2002 Unified Beef Cattle and Range Research Report

Agricultural Experiment Station
Department of Animal and Range Sciences
North Dakota State University

March 2003

Index

Cow Calf

Biological and economic synergies, and methods of integrating beef cow and field crops enterprises
Vern Anderson and Blaine Schatz

Effect of field-pea based creep feed on intake and digestibility of nursing beef calves grazing native range in western North Dakota
A. A. Gelvin, G. P. Lardy, J. S. Caton, and D. G. Landblom

Effects of supplement type on intake and growth in sucking calves grazing native range in southeastern North Dakota
T. D. Maddock and G. P. Lardy

Utilization of field pea and sunflower meal as dietary supplements for beef cows — progress report
C. Smith, T.J.Transtrom, W.W. Poland and L.J.Tisor

Diet composition of beef cows grazing stockpiled native range in southwestern North Dakota — a progress report
T.J.Transtrom, C. Smith, W.W. Poland and L.J.Tisor

Effect of nutrient restriction and compensation on gestating beef heifers
A.M. Encinias, H.B. Encinias, G.P. Lardy, and C.S. Park

Comparison of corn versus soyhulls as a source of energy in lactating beef cow diets
T.A. Baumann, G.P. Lardy, W.W. Dvorak, and V.L. Anderson

Effect of field pea level on intake, digestion, microbial protein synthesis, ruminal fermentation and fill in beef steers fed forage-based diets
J.J. Reed, G.P. Lardy, M.L. Bauer, J.S. Caton and T.C. Gilbery

Quality of CRP hay from lands in North Dakota
Kevin Sedivec and Greg Lardy

Backgrounding and Feedlot

Discovering value in North Dakota calves; The Dakota Feeder Calf Show Feedout Project
Karl Hoppe, Vern Anderson and Ernie Ward

Southwest Feeders Project: 2002 Calf Backgrounding Test
Leif Anderson, Dan Nudell, Chip Poland, Tim Faller, and Don Stecher

Effect of field pea level on intake, digestion, microbial protein synthesis, ruminal fermentation and fill in beef steers fed growing diets
J.J. Reed, G.P. Lardy, M.L. Bauer, J.S. Caton and T.C. Gilbery

Range

Determining an optimum stocking rate for the Missouri Coteau of North Dakota
Bob D. Patton

Effects of dormant season grazing on herbage production and plant growth
Mitch Faulkner, Kevin Sedivec, Jackie Olson, Tim Faller, Jack Dahl, and Greg Lardy

Biological and economic synergies, and methods of integrating beef cow and field crops enterprises

Vern Anderson and Blaine Schatz¹

Most cattlemen rely on range and pasture grasses as their primary forage resource for their cow herd. In intensively farmed eco-regions, cows are used to market various low- value, high-volume crop biomass products such as residues and screenings. Grains and processing co-products are often cost effect energy and/or protein supplements for cows under several different management scenarios. A number of research trials conducted at the Carrington Research Extension Center during the past several years strongly support the biological and economic synergies of a beef cow enterprise integrated with cropping systems.

Beef cows are quite evenly dispersed throughout North Dakota with the exception of the Red River Valley and the northern tier of counties. More productive soils and higher rainfall in the east provide more forage and crop biomass which support a higher density of beef cows than the west. The integrated producers are using more annual forages in their sustainable crop rotations. Field crops with significant feed potential include corn, wheat, barley, oats, triticale, millet, sorghum, sudan, and others. Most can be harvested as silage, hay, or residue. Legumes such as field peas, dry beans, and soybeans offer valuable nutrients for beef cows as forage or grain and residue. Other broadleaf plants including sunflower, canola, and flax can contribute significantly to beef cows' nutritional needs. Most grains can be utilized for growing and finishing feeder calves in a cropland-based, vertically integrated livestock enterprise. Manure from cows and calves contributes to soil fertility, reducing the need for purchased fertilizer.

Introduction

A number of trials have been conducted to explore the use of forages, residues, and co-product feeds in beef cow diets during the past several years. The collective results have shown that cows can be fed a wide variety of feeds if properly balanced for the cows' genetic potential. Satisfactory reproductive performance and good cow condition can be maintained for production of healthy and high-performing calves. More responsibility falls on the manager to formulate low-cost yet productive diets to match respective gestation and lactation needs. This paper summarizes findings of several studies to ascertain biological and economic coefficients of crop-livestock integration and appropriate use of co-products.

Research findings in nutrition

A wide variety of feeds and forages have been used successfully in balanced diets for lactating cows at the Carrington Center. Experiments have been conducted using residues from corn, wheat, oats, barley, several oilseed meals (crambe, canola, sunflower), screenings (wheat, corn, soybeans, sunflower, pea, flax, barley), co-product feeds (soyhulls, barley malt pellets, wheat middlings, oat hulls, potato processing waste, several corn processing co-products), and most grains. In many cases, co-product feeds are preferred over grains as the starch from grains will lower digestibility of forages due to a shift away from fiber-digesting microbes in the rumen. As a general statement, grains should be limited to four pounds per day or less for optimum fiber digestion, but highly price competitive feed grains or expensive forages may override this recommendation. Several publications are available that summarize research studies and give recommendations on feeds and co-products. These include Wheat middlings, A useful feed for beef cattle (AS-1175), Alternative feeds for ruminants (AS-1182), Feeding field peas to livestock (EB-76), Feeding barley to beef cattle (EB-70), By-products and regionally available alternative feedstuffs for dairy cattle, (AS-1180) and Drylot beef cow/calf production (AS-974). Data from research using alternative feeds in cow and calf diets can be found in past Beef Cattle Production Field Day research reports (www.ag.ndsu. nodak.edu/carringt/) or by contacting the animal nutritionists at the Carrington Research Extension Center (701 652-2951, vanderso@ndsuext.nodak.edu or khoppe@ndsuext.nodak.edu). Common sense dictates that when feeding new or unknown feeds, a nutrient analysis is recommended before formulating diets. Least-cost diets need to be formulated to meet the requirements for the genetic potential of cattle in respective production stages.

Vitamin and mineral nutrition is a concern with extensive use of residues and co-products. Aftermath grazing and feeding of straw or stover to cows at any production stage suggests higher levels of mineral and vitamin supplementation. Vitamin A is easily and inexpensively supplemented by injection or by adding a dry supplement to the feed. Feeding small amounts of good quality alfalfa provides additional vitamin A, as well as calcium. Extra calcium may be needed to balance elevated phosphorous levels when higher levels of grain or co-products are fed. More research is needed on mineral requirements when feeding low-quality forages. High sulfur levels in some corn co-products should not be a problem in cow diets as these high-protein feeds are used at low percentages in brood cow diets.

Palatability is an important factor, although cows are less sensitive to the flavor of feeds than calves. Glucosinolates in crambe meal have a bitter flavor but comparative feeding trials suggest this new oilseed meal (~30% crude protein) can be fed at up to 50% of a supplement formulation in cake or in mixed feeds (Poland et al., 2000; Anderson et al., 2000; Anderson, 1998). Deoxynivalenol or DON in barley had no negative effect on intake, cow condition, or rebreeding, and actually improved calf gains when 12 pounds of 36 ppm DON barley per head per day was fed to lactating first calf heifers in a straw- based diet (Anderson et al., 1996). High-fiber feeds such as sunflower screenings (Anderson and Bock, 2000b), oat, barley, and millet hulls have limited and in some cases highly variable palatability and nutrient content. These feeds may be purchased at a lower price and palatability issues can be avoided by mixing with other feeds. Moist feeds such as potato waste serve to enhance palatability when mixed and support excellent performance but logistics of transporting wet feeds needs to be considered (Anderson and Bock, 2000a)

A practical approach to feeding beef cows at the Carrington Research Extension Center is to provide a limited amount of a nutrient dense feed daily or every other day. The supplement can be fed as a cake or in bunks but all cows need to have equal access to prevent dominating cows from over-consumption. Low-quality forage such as straw or CRP is offered free choice which allows cows to satisfy their need for dry matter (Anderson, 1997, 1998; Boyles et al., 1990). Supplemental forage can also be offered to cows on dry pastures to minimize grazing pressure. In cases where forage is not available, cows can be penned and fed limited amounts of co-product feeds or grains to meet nutrient requirements. This approach may be cheaper than purchasing and hauling hay long distances. However, cows will seek additional feed as limited amounts of co-products or grain will leave them hungry but can meet their nutritional needs.

Feeding supplements to cows requires some labor but offering a two-day supply of a nutrient dense supplement on alternate days has been tested with satisfactory results (Anderson 1991c). Rumen function is not disrupted by the alternate day supplementation schedule.

Grazing cropland is often relegated to aftermath opportunities. This is a cheap feed source for gestating cows. Extended periods of aftermath grazing will require supplementation of protein and vitamin/minerals. This can be done with small amounts (2-4 lbs) of cake, mixed feed (3-5 lbs), or high-quality forage (4-6 lbs) such as second-cutting alfalfa. Early weaning is recommended if cows need to gain weight.

Cropland pastures where annual or perennial forage is deliberately sown for grazing cows has not been explored in an integrated cows/cropping system scenario. This method of integrating crops and cows may increase net return to the farm during challenging grain marketing times. Irrigated mixed alfalfa/grass pastures were used for grazing at the Carrington Research Extension Center several years ago. Bloat preventive blocks were necessary but animal performance was acceptable. With irrigated cropland, more beef was produced per acre when corn silage and alfalfa were grown in rotation and fed to cows in drylot. Corn offered the option of grain harvest and feedlot use for calves. Cows were supported by aftermath grazing of stover (Anderson and Meyer, 1983).

Some warm season annual grass forages such as sorghum, sudan, or corn are being deliberately grazed in the late summer and fall. Moisture-stressed cereal grains and hay may also be harvested by grazing cows, however, drought-stressed forages may contain high nitrate levels from incomplete plant metabolism of nitrogen. Samples from the most stressed areas of the field should be analyzed. See Nitrate Poisoning of Livestock V-839 (Revised) for further information on feeding high-nitrate forages. Prussic acid poisoning can be problematic in the fall as well. Frozen regrowth is the most toxic but the cyanide compounds volatilize after a few weeks. See Prussic Acid Poisoning publication V-1150 for more detailed information.

In every case described above, cow health and condition should be continually evaluated and changes made in diets or management if problems arise or cow condition is seriously affected. A period of extra nutrition or "flushing" may be appropriate just before and during breeding season to ensure cycling and conception. Consultations with beef cattle specialists are advised if you have questions on feeds or strategies for feeding.

Creep feeding supports improved calf growth and adapts calves for the feedyard. A number of co-products and new grains can be economically used for creep including crambe meal (Anderson and Trautman, 1996), field peas (Anderson, 1999), wheat midds and corn gluten feed (Anderson and Dhuyvetter, 1997).

Early weaning offers opportunities to mitigate drought or reduce nutrient needs for the cow. Successful early weaning is a matter of providing a palatable and nutrient dense feed to the calves while managing for health and other challenges (Anderson, 1993)

In modeling an integrated crop/livestock farm, cows utilized forage and aftermath with grains dedicated to backgrounding and finishing calves. This approach maximizes use of facilities and equipment, available labor, and genetic potential of the calves. It spreads risk over more enterprises but requires knowledge of care and feeding of weaned calves. In a three-year head-to-head feedlot comparison using 139 head of producer calves each year, feeding calves in North Dakota proved to return more profit than sending calves to large commercial yards in the High Plains (Anderson et al., 1995)

Manure from feeding areas is a valuable nutrient for cropland with composting becoming more popular as the process sequesters more nitrogen vs volatilizing (Sell and Anderson, 1994). Manure applied to cropland or deposited during aftermath grazing will reduce the need for purchased commercial fertilizers. Estimates for the fertility value of manure vary with fecal nitrogen and cost of nitrogen in commercial fertilizer.

Intensive management

Only 16-18% of agricultural income is attributed to livestock in North Dakota, with beef cows the dominant enterprise. Surrounding states realize over 40% of agricultural income from livestock enterprises. Since virtually all available rangeland is grazed, increased cow numbers must be supported with cropland pastures or field crop biomass.

Drought, expansion, or other factors can challenge producers to provide forage for their cows. Drylot management during winter is common. Summer feeding offers marketing opportunities for low-valued feeds through cows. While the drylot cow program at the Carrington Center is a research tool, practical approaches to feeding have proven that extended drylot management is biologically and economically viable (Anderson, 1998a; Anderson 1997; Anderson, 1994; Sell et al., 1994; Anderson 1991a,b; Anderson, 1990; Anderson et al., 1989, Anderson et al., 1988; Boyles et al., 1990; Sell and Watt, 1989; Sell, 1989; and Anderson and Meyer, 1983). See Extension Circular AS-974 Drylot Beef Cow/Calf Production for further information.

Economics of integrating cows and crops

The net economic effect of increased cow/calf production based on cropping system biomass and use of more co-products in-state could be substantial. Economic returns to a beef cow enterprise are to a great extent dependent on feed costs, as this is the single greatest expense. Using "cost of production" for feed to determine net return places credits toward the beef cow enterprise for total farm income. If actual or estimated "market prices" are used, it can create an artificial scenario for estimating feed costs that can be lower than actual costs in some cases and exorbitantly higher in other cases. However, it is logical to use market prices when feeds have been purchased. Beef cows in the integrated crops/cows scenarios are often considered as scavengers, consuming otherwise low-value or unmarketable feeds and forages.

A comparison of breakeven costs for producing weaned calves under traditional pasture or with drylot production (Anderson and Meyer, 1983) used a 10-year average of pasture production coefficients from the North Dakota Beef Cattle Improvement Association and coefficients for drylot production developed at the Carrington Irrigation Station, now the Carrington Research Extension Center. Granted, cost figures have changed but the relative breakeven prices for calves is still valid for comparison. Breakeven prices for marketing weaned calves in this model were $59.23 per cwt for drylot calves and $89.78/cwt for high production pasture calves. Drylot cows require significantly lower capital investment per cow but facility and equipment depreciation was greater. Labor needs were also greater for drylot cows. Salvaged crop residue and other opportunity feeds provided competitive feed costs for the drylot cows. Total annual cost per head was $305.70 for drylot cows and $308.98 for high-production range cows.

In a typical east central North Dakota farm modeled for a three-year period, crops-only or crops plus drylot cows were compared for net returns (Sell and Watt, 1989; Sell et al., 1994). Sixty-five beef cows could be supported throughout the year from the cropping system biomass available on the 1,200-acre farm. Adding cows to the crops-only farm using the same cropping sequence increased requirements for operating capital by $7,200, improved net returns by $12,166, and lowered the year-to-year coefficient of variation in income from .85 to .48. Cows require labor and management and at certain times of the year there is potential for conflicting demand with crop production. However, cows can spread depreciation of machinery over more enterprises and occupy available labor during months of little cropland activity.

In another model, Sell (1989) concluded that a typical east central North Dakota farm using conventional or minimum tillage could provide adequate feed biomass for up to 85 head of drylot beef cows. The drylot cow enterprise increased operating capital requirements by an average of $8,241 and improved net returns to overhead for the farm by $22,190. Production coefficients for animal performance and feed requirements were taken from actual data generated at the Carrington Research Extension Center Livestock Unit.

More recent data from the 2001 state-wide average of North Dakota Farm Business Management report compared returns for crops-only farms with combined crops and beef cattle operations (S. Metzger, personal communication). Net farm income was averaged for 146 crop farms and 103 crop and beef farms. Net returns increased from $34,916 to $37,554 with the addition of beef cattle in a year with a relatively soft cattle market. In addition, labor and management earnings were reported as $12,304 for crops only and $18,063 for crops and cows operations, with a net worth improvement for crops and cows of $8,986 over crops only. This comparison had not been made in previous years, but will be included in all future reports.

Summary

Clearly, synergies exist between crops and cows that improve biological and economic sustainability in crop farms. Past research with alternative feeds, drylot management, and early weaning gives producers information for feeding and managing a cow herd during drought or for adding an enterprise to capture value of cropping system biomass. North Dakota has a wide variety of feeds and abundant feed resources for supporting many more beef cows and for increasing backgrounding and finishing calves. The livestock sector is poised for significant growth which could enhance producer returns as well as the overall economy of North Dakota.

References

Anderson, V.L.(Ed.). 2002. Feeding field peas to livestock. North Dakota State University Extension Bulletin, EB-76.

Anderson, V. L., J. S. Caton, J. D. Kirsch, and D. A. Redmer. 2000. Effect of crambe meal on performance, reproduction, and thyroid hormone levels of mature gestating and lactating beef cows. J. Anim. Sci 78:2269-2274.

Anderson, V.L. and Eric Bock. 2000a. Potato co-product as feed source for lactating mature beef cows and heifers. Beef Production Field Day Proceedings, Carrington Research Extension Center, North Dakota State University. Vol. 23:12-13.

Anderson, V.L. and Eric Bock. 2000b. Sclerotinia infected sunflowers screenings as a feed source for pregnant and non-pregnant mature beef cows. Beef Production Field Day Proceedings, Carrington Research Extension Center, North Dakota State University. Vol. 23:14-15.

Anderson, V. L. 1999. Field peas in creep feed for beef calves. Beef and Bison Production Field Day Proceedings, Carrington Research Extension Center, North Dakota State University. Vol. 22:1-4.

Anderson, V. L. 1998a. Performance of primiparous lactating drylot beef cows on crop residues and processing co-products. Beef and Bison Field Day Proceedings, Carrington Research Extension Center, North Dakota State University. Vol. 21:1-4.

Anderson, V. L. 1998b. Performance, metabolic, and physiological effects of crambe meal as a protein source for beef cattle. Ph.D. Dissertation, Animal and Range Sciences Department, North Dakota State University.

Anderson, V. L. and D. V. Dhuyvetter. 1997. Feed intake and performance of beef calves fed creep feed with dried corn gluten feed and wheat midds. Beef and Bison Field Day Proceedings, Carrington Research Extension Center, North Dakota State University Vol. 20:7-10.

Anderson, V. L. 1997. Supporting intensively managed commercial beef cows on crop residues and processing co-products. Beef and Bison Field Day Proceedings, Carrington Research Extension Center, North Dakota State University. Vol. 20:4-6.

Anderson, V.L., E. W. Boland, and H.H. Casper. 1996. Effects of vomitoxin (deoxynivalenol) from scab infested barley on performance of feedlot and breeding cattle. J. Anim. Sci 74(Suppl. 1):208 (Abstract).

Anderson, V. L., and Bruce Trautman. 1996. Crambe meal as a protein source in creep feed. J. Anim. Sci. 74(Suppl.1) 35 (Abstr.).

Anderson, V. L., K. F. Hoppe, H. Hughes, K. Froelich and K. Alderin. 1995. Performance and economic comparison of finishing calves in North Dakota or Kansas. North Dakota Beef Cattle and Range Research Report. p 59.

Anderson, V. L. 1994. Ruminant production systems inter-related with non-traditional crop management. Proceedings of Carrington Research/Extension Center (NDSU) Livestock Unit Field Day. Vol. 17:12.

Anderson, V.L. 1993. Diets with and without yeast for early weaned beef calves. J. Anim. Sci. 71(Suppl.1):595 (Abstr.)

Anderson, V.L. 1991a. Yeast in high residue diets for lactating drylot beef cows. Proceedings of Carrington Research/Extension Center (NDSU) Livestock Unit Field Day. Vol. 14:16-20.

Anderson, V.L. 1991b. Crop residues in rations for lactating drylot beef cows. Proceedings of Carrington Research/Extension Center (NDSU) Livestock Unit Field Day. Vol. 14:3

Anderson, V.L. 1991c. Reducing labor for drylot beef cows. Proceedings of Carrington Research/Extension Center (NDSU) Livestock Unit Field Day. Vol. 14:10-12.

Anderson, V.L. 1990. Two energy levels for crossbred drylot lactating beef cows. North Dakota Farm Research Bimonthly Bulletin 47:11.

Anderson, V. L. and S. L. Boyles. 1989. Drylot beef cow/calf production. North Dakota State University Extension Service AS-974.

Anderson V.L., S.L. Boyles and J. C. Gardner. 1989. High residue diets for lactating beef cows, a LISA Project. North Dakota Farm Research Bimonthly Bulletin. 47:20.

Anderson, V.L., J. C. Gardner and S.L. Boyles. 1988. Low input integrated crops/livestock production systems. Dept. Anim. & Range Sci. Ann. Rpt., NDSU. p101-105.

Anderson, V.L. and R. F. Meyer. 1983. An economic comparison of three beef production management systems. North Dakota Farm Research Bimonthly Bulletin 49:14.

Boyles, S.L., V.L. Anderson and J.S. Caton. 1990. Evaluation of dry matter disappearance and animal performance of lactating beef cows fed residue-based diets in drylot. J. Anim. Sci. 68(Suppl. 1):81 (Abstr.).

Dhuyvetter, John, Karl Hoppe, and Vern Anderson. Wheat middlings: A useful feed for cattle. North Dakota State University Extension Bulletin, AS-1175.

Lardy, Greg, and Vern Anderson. 1999. Alternative feeds for ruminants. North Dakota State University Extension Bulletin, AS-1182.

Lardy, Greg, and Marc Bauer. 1999. Feeding barley to beef cattle. North Dakota State University Extension Bulletin, EB-70.

Poland, W.P., V.L. Anderson and Lee Tisor. 2000. Developing a commercial range cake with crambe meal. Beef Production Field Day Proceedings, Carrington Research Extension Center, North Dakota State University. Vol. 23:5-11

Schroeder, J. W. 1999. By-products and regionally available alternative feedstuffs for dairy cattle. North Dakota State University Extension Bulletin, AS-1180.

Sell, Randy, David Watt, and V. L. Anderson. 1994. Economic aspects of integrating ruminant livestock on crops only farms in the northern plains. Proceedings of Carrington Research/Extension Center (NDSU) Livestock Unit Field Day. Vol. 17:10.

Sell, Randy and V. L. Anderson. 1994. Substituting composted manure for nitrogen fertilizer. Proceedings of Carrington Research/Extension Center (NDSU) Livestock Unit Field Day. Vol. 17:39.

Sell, Randy, and Dave Watt. 1989. Profitability of including a drylot cow/calf enterprise in a typical east central North Dakota grain farm. NDSU-Carrington Research Extension Center, Beef Production Field Day Proceedings. P34-39.

Sell, R. S. 1989. Adding a drylot cow-calf enterprise to an eastern North Dakota grain farm. Masters of Science Thesis. Agricultural Economics Department. North Dakota State University, Fargo.

Stoltenow, Charles, and Greg Lardy. 1998. Prussic acid poisoning. North Dakota State University Extension Bulletin, V-1150.

Stoltenow, Charles, and Greg Lardy. 1998. Nitrate poisoning of livestock. North Dakota State University Extension Bulletin, V-839 (Revised).

¹Carrington Research Extension Center

NEXT | INDEX