2006 Annual Report Beef Section | Dickinson
Research Extension Center 1089 State Avenue Dickinson, ND 58601 |
Click Here
for Printer Friendly version
Effect of alternative winter feeding methods on
Winter feeding is a major
expense in cow-calf operations in the Northern Plains. The objectives of this study
were to compare cow performance and associated costs of nontraditional feeding
programs in southwestern ND. Young beef cows (n=49; BW = 560.2 ± 59.9 kg; body
condition score [BCS] = 5.9 ± .6) were randomly assigned to one of three
treatments. Treatments included grazing of swathed oat (Avena sativa; SW), grazing of unharvested corn (Zea mays; CO) or oat hay feeding in dry
lot (DL). Number of cows allocated to each replicate was based upon amount of
forage available at the initiation of the study and an intended 8-wk feeding
period beginning in mid October. Cumulative changes in BW and BCS averaged 49.9
kg and .02 units, respectively. Hay fed in DL was provided ad libitum (19.0 ± .23
kg/d). Number of grazing days per cow (P = .94) was similar across treatments
(51.3, 52.5 and 51.0 for SW, CO and DL, respectively). Number of grazing days
per ha (P = .4) was numerically greater for CO (159.6), intermediate for DL (122.4)
and least for SW (99.8). Cumulative ADG (kg/d, P=.05) was reduced in SW (.59)
compared to CO (1.09) and DL (.95). Cumulative change in BCS (P=.2) was similar
across treatments (-.10, .25 and -.19 for SW, CO and DL, respectively). Total
production and use costs per ha were $68.50, $195.10 and $95.93 for SW, CW and
DL respectively. Costs per cow grazing day (P=.29) and per kg of BW gain (P=.70)
did not differ among treatments. Numerically, however, costs per day were least
in SW ($.67), greatest in CO ($1.31) and intermediate in DL ($.89). Likewise,
numerically cost per unit of gain was least in DL ($.93) compared to SW ($.1.19)
and CO ($.1.19). Results suggest that each feeding alternative is feasible in southwestern
ND. However, other elements of nontraditional systems (e.g. manure disposal,
machinery and labor requirements) will need to be valued if they are to be
adopted as “better” alternatives.
Key words: Beef cows, Unharvested corn, Swathed oat
Justification
Agricultural (arable and grazable) land dominates
the landscape in the Northern Plains. Appropriate integration of crop and
livestock systems within this landscape can be a valuable tool in increasing
rural economic development. Inclusion of feed and forage production in cropping
rotations would provide flexibility in developing cropping systems to help
enhance the general sustainability of the underlying ecosystem. Coupling this
feed and forage production with resident and value-added ruminant livestock
production offers a tremendous spring board for capturing the real value of
agricultural production and stimulating additional economic development in the
region in an environmentally friendly fashion.
Annual forage production is increasing in importance
in the agricultural economy of the Northern Plains. Innovative farmers are
seeking ways to enhance crop diversity, control pests and increase crop water
use efficiency without assuming the risks often associated with continuous
cropping. However, a viable market for annual forage production is often
critical for enhancing its impact on regional economies.
Ruminant livestock constitutes a primary economic
engine in this region with cow/calf production a major component. The winter
management program of traditional cow/calf production accounts for up to 60% of
annual production expenses in these operations. Two-thirds of this expense is
for harvested and stored feeds typically fed in total or semi confinement
feeding facilities. Appropriate integration of crop and livestock systems
within the region could conceivably use cattle to create a ready market for
annual forage production while simultaneously reducing the overall
environmental and economic costs associated with traditional winter management
programs.
Objective
Determine the effect of winter feeding method on
beef cow performance and production and use costs in southwestern
Procedures
Three feeding methods initiated in mid October for
an 8-week evaluation.
o
Swath grazed (SW): oat
fields (3.2 ha/replicate) were seeded in mid April and swathed in late July and
left in field for later grazing.
o
Corn grazed (CO): corn
fields (3.2 ha/replicate) were seeded in early May and left standing in field
for later grazing.
o
Hay fed (DL): oat hay fed ad
libitum in drylot (previously mob grazed fields; 4.0 ha/replicate). Hay was
obtained from adjacent fields that were similar in variety, seed and swathing
dates to SW and baled in early August.
Forty-nine 2- and 3-year old dry beef cows (BW =
560.2 ± 59.9 kg; body condition score [BCS] = 5.9 ± .6) were blocked by weight
and randomly assigned within weight block to one of 6 replicates (2 replicates
per feeding method). Number of animals per grazing replicate was determined by
amount of forage available at the start of the experiment, 50% harvest
efficiency, 10.0 kg/cow/d consumption rate and a 56 d feeding period.
Replicates of DL had 8 cows.
Cows were weighed and body condition scored every 14
d until replicate removal from experiment. One SW and one CO replicate was
removed after grazing for 49 d due to a reduction in visual forage available
and in period animal gain. Experimental days for each feeding method were
either an average of actual grazing days (SW and CO) or an estimate of days available
(DL; hay available in swath minus harvest and storage losses divided by actual daily
DM deliveries per replicate).
Forage and animal data were analyzed as a randomized
complete block design using method replicate as the experimental unit.
Costs of feed production per acre were estimated
using FINBIN 10-yr averages (http://www.finbin.umn.edu/CropEnterpriseAnalysis/Default.aspx;
accessed March, 2005) for North Dakota Western Missouri Slope region. Cost of corn
production was estimated as average costs for reporting farms in the region
that produced corn. Cost of hay production was estimated as average costs for
oat hay production plus a hauling charge ($1.25/bale). Cost swath production
was assumed to equal the estimated cost of DL production minus a baling
($6.30/bale) and hauling charge. A use charge of $4.94/ha for electric fencing
was applied to grazing methods (SW and CO) and $0.10 per head per day for
feeding was applied to DL.
Conclusions
Table 1:
·
DL cows were delivered 19.0 kg/head/d.
·
Days grazed/fed per ha were similar across feeding methods (P=.40).
Table 2:
·
Cumulative average daily gain (kg/d) differed across feeding methods
(P=.05).
·
Cumulative change in body condition score was similar across feeding
method (P=.20).
[numerically:
CO > SW ≈ DL]
Table 3:
·
Production and use cost per head per day were similar across feeding
method (P=.29).
·
Production and use costs per kg of gain were similar across feeding
method (P=.70).
Summary
When comparing the grazing of swathed oat or
standing corn to oat hay feeding in southwestern
Implication
Results suggest that each feeding alternative is
feasible in southwestern ND. However, other elements of nontraditional systems
(e.g. manure disposal, machinery and labor requirements) will need to be valued
if they are to be adopted as “better” alternatives.
[ Back to 2006 Annual Report Index ] [ Back to Beef Reports ]
[ DREC Home ] [ Contact DREC ] [ Top of Page ]