Farming, Agriculture, Livestock, Cattle

Follow Us!

Efficiency, reproduction and the cow-size dilemma


We often hear that smaller cows can improve production efficiency, especially in areas of low rainfall and sparse forage. At the same time, we know that smaller cows tend to produce smaller steers, potentially meaning lighter pay weights for weaned calves or finished cattle.
Experts from across the industry discussed the relationships and tradeoffs between cow size and feed efficiency, reproduction and profitability during a seminar last Friday prior to the Leachman Cattle of Colorado bull sale.
Colorado State University animal scientist Milt Thomas, PhD., led off with a discussion of cow size and fertility in an arid environment. He outlined results of a long-term research project with Brangus cattle in Mexico’s Chihuahuan Desert. Through the 1970s and 1980s, cow weights in the study herds tended to grow heavier, and at the same time, pregnancy rates dropped off. During the 1990s, managers began focusing more of their selection on fertility, and as they did so, cow weights, on average, became lighter. Calf weaning weights meanwhile, remained about the same. Weaning weights, he says, fluctuate year-to-year within herds based on environmental factors, but the general genetic trend is toward heavier weaning weights.
Thomas says the idea that lighter cows would be better adapted to a desert environment is not surprising, and notes the same concept applies to semi-arid areas as well. But besides cow mature weights, he says the growth curve is in young females is an important factor in fertility. Selection pressure for fertility tends to favor a steeper growth curve, meaning heifers have faster early growth and reach mature weights earlier in life. This trend toward early maturity appears to coincide with better fertility in young cows, meaning heifers conceive early in the breeding season and have better re-breeding success.
John Maddux, of Maddux Cattle Company in Nebraska, outlined how cow size matters on his family’s operation. Noting that the optimum cow size for any ranch depends on the production environment, marketing goals and other factors, he says smaller cows have fit his family’s system. In 2005, the Maddux family dispersed their entire cow herd, then rebuilt it to capitalize on what they saw as a new reality – higher grain prices.
The family shifted their calving season later, in April and May, and changed to a cow-calf and yearling system. Their goal is to market nine-weight long yearlings in August, a time when demand for that class of cattle is high. For managing and marketing 16-month-old yearlings, he says, high growth potential is not necessary, and could be detrimental, with the calves growing too heavy for feedyard buyers.
Also, the family wants a self-sufficient cow herd. Their cows graze native range through the summer and corn stalks from November through March, with virtually no hay or supplements. First-calf heifers receive some protein cake, but supplementation is minimal. So, Maddux says, fertility is twice as important as growth traits in their herd.
Toward that goal, they developed their own maternal-composite breeding system, targeting three-eights Red Angus and one-quarter Terentaise, with the remaining genetic makeup split evenly between Red Poll, South Devon and Devon. The family chose this breed makeup, and uses individual selection for moderate size and high-fertility cows in a low-input production system. Cow mature weights average about 1,150 to 1,200 pounds.
Maddux acknowledges that growth potential remains important for the value of calves in later production stages. He stresses though, that selection based too much on growth can have negative impacts in terms of maintenance requirements and fertility in cows. Echoing what Thomas said earlier, Maddux says it is fairly easy to select for growth overall. Selecting for early growth, which benefits fertility, is more complex, but can be achieved without pushing cow mature weights too high.
Later this week, part two of this series will cover the cattle feeder’s perspective and other discussion on cow size, efficiency and reproduction from the Leachman seminar.

http://www.cattlenetwork.com/cattle-news/Efficiency-reproduction-and-the-cow-size-dilemma-144284705.html?ref=705

VIDEO: Food Safety Questions Answered On The Go

VIDEO: Mejoramiento Lechero SAGAN

Opportunities Plentiful In Grass Finishing Beef


There are many opportunities that exist for grass finished beef, whether it is direct marketing off the farm or selling to a wholesale company that specializes in marketing grass finished beef.
"Grass finished" is defined by United States Department of Agriculture Agricultural Management Assistance (USDA AMA) as grass or forage fed. Their definition states that in order for an animal to be grass or forage finished, they must meet the following standards.
• Grass and forage shall be the feed source consumed for the lifetime of the ruminant animal, with the exception of milk consumed prior to weaning.
• The diet shall be derived solely from forage consisting of grass (annual and perennial), forbs (e.g., legumes, Brassica), browse or cereal grain crops in the vegetative (pre-grain) state.
• Animals cannot be fed grain or grain byproducts and must have continuous access to pasture during the growing season. Hay, haylage, baleage, silage, crop residue without grain and other roughage sources may also be included as acceptable feed sources.
• Routine mineral and vitamin supplementation may also be included in the feeding regimen.
• If incidental supplementation occurs due to inadvertent exposure to non-forage feedstuffs or to ensure the animal’s well being at all times during adverse environmental or physical conditions, the producer must fully document (e.g., receipts, ingredients, and tear tags) the supplementation that occurs including the amount, the frequency and the supplements provided.
To find out more about the USDA AMA standards for grass finishing, visit their online guide for grass fed marketing claim standards.

http://beefmagazine.com/stockerbackgrounders/opportunities-plentiful-grass-finishing-beef

DNA traces cattle back to a small herd domesticated around 10,500 years ago


An international team of scientists from the CNRS and in France, the University of Mainz in Germany, and UCL in the UK were able to conduct the study by first extracting DNA from the bones of domestic cattle excavated in Iranian archaeological sites. These sites date to not long after the invention of farming and are in the region where cattle were first domesticated.
The team examined how small differences in the of those ancient cattle, as well as cattle living today, could have arisen given different population histories. Using they found that the DNA differences could only have arisen if a small number of animals, approximately 80, were domesticated from wild ox (aurochs).
The study is published in the current issue of the journal . Dr Ruth Bollongino of CNRS, France, and the University of Mainz, Germany; lead author of the study, said: "Getting reliable DNA sequences from remains found in is routine.
"That is why mammoths were one of the first extinct species to have their DNA read. But getting reliable DNA from bones found in hot regions is much more difficult because temperature is so critical for DNA survival. This meant we had to be extremely careful that we did not end up reading contaminating DNA sequences from living, or only recently dead cattle."
The number of animals domesticated has important implications for the of domestication.
Prof Mark Thomas, geneticist and an author of the study based at the UCL Research Department of Genetics, Evolution and Environment: "This is a surprisingly small number of cattle. We know from archaeological remains that the wild ancestors of modern-day cattle, known as aurochs, were common throughout Asia and Europe, so there would have been plenty of opportunities to capture and domesticate them."
Prof Joachim Burger, an author of the study based at the University of Mainz, Germany, said: "Wild aurochs are very different beasts from modern domestic cattle.
"They were much bigger than modern cattle, and wouldn't have had the domestic traits we see today, such as docility. So capturing these animals in the first place would not have been easy, and even if some people did manage snare them alive, their continued management and breeding would still have presented considerable challenges until they had been bred for smaller size and more docile behavior."
Archaeological studies on the number and size of prehistoric animal bone have shown that not only cattle, but also goats, sheep and pigs were all first domesticated in the Near East. But saying how many animals were domesticated for any of those species is a much harder question to answer. Classical techniques in archaeology cannot give us the whole picture, but genetics can help - especially if some of the genetic data comes from early domestic animals.
Dr Jean-Denis Vigne, a CNRS bio-archaeologist and author on the study, said: "In this study genetic analysis allowed us to answer questions that – until now –archaeologists would not even attempt to address.
"A small number of cattle progenitors is consistent with the restricted area for which archaeologists have evidence for early cattle domestication ca. 10,500 years ago. This restricted area could be explained by the fact that cattle breeding, contrary to, for example, goat herding, would have been very difficult for mobile societies, and that only some of them were actually sedentary at that time in the Near East."
Dr Marjan Mashkour, a CNRS Archaeologist working in the Middle East added "This study highlights how important it can be to consider archaeological remains from less well-studied regions, such as Iran. Without our Iranian data it would have been very difficult to draw our conclusions, even though they concern at a global scale".
More information: 'Modern Taurine Cattle descended from small number of Near-Eastern founders" is published in the current issue of Molecular Biology and Evolution.
http://phys.org/news/2012-03-dna-cattle-small-herd-domesticated.html

Maps of miscanthus genome offer insight into grass evolution

Miscanthus grasses are used in gardens, burned for heat and energy, and converted into liquid fuels. They also belong to a prominent grass family that includes corn, sorghum and sugarcane. Two new, independently produced chromosome maps of Miscanthus sinensis (an ornamental that likely is a parent of Miscanthus giganteus, a biofuels crop) are a first step toward sequencing the M. sinensis genome. The studies reveal how a new plant species with distinctive traits can arise as a result of chromosome duplications and fusions.
The two studies were published this year: The first, led by the energy crop company Ceres, appeared in the journal PLoS ONE; the second, from a team led by researchers at the University of Illinois, is in the journal BMC Genomics. The data, materials, methods and genetic markers used in the latter study are available to the public for further research.
Before this work, scientists knew that M. sinensis had a base set of 19 chromosomes and was closely related to sorghum, which has a base set of 10. (Humans have a base set of 23). But without a map and sequence of the Miscanthus genome, researchers who hope to maximize yields or discover which genes give Miscanthus its desirable traits are working in the dark, said Stephen Moose, a University of Illinois crop sciences professor and Energy Biosciences Institute program leader, who led the BMC Genomics study.
Moose and his colleagues used information gleaned from the sugarcane genome to develop hundreds of genetic markers to target specific regions of the M. sinensis genome. Then they crossed two M. sinensis plants and grew 221 offspring in a laboratory. By comparing how the genetic markers from each parent were sorted in the offspring, the team reconstructed 19 "linkage groups" corresponding to the 19 chromosomes of Miscanthus. This rough map of the chromosomes is a first step toward a Miscanthus genome, Moose said.
The researchers also used the sorghum genome as a comparative reference. Their analysis indicated that M. sinensis arose as a result of a duplication of the sorghum genome, with a later fusion of some chromosome parts.
"Some plants will duplicate their genomes and then there's some sorting that goes on," Moose said. "Sometimes whole chromosomes are lost and sometimes there are fusions." Once there are two copies of each chromosome in a base set, each will proceed along its own evolutionary trajectory. "Often what will happen is even though there are two (versions of the same chromosome), one of them will start to deteriorate over time," Moose said. "Some positions and some genes will win out over the others."
Genome duplications may undermine the viability of a plant or give it an advantage. One immediate advantage of doubling, tripling or otherwise duplicating the genome is that it increases the size of the plant, or of certain plant parts, Moose said.
"Humans have selected for these traits," he said. "Strawberries, for example, are octoploids; they have eight chromosome sets. Sugarcane has eight sets, and it's bigger (than its wild cousins)."
Moose and his colleagues were surprised to find a high degree of similarity between the Miscanthus and sorghum genomes.
"I would say that for about 90 percent of the Miscanthus markers, their chromosomal order corresponds to what is known for sorghum," he said.
The new findings and the eventual publication of the Miscanthus genome will help scientists understand the evolution of grasses and the genetic mechanisms that give them their desirable traits, Moose said.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/05/120515104741.htm

A Blood Test to Detect Equine IAD?

Inflammatory airway disease (IAD) in horses, which has been historically difficult to diagnose, might soon be easily detected via a simple blood test, according to a French equine respiratory specialist.
“The results of our present study indicate that IAD is associated with a detectable, albeit moderate, increase in circulating rates of surfactant protein D (SP-D) in the blood,” said Eric Richard, DVM, MSc, PhD, researcher at the Frank Duncombe Laboratory in France, at the 2012 French Equine Research Day held March 1 in Paris. Richard relayed that SP-D plays a principle role in immunity in the alveoli–the thousands of small balloonlike structures within the lungs that participate in the exchange of gases used in breathing.
Inflammatory airway disease can cause poor performance and exerciseintolerance in horses, and it is occasionally associated with a slight cough at rest, said Richard. As it is generally not an infectious disease, laboratory testingof blood samples cannot provide clear links to the condition. The most effective evaluation method currently available is an examination of the cells of the lungs using a bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL), an invasive and expensive procedure requiring sedation, Richard noted.
In his preliminary study, Richard and his colleagues tested the blood serum of 20 healthy horses and 22 horses previously diagnosed with IAD, before and after 60 minutes of treadmill exercise. The IAD horses had significantly higher amounts of SP-D in the blood compared to the healthy horses, both before and after exercise. However, there was no significant difference in the amount of SP-D before and after exercise within each of the two groups. In other words,exercise did not seem to affect the amount of circulating SP-D, whether in healthy horses or those with IAD.
The increase in SP-D in the blood suggests that the alveoli have been damaged, according to Richard. This damage actually makes the alveoli more permeable (meaning that the gas exchange is not as well controlled) as a result of the inflammation.
Explore the power of the human-horse connection as you travel the emotional journey that veterinarians at Rood and Riddle Equine Hospital and owners embark on when a beloved horse becomes ill in Equine ER
“This is consistent with the information we have about SP-D in humans with inflammatory respiratory disease,” Richard said. “Even so, it’s possible thatexercise could affect the SP-D rate and that that difference is only detectable a few hours later.” In his study, Richard had tested SP-D 60 minutes after thetreadmill exercise.
The study–which was made possible by the 2010 French Veterinary Equine Research award and appeared in the Equine Veterinary Journal–also gave Richard reason to believe that improved diagnostic procedures could help practitioners zone in on more specific subtypes of IAD.
“I’m convinced that in a few years we will no longer talk about IAD but about several types of IAD,” he said.

11 tips para ser un excelente líder en tiempos de dificultad

Sabemos que ser la cabeza de un negocio o incluso de un hogar no es cosa sencilla y menos en ésta época en donde el mercado, las empresas y el mundo en general esta en constante cambio, ¿Sabes qué conductas tomar ante situaciones difíciles o que necesitas para guiar un equipo o un negocio? Aquí te presentamos 11 tips para ayudarte con esta gran responsabilidad dentro y fuera de la empresa:
1. Los líderes escuchan: Escucha a tus colaboradores y clientes sobre consejos, recomendaciones o incluso quejas acerca de tu negocio. Es la mejor forma de darte cuenta de tus errores y mejorarlos o cambiar de estrategia.
2. El reconocimiento de los empleados es lo más importante, no hay nada como unas palabras o una buena palmadita en la espalda que diga: “¡Lo estás haciendo bien!”
3. No hay nada como ser tú mismo, no trates de cambiar para aparentar algo que no eres, la gente te va a seguir por los buenos consejos o buena guía que seas, cuenta tu historia, por algo estás en el puesto en el que estás y seguro tienes muchas experiencias que compartir con las que ayudarás a alguien más a alcanzar el éxito. 
4. La comunicación no solo es un factor muy importante en el liderazgo, sino en la vida misma. No hay herramienta más eficaz que ésta para arreglar cualquier tipo de dificultad. Los empleados sabrán que hay un canal siempre abierto para expresarse y entenderán con mayor claridad lo que quieras transmitirles.  
5. La planeación es algo que probablemente sobra decirlo porque como buen líder sabes que sin planeación no hay nada, es imposible en la actualidad “vivir al día” en una empresa, no puedes dejar al destino tus cartas. Con esto además crearás metas y objetivos claros para tu equipo de trabajo.
6. No te dejes llevar por la ansiedad, combate esos miedos y conviértelos en emociones positivas, moldéate como el líder que esperas llegar a ser. Transforma esos problemas que crees que no tienen solución en oportunidades. 
7. ¿Te acuerdas cuando no eras el líder? ¿Te acuerdas cuando alguien hacia la misma labor que haces tú con tu equipo? ¡Perfecto! No seas egoísta y sirve de ejemplo y de guía. Preocúpate por ellos y oriéntate al servicio recuerda que si tu equipo no esta bien, las metas y la organización tampoco. 
8. ¿Sabes que significa la palabra empatía? ¡Conoce a tu equipo! Su edad, su profesión, algunas preferencias, etc. Intégrate con ellos para que no sientan que solo eres el que los manda sino que eres parte del equipo, te ayudará a una mejor comunicación y motivarlos para aumentar su productividad.  
9. Procura que tus metas sean congruentes y lo más semejantes con las de la empresa, transmite esto a tu equipo porque si no compartes tus objetivos no sabrán a donde se dirigen y terminarás enojándote y llegando a un punto negativo dónde tu tengas que entrar a hacer el trabajo que no supiste delegar, organizar y orientar.
10. Fuera el estrés y los gritos, eso ya no está en funcionamiento, años de comprobar que este no es el modo adecuado, nos dicen que lo correcto es: relajarse, tu equipo no tiene la culpa de tus preocupaciones o tu mal humor.
11. Y por último: salte del círculo, trata de ver desde un punto objetivo o más que eso, verlo desde afuera, no como líder ni como empleado, como cliente o posible consumidor; escucha las sugerencias que se hacen para poder encontrar las debilidades y corregirlas a tiempo para convertirlas en fortalezas, encuentra las oportunidades que no estás viendo y mantente abierto a posibles sugerencias. 


http://www.yosoypyme.net/2012/04/11-tips-para-ser-un-excelente-lider-en-tiempos-de-dificultad/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+YoSoyPyme+%28Yo+Soy+Pyme%29

Hablemos de ética laboral, sus principios y normas


Una conducta éticamente correcta en los negocios tiene que ver con los medios elegidos para conseguir el bien de la empresa, con el objetivo de que los miembros de la organización, empleadores y trabajadores, y de la sociedad alcancen su plenitud. Ser bueno con los trabajadores, en el medio ambiente y con la comunidad en la que se vive, hace que la empresa sea más responsable ante los ojos de la opinión pública.
El mundo actual presenta numerosos retos para las empresas, nuestra sociedad ha mejorado en técnicas de gestión, ha mejorado el entramado legal e institucional en las que se desenvuelve la actividad económica y desarrollado las capacidades de conocimiento de directivos y empleados. Aún así, con mejor tecnología, mercados abiertos, profesionales más competentes y entornos más favorables, los problemas continúan surgiendo.
Las claves de estos problemas parecen estar no en los aspectos técnico – económicos y políticos, si no en la calidad moral de las personas y su capacidad para hacer de las organizaciones que dirigen o en las que trabajan lugares donde la ética esté presente, orientando toda su labor.
La ética es totalmente necesaria, no para ser una buena persona, si no para ser un buen profesional; si no se es ético, no se puede ser un buen directivo.
Ser ético no consiste, en procurar no obtener beneficios o en pagar altos salarios, tampoco en aplicar reglas del tipo “esto no se puede hacer” y “aquello no se puede”. Sin dudas hay normas en la ética. Ser ético no consiste en cumplir la ley. Cumplir la ley es, un deber ético.
La ética se refiere entonces a las relaciones humanas. Estas se pueden dividir en tres tipos: personal, interpersonal, y social, cada uno presenta sus propios principios.
El ejercicio profesional en términos generales significa establecer relacionamiento de tipo interpersonal y sus principios básicos son: Beneficencia, Autonomía y Equidad. Mientras que las normas éticas se refieren a la confidencialidad, veracidad y fidelidad.
Los principios son las señales que indican por donde conducirnos en el actuar concreto, se pueden definir como imperativos formales que expresan como se defiende el valor supremo.
Bene-ficiencia, éste principio nos indica entonces el imperativo de hacer el bien a todos.
Según Kant, la autonomía, es la capacidad del sujeto de gobernarse por una norma que él mismo acepta como tal sin coerción externa. Por el hecho de autogobernarse el hombre es siempre un fin.
En nuestro actuar profesional el respetar las decisiones del otro significa obtener consentimiento antes de actuar.
Equidad, se refiere al principio general de justicia aplicado a las relaciones interpersonales. A su vez de este se desprenden dos principios:
  1.  Igualdad de libertades básicas individuales en un esquema compatible con el esquema compatible de libertades para todos.
  2. Las desigualdades sociales e económicas deben: estar asociadas a cargos y posiciones abiertos a todos en igualdad de oportunidades.
Los principios éticos no prevalecen unos sobre otros, si no que es a través del equilibrio de los tres que se resuelven los problemas éticos a los cuales debemos incorporarles las normas éticas y los sujetos deben incorporarlos a su práctica.
Las normas, son reglas que se deben seguir o las que se deban ajustar las conductas, tareas, actividades, etc., según el Diccionario de la Real Academia Española.
Las normas éticas fundamentales son: confidencialidad, veracidad y fidelidad.
La confidencialidad o secreto profesional se remonta al año V a C.. las primeras menciones formales referentes al secreto profesional se formulan dentro del ejercicio de la medicina por Percival en 1803, posteriormente otros códigos de la medicina cuentan con normas explícitas referidas a la confidencialidad, sin presentar mayores modificaciones en su mención.
En la actualidad todas las profesiones constituyen de diferente manera y en forma continua el derecho de las personas a la confidencialidad de aquellas informaciones obtenidas a lo largo de la relación con un profesional.
Veracidad, se refiere a estar en concordancia con los principios de autonomía y de beneficencia, es así que es discutible señalar de inmortal en aquellos casos que el engaño es imprescindible para lograr el bien de una persona.
Por último, fidelidad, se puede entender al mismo tiempo como una virtud y una norma, desde esta acepción responde a la definición como la obligación que se asume al haber aceptado un acuerdo. 
En el contexto actual se requiere que los profesionales de las empresas y organizaciones practiquen la responsabilidad social y sean éticos para afrontar la crisis de legitimidad que vivimos. 
Información adaptada de la Universidad Católica de Uruguay http://www.ucu.edu.uy/

http://empleosverdes.tumblr.com/post/21391767840/hablemos-de-etica-laboral-sus-principios-y-normas

VIDEO: 4 Minutes With Ben Spitzer

A rancher ahead of his time



Doc Hatfield was a one-of-a-kind rancher, entrepreneur and environmental steward. He imprinted those qualities on the Country Natural Beef cooperative, which has set a standard for the niche marketing of beef and helped blaze a trail bridging the urban-rural divide.
With his wife, Connie, Hatfield joined in 1986 with 14 neighboring ranchers near Brothers, and created a unique and highly successful brand of beef. Today, the cooperative includes more than 100 ranch families in 13 states and sells its beef to Whole Foods and other high-end retail stores and restaurants.
At that time, the notion that beef could be raised and sold at a premium ran contrary to an industry that gravitated toward the commodity markets. By raising cattle on grass and attaching a unique identity to the beef, Hatfield and the Country Natural Beef ranchers pioneered a new form of marketing. They were meeting with customers at the grocery stores more than 20 years before the USDA’s “Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food” campaign came along.
They believed in asking Country Natural Beef customers what they wanted. At the co-op’s first meeting, they invited an athletic trainer to their ranch. He told them he was looking for naturally raised beef without added hormones.
From then on, the co-op made that their signature.
Doc Hatfield was more than an entrepreneur. He was a mentor, a friend and a leader in U.S. agriculture.
He freely worked with other ranchers as far away as Canada, helping them to start their own cooperatives. He was as comfortable having breakfast with a member of Congress as he was doctoring his cattle.
He was also a poet, who could paint a word picture of what life in the country is about. During a video presented at the Agri-Business Council’s 2009 Denim and Diamonds dinner awards, Doc spoke about their philosophy.
“Our product is more than just beef,” he said, with Connie at his side. “It’s the smell of sage after a summer thunderstorm, the cool shade of a Ponderosa forest.
“It’s 80-year-old weathered hands saddling a horse in the Blue Mountains, the future of a 6-year-old in a one-room school on the high desert.
“It’s trout in a beaver-built pond, hay stacks in an aspen-framed meadow. It’s the hardy quail running to join the cattle for a meal, the welcoming ring of a dinner bell.”
“All of these pictures are real,” he said. “That’s not just a story. That’s who and what we are. That’s what sustainability looks and feels like.”
Doc Hatfield got it. He got what makes men and women so passionate about life in the country, raising livestock and making a living 100 miles from the nearest town.
He also got that urbanites, many of whom have never even been on a ranch, still have that gene that tells them rural America is where their home is.
The Ag Connection Award the Hatfields received that night could not have been more appropriate. They remarked on numerous occasions that one of the goals of Country Natural Beef was to link the generally conservative rural members of the co-op with the generally liberal urbanites who bought their beef. He was sure that everyone, urban and rural, conservative and liberal, shared an interest in healthy food, healthy land and healthy animals.
Patrick Dale Hatfield died March 20 of pancreatic cancer. He was 74. In the setting western sun, Doc cast a long shadow across the high desert of Oregon and beyond. And as that sunlight flickered out, he left his many friends better for having known him.

http://www.dailyastorian.com/opinion/editorials/editorial-a-rancher-ahead-of-his-time/article_a7cb1092-7825-11e1-88ea-001871e3ce6c.html

VIDEO: Minimize heat stress

Terry Mader, Extension beef cattle specialist at the University of Nebraska, discusses how to help alleviate heat stress in cattle during the summer. This video news is provided by Certified Angus Beef LLC and American Angus Association. Visit www.CABpartners.com or www.angus.org for more information.

Managing soil diseases

Once you've had a soil-bourne disease present in your field, it's likely going to be there for a long time. But, whether they continue to cause crop damage depends on how you manage specific conditions each year, one expert says.


"Managing diseases starts with knowing what is present in the fields," says Purdue University Extension plant pathologist Kiersten Wise. "Growers need to know what diseases have shown up in their fields in the past, and they need to plan for those diseases even if they haven't seen them in a few years."
Environmental conditions, planting date and seed variety planted all go into the prospects a disease returns at harmful levels in the future. So, keeping track of those variables and managing them in the future is crucial to keeping soil-bourne disease pressures are kept at bay.
"Soil diseases don't go away, so growers need to plan to manage them," Wise says. "Knowing the field history can help growers choose varieties that are resistant to previous disease pressures."
If you're planting corn into soils where soil diseases have been present in the past, consider planting later on in the season if possible. And, consider adding at least one disease treatment during the growing season.
"Foliar disease organisms won't be as affected by the mild winter. Instead, they will depend more on the weather during the reproductive stages, probably in July," Wise says. "At that point, if growers are seeing foliar diseases, they can consider fungicide treatments."
And, don't forget to take into account your production system and its influence on disease management. Namely, if you're planting into a no-till field, you may need to pay closer attention to crop residue than you normally would to prevent soil disease from flaring up.
"If farmers are planting into fields with a lot of residue, if they're planting susceptible varieties and if their fields are continuous corn, they could possibly benefit from a fungicide later in the season if the environment is favorable for disease development," Wise says.

http://www.agriculture.com/news/crops/maging-soil-diseases_2-ar23191

Generational transition on family ranches


A great deal of attention has been paid to the statistics that indicate that farmers and ranchers are getting older in the United States. The national average age of farm and ranch operators in the US is over 57. I have read that the average age in South Dakota is even higher. This issue and the overall economic picture in beef cattle production creates a lot of opportunity for beginning producers.
Additionally, the USDA recognizes aging producers as a problem and provides incentives to help beginning producers get started. They provide a low-interest loan program through FSA. They also have a Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program (BFRDP) that provides grants to organizations that can provide assistance to beginning farmers and ranchers. Several of us in SDSU Extension received a grant from BFRDP and are using it to provide educational programming for a group of beginning cow-calf producers.
Another key part to successfully transitioning this next generation onto the ranch is ensuring good communications and careful planning so the transition to multiple generations working well together is successful. We have all heard the horror stories about failures that have led to unsuccessful transitions and broken families. No one wants this to happen. If all generations of the family want a transition to occur so that they live and work together and are both successful and happy, why do these horror stories happen?
I have recently listened to presentations from 2 experts on this topic: Ron Hanson and Dave Goeller from the University of Nebraska. I would like to bring out a few of the important conclusions that can be drawn from their presentations. The keys are that planning and open communications must be started immediately and be ongoing.
When the topic of transition planning is brought up, many of us think about estate planning. That is very important, but it is an early step in a complex and ongoing process. A key word in that last sentence is process. A transition plan is not an event that is completed at some point. It is a process that is ongoing as long as there is more than one generation on the ranch. Consider that many ranches have 3 generations on them. People live and work longer, which means that the grandparent generation and parent generation can be coexisting, with a new “crop” of beginners in their twenties or so that want to join them. Don’t be surprised if there is no end in sight for the transition plan. This makes it even more important that a working plan is in place. This plan has to be a living entity. It must be adjusted as unanticipated changes occur and as the members of each generation age and mature.
Communication is extremely important. For a transition plan to work, everyone in each generation has to know it and be involved in carrying it out. For many ranch families, this is the hardest part. Many ranch people struggle with how to talk about the hard subjects. No one wants to create conflict or is comfortable with how to resolve conflict that is likely to arise in creating and working the plan. However, it is important to consider that not tackling these subjects head on actually increases the likelihood of conflict vs. dealing with them as they arise through open, honest, and mature conversation.
Communication about the transition plan really needs to include everyone with a stake in the game, all the way from the beginning of the discussion and onward through time. This should include all children, both those that return to the ranch as well as those that go on to live off-ranch. It also needs to include in-laws. Not including all parties leads to poor and broken communications; this in turn leads to distrust. If this happens, success and happiness for all generations is unlikely.
I hope I have made a few things obvious  in this article. First and foremost, transition planning is a complex and ongoing process. The complexity of the total plan is beyond this article. Books have been written on the topic. Key to dealing with this complexity is communication. If a plan for your ranch isn’t already in place or at least started, the sooner it is started or put in action as a working process, the better. The legacy of your ranching operation and family depend on it. Start visiting and acting on it today.
Source: Ken Olson
http://www.cattlenetwork.com/cattle-news/latest/Generational-transition-on-family-ranches--143998036.html

VIDEO: Reaching Out To Consumers Online

Developing drought tolerant grasses


WITH the Met Office and Defra warning this year could be year another of low rainfall and dry conditions across the UK, research into the water-use efficiency of grasses has gained even more importance to livestock farmers in particular.

Encouragingly, a programme at IBERS Aberystwyth University as part of The Sustainable Livestock Production (SLP) LINK Programme is reporting significant progress in producing stress-resistant festuloliums, which are fescue cross ryegrass hybrids.
According to Dr Mike Humphreys of Ibers, results from their simulated drought trials under controlled conditions have already been very promising.
“We have recorded an improvement in water use efficiency, which is the forage yield per unit of water consumed, in some festuloliums of 88 per cent,” he says.
“Drought resistant lines from the LINK Programme are now being field tested for their suitability for entry into National List trials this year.”
Earlier breeding work at IBERS resulted in the first festulolium coming onto the England and Wales Recommended Lists for 2012.
AberNiche, an Italian-type ryegrass cross meadow fescue, is now available in drought-tolerant seeds mixtures.

Adapted

Dr Humphreys says this heralds the beginning of a range of new grasses more adapted to a range of stress conditions that may become more common as a result of climate change.
“AberNiche has been bred through natural hybridisation as part of a programme designed to increase stress resistance, including winter hardiness and drought tolerance,” he says.
“Improved root systems are bringing environmental benefits, such as more efficient water and nutrient use and carbon sequestration.
“This variety shows the transfer of more stress resistant fescue genes into ryegrasses can be achieved without negatively affecting the yield or quality characteristics of the grass.
Improved root systems are bringing environmental benefits, such as more efficient water and nutrient use and carbon sequestration
Mike Humphreys
“In addition to the development of drought-tolerant Italian ryegrass cross fescue hybrids, we are also working towards introducing the beneficial fescue genes into perennial ryegrasses. This will expand the scope for utilisation by livestock farmers quite significantly.”
For now, the approved and available festulolium AberNiche can be combined in short-term mixtures with Italian or hybrid ryegrasses, whilst those seeking a long-term grass-based mixture can consider the inclusion of cocksfoot alongside perennial or hybrid ryegrasses, plus white clover.
As Paul Billings of British Seed Houses points out, there are alternative forage crops that also provide a solution to dry conditions with breeding progress again offering livestock farmers better options than in the relatively recent past.
“Perennial chicory has become increasingly popular in recent years, mainly used within grazing mixtures alongside perennial ryegrasses and often white clover,” he says.
“Bred and used extensively in New Zealand, new varieties such as Puna II perennial chicory are performing well in UK conditions. This produces high yields of quality grazing suitable for cattle and sheep and – due to its deep tap root – is much more resilient in dry conditions than ryegrasses.

Interest

“Lucerne is another forage crop attracting increased interest amongst UK livestock farmers and is more typically grown as a monoculture to provide three or four silage cuts in a season.
“Like perennial chicory, lucerne has a deep tap root, which gives it the ability to perform in dry conditions. Being a legume, lucerne also generates its own supply of nitrogen through fixation and helps reduce the reliance on bought-in fertiliser.”
In addition to alternative forage crop options, increased productivity in dry conditions will be achieved by maintaining good soil structure, avoiding compaction and including more traditional companion species, such as white clover or red clover, in rotations.
“Ryegrass swards containing white clover will tend to perform better in dry conditions,” says Mr Billings.
“White clover roots will tend to help improve overall soil structure, which means all plant roots are better able to locate water. Red clover is similar to perennial chicory and lucerne in that it has a deep tap root that can penetrate further into the soil profile.”

http://www.farmersguardian.com/home/livestock/livestock-features/developing-drought-tolerant-grasses/45792.article

VIDEO - We create chemistry

Stock density as a grazing management tool
In my nine years of range management graduate studies at three major universities in the West, never did I encounter the term “stock density.”
040312_ground_round
That’s pretty amazing considering that we now acknowledge stock density as one of the most important tools in grazing management.
I first encountered the term when Allan Savory rubbed our noses in it at Montana State University in 1978.
He also forcefully clarified the actual meaning of “overgrazing.” He was not a subtle guest lecturer.
So what exactly is stock density? It’s the number of grazing animals per unit area at any moment in time, usually expressed as the number per acre (animal units per acre, or AU/A).
It’s a feature of all of the “intensive” grazing systems, such as time control, short duration, mob, MIG and others. I believe it to be one of the keys to efficient forage use and sound grazing management.
0512pc_sindelar_2While at Montana State, I conducted research using 30 cow/calf pairs per acre in spring and fall grazing trials.
In addition to high-density grazing programs for cattle, I also designed and implemented a grazing program for 2,650 head of Montana bison using high stock densities. There was much to learn from these endeavors. 0512pc_sindelar_2
Stock density in most western U.S. ranching situations is typically very low, as in one animal per 10 acres (0.1 AU/A).
In some of the intensive grazing systems, stock densities of 10 to 30-plus AU/A are not uncommon.
This constitutes a huge difference in the way grazing occurs and in its impacts on the soils and vegetation.
How and why is stock density such a valuable tool in achieving range health and production goals? How does it affect soils and vegetation and how does it affect livestock? This article is intended to answer some of these questions.
Traditional grazing management with low stock densities only controls:
■ How many livestock are in a pasture
■ When livestock go in a pasture
■ When livestock go off the pasture
Thus, when livestock are in a pasture they choose where they go and what they prefer to graze. That is, unless we use the tool of stock density.
0512pc_sindelar_fg_1Stock density becomes an active tool at densities as low as 1 AU/A and especially at densities above 10 to 20 AU/A.
At higher stock densities, animals necessarily distribute themselves throughout a grazing unit to access forage – they eat forage they may not prefer and their impacts to soils are increased with their trampling, dunging and urinating (not a bad thing).
Let’s briefly consider the role grazing can play in forage plant mortality.
Kinds of grazing that damage or kill forage plants:
1. Amount of forage removed – overutilization
2. Time when forage is removed – season of use
3. Number of times grazed – grazing frequency
4. Length of time between defoliations (grazing interval) – overgrazing
5. Non-use and consequent stagnation – over-resting
Stock density is the one tool that can help the grazing manager avoid most of these threats to forage plants. Here’s an example of how overgrazing and over-resting can be avoided:
An example of stock density in action
Contrast the grazing management strategies of two ranch managers regarding the same ranching property. In each case, 2,000 acres of range are available from June 15 to Oct. 1 (3.5 months).
A stream runs through the long axis of a valley, with timbered uplands on one side (see figures).
0512pc_sindelar_fg_2Manager A grazing plan
■ 2,000 acres, 200 cows, 1 pasture
■ Stocked at 3 acres per AUM
■ Stock density = 2,000/200 = 0.1 AU/acre, i.e. each cow has 10 acres
■ Grazing period is 3.5 months (about 100 days)
Manager B grazing plan
0512pc_sindelar_fg_2■ 2,000 acres, 200 cows, 10 pastures, each 200 acres
■ Stocked at 3 acres/AUM
■ Stock density = 200/200 = 1.0 AU/acre, i.e. each cow has 1 acre
■ Grazing period is 10 days for each pasture, or 3.5 months for 10 pastures
Note: The “stocking rates” used by each manager are identical (3 acres per AUM).
Consider potential livestock distribution patterns and forage use in these diagrams.
Manager A turns 200 head into a 2,000-acre pasture and leaves them there for 3.5 months (100 days).
Manager B divides the unit into 10 pastures, each 200 acres in size. He turns 200 head into a 200-acre pasture and leaves them there for 10 days before moving them to the next unit for 10 days.
Let’s examine how forage plants respond to these two contrasting grazing scenarios.
Assume that three major forage plants are present:
■ Species A: highly palatable, preferred by livestock (e.g. green needlegrass)
■ Species B: palatable, moderately preferred by livestock (e.g. bluebunch wheatgrass)
■ Species C: moderately palatable, not preferred by livestock (e.g. Idaho fescue)
0512pc_sindelar_tb_1For the 3.5-month grazing season, note the resultant forage plant use (see Table 1.)
Consequence: With Manager A, the least-preferred plants get the most rest; the most-preferred and most valuable plants get the least rest.
With Manager B, all plants receive the same exposure to grazing and the same amount of rest.
Questions to consider for these contrasting scenarios over a period of years:
■ What are the consequences to forage plants, soils and riparian areas of reducing grazing periods from 100 days to 10 days per grazing season?
■ Which forage plants will be grazed? Which forage plants will not be grazed?
■ Where will the cattle graze? Where will they loiter?
■ How will the soils and the riparian zone be affected?
■ How will range condition be affected?
■ What other conditions will be altered, such as water quality, wildlife habitat, weed infestations, etc.?
While this is a simplistic example, it illustrates some of the responses to using stock density as a management tool.
Conclusions
Stock density is a valuable tool in grazing management because it will achieve the following when used properly:
■ Alter livestock feeding behavior and forage preferences, allowing greater harvest efficiency and higher range carrying capacity
■ Improve the distribution of livestock within a grazing unit, further increasing carrying capacity
■ Provide shorter grazing periods and longer rest periods, thus improving health of vegetation
■ Improve soil functions and nutrient cycling through the concentration of dung and urine and impact of animal hooves
■ Facilitate movement of livestock by reducing the size of individual grazing units
As with any management tool, stock density requires training and experience to apply properly. At very high stock densities (e.g. more than 10 AUs/A), forage can disappear quickly and animals may be stressed, particularly if the forage supply runs short.
Length of grazing periods must be watched carefully so that the forage resource is not overutilized before livestock are moved.
What are the costs to management associated with use of higher stock densities? Additional fencing is typically needed and additional livestock moves are necessary.
Fortunately, the advent of excellent electric fencing systems makes effective, low-cost pasture subdivision a reality.
Livestock enjoy moving onto fresh forage and moves are generally easily managed. The payoff is improved range carrying capacity and improved land health.
Dramatically increasing stock density is not always practical or appropriate in every ranching situation.
However, even relatively modest increases in stock density can be readily achieved and will yield noticeable responses in animal behavior, greater production and land health improvement



http://www.progressivecattle.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4669:stock-density-as-a-grazing-management-tool&catid=93:featured-main-page

Who is winning the food fight?


Most farmers are working quite hard to produce as much food as possible for a hungry world and marketplace, but daily get criticized by non-farmers because of doing things that the non-farmers do not think should be done. Few folks, other than pork producers, have seen pregnant sows fight, but think they know how hogs should be raised. Today, agriculture seems to take it on the chin from society, and it makes you wonder who is winning.
The winner in the modern day food fight has not been decided, but each has scored punches, believes Robert Paarlberg, a Wellesley University ag economist, who recently spoke at Purdue University.  Addressing “Food Politics,” Paarlberg said there are several fundamental disagreements, including what farms should look like, agriculture’s relationship to nature, and who should make decisions about food and agriculture.
Dividing the two sides into advocates for conventional agriculture and advocates for alternative agriculture, Paarlberg said large specialized farms are OK for conventional agriculture, but not for the alternative group. He said the first group finds the primary challenge is to produce much more food by 2050, but the alternative group wants to preserve traditional rural livelihoods, protect biodiversity, and provide ecosystem services. Regarding their relationship with nature, conventional agriculture sees nature being protected by high yields to reduce the area being cropped. The alternative group believes the best systems are those that imitate nature.  And regarding decision making, conventional agriculture accepts governments, technical experts and the market, all of whom are not to be trusted by the alternative group.
The current movement toward “local food,” promotes the fact that the number of farmers’ markets has doubled since 1998, and the number of community-supported agriculture enterprises has risen from 400 in 2001 to 4,000 today. However, food sales by those entrepreneurs represent only .04% of all agricultural sales in the U.S. Similarly, only 4% of all food sales is organic, only 7% of farmers’ market sales is organic food, and 45% of all organic food is produced in only 2 states. In 2008, harvested organic cropland made up only .51% of all US cropland.
Within nations belonging to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) the period from 1990 to 2004 saw a 5% increase in the volume of food production, along with a 4% decrease in land farmed, a 9% decrease in irrigation used, a 17% drop in excess nitrogen use, a 5% decrease in pesticide use while the contribution to increased greenhouse gas production was only one sixth of the rest of the economy. Since 1980, U.S. agriculture has engaged in precision agriculture for more precise irrigation, fertilizer use, reduced pesticide use and reduced tillage, which saves diesel fuel. Paarlberg pointed to his home state of Ohio and said while 30% of all farms had GPS systems in tractors, that technology was used by over 78% of farms in the large category with over $1 million in commodity sales.  The same comparison was made for yield monitors, which are used by 25% of all farms, but 80% of large farms, and for geographically-referenced soil mapping that is used by 23% of all farms, but 56% of large farms.
Crop protection chemicals are becoming more precise in their use says Paarlberg since the 1972 ban on organochlorine insecticides and the 1990 introduction of variable rate application. In 1996, glyphosate was introduced replacing more toxic herbicides, and in the same year Bt corn and cotton was introduced to reduce the insecticide use on those crops. He also said significant reductions in the use of diesel fuel and loss of soil began in the 1980’s with the use of no-till planters and in the 1990’s with the introduction of glyphosate that required less mechanical cultivation.
However, Paarlberg said confined animal feeding operations or CAFOs have become significant targets recently for opponents. While CAFOs have reduced the cost of food to consumers and reduced the frequency of food contamination, CAFOs work less well for waste disposal, dependence upon antibiotics and raise animal welfare complaints.  He noted the increasingly hostile environment for CAFOs, in which court and FDA actions have been against the use of antibiotics, there have been state-level bans on gestation crates for gilts and sows and small cage space for laying hens. And he said a growing number of food service companies have taken voluntary action against gestation crates.
So who is winning the food fight? Paarlberg concludes that alternative agriculture has become dominant in the elite cultural marketplace. Conventional crop farming has given up none of its dominance in the commercial marketplace.  And conventional livestock farming is being forced to accept new restraints from the commercial and political marketplace.
Source: FarmGate blog

Unite or die - the vision for livestock industries


The cattle industry's various groups need to unite, or risk dying.

That's the dramatic view of John Berry, head of Australia's largest meat processor JBS.

There's two themes emerging from speakers at this year's ABARES conference in Canberra - farming needs one voice, and more investment is needed in infrastructure.

Mr Berry says Government and industry must work together to develop northern Australia before it's too late.

He says the north is the key location for Australia's beef markets.

He also acknowledges there are a number of views on what should be done for the industry - should it be locked up and conserved or managed sustainably to develop further abattoirs.

John Berry says it's good to see an entrepreneurial spirit in the industry and the government has a role to play in that.

"At the end of the day these are very low margin businesses and [we need] to operate for as much of the 12 months in the year as possible."

Australia should be very proud of its animal welfare standards, but at the end of the day they are business operations.

He believes neither Government nor outsiders should be commenting on what sort of model the livestock industry should be operating - live exports or boxed beef.

"Historically we've had an antagonistic position between producers and processors. In the last couple of years we've been trying to build a bridge. It can be done better, in areas such as market access, infrastructure, responses to government. A cohesive view is better than a fragmented view.

He says it's a passionate and emotional industry, but that Australia must be competitive in an international market - and that means the whole chain from producer to processor must work together.

Mr Berry says there's a disconnect about who's representing the industry.

"In hindsight the whole communication strategy could have been handled better, and I'm sure everyone would acknowledge that."

He says the industry needs to look at itself, be more open, more mature and deal with it.


http://www.abc.net.au/rural/news/content/201203/s3447825.htm

VIDEO: Modelo productivo de Tomate en tres corregimientos

Beef industry responds to ‘pink slime’ concerns


Consumer response from news reports about lean finely textured beef (LFTB) trimmings, dubbed “pink slime” by food critics, pushed the beef industry and its allies, including the USDA, into a high gear public information response.
But those campaigns may have started too late, as meat production plants using LFTB were forced to cut jobs and close some operations due to the public’s response.
As beef producers dealt with the “pink slime” fallout, USDA began approving requests for companies to voluntarily label how their beef uses or does not use LFTB.
That type of label would be a claim and require USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service to verify the accuracy of the label claim.
Beef Products Inc. (BPI), the South Dakota-based operation that created the technology making LFTB trimmings, announced in late March that the “pink slime” backlash would force the company to idle three of its four operations and temporarily lay off 659 employees.
On Monday, beef processor AFA Foods, with plants in six states, filed bankruptcy records and cited the public’s “unfounded public outcry” over the beef product as a factor in its filing for Chapter 11.
The catalyst to those decisions came when grocers such as Kroger, Supervalu and Safeway said they would no longer sell LFTB in their ground beef mixes, due to harsh consumer response.
BPI also began its own consumer information campaign to explain its production methods, largely through its website. The American Meat Institute and the Environmental Safety Alliance also waged information campaigns responding to the furor.
State governors and lieutenant governors from Texas, Iowa, Kansas, South Dakota and Nebraska, where BPI has employees, appeared at BPI’s Iowa plant on March 29 to tour the facility.
The officials issued a statement supporting the product, and saying media sensationalism was trumping sound science, and putting jobs at stake.
"Ultimately, it will be the consumer who pays for taking this safe product out of the market,” the statement said.
“The price of ground beef will rise as ranchers work to raise as many as 1.5 million more head of cattle to replace safe beef no longer consumed because of the baseless media scare."
The governors also began urging retailers to continue selling beef with lean trimmings, which led to Hy-Vee stores reversing course and deciding to keep lean-trimming ground beef in its cases, albeit by labeling beef with the trimmings. Walmart stores announced a similar policy.
The controversy erupted in early March when bloggers and network media seized on the process and the term “pink slime” to criticize USDA and its decision to purchase the beef for school lunches.
The term “pink slime” first came from a New York Times story in 2009 that quoted former U.S. Department of Agriculture microbiologist Gerald Zirnstein, who used the term in a 2002 e-mail to colleagues.
The lean beef mixture is derived from a heating process that separates lean meat from fat. The meat is then treated with a small amount of ammonium hydroxide gas, which kills pathogenic bacteria.
Critics have called the resulting meat a “filler” that was only previously used in pet food and cooking oil production, and assailed the use of ammonium hydroxide.
Beef industry specialists, however, have said the process uses real lean beef and allows producers to use most of the animal, with up to 12 pounds of beef gained per carcass.
Food scientists also defended ammonium hydroxide as food-grade additive that USDA has deemed Generally Recognized As Safe (GRAS) since 1974. Ammonium hydroxide is also used in the production of breads, cheeses, gelatins, and common items ranging from ketchup to chocolate.
Russell Cross, head of the Texas A&M University Department of Animal Science, said he approved the process when he was at USDA’s Food Safety Inspection Service in 1993, but the media have ignored science supporting that decision.
“I’ve never seen more biased, bogus reporting than I’ve seen in this particular case,” Cross said.
“All the reporting that caused this issues, none of the reporters checked the facts, none went to universities, the government. … We need to do what we can to get the truth out about this product.”
Ted Schroeder, a livestock marketing professor at Kansas State University, said the issue boils down to a misperception and “yuck factor” among consumers “that has nothing to do with the quality or safety of the product.”
“If there’s something wrong with it, it should be modified or banned,” Schroeder said. “But from what I understand, I’ve never seen anything suggesting this product is less than safe.”
As for the demand to label LFTB, Schroeder says that process may add a far greater cost in tracking and traceability.
“If we take every food production activity that’s been widely adopted and proven safe and helps get more consistent product to consumers, and we start saying ‘you washed lettuce in that, you have to label that,’ if we start doing that there really is no end. It starts to get into slippery slopes.
How much are we going to put up with increasing costs because we have strangely identified labels, some which may not matter to consumers.”
Schroeder said companies like BPI may find it easier to educate consumers, and reassure them of the product’s safety, and the safety precautions required with ground beef.
“If you regulate because you can, you get a costly industry. If you educate, you just have to get out and help them understand.”
Charlie Powell, chief information officer for Washington State University’s College of Veterinary Medicine, said the public’s response was predictable and caught the beef industry unprepared, given how the “pink slime” label was disclosed over two years ago.
“If an industry can’t explain things, or chooses not to explain to the consumer, they run the risk of discovery and exploitation, which always exacerbates the danger of a negative event like this,” Powell said.
The safety of LFTB isn’t in question, Powell said, but the timing of that information came too late when the controversy boiled over. Commodity producers need to embrace open transparency in their production methods, Powell urged.
That requires more than just labeling, but a proactive sustained strategy to educate stakeholders before a blogger or reporter reveals a production secret handed to them by someone unfriendly to the industry.
“Take a page out of the playbook of other commodities. Help (consumers) understand not only the health of the product but also what it takes to produce this. My argument is for complete transparency. Then people aren’t vulnerable to a disinformation attack.”

http://www.progressivecattle.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4635:beef-industry-responds-to-pink-slime-concerns&catid=93:featured-main-page

VIDEO: Massey Ferguson Tractors Star at World Premiere of Rural Rom-Com

La reconversión a ganadería ecológica como forma de capear la crisis

José Luis Sáez, ganadero de vacuno de leche en Calera y Chozas, ha invertido casi dos años en certificar su explotación como granja de producción ecológica, la primera de la provincia de Toledo y la segunda de Castilla-La Mancha, para que sea más competitiva y así pueda capear la crisis.
"Era esto o el cierre", ha explicado a Efe, de una manera muy explícita, este ganadero al que "mucha" gente le dice que hay que estar loco para apostar por un sector en el que las granjas van cerrando porque los precios de la leche están por los suelos y porque los costes de producción no dejan de subir.
Pero Sáez ve en el sello ecológico una alternativa, una calidad añadida para su leche, una posibilidad para diferenciar y destacar su producto y sobrevivir con su explotación ganadera.
Este productor recibió hace quince días la certificación que garantiza que su leche es ecológica, y ahora su intención es hacer una inversión de 80.000 euros para fabricar derivados lácteos, para la que confía en recibir una subvención de I+D+I que ha solicitado.
La granja Beatriz de Calera y Chozas está situada en la comarca de Talavera de la Reina, que congrega el mayor número de explotaciones ganaderas y cabezas de vacuno de Castilla-La Mancha.
La explotación se ha convertido en la primera de Toledo que consigue la certificación ecológica y la segunda de Castilla-La Mancha, detrás de otra de Letur (Albacete).
De momento, el litro de leche ecológica se paga a unos 20 céntimos más que el litro normal y de esta explotación salen 2.500 litros diarios cuya comercialización es el gran reto que José Luis Sáez tiene ahora.
Los forrajes procedentes de agricultura ecológica, heno o alfalfa, sin pesticidas ni químicos, son la base alimentaria de las vacas de José Luis, que incluso explota 40 hectáreas de terreno para consumir los pastos que él mismo siembra.
Los demás cambios que se han introducido en la granja se centran en modos de producción y "en la mentalidad", indica Sáez.
En la granja Beatriz hay unas 140 cabezas de ganado incluyendo terneras, de las cuales 75 se ordeñan, tres veces al día.
Son vacas de raza frisona y holstein, seleccionadas genéticamente por sus cualidades como productoras de muchos litros de leche con bajo contenido en grasa.
José Luis Sáez espera que el esfuerzo y la ilusión invertida en la reconversión de su granja empiecen a dar sus frutos, y también rentabilidad para poder seguir viviendo de una profesión sacrificada pero que le apasiona.
"De momento, las vacas están mejor, más contentas, y enferman menos", asegura el productor.
Si las cosas salen como espera, en un tiempo Sáez podrá vender quesos, batidos o yogures elaborados con su leche ecológica y habrá encontrado una salida para no tener que colgar el cartel de cerrado en su explotación.
Este ganadero considera que el consumidor sí sabe valorar la calidad y la diferencia entre una leche ecológica y otra normal y hace un llamamiento a la administración para que regule mejor el mercado, donde en ocasiones se venden "subproductos, desechos alimentarios" bajo etiquetas que no indican realmente al consumidor lo que está comprando.

http://www.finanzas.com/noticias/empresas/2012-03-11/677639_reconversion-ganaderia-ecologica-como-forma.html

Who owns the beef cows in the U.S.?


In March 2011, a report from the USDA Economic Research Service (ERS) was published titled “The Diverse Structure and Organization of U.S. Beef Cow-Calf Farms.” It’s probably not a surprise to anyone associated with the beef industry that the title itself provides an accurate description of this segment of our industry.
Due to the large differences in terrain, climate and motivation for owning beef cows in the U.S., it naturally follows that variation exists.
In this study, ERS uses data from USDA’s 2008 Agricultural Resource Management Survey of U.S. beef cow-calf operations to examine the structure, costs and characteristics of beef cow-calf producers.
0612pc_whittier_fg_1
The survey covered 22 states and targeted beef cow-calf producers with at least 20 beef cows on the operation during 2008. Here are a few highlights from that report:
• Beef cow-calf production in the U.S. is widespread, occurring in every state.
• Nearly 765,000 farms, about 35 percent of the 2.2 million farms in the U.S., had beef cows in 2007. Most of these were small, part-time operations.
• About one-third of farms that raise beef animals had a beef cow inventory of less than 10 cows; more than half had fewer than 20 cows and nearly 80 percent had fewer than 50 cows.
• About 60 percent of U.S. beef cow-calf farms produce calves that are sold at or shortly after weaning. These are usually small farms and most are located in the Southeast and Southern Plains. Many of the farm households on these operations generate most of their income from off-farm sources.
• More than one-third of beef cow-calf farms retain ownership of calves after weaning and continue grazing, or backgrounding, the calves from 30 to 90 days before selling. These farms are generally larger, have more beef cows and are distributed throughout the U.S., with many in the Northern Plains and West regions.
• The majority of U.S. beef cows are located in the South, including the Southern Plains (primarily Texas) and the Southeast.
These regions have the advantage of a longer grazing season and less need for supplemental forage to support beef cattle during the winter, which results in lower feed costs.
Despite higher feed costs in the Northern Plains, large beef cow-calf producers in this region are able to compete with those in the South due to production efficiencies and economies of size.
• Economies of size in beef cow-calf production suggest that farms have an incentive to become larger.
However, the significant land area required for large-scale beef cow-calf production inhibits many producers from expanding.
In most areas of the U.S., beef cow-calf production is the residual user of land. As the opportunity cost of pasture and range land increases for uses such as crop production or recreational activities, the size of beef cow-calf operations may be limited or fragmented into smaller units.
• Most farms with beef cows do not specialize in beef cow-calf production. In 2008, cattle production accounted for less than 40 percent of the average farm product value on U.S. beef cow-calf farms.
Regionally, cattle production accounted for about two-thirds of farm product value on beef cow-calf farms in the Southern Plains and West regions, but less than 40 percent in other regions.
Specialization in cattle production increased with farm size and peaked at 60 percent of farm product value for operations with 250 to 499 beef cows. Among the largest operations – those with 500 or more cows – less than 50 percent of farm product value was from cattle.
• Operators of more than one-third of beef cow-calf farms worked off-farm in 2008, and half of beef cow-calf farms are classified as rural residence farms.
These farms are small operations that specialize in beef cow-calf production but report off-farm earnings as the primary source of household income.
Commercial farms with beef cow-calf enterprises are mostly diversified farm operations on which cattle are a secondary enterprise that accounts for about one-fourth of farm product value.
On intermediate farms, which have annual farm sales under $250,000 and report farming as the main occupation, the beef cattle enterprise accounts for over half of farm product value. Intermediate farms are among the most financially vulnerable to the input and output price variations of beef cattle production.
The authors of the report further state: “These findings suggest that operators of beef cow-calf farms, large and small, have varying goals for their cattle enterprises, of which farming as a lifestyle choice is not uncommon.”
During the past year there has been much discussion about the decrease in the number of beef cows in the U.S. There are many reasons for this decrease, including increases in feed prices, drought, high prices for cull cows that have drawn lower-producing cows to be harvested for beef and many other factors.
It will be interesting to see how the diverse beef cow owners noted in the ERS report respond to current and upcoming signals.
My guess is that we will always have a large population of “rural residence farms” that crave the slower pace away from the city and enjoy the lifestyle associated with owning a few cows.
On the other side of the spectrum, I believe the profit potential associated with production efficiencies of large-scale cow-calf operations will continue to drive increases in that sector.
Recent projections indicate that heifer retention is beginning to occur. I wonder what the diverse structure and organization of U.S. beef cow-calf farms will look like 10 years from now

http://www.progressivecattle.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4779:who-owns-the-beef-cows-in-the-us&catid=93:featured-main-page

Bee book opens a window on key part of agriculture


For the past decade, U.S. media have carried reports of declining honeybee populations and the impending doom it could mean for food production.
I'd seen depressing stories about "colony collapse disorder," where whole hives of bees inexplicably disappear, so it was with some trepidation that I picked up "Beekeeper's Lament" by Hannah Nordhaus from the library. However, I wanted to know exactly was happening with our fuzzy little friends.
The book opened a window on a whole aspect of agriculture I had no idea existed. It also helped sort out facts from myths, and left me feeling more hopeful than I expected.
For example, popular opinion says "wild" honeybees have gone extinct in North America, for reasons largely unknown. The reality is far more complicated.
For starters, honeybees are not native to North America. Europeans brought domesticated bees to the East Coast around 1620 and they reached the West Coast in the mid-1800s. Arguably, there never has been a wild species.
Bees periodically swarm and leave their hives (most commonly because of overcrowding; some leave to form a new colony). If a beekeeper is present, they lure the bees into a new man-made hive, but sometimes a swarm finds a natural home, such as a hole in a tree, and then may be called "wild" because no beekeeper is actively caring for them. Genetically, though, they are the same strain as domesticated bees.
That's not to say honeybees are not distressed. All genetically related honeybees, whether wild or domestic, are vulnerable to the same diseases, parasites and predators, and there are lots of them. If so-called wild bees have died off and bees with keepers have not, it may be because their human caretakers are intervening to protect them.
For me, the most stunning revelation was how utterly dependent much of U.S. farming is on mobile bee herds. As monoculture farms have evolved (farm areas where huge acreage is devoted to single crops), beekeeping has evolved, too.
Did you know that hundred of thousands of hives are shipped from all over the country every year to central California to pollinate almond orchards? Other crops receive similar treatment.
Beekeepers are willing to move their fragile cargoes around because natural food supplies for honeybees have dwindled. Honeybees need a steady supply of summer pollen to be healthy. Wild meadows are a good source, with mixed plants blooming at different times, but satisfactory wild places have become rare.
Commercial monoculture makes moving bees to food economically viable, since growers will pay for pollination services. If bees stayed in one place, many fewer bees could be sustained, which would result in a lot less food available for humans.
Keeping honeybees alive and healthy is difficult, even under the best conditions. They are subject to viruses, mites, predators and unseasonable weather. Humans have added destruction of habitat, pesticides and herbicides to the list of fatal hazards.
I spoke with local beekeeper Rob Rienstra, of Backyard Bees, to learn about the status of Whatcom County bees. Rob sells his honey at Bellingham Farmers Market. His business focus is honey production, and he does his own honey extraction (removing and purifying the honey from the waxy honeycomb). Most of his bees are in urban backyards around Bellingham, but he also provides pollination services for a local apple orchard and a raspberry farm.
Rob says he's very selective about the kind of commercial crops he lets his bees pollinate. "Some pollen is not as good for bees," he says. Reasons range from the chemicals used, to the quality of nutrients available.
"It's like people combining rice and beans to get all their necessary amino acids," he says. "Some pollens have better combinations of nutrients."
Rob sends some of his strongest hives to California for the almond orchards. There, his bees get better spring weather and more bountiful pollen, and come back stronger and healthier for summer honey production locally.
Rob says he hasn't personally seen a colony collapse event in this area, and doesn't think a Skagit beekeeper friend has seen one, either. The greatest bee loss happens during winter, when bees are dormant. Last summer was cool and wet, not good weather for honeybees, so most of Rob's winter loss was due to Nosema, a bee virus that thrives in cool, damp years.
Overall, Rob says he doesn't think county farmers have problems getting enough bees for adequate pollination, though many bees are shipped from other parts of the state and beyond for local raspberry production.
If you want to support honeybee health, Rob recommends using "serious caution" before using pesticides or herbicides, especially those intended for ants or wasps. Many have unintended consequences for honeybees. Also, Rob wants people to know that honeybees are gentle.
"Honeybees are really, really safe to be around unless you are known to be allergic," he says. "Unless you step on a bee or kick its hive, you're very unlikely to be stung by a bee."
To ensure quality honey, Rob says "Buying closer to home is a better bet."
I couldn't agree more. The Los Angeles Times reported last November that "A torrent of illegal Chinese honey labeled in India (to skirt American trade restrictions) is slipping into the U.S. potentially laden with untraceable antibiotics and heavy metals."
Not on my family's table, thank you!

http://www.bellinghamherald.com/2012/02/28/2406860/bee-book-opens-a-window-on-key.html

NOTA DE SABADO: Un ganadero usa fotos de sementales para estimular la libido de sus ovejas


El ganadero Alberto García ha colocado fotos de sementales entre las ovejas hembras para intentar potenciar su libido sexual y así incrementar la reproducción en su explotación ganadera en la localidad vallisoletana de Olmedo.
En una entrevista telefónica con Efe, el ganadero ha explicado que el objetivo de su experimento, probado ya en Australia, es "desestacionalizar el rebaño", ya que la época en que las ovejas suelen quedarse preñadas es el otoño y no en la actual.
Con luz tenue y unas fotografías de 1,40 metros de ancho y 1,10 metros de altura, "casi tamaño real" de los animales sementales del rebaño, García pretende estimular a sus ovejas ante la llegada del macho.
Normalmente, el ganadero utilizaba otros métodos para excitar a los animales, sin embargo, se percató de que las hembras tardaban demasiado tiempo en quedarse embarazadas.
Con esta técnica, las cien ovejas seleccionadas para probar la idea tendrán ante sus ojos las fotografías de los machos durante quince días para que "que desde el primer momento estén receptivas".
Una vez que los machos y las hembras dejen de estar en contacto se realizarán ecografías a los animales para comprobar los resultados.
Si el método funciona, la fertilidad de la granja de García se incrementará un 15% al año, lo que supone 250 cabezas de ganado más para su explotación, de forma que subiría también la venta de leche y lechazo.
El objetivo final es que las ovejas del ganadero olmedano produzcan leche y lechazo durante todos las estaciones del año, ya que en primavera "el precio cae en picado debido a la gran oferta que hay de producto".
Sin embargo, en otoño el precio de los productos será "el doble", ha expresado García, por lo que pretenden que los corderos nazcan en esa época del año gracias a su experimento.
Además de esta técnica, desde que el ganadero puso en marcha su explotación, hace nueve años, las ovejas disfrutan de música para relajarse e intentar que estén tranquilas ante la llegada de los visitantes de la granja, que suelen ser estudiantes o niños.

http://www.elmundo.es/elmundo/2012/03/01/valladolid/1330632258.html

Con la tecnología de Blogger.