Air December 20 - 28, 2006
Relative Feed Value (RFV) and what it doesn't mean
This is Ag Outlook 2006 on 1420 KJCK, I'm Chuck Otte, Geary County, K-State Research and Extension Ag & Natural Resources Agent. A couple of interesting things have come out of all the forage testing we've done this fall. First, there is a little bit better recognition of the relative feed value test but also a lot of confusion. The truth is that relative feed value only has value, when you are comparing two lots of hay from the same forage. You can compare two lots of alfalfa, but not a lot of alfalfa vs a load of bromegrass. And the other thing is that when it comes time to balance a ration, you still have to depend on the other measurements like protein and ADF, etc - not relative feed value. In comparing alfalfa and grass hay, with each being put up at the proper time, grass hay will always have more fiber than alfalfa hay. That's just part of the difference between a grass and a broadleaf plant. However, not all fiber is the same. Grass fiber is more readily digested by ruminants than alfalfa fiber. Another thing about RFV is that it has it's highest value for dairy cows because of the heavy influence of energy measurements. For other species and even non-dairy cows, relative feed value is less important. Beef cows are not going to react the same way to different RFV hays than dairy cows because the energy intake isn't quite as critical as with those heavy milking dairy cows. The bottom line - relative feed value is probably an important thing to test for IF you have alfalfa that you can feed to dairy cows or can sell to a dairy herd. If dairy isn't in your picture or you aren't putting up alfalfa, stick to the more traditional lab measurements - they'll do you a lot more good! This has been Ag Outlook 2006 on the Talk of JC, 1420 KJCK, I'm Chuck Otte.
Crop Production update
This is Ag Outlook 2006 on 1420 KJCK, I'm Chuck Otte, Geary County, K-State Research and Extension Ag & Natural Resources Agent. I wanted to hit a couple of crop production update topics this morning. Variety yield test bulletins are coming in to the Extension Office now. The sorghum book is now available and is now being published in the same format as the wheat bulletin, more like a newspaper than a booklet. I expect soybeans should be out any day as well. The alfalfa test bulletin isn't out yet, but I do have the proof copy and can make copies for you. The alfalfa tests really show what a dry year it has been with yields being reduced anywhere from 25 to 75% from 2005 yields, depending on location. Even some of the irrigated tests had yield reductions because of the hot dry weather. Still, yields of 2 to 4½ tons per acre were being recorded! The weed control handbook, aka the herbicide book, should be out in early January - keep listening and I'll let you know for sure when it'll be available. Switching gears now, there have been some long term yield studies being done around the state on the effect of residue treatment in continuous wheat. These studies have been for anywhere from two to ten years in length. And the results, to date, are intriguing. A ten year study in Harvey county shows no-till with the highest yield of 49.7 bushels per acre, burning is second with 48.8 and chiseling third with 46.5. Other studies in no-till burned vs no-till unburned shows some big difference in variety yields based purely on the disease resistance in that variety. The bottom line is that continuous production of wheat isn't a good idea, and a crop rotation is going to have great benefits over the long haul!! This has been Ag Outlook 2006 on the Talk of JC, 1420 KJCK, I'm Chuck Otte.
Handling Livestock
This is Ag Outlook 2006 on 1420 KJCK, I'm Chuck Otte, Geary County, K-State Research and Extension Ag & Natural Resources Agent. With hay and feed being as tight and expensive as it is right now, some serious culling of the cow herd over the next few weeks may be a prudent move. K-State has a really good cow calf specialist that always likes to talk about his theory for culling cows. His concept is very simple, you cull cows based on the 4 "O"s: Open, Old, Odd and Ornery. Currently, based on the records of the 3400 members of the Kansas Farm Management Association, it costs right at $675 per year to keep a cow in the herd and get a calf from her, weaned and sold. If you have a cow that is open, regardless of its history, can you afford a pet that's going to cost you $675 and gives you nothing in return? Even if you only consider feed costs, you're still looking at nearly $300 per year for feed alone. Old and Odd are a couple of obvious ones. What constitutes old depends on each cow and odd can be either the cow or her calves. If they just don't fit in to your herd maybe it's time to get rid of 'em. If certain cow's calves are always getting sorted off at the sale barn and being sold for less, you can't tolerate that discount. And ornery, well, that speaks for itself. If that cow is always impossible to move and handle, maybe she needs to go! Speaking of handling livestock, the Onaga FFA Alumini are hosting a meeteing on livestock handling on February 10th. They are bringing in Richard McConnell for a one day workshop on low stress livestock handling that should be pretty good. For registration cost and information, give me a call at the Extension Office. It looks like it should be a really good meeting! This has been Ag Outlook 2006 on the Talk of JC, 1420 KJCK, I'm Chuck Otte.
Return to Radio Home Page
Return to Ag Home Page