo packing effectiveness. If moisture levels are too low at harvest, it is difficult to achieve adequate packing, which leads to poor fermentation and an increased risk of mold growth.

Because southern rust coverage reduces the photosynthetic area of the leaf, grain fill is often hindered, leading to a lower energy and protein content in the silage.

Southern Rust Silage Management

There are a handful of strategies producers can apply to counteract the effects of southern rust:

Adjust harvest time based on moisture content. Southern rust can cause corn to dry down faster than normal. Monitor moisture levels closely to ensure the proper fermentation of silage.
Consider a silage inoculant. Inoculants improve fermentation, and the rapid pH drop can inhibit mold and yeast growth.
Ensure good packing and storage. Pack silage well to limit oxygen exposure and prevent mold growth. Cover bunkers immediately and weigh down coverings thoroughly.

Feeding Southern Rust Silage

To counter the nutritional challenges of feeding southern rust-infected corn silage, dietary supplementation may be necessary.

Prior to inclusion, test all potentially infected silage for mycotoxins. This will allow you to determine the safety of the feed and avoid potential health issues. If mycotoxins are high, the incorporation of a mycotoxin binding agent into the ration will help reduce toxin absorption in the animal’s digestive tract. Additionally, supplementation with antioxidants, such as vitamin E and selenium, could help animals by countering oxidative stress caused by mycotoxins and supporting immune function.

If grain fill was affected and starch levels are low, you may need to incorporate an additional energy course to compensate. Further, poor grain fill could reduce the already low protein content of corn silage, and protein supplementation may be required.

When incorporating infected silage, ensure it is thoroughly mixed into the TMR to dilute potential ‘hot spots’. Inclusion levels of contaminated silage in the feed may need to be limited or removed entirely for sensitive animals, including lactating or breeding animals. Livestock should be monitored closely for symptoms of mycotoxin toxicity, such as reduced intake, weight loss, digestive issues or reproductive challenges. Be prepared to respond if issues arise.

When feeding corn silage infected with southern rust, caution is essential to protect livestock health and performance. The thoughtful use of compromised silage can help minimize risk while maintaining efficiency and animal well-being.

Your next read: Southern Rust Set To Take Big Bite Out Of Midwest Corn Crop?

Be Aware: Dangerous Asian Longhorned Tick Continues Migrating West

Wed, 18 Jun 2025 14:42:45 GMT

The Asian Longhorned Tick (ALHT) poses a serious threat to cattle health. ALHTs carry Theileria, which is a protozoan parasite that infects red and white blood cells. It can lead to anemia and, in some cases, death.

ALHTs are native to eastern Asia, eastern China, Japan, the Russian Far East and Korea but were introduced to Australia, New Zealand and western Pacific Islands. In other countries, it can also be called a bush tick, cattle tick or scrub tick.

In the U.S., ALHT was first detected in New Jersey in 2017. Since then, it has spread to more than 20 states with recent confirmations in Illinois , Michigan and Iowa .

According to USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) ALHTs are known to carry pathogens, which can cause disease and may also cause distress to the host from their feeding in large numbers. For example, a dairy cow may have a 25% decrease in milk production after becoming a host.

A female can reproduce without a mate and lay up to 2,000 eggs at a time. This can cause great stress on a heavily infested animal and result in reduced growth and production. A severe infestation can kill the animal from excessive blood loss.

Asian longhorned tick life stages and relative actual size.

(Photos of unfed ticks by Centers for Disease Control. Photos of engorged ticks by Jim Occi, Rutgers, Center for Vector Biology.)

What does it look like?

Unfed ALHTs range from a light reddish-tan to a dark red with brown, dark markings. While the adult female grows to the size of a pea when full of blood, other stages of the tick are very small — about the size of a sesame seed.

Adult females are a grey-green with yellowish markings. Male ticks are rare.

APHIS reports it only takes a single tick to create a population in a new location.

The above photos are of a AHLT engorged (on the left) and an adult AHLT not engorged.

(New Jersey Department of Agriculture)

ALHTs need warm-blooded hosts to feed and survive. They have been found on various species of domestic animals — such as sheep, goats, dogs, cats, horses, cattle and chickens — and wildlife. The tick has also been found on people.

What are the health risks?

APHIS says ALHTs are not known to carry Lyme disease, but they can cause tickborne diseases affecting humans and animals such as:

Rocky Mountain spotted fever
Heartland virus
Powassan virus

APHIS says those diseases have not been confirmed outside of a laboratory setting in the U.S. In addition, U.S. ALHT populations can transmit U.S. Theileria orientalis Ikeda strain (Cattle theileriosis) in the laboratory.

In an Iowa State University release , Grant Dewell, Extension beef veterinarian and associate professor, says cattle affected by Theileriosis will show signs of lethargy, anemia and difficulty breathing. They may develop ventral edema, exercise intolerance, jaundice and abortions.

“Although signs of Theileriosis are similar to anaplasmosis, younger animals and calves often display more severe signs compared to mature cows and bulls,” he says. “Due to anemia from both tick infestation and Theileria, the risk of death can be elevated. If cattle producers suspect either Theileria or ALHT, have a veterinarian collect appropriate samples and submit them to a veterinary diagnostic lab.”

According to an Oklahoma State University press release , under laboratory conditions ALHT is a competent vector of numerous pathogens that can cause disease in humans, including Rickettsia rickettsii (Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever), Heartland Virus and Powassan Virus.

In “ Clinical Infectious Diseases, ” Bobbi Pritt, MD, MSC, with the division of clinical microbiology at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., reported a human bite that occurred in New York in 2019. She says though the report of a human bite isn’t surprising, it proves the invasive longhorned tick continues to bite hosts in its newest location.

“This is extremely worrisome for several reasons,” she writes. “One reason is Asian longhorned ticks can carry several important human pathogens, including the potentially fatal severe fever with thrombocytopenia syndrome (SFTS) virus and Rickettsia japonica, which cases Japanese spotted fever. While these pathogens have yet to be found in the United States, there is a risk of their future introduction.”

Also, Pritt says several other human pathogens have been detected in the ticks, but it’s not clear if the ALHT species are able to transmit them to humans. They include Anaplasma, Ehrlichia, Rickettsia, and Borrelia species. Lyme disease is caused by Borrelia burgdorferi bacteria.

She warns the organisms are present in states where ALHTs have been found and that it’s possible the tick — known to be an aggressive biter— might be able to transmit Heartland virus given its close relationship to SFTS virus.

How to Tackle Ticks

According to APHIS, various strategies effectively mitigate tick populations on hosts and in the environment.

Regular tick treatments should be effective against ALHTs. Consult your veterinarian or agriculture extension agent about which products to use.
Check your livestock for ticks regularly.
Safely remove ticks from people and pets as quickly as possible. If you think you’ve found an ALHT, seal it in a zip-top bag and give it to your veterinarian for identification.
Habitat modifications can help prevent ticks on feedlots and pastures. This may include mowing grass, removing trees, reducing shade by thinning trees, understory removal and placing mulch barriers.
Apply acaricide using label instructions to tick habitats, such as woodland edges and grassy patches, during times when ticks are most actively seeking hosts. Although it varies by year, ALHTs are generally active from March to November. Consult your state and local regulations for approved acaricides.

“Cattle producers should aggressively control external parasites this summer,” Dewell summarizes. “Insecticide ear tags alone are not enough to control ticks. Consider incorporating a back rubber or regularly applying a pour-on during the summer. Pyrethroid-based products are also available that include a tick control label. If an increase in tick infestations is observed, an avermectin pour-on may be the best intervention.”

Your Next Read: 1,500-lb. Carcasses the New Normal, Not the Exception

Rollins Rolls Out 5-Point Plan to Contain New World Screwworm

Wed, 18 Jun 2025 19:01:29 GMT

Today Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins announced a five-pronged plan to combat New World screwworm (NWS) – a pest that would devastate ranchers if it made its way across the border.

Rollins made her announcement at the Moore Air Base facility near Edinburg, Texas. Moore was instrumental as a sterile fly production lab to rid the U.S. of NWS in the 1960s and 1970s. Hundreds of millions of flies were reared, sterilized with radiation and dropped from aircraft to eliminate the parasitic pest that preyed upon wildlife and livestock. According to a USDA spokesperson it will cost an estimated $8.5 million to get the base up and running as a distribution facility.

U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins this morning launched an $8.5 million sterile New World screwworm (NWS) fly dispersal facility in South Texas and announced a plan to enhance USDA’s already robust ability to detect, control, and eliminate this pest.

(U.S. Department of Agriculture)

According to the Texas Wildlife Association , there are currently more than 1,800 cases of livestock infestation in southern Mexico. The flies are moving north and are currently 600 miles from the south Texas border.

“We have defeated the screwworm before, and we will do it again,” Rollins says.

Here in McAllen, TX to announce a BOLD 5-pronged plan to combat the deadly parasite called New World Screwworm – which would devastate ranchers if it made its way across the border.

We are protecting producers, strengthening biosecurity, and ALWAYS standing up for American… pic.twitter.com/VHOlqZyZ9a
— Secretary Brooke Rollins (@SecRollins) June 18, 2025

Her five-pronged plan to combat NWS includes:

Stop the pest from spreading in Mexico.
Rollins plans to continue partnering with her Mexican counterparts and using sterile insect technology to stop the spread. This includes investing $21 million to produce up to 100 million additional sterile flies weekly.

“We are first enhancing the international sterile fly production and investing $21 million in renovation of an existing fly facility in southern Mexico, which will provide up to 100 million additional sterile flies every week to stop the spread,” Rollins says.

Currently, the only sterile fly facility is located in Panama. It’s jointly run by the Panamanian government and the U.S. government. USDA had previously announced its plan to invest in the retrofiting of a fruit fly facility in Chiapas, Mexico, to produce additional sterile flies.

According to the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association , “The Chiapas facility produces about 117 million flies per week, but to form an effective barrier along the U.S. southern border, we need upward of 300 million sterile flies per week.”
Protect the U.S. at all costs.
Rollins temporarily closed the southern border to live animal imports and intercepting illegally introduced livestock. USDA is working closely with Mexico to improve surveillance.

“I do believe we have met and moved into a new era of productive partnership —perhaps better than ever before — with our Mexican counterparts,” Rollins says.
Maximize our readiness.
This will be achieved by partnering with state animal health officials to update emergency management plans and stockpile therapeutics for ranchers.
Take the fight to the screwworm.
The domestic fight includes establishing a sterile fly dispersal facility at Moore Air Base. Rollins says they are exploring options for building a domestic production facility at Moore that could produce up to 300 million sterile flies per week.

“We can’t get a brand new facility up and running probably before two or three years. So, that’s why we’ve got to really focus on the today,” Rollins explains.

She also announced USDA will be hosting listening sessions in affected areas starting next week.
Innovate Our Way to Eradication.
Leverage the sound science including USDA’s Agriculture Research Service (ARS) to continue to quickly develop novel treatments, preventatives and response strategies. Rollins says this includes working with land grant universities in Texas, Arizona and New Mexico. She listed these key strategies during the press conference:
- Develop better fly traps and lures
- Provide local training
- Improve surveillance methods
- Create new response strategies

Nearly 80 lawmakers led by House Ag Committee Chair Glenn “GT” Thompson (R-Pa.) sent a bipartisan letter on Tuesday to Rollins urging immediate action and promising congressional support for the significant funding required.

The letter included this message, “When looking solely at the historical impact of NWS in Texas, USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) estimates a contemporary outbreak would cost producers $732 million per year and the Texas economy a loss of $1.8 billion. Extrapolating those results to the states within the historic range of NWS pre-eradication, a contemporary outbreak of NWS could cost producers $4.3 billion per year and cause a total economic loss of more than $10.6 billion. This does not account for the possible expansion of NWS beyond the historic range.”

U.S. Congresswoman Monica De La Cruz (R-Texas) was at the announcement and recently shared in a letter to Rollins these key advantages of the Moore Air Base location:

Border proximity: The proximity to the border with Mexico is crucial for effective monitoring and control of potential incursions of invasive fly species. A facility in this region would allow for rapid response and containment, minimizing the spread of infestations into the U.S.
Existing agricultural infrastructure: The region boasts a robust agricultural sector with established infrastructure and expertise in livestock management. This existing framework would facilitate efficient integration of the sterile fly facility and streamline its operations. Additionally, Moore Air Base has operations runways equipped to distribute sterile flies.
Strategic location: Moore Air Base offers a central location for distribution of sterile flies to other areas in the southern U.S., if such a need arises. Additionally, this base was the site of a facility used in the 1960s to successfully combat NWS.
Economic impact: The establishment of such a facility would provide valuable economic opportunities for the region by generating jobs and stimulating local economies.

U.S. Congressman Ronny Jackson (R-Texas) summarized at the announcement, “This is important to the whole country. We are going to be aggressive about this, and we are going to make sure that we don’t get screwed by the screwworm.”

Your Next Read: Urgency in Action: We Must Eradicate New World Screwworm

Buckle Up: Here's Why Cattle Prices Are Setting Up for Another Wild Ride in 2025

Fri, 07 Feb 2025 21:47:01 GMT

The cattle markets hit historic highs again to start 2025, and as USDA’s latest Cattle Inventory report showed U.S. beef cattle inventory fell to the lowest level in 64 years , tight supplies and strong demand could push cattle prices to even higher highs in 2025.

USDA’s annual Cattle Inventory Report released Friday shows the U.S. total cattle inventory shrunk another 1% over the past year, with the number of beef cows also down 1%.

Those numbers, along with questions around just how much higher these markets can go, were major topics surrounding the 2025 CattleCon in San Antonio, Texas, (the annual cattle industry convention) this past week.

Signs of a Slowdown?
Economists and market analysts knew the cattle herd was still shrinking, even before the report was released last week. But economists say there are some signs starting to signal that is slowing down.

“We certainly got smaller in 2024. That was actually kind of obvious about a year ago when you looked at heifer numbers,” said Derrell Peel, Oklahoma State University Extension livestock specialist. “If you look at the heifer numbers in this report, we don’t have a lot. And so we’re going to be challenged going forward to stop this liquidation. I think we might stabilize numbers this year, but I think growth is pretty much a long shot at this point.”

“I think we’re getting close to the bottom, as Darrell referenced,” said Don Close, senior animal protein analyst for Terrain, during the U.S. Farm Report live taping at NCBA’s annual convention. “I think the challenge is retaining enough heifers out of the supply that we have to provide the fuel for the build back.”

Calf Crop Was a Big Surprise
Casey Mabry, with Blue Reef Agri-Marketing, said there actually was a surprise in the latest cattle inventory report, and that wasn’t with heifer numbers.

“The biggest surprise to me was really looking at the total calf crop report, because we’re looking at the total cow inventory numbers. I think that probably caught some people off guard, having the calf crop a little bit bigger than what most people’s expectations were,” said Mabry.

Incentives Drive Outcome
With cash cattle hitting records to start 2025 a question on almost everyone’s mind is, can it continue? Mabry said it really depends on if demand can remain steady, since the supply side will remain tight.

“Incentives drive outcome and obviously with grain prices as cheap as they’ve been, and cattle prices as high as they’ve been, we’ve held on to some cattle. So it’s kept the front end of the market really, really tight and it’s kept packers chasing after cattle. So that ran the market $10 or $15 higher, in my opinion, than what we should have on the front end,” said Mabry. “So, it’s going to be really interesting to watch as we go through the back end of this thing. We’ve probably got to work through some stuff right here on the front end. But if the analysts continue to say we’re going to be tighter and demand stays pretty good, we’ll probably see prices exceed where we were before.”

“We’re Still Bullish”
Peel reminds producers there’s a great deal of risk in these markets. He said the markets don’t like uncertainty. With trade concerns and tariff threats, combined with a strong U.S. dollar, the combination is throwing uncertainty into the market.

“We’re very bullish and still bullish in general going forward for average prices,” said Peel. “But we also know that we’re subject to a lot of shocks right now. We’ve seen a couple already. We’re certainly vulnerable. There’s a lot of air below us since this market is so high. So producers really need to still do that risk management. Producers need to think about those marketing windows. If you got caught in a shock in one of those, it could really be devastating to you.”

Close has similar advice. He said with the development of insurance products, plus futures and options contracting, there are several ways for producers to manage risk today.

“At the price level we’re at, and just any measured retracement in the market, it could take you out of the game. At these price levels, it is absolutely imperative to have some kind of price risk management program in place,” said Close.

“I think you just need to run with what I call a keen sense of paranoia,” said Mabry. “I mean, be bullish, be excited about the market, but don’t get overly euphoric. We’ve got to remember back a short three or four years ago, we were all in the doldrums and very scared. And there’s a lot of people that were telling their kids to get into a different business. And now all of a sudden, we’re all jumping on the bandwagon of cattle and getting excited about this. So, we want to make sure that you guys are running your businesses like businesses and not gambling on cattle.”

Your Next Read:

Are More Record Cattle Prices Ahead in 2025?

Beef-on-Dairy: A Critical Solution to the Shrinking U.S. Cattle Herd

Wed, 05 Feb 2025 16:04:56 GMT

The U.S. beef cattle herd is the smallest it has been in 64 years, and there’s little indication that rebuilding will happen anytime soon. Persistent drought and strong cattle prices have discouraged beef producers from retaining heifers, further tightening supply. As a result, the beef industry has increasingly turned to dairy farmers to produce beef-on-dairy crossbreds to help meet growing demand.

USDA NASS says as of January 1 2025, there were 86.7 million head of cattle and calves on U.S. farms.

(Lindsey Pound )

Beef-on-Dairy’s Growing Role in the Industry

During the 2024 MILK Business Conference, Dale Woerner of Texas Tech University highlighted the impact beef-on-dairy has had on the industry.

“Ultimately, these crossbred animals have improved the conventional straight Holstein steer so much, and they’ve offered more volume and a really high-quality product into the beef industry,” he said. “With low native cattle numbers, the industry has to have these cattle. Not only do they have to have them, but they have to have them grade prime or choice.”

Woerner believes that beef-on-dairy crossbreds have added immense value to the beef supply chain and should be seen as a long-term solution. “Beef-on-dairy crossbreds have added enough value to the beef supply chain that we should never change what we’re doing. We should continue creating these crossbred cattle for the future.”

A Reliable and Consistent Supply of Cattle

With native beef cow numbers dwindling in recent years, beef-on-dairy crossbreds have stepped in to fill a critical gap, offering both consistency and quality during a time of supply uncertainty. Despite inevitable market fluctuations, Woerner is confident these crossbred cattle are here to stay.

“While we can’t promise that we’ll always see $800-$900 for a beef-on-dairy calf as we do today, I don’t think we’ll ever return to the low value of purebred Holstein steers from the past,” Woerner added.

Feedlots have become especially reliant on these crossbreds. “Feedlots need these animals – they’re a top commodity,” Woerner noted. “Over the years, many feedlots have gained experience in feeding beef-on-dairy cattle, optimizing their efficiency and performance. From a feedlot perspective, these cattle are in higher demand than ever before.”

The Value of Traceability

Looking ahead, Woerner thinks it’ll take at least three to five years to rebuild the beef herd, depending on weather and market conditions. But even with that, beef-on-dairy crossbred calves are still going to be a valuable part of the industry. One big advantage he sees with these animals is the traceability they offer, which adds extra value and transparency throughout the supply chain.

“Even when native cattle numbers rebound, the traceability system in place with beef-on-dairy crossbreds will continue to offer a level of accountability that sets these animals apart in the marketplace,” he added. “I wouldn’t be surprised if feedlots and packers start offering a premium for that kind of information.”

Challenges Ahead

While the native beef herd has reached record lows and prices have skyrocketed in recent months, beef-on-dairy crossbred cattle have stepped in to help fill the gap. Woerner noted that these crossbreds have provided much-needed consistency and quality during a time of uncertainty. And although the beef herd is expected to gradually rebuild over the next few years, it’s clear that the beef industry will continue to rely on these crossbred animals to meet demand and keep the pipeline full.

Even though the beef herd is expected to rebuild in the coming years, analysts warn that it won’t happen overnight. Arlan Suderman, chief commodities economist at StoneX, pointed out that the industry hasn’t even started rebuilding the breeding herd yet. “The next takeaway is that we have not started rebuilding the breeding herd. As such, perhaps we have a little higher numbers over the next half year or so, but then things get tighter, and more significantly tighter once we actually do start holding back heifers,” Suderman explained.

A Long-Term Solution

With native cattle numbers still under pressure, beef-on-dairy crossbreds are providing the industry with a critical supply of cattle. Their value—through efficiency, consistency, and traceability—ensures they’ll remain an essential piece of the beef supply chain, even as the market continues to evolve.

Your Next Read: Navigating Uncertain Waters: The Impact of New Tariffs on U.S. Dairy Farmers

Monarch's MK-V Dairy Tractor Rolls Out Autonomous Feed Pushing

Wed, 05 Feb 2025 15:28:35 GMT

Monarch Tractor announces its first-in-class, fully-autonomous Autodrive feature is now commercially available on its MK-V driver-optional dairy tractor (EV or diesel) , according to a press release from the startup.

“Autonomous feed pushing offers value to dairy farmers by improving efficiency and increasing milk production,” says Praveen Penmetsa, CEO and co-founder of Monarch Tractor. “It allows the dairy farmers to focus on what matters most – the health and well-being of their animals.”

Autonomous feed pushing helps dairy farmers manage through labor shortages, and the ability to monitor feed pushing remotely while tending to other critical tasks ensures cows can be consistently fed every hour.

Additionally, the “smart tractor” is armed with Monarch’s Wingspan Ag Intelligence and WingspanAI technology stack , which tracks performance data while 360-degree cameras record video footage for real-time and historical insights. The MK-V Dairy is also a mobile power bank with 12v, 110v, and 220v plugs.

Monarch is hosting an in-person Autodrive demonstration at a working dairy on February 12, at 3 p.m. in Tulare, California, during World Ag Expo. Monarch reps and engineers will be on hand to talk to attendees and give them the opportunity to engage with the tractor. Reservations for the demonstration can be made here.

If you can’t make it to California next week, Monarch says dairy farmers can reach out and set up a demonstration at their farm.

Texas-Sized Problems Hit the Lone Star State, but Ag Commissioner says ‘Things are Getting Better’

Thu, 04 Apr 2024 21:26:34 GMT

Already this year, farmers and ranchers based in the Texas Panhandle have dealt with some Texas-sized problems that have impacted their livelihoods.

In March, the Smokehouse Creek Fire burned more than a million acres and killed thousands of cattle, primarily in the Panhandle and in Oklahoma.

Cal-Maine Foods, the largest producer and distributor of fresh shell eggs in the U.S., announced on Tuesday that chickens at its facility in the southwest part of the Texas Panhandle, in Parmer County, tested positive for highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI). As a result, Cal-Maine had to cull nearly 2 million chickens − 1.6 million hens and 337,000 pullets.

Dairy producers in the Texas Panhandle have also grappled with outbreaks of HPAI in their cow herds in recent weeks. To date, the USDA has confirmed the H5N1 strain of HPAI in dairy cattle on seven Texas farms.

In addition, one dairy worker has contracted an HPAI infection and displayed mild symptoms, the Texas Department of Health and Human Services reported Monday.

“It’s a mild, mild case and the only symptom he had was pinkeye,” Sid Miller, state commissioner of the Texas Department of Agriculture, told AgriTalk Host Chip Flory on Thursday. Miller said it’s unknown how the individual was infected.

You can listen to their conversation here:

What’s Going To Happen Next?
Flory asked Miller whether he believes state agriculture department investigators are in front of the latest issues with HPAI in dairy cattle.

“I think so,” Miller replied. “We’ve got about 10 months before the ducks and geese come back, so I think we’ll have it figured out by then.”

Miller speculated that waterfowl caused the dairy and poultry HPAI infections.

“Cowboy logic would tell you that cattle were drinking from the same ponds where waterfowl were present,” he said. “Or, maybe waterfowl had been in the feed boxes eating grain or something (along those lines). So, we’ve got to take better biosecurity measures to make sure that we eliminate all those possibilities.”

Despite the challenges Texas agriculture has faced the past few months, Miller is cautiously optimistic.

“Things are turning around and getting better. They really are,” he said.

One concern the livestock industry has now is whether HPAI will impact beef cattle at some point.

“You’ve seen what’s happened in the cattle markets,” Flory said. “They’re looking at it like this is a major problem for beef.”

Miller replied that he doesn’t anticipate there will be an HPAI problem in Texas beef cattle, which consist primarily of feedlot cattle in the Panhandle.

“The cattle that get it are the older lactating cows, and we don’t have those in the feedlot,” Miller said. “I think we’re OK, but we’re certainly going to research that.”

Food Safety Precautions
Miller said one of the Texas Department of Agriculture’s primary responsibilities is to make sure food produced in the state is safe for consumers. None of the affected milk, meat or eggs ever reached the marketplace.

“If you want to take some precautions, you might lay off the raw milk and unpasteurized dairy products, because that’s about the only way (HPAI) could get there,” Miller said. “But it’s not in the food chain. It’s not going to create a shortage of milk and dairy products. There’s no shortage of eggs. So, consumers, just rest assured. Don’t be alarmed. This is really not going to affect you.”

In a statement last week, the Centers for Disease Control said it considers the human health risk to the U.S. public from the virus to be low, though people who work with livestock are at higher risk of infection. The agency also advised against eating unpasteurized dairy products, such as raw milk or cheese, from animals with suspected or confirmed cases of HPAI.

More news on HPAI is available here:

Rare Human Case of Bird Flu Confirmed. Officials Believe it Began on Texas Dairy

HPAI Now Detected on Ohio Dairy: Strange Bird Flu Concerns See Growth

New Regulation: Dairy Cattle Entry into Nebraska Now Requires Permit Amid HPAI Bird Flu Concerns

Twelve Cases of HPAI in Dairy Cattle Confirmed in Five States

Beef-on-Dairy: Why Feedlots Crave This Important Information

Thu, 01 Feb 2024 14:37:24 GMT

Within the last five years, the number of purebred dairy animals that have passed through feedlots has shrunk drastically. What used to be a purebred Holstein steer has now become a beef-on-dairy cross, and it’s estimated almost 23% of the total number of fed steers and heifers within the U.S. are actually coming from dairies.

According to Dr. Aimee Halfa, a beef innovation lead at Cargill, there are several reasons why these beef-on-dairy animals have seen explosive growth. One of the biggest spurs from the severe drought that has blanketed most of the Midwest, which in turn has forced herd reductions amongst the beef industry.

With the conventional beef herd currently in a liquidation phase, feeder calf prices have skyrocketed, triggering a supply and demand issue between the beef industry and feedlots. Dairy producers, however, have helped fill the pipeline by producing beef-on-dairy calves, and have turned a hefty profit in doing so.

Feedlots and Consumers Crave Knowledge

Not only have beef-on-dairy animals proven their worth within the beef supply chain system, they’ve also won over consumers with their overall consistency.

“The beef industry has always been segmented and variable,” Halfa told the audience during the Dairy Strong conference held in Green Bay, Wis. “We have cattle that originate from variable genetics, different production systems and different environments. All of this is feeding into a system where our customers and consumers want to be able to purchase a steak, hamburger or whatever kind of beef product they want and have the same eating experience every single time. Additionally, they want to know exactly how that animal was raised. This is where dairy can contribute nicely to our system.”

According to Halfa, beef-on-dairy cross animals work well in the beef industry because they are so uniform. And because of this, dairy farmers have the opportunity to contribute quality beef to the pipeline while also turning a sizeable profit. To do so, however, requires producers and feedlots to breed and feed these animals efficiently. And as beef-on-dairy animals within the feedlot system continue to rise, feedlots are craving two key pieces of information to help ensure these crossbred cattle thrive.

Health Records

No matter what age beef-on-dairy animals are sold, buyers want to see that the animals they are purchasing were well cared for. In particular, feedlots are looking for beef-on-dairy animals who were given colostrum, vaccinated and who have been exposed to a minimum amount of stress.

“One thing we’ve known for a while in the beef cattle industry is that disease, specifically respiratory disease, has a big impact on animal performance and carcass quality,” Halfa says. “Knowing when and what vaccinations or antibiotics were used along with having information on any health events is really valuable data to pass along.”

By knowing the animal’s health status before it enters, feedlots can make more informed treatment decisions and better understand a specific animal’s performance metrics.

Nutrition Records

When a beef-on-dairy calf makes its way to the feedlot, the transition can be a stressful one. Just the dietary changes alone can be a challenge, Halfa notes.

“One area I see some operations struggle with is the transition from a calf grain to a feedlot TMR,” she says. “This is a really challenging point in these animals lives and when it’s not done correctly, you can really miss out on some good performance during a time when you should be capturing great feed efficiency and gain.”

To help make the transition a bit smoother, Halfa recommends dairy producers provide feedlots with the nutritional information of beef-on-dairy calves sold after weaning.

“Providing feedlots with previous diet information along with when the animal was weaned are two excellent pieces of data to pass along,” Halfa says. “Bonus points should be given to producers who track an animal’s average daily gain. Communicating that captured level of information can be really helpful for the next person feeding those animals.”

Additional Areas to Focus On

Besides providing health and nutritional information, Halfa says there are several other ways dairy producers can work to keep the buyers of their beef-on-dairy animals happy.

Communication - Regardless of who you are selling your animals to, communication and a well-established relationship will always be essential.

“Ask questions, get feedback and make improvements,” Halfa says. “People who are feeding or buying your cattle love to get information on the animals they are purchasing, and its valuable information dairy producers can provide. Prioritizing communication is an excellent way to help secure future business relations.”

Traceability – Knowing exactly how and where an animal was raised can be a big-ticket advantage for feedlots looking to buy animals who are predictable and consistent. According to Halfa, this is an area where dairy producers excel.

“When it comes to traceability, the beef industry has a lot of hurdles. The dairy industry, however, has a great opportunity to provide a traceable beef product much easier and quicker,” she says.

Dairy farmers are no strangers to providing quick and accurate information. In turn, not only does this help supply buyers with valuable information, but it also opens doors of opportunity to increase market access and build up your farm’s reputation of producing high-quality animals.

Metrics = Money

Whether you are selling your beef-on-dairy animals to a private buyer or a commercial feedlot, knowing the specific data points these buyers are looking for can help bring additional value to the animals you bring to market. Failing to pass this information along could be cause you to leave extra dollars on the table.

“Beef-on-dairy animals have the potential to add quality cattle to our fed beef supply,” Halfa says. “If you are going to look at breeding dairy animals to beef, it’s important to understand the metrics behind how these animals should be handled and fed within feedlots in order to sell them for a healthy alternative income stream.”

For more on beef-on-dairy, read:

Flash Flooding Hits Texas Panhandle, Several Feedyards Now Face Massive Cleanup and Cattle Losses

Tue, 30 May 2023 18:18:41 GMT

From drought to now major flooding, historic rainfall fell in the Texas Panhandle over the weekend and prompted flooding. Hereford, Texas, is an area that was hit especially hard by the historic rains, with feedyards flooded and cattle trapped. Now, work is underway to pump a massive amount of water out.

According to the National Weather Service in Amarillo, the Hereford, Texas, area unofficially received 8 inches of rain in the past month. The heaviest rainfall event came Friday morning, with some volunteer observers showing 2.45 inches of rain fell in just 40 minutes.

@NWSAmarillo US Highway 385 is now being overtopped in the south side of Hereford. Water has come up approximately 5 feet in the last 30 min. Taken 9:20am pic.twitter.com/Gb1wCh49sT
— Brady Kendrick (@BradyKendrick24) May 27, 2023

According to John Robinson, senior vice president of membership and communications for the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA), the water simply had nowhere to go, which prompted the flooding around Hereford. With such a quick rainfall event, there also wasn’t any advance notice that would have allowed residents to prepare.

“It’s flat topography down there. Once those creek beds that have been really dry for years fill up, there’s no place for that water to go. So that water spills over into low-lying areas adjacent to those creek beds. And it’s really caused a problem around the Hereford-Amarillo area down in the panhandle of Texas,” says Robinson.

The flooding impacted residential areas, and from an agricultural perspective, Hereford is also a major cattle production area and home to several feedyards.

“It’s one of the largest cattle feeding areas in the United States, so there are definitely widespread impacts,” says Robinson. “There’s probably going to be some production losses, some performance losses in terms of rate of gain, things like that.”

FLOODING IN HEREFORD continues. All of this water is headed to Buffalo lake and if/when it is full, the rest will head towards Palo Duro Canyon. Here is some video from @DowningMitchell #txwx #flooding #heavyrain @ABC7Amarillo @StormSearch7 @natwxdesk @NWSAmarillo pic.twitter.com/oLXi3x1AHU
— Corbin Voges WX (@CorbinVogesWX) May 27, 2023

Robinson points out while the short-term impact is painful for any feedyard dealing with the flooding, he says it shouldn’t create a big impact on cattle supply longer-term.

“It’s mostly going to work its way out here in the next few days,” he says. “There shouldn’t be supply chain increases, there shouldn’t be significant price increases. Who knows what else might happen in the meantime, but the impacts are going to be relatively short-lived for the vast majority of these areas.”

Major flooding in Hereford, TX following the overnight storm. Houses, cars, and semi-trucks under water as authorities work to divert citizens from the area. @ABC7Amarillo @StormSearch7 pic.twitter.com/GzY48iKqK7
— Mitchell Downing (@DowningMitchell) May 27, 2023

Some rumored estimates over the holiday weekend claimed 25,000 head of cattle died in the flooding, but NCBA says its representatives are in constant conversation with several producers in the area, and those estimates are way too high. NCBA says everyone is still trying to get a handle on losses, but it’s a fraction of the 25,000 number being thrown around.

Robinson says feedyards around Hereford are getting creative in pumping water out and cattle to dry ground.

“On one yard in particular, they brought in some dewatering pumps from oil drilling sites, maybe as far away as New Mexico. They’re pumping that water out, in some cases, over a mile to get it off of the feedyard so they can dry things out, get cattle to a safe, dry place to bed down,” he says.

Most of the water has receded in the Hereford area, but Robinson says there will be a lot of clean-up work that follows.

“While they’re trying to get all this other work done, they’re getting fences repaired, VDR pens repaired and dried. And it’s a lot of work. But there’s a committed crew of folks down there doing it, and not just from the agriculture industry, but from oil and gas and others as well,” says Robinson.

More precipitation could be on the way. Forecasts point to more severe weather—and heavy rains—which could cause further flooding.

The 'Golden Ticket' To Cattle Feeding Efficiency? It’s Been Found, FBN and Boveta Suggest

Fri, 03 Feb 2023 15:30:37 GMT

Has the ‘golden ticket’ to cattle feeding efficiency and carcass yield with reduction in methane gas emissions and wet waste been found? Farmers Business Network (FBN), along with its partner, Boveta Nutrition, LLC, believe so.

Recently, the companies announced results from an FBN-managed independent study at an operation outside of Lincoln, Nebr., trialing the partnership’s amino acid balancing program.

The farm manager, Ben Row at Talcott Land and Cattle, says their backgrounding operation went from $1.20 cost of gain, to now being around $0.71. Row also believes the health of the cattle and overall performance has improved on the program.

Additional findings from Boveta research with cattle on the company’s balanced diet plan conclude:
• Backgrounding cattle on forage diet showed $0.20 per lb. cost of gain advantage
• Finishing cattle consumed 15% less feed, maintained daily gain and delivered an average savings of $0.07 per pound gained
• A large commercial feedlot study produced a $30 per head advantage for steers
• In dairy cattle, milk yield increased by 3.9 lb/day or 4%

While these recent findings show a promising future in cattle production, it’s worth nothing that amino acid balancing is not a new concept.

“Amino acid balancing has been a standard nutritional practice in the swine and poultry industries to drive margin and animal growth, but we haven’t been able to solve the riddle with beef cattle until now,” says Dr. Monty Kerley, FBN’s senior ruminant nutritionist, in the release. “After decades, we finally believe we’re able to deliver this solution to beef producers and its unique potential to decrease feed costs while maintaining optimal growth.”

Specifically, growth performance, average daily gain and feed efficiency rise to the top as the driving forces behind amino acid balancing, Kerley adds.

The program is set to begin with FBN customers with cattle operations in Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, North Dakota and South Dakota—with plans to expand nationally and internationally in the future.

As the first step towards implementing the program, FBN offers a feed consultation and will take inventory of the producer’s available feed resources to formulate the best, most cost-efficient ration for the specific cattle in the current operation. Then, in balancing the amino acids, a unique ration and supplement will be formulated to complete the operation’s feeding plan.

Once the final nutrition recommendation is created and priced, the producer will then have the option to purchase the supplement and officially enter the program.

Kerley says obtaining the supplement should be no different for producers, as FBN and Boveta plan to work with local feed mills and cooperatives to fulfill the operation’s needs.

When encouraging producers to consider the program, Kerley explains, “Focus on cost of gain and not cost per ton. A lot of times, we change the proteins around. We may be looking at a $5, $10 or $15 per ton feed cost increase, but the reason we do that is because there’s going to be a cost of gain advantage to the producers. They’ll realize the net benefit.”

In addition to production performance and growth, the companies explain the environmental impacts of cattle production can also be improved through the program.

“Reducing intake by use of Boveta’s patent-pending diet formulation model improves income over feed costs by 8 to 12% while similarly reducing methane and wet waste. Combining that improved efficiency with reduced roughage intake provides a healthy, practical way to further improve profits and reduce methane emissions up to 30% or more,” says a Boveta research report.

The program is still in a very hands-on stage, and Gregory Mills, president and CEO of Boveta Nutrition, LLC, says the availability of a mobile app or computer software is not there yet.

More Boveta Nutrition, LLC research results from implementation of amino acid balancing and diet formulation in beef and dairy cattle can be found on the company’s website .

Read More:
Proprietary Feeding System Improves Feed Efficiency and Carcass Yield

Nuisance Birds May Be Showing Up Soon

Wed, 22 Sep 2021 14:50:26 GMT

The onset of fall marks the return of nuisance birds to dairy farms and feedlots in cooler climates.

Ricky Woods, USDA Wildlife Services specialist based in Nebraska, shared advice for managing the birds in a recent episode of the I-29 Moo University Dairy Podcast series .

Woods said he typically sees migratory birds like starlings returning from about late October until March. Starlings are recruiters, so they may come back to the same site year after year, with not only their offspring, but other birds that have joined the flock along the way.

Flocks ranging in size from 1,000 to 100,000 birds may travel together. Dairies and feedlots are popular destinations because of easily accessible shelter and feed sources. Sometimes, flocks will choose one site during the day, then travel to another site within a 20-mile radius at night. On some farms, flocks move in only at night to roost inside barns.

According to Woods, one starling will eat about a penny’s worth of feed per day. “That may not sound like a lot, but it can add up to huge losses when you consider thousands of birds residing on farms for several months,” he stated.

In addition to the feed loss, birds like starlings and pigeons can tear insulation out of barns, and contaminate the feed that cows consume. Woods said the feces and feathers from invasive birds can spread E. coli, salmonella, cryptosporidium and histoplasmosis to cows.

Getting rid of troublesome bird flocks can be tedious and time-consuming. Woods said pyrotechnics, noisemakers, trapping, and toxicants all have been used to accomplish the task. The choice of tactic depends on the nature and severity of the bird problem.

The goal of a bird eradication program is to make the birds so uncomfortable that they don’t want to be there. Something as simple as a hinged pair of 2X4s, clapped together, can be used to frighten birds so they don’t land. But that effort must be conducted essentially from sun-up to sundown for 7-10 consecutive days to be effective.

If birds are showing up to roost at night, pyrotechnics can be used to defend against them. The time window is shorter because the situation only needs to be addressed when birds arrive to roost in the hours just before and after sundown.

Woods said chemical toxicants like Avitrol® and DRC 1339 are Restricted Use Pesticides. While they will kill some birds, their true purpose is scare birds away.

Shooting is not an effective way to drastically reduce the bird population, but will help to frighten them. Mixing up approaches and using more than one mitigation method may be necessary. Human safety, of course, should be a primary priority in any bird mitigation effort.

If a dairy is struggling with a bird problem, Woods said the best approach is to contact a USDA

Wildlife Services representative. Their initial assessment and advice should be at no cost to the producer.

When asked why some dairies have zero bird problems while others struggle with them mightily, Woods said there really is no rhyme or reason why birds target certain farms. “Unfortunately,” he said, “it’s purely a case of bad luck.”

Packer Lawsuits Will Be Consolidated Into One

Fri, 20 Nov 2020 05:49:55 GMT

Three lawsuits filed against America’s largest beef packers can be consolidated, a Minnesota federal court ruled last week (July 10, 2019).

U.S. Magistrate Judge Hildy Bowbeer said in a nine-page order the court will oversee three proposed class actions filed by ranchers and industry groups that claim beef packers colluded to suppress prices and violated federal antitrust laws.

On April 23, 2019, R-CALF USA filed suit in Chicago against Tyson Foods, Inc., JBS S.A., Cargill, Inc., and National Beef Packing Company, LLC, and certain of their affiliates alleging that from at least January 1, 2015 through the present, the packers conspired to depress the price of fed cattle they purchased from American ranchers, thereby inflating their own margins and profits.

Three days later in a Minneapolis court the same packing companies were accused in a consumer class action lawsuit of a similar price-fixing scheme. That suit, Wright et al. v. Tyson Foods Inc. et al., claims all consumers who bought any fresh or frozen beef products may be entitled to reimbursement. The suit alleges the packers forced consumers to pay inflated prices for steak, hamburger and other beef products.

A third lawsuit was filed May 9, 2019, by Michael Sevy, who claims that, as a live cattle futures trader, he “suffered damages from a manipulated live cattle futures and options market.” The suit alleges, “Plaintiff suffered monetary losses by transacting in live cattle futures and options at artificial prices directly resulting from packing defendants’ conduct, including their suppression of fed cattle prices.”

Sevy’s lawsuit alleges the companies’ conduct had the effect of “manipulating the prices of live cattle futures and/or option contracts traded on the CME” in violation of the Sherman Act.

All three of the lawsuits allege beef packers colluded to suppress beef prices in part by agreeing to reduce slaughter volumes and curtailing purchases. The plaintiffs said the collusion caused an unprecedented drop in fed cattle prices in 2015.

Other price suppression tactics the meatpackers allegedly have deployed include importing large numbers of foreign cattle, purchasing cattle during a narrow 30- to 60-minute window on Fridays and slashing slaughter volumes.

Previously, Tyson spokesman Gary Mickelson said in a statement, “We’re disappointed this baseless case was filed. As with similar lawsuits concerning chicken and pork, there’s simply no merit to the allegations that Tyson colluded with competitors.”

A previous statement from Cargill said: “For many years, Cargill has served as a trusted partner to American cattle ranchers, committed to supporting their family farms and livelihoods. We believe the claims lack merit, and we are confident in our efforts to maintain market integrity and conduct ethical business.”

An obstacle to the success of these lawsuits is previous packer investigations, including a 2016 U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee review of the decline in cattle prices. The committee said it found no evidence of collusion.

And just last year the U.S. Government Accountability Office looked into the matter at the behest of the Judiciary Committee. The office reported that its analysis of the data “indicated that competition levels among packers that slaughter and process fed cattle did not appear to affect the national price changes in the fed cattle market.”

Related stories:

R-CALF Sues Tyson, Cargill, JBS And National

Consumers Sue Beef Packers, Allege ‘Price Fixing’

Dairy Cattle Beef up Beef Industry

Fri, 20 Nov 2020 05:47:55 GMT

While dairy producers are seeing profitability from milk checks there is also a tremendous opportunity to market cattle into the beef supply thanks to record high beef prices.

According to Lance Zimmerman, an analyst with CattleFax, dairy cattle account for 1 in 5 pounds of beef production in the U.S., so they are vital part of the beef supply chain. Zimmerman gave a presentation on the topic of marketing cull cows and dairy calves at Dairy Today’s Elite Producer Business Conference in Las Vegas.

The cattle industry has seen a drop in total numbers from a peak in 1982 at 50 million cows to this year’s low of approximately 38 million cows. Some of those losses can be attributed to drought experienced. In 2012, drought affected 80% of the beef cow herd and 85% of corn production. Dry periods from 2008 to 2014 caused 3 million cows to leave beef operations.

While drought is still affecting dairy producing regions like California it is not as widespread. Currently only 12% of beef cow herd and 5% of corn production is being affected by drought.

As we’ve transitioned from the dry period of 2012 to a wetter 2014 we’re seeing beef cow slaughter drop off Zimmerman says.

Many beef producers are holding back more cows to capitalize on record high calf prices. In the past 4 years 550 lb. feeder calf prices have increased 83%.

Other animal protein sectors have also seen record high prices thanks to demand and a drop off in production.

Per_Capita_Net_Meat_and_Poultry_Supplies

©

Pork producers had to deal with PEDV and broilers had fertility issues. However, both of those industries can rebound much quicker because it takes weeks to hatch more chickens and months to farrow more piglets. Beef and dairy producers need 3 years to develop a heifer into a cow.

“We’re going to have larger protein supplies next year by just a couple of pounds, but it is all going to be due to the other proteins, not beef,” Zimmerman adds.

Zimmerman believes it is likely that fed cattle and cull cow prices will still be in the same area next year for the highs, with maybe a $5/cwt increase. It will still be nothing like the $20 to $30/cwt increase from this year.

“Where we’re going to get the depreciation is the lows. I think $1/lb. is going to be pretty normal for the low in the cull cow market,” Zimmer says. “The high on those cull cows is going to be right in that $1.20-$1.30/lb. range.”

Looking forward the beef industry will be in a supply driven environment.

“Anytime we’re in a supply driven environment, it doesn’t matter if it is beef, chicken or Mercedes Benz, the leverage situation changes where the guys down the food chain hand leverage to the guys up the food chain,” Zimmerman says.

Retailers can’t stand open shelf space so they will bid more on a product to keep their stores full. In the case of the beef industry that price gets handed down to the packer.

Zimmerman relates packers will have to bid more for cattle to help cover the fixed cost of keeping plants open and hopefully make a profit.

“The guys holding the supply, whether it’s day-old Holstein calves, cull cows or a cow-calf producer in central Kansas, you guys hold the chips for a little while longer,” Zimmerman says.

These tight supplies should last for another year to 2 years before it will transition towards the retailer and packer.

US_Beef_Production_Breakdown

©

Dairy cows account for 6% of beef production, while fed dairy calves account for 14%. Even though the beef cow herd has declined in the past few years, the dairy herd has remained relatively stable.

The drought forced the majority of beef cows out of the traditional feedlot region south of Interstate 70 in the High Plains of Texas, Kansas, Colorado and Oklahoma. To help fill those pens and keep packers near capacity feedyards had to buy an increasing number of dairy calves, driving up prices. Additionally, more grower yards and heifer development facilities have been taken on at feedlots in the region.

The biggest driver in all of this will be consumer demand.

International markets will help drive the boat more and more as countries like China continue to eat increasing amounts of protein. Domestic demand will be the primary market, particularly for grinding meat.

“I think you could easily say 55-60% of U.S. consumption this year is ground beef,” Zimmerman says. “For years the beef industry cried ‘we need our own chicken nugget or chicken breast.’ My message to everyone in the beef industry that will listen is you have it. It’s called a hamburger.”

Trim accounts for approximately 65% of a cow carcass, and it accounts for a lot of value. At one point in 2014 trim was worth 75% of the total value of a cow carcass.

“Dairy-influenced beef will continue to be a bigger part of the beef story. Dairy cull cows are increasingly important to beef production,” Zimmerman adds. ”Feedlot overcapacity has made dairy-influenced calves attractive and veal isn’t the only market.”

Study Shows Cattle Are Increasingly Resistant to BRD Antibiotics

Fri, 20 Nov 2020 05:37:32 GMT

—Kansas State University news release

A survey of records of bovine respiratory disease cases at the Kansas State Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory showed that drug resistance in one of the primary pathogens that cause BRD, Mannheimia haemolytica, increased over a three-year period.
“We have been seeing an increase in the number of antibiotic resistant bacteria that cause pneumonia (also called BRD) in cattle,” said Brian Lubbers, assistant professor in the diagnostic lab, based at Kansas State University. “Many of these bacteria are resistant to, not one, but almost all of the antibiotics that we use to treat pneumonia in cattle.”
BRD is one of the most important diseases of feedlot cattle, particularly, said Lubbers, adding that the economic toll from the disease has been estimated to approach $1 billion annually in the United States alone, if one takes into account drug and labor costs, decreased production, and animal death losses.
Until now, one of the aspects that has not been studied very well is the cost linked to antimicrobial resistance in BRD cases, he said. To take a closer look, he and colleague Gregg Hanzlicek, also an assistant professor in the diagnostic lab, examined records of cases in which specimens of bovine lung tissue were submitted to the diagnostic lab over the three years, 2009 to 2011. Most of the cattle were from Kansas and Nebraska.
They found that over that period, a high percentage of M. haemolytica bacteria recovered from cattle lungs were resistant to several of the drugs typically used to treat that pathogen. The researchers also found, however, that no specimens were resistant to all six antimicrobial drugs.
The study was funded internally by the diagnostic lab.
Using resistance to three or more antimicrobials as the definition of multi-drug resistance, 63 percent of the bacteria would be classified as multidrug resistant in 2011, compared with 46 percent in 2010 and 42 percent in 2009.
The results of the study were published by the Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation. The abstract is available.
“Antimicrobial resistance in veterinary medicine has received a considerable amount of recognition as a potential factor leading to antimicrobial resistance in human medicine,” Lubbers said. “However, the contribution of multidrug resistance to limited or failed therapy in veterinary patients has received much less attention.”
Because there are a limited number of antimicrobial drugs that can be used for treatment of BRD pathogens, Lubbers said, multidrug resistance in those pathogens poses a severe threat to the livestock industry.
“We (KSVDL) consider this type of information to be part of our active ongoing disease surveillance and will continue this work,” Lubbers said. “The questions of how these bacteria develop or where they come from, how widespread they are, and what is the impact on cattle production are still unanswered. We are actively seeking industry partners to investigate these questions.”

Feed Costs Too High?

Fri, 20 Nov 2020 05:32:56 GMT

Sky-high feed costs are making it tougher than ever for cattle producers to break even and make a profit. While high feed costs are a reality for every cattle operation today, you can better manage the costs on your farm or ranch by evaluating your long-term goals and daily practices.

Two basic factors should be considered to manage feed costs, says John Lawrence, director of the Iowa Beef Center (IBC) at Iowa State University (ISU).

“First, it’s a strategic issue. If you built your cow-calf or feedlot system around $2 corn, you need to reevaluate it because that world no longer exists. Your current system may work, but look at it in the light of higher feed and land prices,” Lawrence says.

Producers need to evaluate their entire operation, Lawrence says, not simply whether they are feeding the right products or coproducts. Producers may also need to change their grazing systems, cow size or weaning dates to better fit the environment.

Bonus Content:
ISU web tools to help you manage feed costs.

The second factor in managing feed costs is the day-to-day tasks such as reducing feed wastage, proper hay storage, not overfeeding cattle and checking for body condition. Attention to the details will help reduce feed costs, Lawrence says.

The IBC has an in-depth section on its Web site to help manage high feed costs. You can find the link at www.beeftoday.com by clicking on the headline “Feed Costs Too High?”

The section offers articles by ISU researchers and Extension specialists on all aspects of cattle production to help lower feed costs, including the “Top 10 Ways to Reduce Feedlot Costs” and “Top 12 Ways to Reduce Cow–Calf Costs.”

The IBC section on managing feed costs also offers assessment worksheets for feedlot cost management and for cow winter-feeding costs.

“The worksheets are popular with producers in workshops that our specialists conduct around the state,” Lawrence says. “Producers can evaluate their operations and find specific things they need to change to save money.”

By going through an assessment checklist and evaluation process, cattle producers can identify and prioritize areas that need improvement, and then develop an action plan to fix problems.

Operate efficiently. The assessment worksheet for feedlots has sections on nutrition and rations, feed delivery and bunk management, feed storage, feed additives, implant systems, records and tracking, budgeting and purchase costs, cattle marketing and improving cattle comfort. Each section has a series of items that are scored. The tallied scores may range from “excellent” to “needs to develop,” which helps producers determine the areas that require improvement.

By taking the cow winter-feeding cost assessment, producers can learn whether they fall into the high, average or low-cost production category. For example, the question “What winter grazing options are available?” can be answered with “None” (for a high-cost producer), “Owned stalk fields, hay stubble” (average-cost producer), or “Owned and leased stalk fields, stockpiled hay fields, winter annuals” (low-cost producer).

Once the initial assessment is completed, a producer can print an action plan of goals, performance measurements and essential steps to help meet the objectives. BT

Cattle and Dairy: Lock in Feed Inventory, Prices Now

Fri, 20 Nov 2020 05:31:17 GMT

Corn and soybean producers aren’t the only ones feeling the squeeze of wet weather. Cattle and dairy producers are left wondering what this means for their access to feed, and how soon they should lock in inventory.

“’Normal’ production has been hard to find in recent years,” says Mike North, with Commodity Risk Management Group. “At the end of the day you need to make sure you have the corn supply you need at your disposal to carry you through next summer.”

There are three things cattle and dairy producers should be doing now, in this order, he says.

Take in physical inventory—you can’t feed cows contracts and you don’t know what corn will be available.
Lock in prices—they could keep going up, lock in prices through fall 2020.
Give yourself some price protection—work with a broker on puts, calls and options just in case the price does go down.

“Higher corn prices will drive a lot of acres into corn next year, so we could see corn back in a robust scenario,” North says. “Still, protect corn until next fall.”

Stop Feed Loss to Birds

Fri, 20 Nov 2020 02:41:02 GMT

^{Source: North Dakota State University}

Feed is the single largest expense in raising cattle. An important way to control feed costs is managing the loss of feed that was delivered but never consumed. Depending on the feedstuff, feed shrinkage can account for 5% to 30% of the feed for a season.

Birds can be a major cause of feed loss, according to North Dakota State University Extension Service dairy specialist J.W. Schroeder. For example, starlings have been estimated to consume up to half of their body weight in grain each day.

Starlings eat an estimated 0.0625 lb. per bird per day. Thus, if a farm has 20,000 starlings and 80% of them steal feed, they may be eating 1,000 lb. of grain per day.

“They’re not only robbing you of valuable feed, but they can change the ration in the feed bunk,” Schroeder says.

Here are some options that have been successful in reducing the loss of feed to birds:

Feed early in the evening or late at night.
Regulate particle size of the feed so birds won’t select it or can’t consume it. For example, starlings won’t eat pellets that are 1/2 in. or larger.
Lower water levels to at least 6 in. below the top of the waterer and maintain a water depth of at least 6 in. in the trough to discourage birds.
Use methylanthranalate, a grape food flavoring, as a repellent. It is a derivative of products used on golf courses and around airports. While it generally is regarded as a safe product and quite often is used as an ingredient in many foods or as a repellent mixed in feed, it usually is cost-prohibitive when used in the concentration needed to make it work as a repellent in feed.

Controlling birds is important because they not only eat feed, they also contaminate feed and water with feces, which may result in reduced intake or the spread of disease, Schroeder warns.
“While facility design can limit birds’ access to bunks, habitat and population management can help when access cannot be eliminated,” he says. “This means having rights to adjacent land and modifying the environment to discourage birds.”

Producers have had some success in reducing adjacent roosting sites, such as cattail growths, or thinning or pruning vegetation to remove protective cover. Habitat management, however, usually produces a more lasting effect than other methods and tends to be less expensive in the long run.

“There is no silver bullet when it comes to this problem,” Schroeder says. “While each of these tactics can be effective in the appropriate situation, a combination of control options typically provides the best results.”

Moisture Critical Component to Good Silage

Sun, 15 Nov 2020 21:28:11 GMT

One of the most important steps to make good silage is to cut it at the proper moisture level.
By: Tracey Erickson, SDSU Extension Dairy Field Specialist

The optimum moisture range for cutting corn and making silage is between 60-70% moisture (30-40% dry matter). Given the genetics of today’s corn varieties, utilization of the old relationship between the milk line and plant moisture content may not always be accurate.

An easy, quick and relatively inexpensive method to determine the actual moisture content of the whole corn plant is using a microwave oven. One additional advantage is that it takes typically less than 20 minutes to run the test.

So what equipment will you need to facilitate the moisture test?

Microwave, with a turntable (preferably). Your wife or significant other will appreciate you NOT using the kitchen microwave or doing this in the house kitchen, as it does produce an unpleasant odor. It is thus recommend to have a microwave in the shop or barn to run the moisture test.
Scale, one that weighs in grams is best.
Container, something that is microwave safe such as paper plate, paper boat, or a glass or plastic dish.
Water – 8 oz glass to protect the microwave oven
Paper & Pencil to record weights
Calculator

Next you need to collect a sample. Collect at random 10-20 plants throughout the field. You will need to chop these plants and this can be done by either shredding them in a brush chopper/branch shredder or by running them through your chopper. Please keep in mind that this can be a very dangerous process and care should be taken when doing this. The other option is to chop test areas in your field. Then take random grab samples from the green chopped silage. You should have about 2 gallons worth of product to mix and collect your test sample from. Once you have collected a representative sample you can start the process to run the moisture test.

Follow these steps to determine the moisture content of your corn silage or forage. Please note that this method can also be used to determine moisture content in any other forage.

Take your gram scale and weigh the container you will use to hold the sample. This weight is known as Value A.
Mix your sample and place about 100 grams in the container. Collect the total weight of the container and wet sample, record the weight as Value B.
Put an 8oz. glass of water in the corner of the oven.
Put the container with the sample in the microwave oven. Using a medium to high heat setting start drying the sample, starting with approximately 2 – 3 minutes if you suspect the sample is above 35% moisture.
Remove the container and sample, weigh them, and record the weight. It should weigh less than the Value B that you initially recorded.
Gently stir the sample and place back in the microwave.
Reheat the sample again for another 30 seconds. Remove, reweight, and record the weight. You should continue this process, recording the weight every time.
Once you have two continuous weights that are equal, the sample is considered dry. Record this final weight as Value C.

You will need to be careful not to char or burn the sample. If you do then either start over or take the previous recorded weight prior to charring the sample. You do not want your sample to be charred, so a hint is to go in time increments of less than 30 seconds once you feel your sample is getting close to dry.

Lastly you will need to calculate the percent moisture using the following formula:

Value A = weight of container
Value B = weight of container initial wet sample weight
Value C = weight of container dry sample weight

% Moisture = (B - C) / (B - A) X 100

Producers need to remember that if the silage is too wet there is a risk of butyric acid forming and nutrients being lost due to seepage. On the other hand if it is too dry it will not ferment or pack adequately resulting in mold.

Mycotoxins: Testing and Surveillance to Reduce Risk

Thu, 12 Nov 2020 04:52:31 GMT

Mycotoxins represent a broad category of toxic agents produced by various naturally occurring fungi, mostly soil borne and environmentally dependent. Three types – aflatoxins, fumonisins and zearalenone – cause most mycotoxins in cattle, says Jim Simpson, a consulting beef cattle nutritionist who operates Simpson Nutritional Services, LLC, based in Canyon, Texas.

Simpson presented information on mycotoxins during the recent Academy of Veterinary Consultants (AVC) spring conference in Fort Worth, Texas.

Effects of mycotoxins in cattle often remain subclinical, causing performance losses but not clinical disease or death loss.

Aflatoxin, produced by Aspergillus fungus, is the most common mycotoxin in corn and other grains used in cattle feed. The fungus can grow on standing crops or in storage, depending on environmental conditions. Stressed crops, such as those grown under drought conditions, become susceptible to aflatoxins, as can grain damaged by insects. Aflatoxins are known carcinogens, and the FDA lists “action levels” for the toxins in feedstuffs, including 300 parts per billion (PPB) in corn for feedlot cattle and 100 PPB in corn for breeding cattle. The action level for aflatoxins in corn for dairy cattle is much lower, at 20 PPB, because the toxin can be excreted in milk.

At lower levels, aflatoxins in cattle feed inhibit growth and feed efficiency. At higher levels, the toxins can cause chronic liver disease and acute poisoning, and also are associated with a higher incidence of bovine respiratory disease.

Pre-harvest treatments, such as Afla-Guard and Aspergillus flavus AF36 , show promise for reducing aflatoxins in grain through competitive exclusion, Simpson says. Also, Bt corn hybrids appear less susceptible to aflatoxins than conventional varieties, probably because of less insect damage to grains.

Simpson offers several suggestions for minimizing aflatoxin risk in cattle operations.

Watch growing conditions in your area for signs of crop stress. Also utilize historic information as the soil-borne fungus tends to recur in certain fields when environmental conditions favor it.
Test grain from each new crop, and test stored grain randomly through the year, as the fungus can spread during storage.
Work with your analytical laboratory to ensure accurate sampling of feed stores.
Ultraviolet “black light” screening can identify Aspergillus fungus in feeds, but produces around 50% false-positive results.
Quick test kits can detect aflatoxins in feed as deliveries arrive, but the kits require significant financial investment and can slow the grain-receiving process.
Removing fines from delivered feeds can reduce aflatoxin levels significantly.
Purchase grain from reputable sources, ideally with aflatoxin guarantees.

While aflatoxins present the most common risk in cattle feeds, Simpson notes that fumonisins, produced by Fusarium fungus, can emerge as a problem in cattle, such as during a 2016 outbreak in Texas. The fungus can grow in fields or in stored grains, depending on environmental conditions. Hot, dry weather during the mid-growth stage in corn, and cooler, wet weather during pollination tend to favor Fusarium and fumonisins. The toxins are associated with leaky gut syndrome, immune suppression and oxidative stress in cattle, and are deadly to horses.

Zearalenone, also associated with Fusarium fungi, is most common in corn-corn rotations, especially with wet weather during silking and harvest. Cattle consuming grain contaminated with zearalenone can secrete zeranol, a nonsteroidal estrogen, in their urine, which can disqualify animals from programs specifying no hormone treatments.

AVC members can view recorded proceedings from AVC conferences on the AVC website . The next AVC conference takes place August 9 to 11 in Denver, Colo.

Convenient Truths?

Sun, 08 Nov 2020 17:25:21 GMT

I’ve commented in the past about some of the writings of James McWilliams, a history professor in Texas, who – while critical of rank and file food production in the U.S. – is more interesting to listen to, because he’s also clear-eyed about many of the weakly-supported notions and downright falsehoods behind other, “alt” forms of food, such as organic, grass-fed, local, etc. (Here are links to 3 previous postings of mine, from August , July , and March of last year, that mention some of his observations).

His latest column, in the April 8 issue of The Atlantic , about how “natural” food production is morally no better than any other conventional form of food production, is also worth posting. The crux of his argument is stated thusly:

For consumers willing to pay more for pastured meat, this [“free-range”] is a guilt-absolving distinction. We’ve imbued “natural food” with such virtuous connotations that meat supposedly raised according to the law of nature is, ipso facto, thought to be an ethically worthwhile choice.

From his point of view, any system of meat production (and I am including dairy in that, although his column doesn’t mention it) lacks any ethical superiority just because the animals were supposedly closer to nature. Or, as he puts it:

But what if, as I’m arguing here, the free-range experience is nothing but a more humane way to force animals into serving our culinary wants?

The reason I think this line of argument is notable is that he is willing to explore the notion that “natural” production, which exposes livestock to greater threats from predators, parasites and extreme weather, is hardly more humane than more common confinement operations….and is, according to many measurements, demonstrably more stressful. And it arrives at the same bottom line: the demise of a farm animal so people can consume their meat.

There are people for whom meat consumption, or the ingestion of any animal products, is a deal-breaker. Like it or not, they’re a part of all societies. They’ve become much more vocal (although probably not really more numerous) as of late in American society, and farmers and ranchers understandably may feel picked on because of the rise of veganism, and its fellow traveler, the animal rights movement.

But just as to govern is to choose, so is eating a choice. What’s happened in the rise of food-ism, as McWilliams and a few others have noted, is that people are being presented with false, or at least illusory, choices. “Natural” isn’t really all that different, at least as officially defined by the USDA and FDA, than foods without that label. And indeed, within livestock production, if natural means more exposure to harsh or unhealthful practices, is it better for livestock? There is a growing body of evidence that it is not.

Trusteed IRAs: why they are popular, who should consider them, what benefits they offer

Fri, 23 Sep 2022 20:01:45 GMT

Q: I’ve heard a lot about trusteed IRAs. How do they differ from traditional IRAs?

A: Simply put, trusteed IRAs offer potential tax benefits of traditional or Roth IRAs with the protection and control of a trust. They provide tax advantages that stretch into the future and offer the ability to control how, when and in what amounts assets are distributed. Trusteed IRAs have become more popular given some of the inherent limits of traditional IRAs and the growing prevalence of self-directed retirement accounts combined with the decline of pension plans. They also are more cost-effective than setting up a trust and are generally more compliant with tax laws.

Q: Who should consider a trusteed IRA?

A: There are several reasons why someone should consider a trusteed IRA, the most consequential of which is if an owner has an interest in controlling assets and realizing tax benefits beyond their lifetime. This can mean an owner is concerned with the financial discipline or sophistication of heirs.

Other reasons include if an owner remarries and wants to provide for a current spouse as well as children from a previous relationship and/or is concerned about IRA management in the event of incapacitation.

Q: I’m in the middle of estate planning. How can a trusteed IRA help with the process?

A: They can help process if only to preserve the potential tax-advantaged accumulation of IRA benefits to pass on to heirs. Under traditional or custodial IRAs, a beneficiary is required to withdraw at least the Required Minimum Distribution (RMD) each year. However, a beneficiary may withdraw additional amounts, for any reason, at any time—and incur possible fees or tax penalties.

Additionally, owners can restrict payouts to a beneficiary to the RMD, enabling it to operate as a spendthrift trust. At the owner’s death, the trusteed IRA would be automatically split into separate accounts for individual beneficiaries, with distribution terms defined for each account.

Another benefit is that estate plans don’t need to be rewritten or updated; trusteed IRAs can be added independent of an estate plan to protect IRA assets which legally pass outside of wills.

Q: Is a trusteed IRA better suited to farmers or owners of farm assets?

A: Not expressly, but a trusteed IRA can play an important role in legacy planning and preservation of farm assets over multiple generations. Given the growing generation gap among farming families, trusteed IRAs could be a way help preserve farm family values over generations from beyond the grave. Moreover, as farm economics continues to change, farmers may find value in the highly customizable nature of trusteed IRAs. In the event of a divorce in the family, for example, assets can be made to not leave the family’s bloodlines.

Q: Are there any downsides to trusteed IRAs?

A: Given that a trusteed IRA requires a corporate trustee, it’s harder to change ownership and family members cannot be named as trustees. Not all financial institutions offer trusteed IRAs so they may not be widely available to interested clients. Additionally, while they offer greater customization and more control, trusteed IRAs carry some limits. To have the highest level of customization and control, a trust would need to be created.

Please send questions, comments or requests to address a topic or issue to Rees Mason at rees.mason@ml.com.