FARM REPORT

February 2010 The William H. Miner Agricultural Research Institute

Vet’s Corner: Anovular Cows Revisited;  Crop Congress 

2 From The President:  The Importance of Undergraduate Research 

3

To Plow or Not to Plow  4 “Temping” Cows  5 Soil Nitrogen Testing  for Corn: Some  Unofficial Research 

6 What’s Happening  on the Farm  7 Improving Cow  Comfort in Tie Stalls  8 Crop Input Trends:  What’s Up, What’s Down  9 Southern Exposure;  No Excuse for Quackgrass  10 Random Thoughts;  Farm Report Survey Overview  

11

Inside this issue: 

FORAGE QUALITY ASSESSMENT: CORN SILAGE

minerals, it’s fast and inexpensive compared to the Gold Standard of wet chemistry analyses. 2. Dry matter. Are any of these samples too wet or too dry for further consideration? Understanding the perils of soggy wet forage on DMI and possibly indicating immature corn at harvest or problems in fermentation. Too dry a forage, also risking limited DMI, suspect fermentation and risk of spoilage, yeasts and molds, poor digestibility of hard dry kernels, low forage digestibility.

CS ID A B C D E

DM% 28.5 31.7 32.1 32.1 29.0

CP% 7.7 6.7 8.2 8.3 9.1

Sol Pro% CP

52.0 78.0 59.0 78.0 78.0

ADF% 23.8 23.9 21.4 24.5 22.3

NDF% 40.8 40.1 41.9 39.7 37.4

Sugar ESC

3.1 2.1 1.9 1.7 1.4

Starch% 35.8 36.9 35.8 33.4 33.1

Table 1. Corn silage analyses

See FORAGE on Page 9

A correlation of the table, left, with the photograph above: Silage A is not shown; B=4; C=3; D=2; and E=1. Sample A was taken from a different forage pile. It is important to keep in mind the dangers associated with standing near the face of a forage pile. As we reported in the October Farm Report, even well-managed silos can give way without warning.

We started our Advanced Dairy Management class with the Annual Forage Quality Assessment exercise. We provide the students with actual forage analyses of 5 corn silage samples and ask them to evaluate and critique with the notion of having to purchase 500T. We ask them what are the pertinent concepts to consider when reviewing just the lab analyses and what more information would they like to have, short of actually seeing, smelling and holding the forages. So, based on the abridged analytical data below, how would YOU assess and rank these silage samples? Which would you be willing to purchase? Now for highlights of the thought process of assessment: 1. W h a t t y p e o f analyses are these? NIR or wet chem., does it matter on CS for lactating cows? NIR is relatively accurate for many components except

1

2

3

4

The William H. Miner Agricultural Research Institute Farm Report        February 2010 — 2 

VET’S CORNER: ANOVULAR COWS REVISITED The November 2007 “Vet’s Corner” article reported that anovular cows have lower conception rates than cows that resume ovulation within 40 days of calving. Recent research conducted by Dr. Paul Fricke from the Univer-sity of Wisconsin indicates that anovular cows also have a high rate of double ovulation on the first service fol-lowing a low progesterone postpartum period, and higher Early Embryonic Death (EED) rate 33-61 days after service. The definition of an anovular cow is one with low blood progesterone who doesn’t resume cycling during the first two months after calving. Since it isn’t practical to blood test cows for progesterone, the herd health veteri-narian has used rectal palpation or transrectal ultrasound to detect the presence of a functional CL to identify anovular cows. In normal herds, 24-28% of cows are not cycling at 65-75 days in milk as determined by ultra-sound or serum progesterone tests. When anovular cows are put into a Timed Artificial In-semination protocol after the first TAI: Anovular cows had 31% conception rate (CR) vs. 52% CR for cycling cows; and anovular cows had 18% EED at 33 – 61 days vs. 6% EED in cycling cows.

In herds with low CR and high EED rates, palpation or ultrasound for a functional CL could be performed on cows that have not exhibited estrus signs twice, at 47-53 and 54-60 days postpartum before going on TAI. If anovular cows are identified and kept out of TAI, some repro problems could be avoided. In another study, anovular cows were diagnosed at 45 DIM and placed on TAI. On the first ovulation 36% had multiple ovulations, and on the second ovulation multi-ple ovulation rates dropped to a normal rate of 8%. Breeding anovular cows on the first ovulation from a TAI service could result in a significant increase in twinning rate. The combination of twinning and low body condition that is commonly associated with anovu-lar cows can create life threatening metabolic problems on the next calving. We also know that the abortion rate for cows diagnosed with twins is three times greater than for single pregnancies, so there is another connec-tion between anovular cows and higher abortion rate.

— Kent E Henderson, DVM Northwest Veterinary Associates, Inc.

hugamoo@comcast.net

CROP CONGRESS AT MINER INSTITUTE

Speakers include:

Quirine Ketterings, Cornell University, Corn-Alfalfa Ro-tation Management.

Anita Deming, Cornell Coop-erative Extension of Essex County, Costs of Roundup Ready Corn Production Ver-sus Conventional Herbicide Programs.

Eric Young, Miner Institute, Getting the Most From Your Soil Tests.

Wednesday, Feb. 17 — 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. at Miner Center Auditorium, 586 Ridge Road, Chazy, NY. Admission is free, lunch will be available for $5.

Karl Czymmek, PRO-DAIRY, Cornell University, CAFO Update and Emerging Environmental Is-sues.

Dr. Russ Hahn, Cornell Univer-sity, An Update on Weed Control in Corn.

For more information, contact Eric Young by calling (518) 846-7121, ext. 113 or email him at young@whminer.com.

The William H. Miner Agricultural Research Institute Farm Report        February 2010 — 3 

FROM THE PRESIDENT’S DESK — THE IMPORTANCE OF UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH

As I write this article, the second week of the spring semester is just underway with our Advanced Dairy Management (ADM) students. They spend one full se-mester here at Miner as part of a 2 + 2 program between Vermont Technical College and University of Vermont. During their time in residence at the Institute, these stu-dents rotate through the dairy farm operations, take courses in agronomy, nutrition and forage management, seminar presentations, and dairy farm evaluation. An important component of their educational experi-ence at Miner is conducting an undergraduate research pro-ject. During the first week of classes, students meet with the research staff and discuss a range of potential projects that are all aimed at solving a current on-farm problem or gener-ating preliminary information for a later, more in-depth study. Each year, I am impressed with how quickly the stu-dents appreciate the importance of the individual studies – both in terms of the information to be learned as well as the importance of understanding the research process for them as students and future dairy producers. For us, the goal of undergraduate research is four-fold: 1) we of course generate useful data for on-farm decision making and often for future studies, 2) we nur-ture critical thinking and problem-solving skills in these students within an applied agricultural research setting, 3) these skills allow the students to assess product infor-mation supplied to them in the future as dairy producers more critically, and 4) conducting and interpreting a study provides a (relatively) painless and practical vehi-cle for teaching the fundamentals of statistics in a man-

ner that is less easily forgotten once the semester ends! To give you a flavor of the range in project topics the students tackle, here are the topics for this semester: Does dietary starch Content affect the meal pattern of lactating multiparous cows? Influence of maturity at harvest and ensiling time on protein solubility, starch degradability and fiber digestibil-ity of corn hybrids harvested for silage. Evaluating corn silage quality and fermentation char-acteristics in mini-silos Relationship between fecal cortisol metabolites and serum cortisol collected under two different conditions. Do cows have similar feeding duration when feeding from a Calan gate versus a headlock feeding barrier? Effect of regrouping on resident and introduced lactat-ing dairy cows. Evaluation of methods for diagnosing clinical and sub-clinical metritis in Miner Institute’s herd The effect of copper sulfate footbaths on bacterial con-tamination of teat-ends after milking

So, you can see that the students will be busy this spring semester. But, by May we expect to have gained valuable insight into a range of important issues. And perhaps more importantly, these ADM students will have gained a working appreciation for the value of the research process and critical thinking in their future pro-fessional lives within the dairy industry.

— Rick Grant, grant@whminer.com

ROUNDUP READY ALFALFA: STATUS REPORT Progress by government committees is much like breeding elephants: The activity takes place at a high level, is accomplished only after considerable noise and commotion, and it takes a very long time (in the elephant’s case, 22 months) to see the results. Such is the case with the USDA regarding Roundup Ready alfalfa.

There’s been a period for public comment on the en-vironmental impact of this technology, and now four meetings are being scheduled at various places around the U.S. for the public to comment on USDA’s draft Environmental Impact Statement

(EIS). The deadline for sub-mitting comments on the draft EIS is Feb. 16.

With others, we were hop-ing that even though RR alfalfa won’t be nearly as popular in the East as it will be in the West, the process would be completed in time for 2010 seed sales. This is proving to have been a false hope.

A baby elephant with its mother.

The William H. Miner Agricultural Research Institute Farm Report        February 2010 — 4 

TO PLOW OR NOT TO PLOW A farmer I’ve known for many years recently asked me why the Institute still uses a moldboard plow. Long ago he moved from plowing to reduced tillage, and reports excellent results. It’s a good question from a very good farmer, and deserves an answer. (Miner Institute’ s crop program is now under new management, namely Eric Young, so this ex-planation will consist of what we’ve done in the past, not nec-essarily what we’re going to do in the future.) Some of the Institute’s crop-land has been continuous no-till, or almost so, since we brought it into production in the early 1980s. That’s be-cause this land is so stony that conventional tillage would bring up an ungodly number of stones, and if we were to at-tempt to pick them we’d only succeed in lowering the eleva-tion of the whole field. I used to tell people that this land has “two rocks for every dirt”, which isn’t far from the truth. The “almost so” com-ment is because the only tillage done on this land has been one pass with a secondary tillage tool (formerly a tandem disk, now a John Deere Cul-timulcher) following the last year of corn. This smoothes out ruts and fits up an inch or so of soil so we can seed al-falfa-grass with a conventional grain drill. This sys-tem has worked very well, and one tillage pass every 10 years is almost “continuous” notill. We’ve been moldboard plowing the rest of our crop-land twice during the typical 8-10 year crop rotation, as we rotate into and out of forage seedings. We plow as we rotate out of alfalfa-grass (and into corn) be-cause much of our land is clay loam and our experi-

ence with notill corn on clay loams has been unpleasant. We then chisel plow for several years. We also moldboard plow following the last year of corn, in the process incorporating any surface debris including manure solids, herbicide residues, and weed seeds. Since we don’t use herbicides on alfalfa-grass seed-ings it’s good to bury the sins of the past — i.e. weed seeds. Moldboard plowing also allows us to be a bit more liberal with our use of atrazine in the final year of corn production since any surface herbicide residues are buried six to eight inches deep. Many years ago Successful Farm-ing magazine ran an excellent feature article on how effectively various tillage tools incorporate surface residue. Ag engineers treated small beads of man-made “residue” in such a way that they could photograph the soil profile following tillage and see where the residue wound up. The till-age tools included moldboard plow, tandem and offset disks, and both straight and twisted shank chisel plows. Only with moldboard plowing was the sur-face residue incorporated more than a few inches deep. We did some related research at Miner Institute examining the fate of nutrients after many years of con-ventional vs. minimum or no tillage, and found that unless the field was

moldboard plowed, the applied nutrients (primarily phos-phorus and potassium) remained in the top inch or two of soil. There’s still a place for moldboard plows on many Northeastern U.S. dairy farms. As they say, there’s more than one way to skin a cat — or grow a crop.

— Ev Thomas, thomas@whminer.com

Oxen-pulled plow.

Moldboard plow.

Chisel plow.

The William H. Miner Agricultural Research Institute Farm Report        February 2010 — 5 

“TEMPING” COWS Measuring the rectal temperature of a cow during the first 7 to 14 days after calving has become a common practice for identification of sick cows. The procedure is quick, low cost, and can be done while making other health assessments such as attitude, breathing rate, ru-men fill, vaginal discharge, and udder appearance. Our research technicians at Miner Institute have spent the last several months measuring rectal temperatures on our fresh cows enrolled in an early lactation nutrition study. Our technicians’ observations and comments re-minded me that “temping” a cow and using that infor-mation as an indicator of illness is not always as straightforward as it should be. Many veterinarians, farmers, and researchers use 103°F as the threshold value to define fever and indicate illness. This threshold needs to be modified based on thermometer accu-racy. We have used several different digital thermometers at the Institute that varied in cost and accuracy. In general, the cheaper “drug store” thermometers have an accuracy of ± 1°F, while the more expensive thermometers have an accuracy of ± 0.1°F. However, cost doesn’t always tell the story as we have found some of the more expensive “veterinary” thermometers to have poor accuracy (± 0.5°F to ± 1°F). We now check the thermometer accuracy before buying a new thermometer. The accuracy impacts the threshold at which we consider a cow having a fever and possible illness. We prefer to use the more accurate (± 0.1°F) thermometers. However, the durability of these ther-mometers is often an issue, causing us to use a less accurate back-up thermometer on occasion. The less accurate ther-mometer forces us to look at a larger range of temperatures (102°F to 104°F) as possible fever and evaluate other health assessments more carefully. Some researchers from Germany and Canada (Burfeind et al., 2010) recently evaluated the variability of rectal tem-peratures in cows and discovered that the type of ther-mometer and the procedure used to obtain the temperature influenced the measurement up to 1°F. They compared 4 digital thermometers to a liquid-in-glass thermometer and found a high correlation among the thermometers but a maximum mean difference of 0.7°F. The penetration depth of the probe into the rectum (2.4” vs. 4.5”) affected the tem-perature by 0.8°F with the higher temperature occurring when the probe was inserted deeper. Differences in rectal temperature before and after defecation were minor (0.1°F) in cows with normal manure. In addition to the factors iden-tified in the study, ambient temperature, time of day, and management routines can affect rectal temperature by 1 to 2°F.

The variation in accuracy of thermometers and the pro-cedure used can explain why several “healthy” cows can have temperatures over 103°F and why sometimes cows that appear sick don’t have a fever. The take home mes-sage is that “temping” cows is useful if you understand the method limitations and combine the measurement with other assessments of health. Our research technicians are always looking for a “better mousetrap.” If you have a durable, accurate thermometer that you use and like, please let Heather Dann know at dann@whminer.com or call 518-846-7121, ext. 119. Reference: Burfeind, O., M.A.G. von Keyserlingk, D.M. Weary, D.M. Veira, and W. Heuwieser. 2010. Short communication: Repeatability of measures of rectal temperature in dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 93:624-627.

A Miner Instiitute research technician uses a rectal thermome-ter to take a cow’s temperature.

The William H. Miner Agricultural Research Institute Farm Report        February 2010 — 6 

SOIL NITROGEN TESTING FOR CORN: SOME ‘UNOFFICIAL’ RESEARCH

Trying to predict soil nitrogen (N) availability is a bit like trying to predict the weather beyond a couple of days in the North Country― it’s difficult and generally meets with mixed success. Tools for predicting N avail-ability in corn range from relatively simple soil testing methods to more complex, process-based models that incorporate rainfall, temperature, soil properties, and crop and manure management. For many, using process-based models to manage N inputs is not yet a practical option.

This past cropping season the pre-sidedress nitrogen test (PSNT), the Illinois soil nitrogen test (ISNT), and the corn stalk nitrate test (CSNT) were utilized on three corn fields at the Institute to determine whether additional sidedress N was warranted. One field (B4) was first-year corn, where N beyond a starter is not required. The other two fields (R36 and A28) were third and fourth-year corn fields. Soil types range from sandy loam to silty clays in spots, and manure was applied the previous fall. Samples for the PSNT were taken in July, while the ISNT and CSNT samples were taken about a week prior to corn silage harvest. Results from the tests were in agreement and indicated that additional sidedress N would not be needed for an economically optimum yield. The PSNT results for each field were above the critical level of 25 mg/kg, where additional N is considered unnecessary. Results from the ISNT test also showed that N beyond a starter was not needed, as ISNT-N concentrations were above the critical level for each field (based on ISNT and the field’s or-ganic matter content). The CSNT confirmed that N avail-

ability was sufficient. Fields R36 and A28 had excessive nitrate levels in the plant at harvest time, confirming that N was not limiting. PSNT was not used to guide sidedress N this past year, and both R36 and A28 received an additional 70 lb N/acre. Fields with CSNT values above 5,000 ppm are op-portunities to save on sidedress N. The sidedress N did “green” the corn up, but this is an unreliable index of N needs.

This was not a replicated trial, but that doesn’t make it useless― hence the term “unofficial research”. Given the low milk price, the cost of N, and the risk for N leaching, holding off or cutting back on sidedress N for these fields makes sense. Next year we’ll use N tests for all 2nd year and older fields and compare yields from strips with different sidedress N rates.

— Eric Young, young@whminer.com

A Miner Institute corn field in late August, 2009.

The William H. Miner Agricultural Research Institute Farm Report        February 2010 — 7 

WHAT’S HAPPENING ON THE FARM In January, Jenna McNeil joined our team as the new herdsman intern. Jenna grew up on a small farm in El-lenburg, NY, about twenty minutes west of Chazy. Her family has a beautiful show string of Ayrshire and Hol-stein cows that have been to the NY State Fair, the Big E in Springfield, the All-American Show in Harrisburg, and the RAWF in Canada. Graduating from SUNY Co-bleskill with a Bachelor of Technology degree in Dairy Science, Jenna brings to the Miner Institute farm both practical experience and an understanding of dairy sci-ence from her classes in college. She also brings a dairy judge’s eye for good cattle; in 2008, Jenna competed in the colle-giate dairy judging com-petition at the World Dairy Expo. Her team placed 1st and she was the 2nd highest individ-ual (missing first place by one point!). She will be learning about the different aspects of herd management this year as she works alongside the barn staff. Winter is a good time to catch up on things around the farm and to take time out for education. Our regional Cornell Cooperative Extension Educator has organized

a series of classes this winter on herd health. Depending on the schedule, a cou-ple people from the farm attend class on Tuesday afternoons to brush up on their skills and learn ways to improve cow health, hoof care, biosecurity, calf care, etc. It’s also been an opportunity to see other farms and talk with other producers – both great ways to learn new things to improve management on our farm. Last month’s article reviewed the farm’s team effort in 2009 to raise, feed, milk, and manage our herd of cows. While we hope the Farm Report readers enjoyed our year end summary, we also knew that it was important for our team to understand how much they had accom-plished in 2009. So recently we bought some pizza and an ice cream cake for an evening meeting after work to review 2009 and set some goals for 2010. Hopefully, we all came away with a greater appreciation for how everyone’s job affects the whole herd performance.

— Anna Pape, pape@whminer.com

UPCOMING HERD HEALTH CLASSES

Feb. 9 in Clinton Co. Feb. 10 in Franklin Co. — Infectious Disease and Biosecurity.

Feb. 16 in Clinton Co. Feb. 17 in Franklin

Co. — Lameness Management. Feb. 23 in Clinton Co. Feb. 24 in Franklin

Co. — Reproductive Management. For more information, contact Emily Myers at (518) 353-4949 or erm35@cornell.edu.

The William H. Miner Agricultural Research Institute Farm Report        February 2010 — 8 

IMPROVING COW COMFORT IN TIE STALLS In a recent report by the Humane Society of the United States, tie-stall housing was included on a recent list of factors affecting the welfare of dairy cows. The restric-tive nature of this type of housing is the main reason that it’s an area of interest. Two recent studies, one in the Journal of Dairy Science and one in Preventative Veterinary Medicine, focused on ways to improve the cow comfort of tie-stall barns. First, in a series of three experi-ments research-ers from the Uni-versity of Cali-fornia at Davis, the University of British Colum-bia, and Agricul-ture and Agri-Food Canada investigated the effect that various amounts of sawdust or straw bedding can have on lying behavior. All experiments involved 12 cows, a mix of mature cows and heifers, housed in a tie-stall facility. The cows were milked twice daily, fed once daily in the morning, and released for 1.5 hours of exercise once daily. In the first experiment the cows were provided approximately 7, 20, 33, or 52 lbs of sawdust bedding per day. In-creasing the amount of bedding did not alter the dura-tion of lying bouts, the number of bouts per day, or milk production. The average lying time per day was in-creased by 1.1 hours per day by increasing the bedding amounts. In Experiment 2, cows were provided 2.2, 7, 11, or 20 lbs of straw bedding per day. Similar to Ex-periment 1, the amount of bedding did not affect aver-age duration of a lying bout or milk production; how-ever, the number of lying bouts per day and the average daily lying time increased as the amount of bedding in-creased. In Experiment 3, 1.1, 2.2, 4.4, or 6.6 lbs of straw bedding were provided. The authors described this as an insufficient amount of bedding to cover the base of the stall at all treatment levels. In this experiment, none of the 4 response variables were affected by the treatment. Across all experiments, the compressibility of the bedding increased as the amount of bedding in-creased. The second study was conducted by researchers from the Estonian University of Life Sciences and the Swed-ish University of Agricultural Sciences. The treatments in this study consisted of the inclusion of two different

styles of stall partition. The partitions consisted of a ny-lon strap that either extended straight down to an attach-ment point on the floor or attached to the floor in an in-verted Y-shape. Measurements included stall cleanliness (defined as the cross contamination of a stall by the neighboring cow’s urine or manure), lying position, and total lying time relative to stalls containing no partition. The inclusion of the partition reduced the number of times a cow defecated in their neighbors stall, but did not affect the number of times a cow urinated in their neighbors stall. Cows with partitions spent less time standing at a 45° angle to the feed bunk than those with-out. Mean daily lying time was unaffected. The results of these studies demonstrate two practical ways to improve cow comfort in tie-stalls. Increasing the amount of bedding increased lying times and the increased compressibility may reduce the occurrence of injuries to the front knees – this can occur when a cow is transitioning from standing to lying. The addition of partitions reduces the amount of manure coming into the stall from a neighboring cow. This may reduce lameness by lowering the amount of manure that a cow stands in. Additionally, teat injuries can be reduced by preventing cows from standing at angle and entering the resting space of their neighbor.

— Peter Krawczel, krawczel@whminer.com References: Aland, A., L. Lidfors, and I. Ekesbo. 2009. Impact of elastic stall partitions on tied dairy cows’ be-haviour and stall cleanliness. Prev. Vet. Med. 92:154-157. Tucker, C. B., D. M. Weary, M. A. G. von Keyserlingk, and K. A. Beauchemin. 2009. Cow comfort in tie-stalls: Increased depth of shavings or straw bedding increases lying time. J. Dairy Sci. 92:2684-2690.

The William H. Miner Agricultural Research Institute Farm Report        February 2010 — 9 

CROP INPUT TRENDS: WHAT’S UP AND WHAT’S DOWN

We can talk about what’s hot and what’s not in crop inputs, but the bottom line is what farmers are actually buying. We don’t yet know what will happen in 2010, but here were the ups and downs in 2009 purchases of crop inputs, as reported by agricultural retailers: UP: Genetically modified seed, herbicide adjuvants, seed treatments, crop protection chemicals (pesticides). Over 60% of U.S. agricultural retailers reported sales gains in these four input categories. FLAT: Custom application, micronutrients, precision agriculture technology.

DOWN: Fertilizer, traditional seed. Fertilizer was a big drag on sales, with 57% of retailers reporting re-duced sales in 2009. But traditional (non-genetically modified) seeds also had a bad sales year, with only 20% of retailers reporting increased sales. These results differ markedly from 2008, where eight of the nine input categories were up more than 50%, with traditional seeds the only laggard. In 2008 at least 90% of agricultural retailers reported sales in-creases in crop protection chemicals, fertilizer and GM seed.

FORAGE: Continued from Page 1 3. NDF (and ADF) values: Indicative of stage of maturity at harvest, possible indicator of energy content of the feed, effects on gut fill with increasing NDF limiting DMI. 4. Starch content: high, low, adequate? Good CS typically has starch around 35% or more. 5. CP analysis of value in CS? If >10% may indicate immature crop, if in conjunction with high NDF (>45%) and low starch (<25%) or high sugar (>5%) 6. Soluble protein okay? Higher value may indicate length of time silage has been fermented as soluble protein increases with time in silo or some other anomaly in fermentation process. Have all of the samples listed fermented the same length of time? 7. What other analyses you would like to have? VFA and pH to indicate quality of fermentation, NDFD, StarchD, particle size, others? Could all of these samples come from the same bunker silo? If so, where would you find each of these samples within the silo? Can you match up the analysis with the sampled spots noted in the photo on page 1? Why the variation in CS quality between layers within the same bunk silo? With a variety of hybrids and fields going into a single bunker using a progressive wedge fill technique; it is understandable to obtain the layers of corn silage variation. Some of this variation may be an effect of maturity as the upper layers were harvested later than the lower layers and possibly had more time to deposit starch in kernels and increase in DM%. This group of CS samples does not vary too much, all a bit

wet but okay. In terms of DM and starch, samples B and C look to be the forages to buy. How many of you chose C, the red layer of CS resulting from a harvest delay, as the forage of choice? Funny how it analyzes fairly well, except for the 59% soluble protein. The low DM value for E, may result from being slightly green at harvest or some ground water seepage from the bunker floor given the wet year in 2009. Also, note how starch decreases from top to bottom of this bunker, possibly due to maturity at harvest. But where does that leave CS “A”? Actually, samples “B-E” are from the bunker silo of 2008 CS and “A” is 2009 BMR CS, just opened, hence a lower soluble protein value. The sample code from table and photo is: A-not shown BMR pile, B-4, C-3, D-2 and E-1. Some take home points, again to reiterate the extent of variation of forage quality within a bunk silo and the need to thoroughly blend the forage taken from the face for a homogenous forage to be fed on a consistent basis. Given this information is there reason to alter our harvest process? Is there reason to reconsider our choice of corn hybrids? Should we be considering potential changes in our local climates when selecting hybrids? Does historical weather and heating degree-day information still hold or should we be considering previous 5-10 year averages of climate conditions? Certainly more questions than answers, but this is to get people thinking about what the new year and new decade may hold for the production of high quality forage.

— Kurt Cotanch, cotanch@whminer.com

The William H. Miner Agricultural Research Institute Farm Report        February 2010 — 10 

SOUTHERN EXPOSURE As someone who’s spent his life in the Northeast it’s amus-ing to see how Southerners behave during and after a “snow event.” Not snow necessarily, but just an “event” because the mere possibility of snow causes Southerners to make a desperate run on food stores, buying large quantities of milk, beer, grits, toilet paper and other basic necessities. During the first (and to date only) “significant” snow event of the season — a total of 6”— it was impossible to find a snow shovel in any store in the Richmond area. It was amusing watching one of our neighbors try to clear snow from his front porch using a garden rake. The pastor of the church we attend here said that he bought the very last pair of boots in stock at Payless Shoes. They had plenty of san-dals, though. After an actual snowfall it’s wise to stay off the roads for a while, for two reasons: First, there aren’t nearly enough snowplows to clear the roads in a timely fash-ion. Virginia highway authorities reported that their goal was to plow all roads within 48 hours of the aforemen-tioned snow event. 48 hours for 6” of snow? (They did-n’t achieve their goal.) Second, native Southerners sim-ply have no idea how to drive on snow-covered roads, apparently thinking that the best way to stop is to tromp on the brake pedal and wait for their vehicle to slide to a

halt or to hit something solid — often another vehicle. The result is something between the Keystone Kops and a demolition derby. No. 1 son Jim and I have 4WD ve-hicles and are used to driving in wintry conditions, but we stayed off the roads until they were plowed.

— E.T.

Richmond, Virginia residents dig out following a “snow event.”

NO EXCUSE FOR QUACKGRASS

Idaho hay hauler Brad Nelson recently noted that you can pull quackgrass up, shake all the dirt off the roots, hang it on the fence for two years, burn it, then bury the ashes and it will grow. A bit of hyperbole to be sure, especially since farmers have long had glyphosate (Roundup) in their herbicide arsenal. In the old days when quackgrass control in corn involved applying atrazine and more atrazine, it was common to see patches of quackgrass that escaped even split applica-tions of the herbicide. Farmers who didn’t grow corn were in much worse shape in this regard since there weren’t any herbicides that would effectively control quackgrass in hay crops. But that was then and this is now, and judicious use of glyphosate even once during the crop rotation can es-sentially eliminate quackgrass as an economic problem. There simply is no reason for farmers to have to put up with this persnickety perennial.

— E.T.

STARTING SALARIES FOR BEGINNING VETERINARIANS

A recent survey conducted by the American Veterinary Medical Association found a big difference in starting salaries for recent veterinary college graduates depend-ing on what type of animals they treat. (Vet college graduates entering government service earned somewhat less regardless of critter type.) Food animal vets (cows and pigs) entering private practices had the highest start-ing income, averaging about $72,000. The average start-ing salary in companion animal practices (dogs and cats) wasn’t much less — $69,000 — which in turn was higher than the average starting salary of $63,000 for mixed, predominantly food animal practices. But it’s a long way down the salary scale for veterinary college graduates entering private equine practices, whose aver-age starting salary was just under $39,000. (This is not a misprint.) About 80% of 2009 veterinary college gradu-ates either got job offers or opportunities for advanced study, down 11.5% from the previous year. This is so-bering news for those in the remaining 20%, who have an average debt of about $130,000 upon graduating from vet college.

The William H. Miner Agricultural Research Institute Farm Report        February 2010 — 11 

RANDOM THOUGHTS If you sometimes think you have a really lousy job,

here’s a suggestion: Buy a rectal thermometer made by one of the world’s leading medical supply com-panies. Remove it from the package and check out the small print in the accompanying literature stat-ing that “Every rectal thermometer made by (the company) is personally tested and then sanitized.” Remember, there’s always someone who has a job that’s more of a pain in the butt than yours.

A battle has been raging over proposed windmills in

my home town of Hammond, N.Y. Most people appear to be in favor of wind power as a concept, but opposed to windmills in their community unless they’re on their own land. An ideal place for wind-mills is on the banks of the Potomac River (near Washington, D.C.) since there’s always an excess of hot air in the vicinity, and no shortage of windbags.

A Chinese shopping center about 250 miles north of Beijing recently opened a “Women Only” parking lot featuring additional lighting and extra-wide parking spaces. The spaces are one meter wider than normal, to accommodate what an official called women’s “different sense of distance”. Nicely put… Female parking attendants have been trained to help guide women drivers into their (wider) parking spaces.

Today we mourn the passing of a beloved old friend, Common Sense, who has been with us for many years. He will be remembered as having cultivated such valu-able lessons as: Knowing when to come in out of the rain; Why the early bird gets the worm; Life isn't al-ways fair; and Maybe it’s my fault. He is survived by four stepbrothers: I know my rights; I want it now; I’m a victim; and Someone else is to blame.

— E.T.

FARM REPORT SURVEY OVERVIEW We would like to take this opportunity to tell you about what we learned from our recent Farm Report survey. If you still have not responded to the survey and would like to continue to receive the Farm Report, please mail i t i n immed ia t e ly o r ema i l dutil@whminer.com. Of the several hundred who responded, 51.5% have been subscribers for more than six years; 52.9% are farmers; most are from New York state or from somewhere in the Northeast, but some are from as far away as the United Kingdom and New Zealand. Most respondents said they felt the balance of dairy and crop-related arti-cles was good. Fourteen respondents thought we should have more dairy articles, 14 thought we should have more crop articles. Many of the respondents included comments similar to those from the subscriber in St. Albans and in Liver-

pool, and many subscribers opted to heed our call for article suggestions. Some suggestions include: Breeding issues and things to help producers drill down to the core prob-lem and make better management deci-sions. Foot health, freestall design and

the effect on cow comfort. Molds and control in corn. How do we make a profit on $10 milk? Increasing fiber utilization through pro-biotics. There are a lot of articles on how to diagnose problems, but a follow up article on where to go once you have found the problem would be helpful; or how or when it is a good idea to imple-ment changes in your herd due to new research. We thank all of you for your continued support and feedback. It helps to make the Farm Report that much more relevant.

“We like to see What’s Hap-pening on the Farm and we appreciate the dry and side-

splitting humor. It often helps get through a rough

day when you can read about broken wings and

random thoughts.”

— Subscriber in St. Albans, VT

“All I can say is – It is the

BEST publication of its kind that I receive, period! Keep

up the great work!”

— Subscriber in Liverpool, NY

The William H. Miner Agricultural Research Institute Farm Report        February 2010 — 12 

The William H. Miner Agricultural Research Institute 1034 Miner Farm Road PO Box 90 Chazy, NY 12921  Change Service Requested 

Non‐Profit Organization 

U.S.POSTAGE  PAID Chazy, N.Y. 12921 

Permit No. 8 

www.whminer.org 518.846.7121 OFFICE

518.846.8445 FAX

YOUR FEBRUARY

FARM REPORT HAS ARRIVED

ENJOY!

C l o s i n g C o m m e n t

Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional.