2012 Vermont Agronomy Plus

Join us at one of the seven 2012 Vermont Agronomy Plus workshops in January and Feburary!

There has never been a greater need to think seriously about managing for long-term success: maximizing the impact of every dollar invested in farm operations, capitalizing on opportunities, and avoiding common pitfalls.  Join us as we discuss:

• Top-quality haylage production.
• Nitrogen management in grass haylage: how much N is enough?
• What’s the difference? Characteristics of farms that succeed and farms that fail.
• Optimizing profitability with low-cost rations.
• Other locally relevant topics.

Attendees will enjoy interactive presentations, discussions, and an excellent lunch with UVM Extension faculty and staff including Sid Bosworth, Mark Canella, Jeff Carter, Alan Curler, Heather Darby, Daniel Hudson, Dennis Kaupplia, Tony Kitsos, and Bob Parsons (depending on location).

LOCATIONS

• Jan. 31, St. Johnsbury: Union Baptist Church, 932 US Rt.5, Waterford, VT.
• Feb 1, Randolph: VTC Red Schoolhouse, 46 S. Randolph Rd., Randolph Center, VT.
• Feb 2, Springfield: Holiday Inn, 818 Charlestown Rd.
• Feb 7, St. Albans: American Legion , 100 Parah Dr.
• Feb 8, Poultney: The Tiny Theatre, 153 Main St.
• Feb 9, Vergennes: American Legion Hall, 100 Armory Lane
• Feb 15, Newport: East Side Restaurant, 47 Landing St # 3

Time (all locations): 10:00 a.m – 3:30 p.m  (registration begins at 9:30 a.m.)

If you need directions, please call 802-751-8307 or e-mail                    brent.passut@uvm.edu.

Register by filling out the flyer or REGISTER ON-LINE by going to www.uvm.edu/extension/agronomyplus Visa and MasterCard accepted

Managing Flood Damaged Crops and Forage from Tropical Storm Irene

The factsheet Managing Flood Damaged Crops and Forage from Tropical Storm Irene contains information specific to handling crops that have been flooded by Hurricane Irene.  Other documents out there focus on the general problem of handling flooded crops, but many of them are focused on early-season events.  This document also includes information about sampling and testing for mycotoxins.

Inoculant Applicators Are Relatively Simple to Attach and May be ‘Free’ From Your Local Vendor

We do not endorse or promote the products of any company over another either explicitly or implicitly.  That said, I want to make you aware of companies that have contacted me with offers that might be of interest to farmers with flood-damaged corn.  If any other agribusinesses contact me with similar information, I will be glad to pass that along to you as well.

Many farmers are not set up to inoculate, but are interested in inoculating this year due to the crop flooding caused by Hurricane Irene.  Seedway (Shoreham, VT), with one of their suppliers, has put together a program where farmers can get ‘free’ inoculant applicators if they agree to buy the actual inoculant from them.  Other companies may have similar offers, so you may have success getting a similar offer from other companies, so please look around to compare products and offers with recommendations that we have already given.

Some of these applicators should be relatively easy to add on to your chopper.  One estimate was that it would take about an hour.

To see an application for the program I mentioned, please visit: http://agronomator.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/flood-damaged-applicator-program-seedwayed.pdf or call Ed Schillawski at 802-338-6930.

FINALLY:  rumors continue to swirl.  The claim that all flooded corn must be destroyed IS NOT TRUE.  Pass the word along as you are able.  You should be getting communication from the Agency of Agriculture in the near future with more details about mitigation, testing, etc.

Update on Harvesting Crops that Have Been Flooded

Many, particularly in the Southern Vermont, are either gearing up for corn harvest or have already begun.  If you have crops that have been flooded and you plan to harvest them for feed or let animals graze them, this post is for you.

In some parts of the country when corn has been flooded, the FDA has ruled that it cannot/could not be fed due to concerns about food safety.  Obviously, painting with such a broad brush is not ideal if it is possible or likely that some of the corn could be fed.  No doubt we all appreciate the Vermont Agency of Agriculture pushing for a situation where there is more flexibility for such decisions to be determined on a case-by-case basis.  The Vermont Agency of Agriculture submitted a ‘mitigation’ proposal to the FDA, which was accepted.  You should soon receive a letter from the VT Agency of Agriculture detailing the implications for corn that was flooded.  My current understanding is that:

• Corn that was flooded should be segregated.  If flooded corn is mixed with unflooded corn, the whole batch will need to be treated as though it was all flooded.
• Testing requirements may vary, depending on where you are located, what discharge events happened upstream, etc.
• You will likely be required to have the flooded corn tested weekly, at least for some things.  It bears mentioning that one primary concern is ‘aflatoxin’ which can develop in these types of situations.  Although it is said to be unlikely to be a problem this far north, it is highly carcinogenic and does pass over into the milk.  Heavy metals and other contaminants are of concern in some locations.
• If you don’t plan to harvest any crops that have been flooded, the mitigation plan does not apply to you.
• More specific details will be forthcoming

Regarding pastures that have been flooded:  some of them look great, but can cause expensive losses.  I spoke with a farmer today who related a scary anecdote from the 1996 flood: three weeks after the flood, he let the cows out into the pasture and 6 or 7 (of about 70) aborted.  There are probably many possible reasons for this, but clostridium and listeria come to mind.  Given the risks, it seems wise to wait until next year to graze or harvest pasture/hayland that has been flooded.

If you do plan to put your animals out on pasture, be sure to talk with your veterinarian about the risks, necessary vaccinations, and other precautions to minimize your risk.  Don’t graze too low to the ground, make sure they have other feed available free-choice, etc.

WHAT IF I DID NOT HAVE INSURANCE?

Even if you don’t have crop insurance, REPORT ALL FLOOD DAMAGE TO THE Farm Service Agency.  Document the damage before harvesting what you plan to harvest, but let them know.  Contact me or someone else from UVM Extension, your local Conservation District, NRCS office, or the FSA if you need help documenting the damage.

Please let me know if you are lacking any information about dealing with flood-damaged crops or other damage related to Hurricane Irene.

An excellent compilation of disaster relief resources can be found at the UVM Extension Website.

Making the Most of a Bad Situation

Daniel Hudson and Dennis Kauppila, UVM Extension

The situation faced by Vermont farmers raising corn reminds me of one of my favorite scenes from the movie Chariots of Fire where Eric Liddell (the main character) is running the 440 yard dash in a Scotland vs. France competition.  Early in the race Eric is knocked down and rather than laying there cursing fate, he gathers himself up with great determination and proceeds to win the race.  In such circumstances, winning is usually ‘good enough’ and one would not lose much sleep over not achieving a personal-best time.  Whether you were forced to plant late or experienced flooding from Hurricane Irene, all you can do is try to do your best with the things that you can control.  This obviously starts with getting all the basics of silage production right.  My purpose here is not to give an exhaustive treatise on silage production, but I do want to encourage you to make sure the basics are at the front of your mind, because they will pay you back faster than anything else.  There are many good Extension resources on this subject from across the country:

• an excellent resource from the University of Delaware: Practical Management Aspects of Corn Silage Production for Dairy Cattle 
•  if you have access to high-speed internet, you will greatly benefit from the video presentation An Update on Silage Management by Dr. Limin Kung (University of Delaware Extension), one of the nation’s foremost silage production experts.
• focusing on oxygen exclusion: An Update on Covering Bunker Silos
  
• from the University of Wisconsin, a very systematic conversation about Managing Aerobic Stability in Silages and High Moisture Corn
  
• to learn more about how to decide which type of inoculant to use, see Help in Choosing and Effective Silage Inoculant by Dr. Limin Kung.

Points to Consider When Making Decisions about Harvesting Flood-Stressed Corn for Silage

Many Vermont dairy farmers had fields that were flooded due to the effects of Hurricane Irene.  On some farms, the corn was pushed down flat to the ground by flood waters and will be unharvestable, while corn in other fields remained standing and seems undamaged at this point except for being covered with varying amounts of silt.  Because each farm was affected differently, there is no one prescription that describes exactly how to proceed.  Some of the corn will be unharvestable, while it is likely that much of it will be salvageable.  Many of the points below come from Dr. Kung’s work and recent conversations with him:

• Be patient.  If it looks like there is a chance that the corn will be harvestable, monitor the field every few days to see what happens.
• If your fields were flooded, report it to your insurance company immediately: do not wait for damage to become evident.
• In fields that were flooded but you believe will probably be harvestable, note whether the plants are physically damaged in ways that will allow pathogens to begin invading the stalk and ear.  Look inside the husk to note whether fungus is beginning to grow.  If the plants are physically damaged, or quality is visibly deteriorating, plan on harvesting sooner than later.  It is better to put the silage up a bit wet than to have high levels of mycotoxins develop and otherwise lose yield or quality.  Also, it is obviously wise to avoid harvesting areas that are excessively contaminated.
• Silt-covered corn will put out a lot of dust when it is being chopped, so it is necessary for those in the field to use all means necessary to protect their respiratory health.  The silt is also abrasive, so it will be very hard on machinery and operators will need to take extra pains to ensure knives are sharp and to be prepared for extra repairs.
• It is advisable to inoculate with lactic acid bacteria (LAB) from a reputable company.  It may cost up to $3-4/ton for a good inoculant, but do not skimp on the rate.  Dr. Kung emphasizes that there are many LB products that are on the market that do not supply the recommended number of bacteria per gram of harvested forage, and farmers should be wary of such products.  Recommended ratea are 100,000 cfu/g of harvested forage for homolactic bacteria and 400,000 cfu/g of harvested forage for when L. buchneri is part of the inoculant formulation. In circumstances where there flood waters have contaminated the corn plants, doubling the rate may be advisable. .
• If the situation demands that the corn be harvested wetter than is ideal (i.e., 28-30% DM), the silage should be treated with a straight homolactic LAB inoculant (do not include L. Buchneri inoculant) as described above as well as 2 – 3 pounds of buffered propionic acid.  These products should not be mixed in the same tank and ideally would enter the silage stream at different points.  Silage harvested at these high moisture levels should not be inoculated with L. bucherni as this may cause more acetic acid to be produced than is ideal.
• If harvest moisture levels are typical (i.e., 32 – 37%) and the corn has soil contamination, inoculation with a combination of homolactic LAB and L. buchneri is highly recommended.  Growth of molds and fungi are inhibited by acetic acid, and L. buchneri causes acetic acid to be formed in the silo and can increase the stability and quality of the end-product.
• If the corn was significantly covered with silt, be aware of the possibility of higher than normal nitrate accumulation in the plant.  Being covered with silt can have the same impact on plant nitrate accumulation as cloudy weather can, so pay particular attention to nitrate levels when looking at the forage quality reports.  The Penn State Article Beware of Nitrates in Corn Silage  speaks to some important details surrounding this issue.
• Flood damaged corn (and haylage) should be segregated (i.e., stored in different ag-bags, piles, bunker silos, etc) from crops harvested from undamaged fields.  While we can do much to improve the odds of the ensiling process going well for flood damaged corn, it is not guaranteed.  Spoilage may still occur, mycotoxin levels could be too high which can cause adverse effects on lactation and permanent damage to the cattle.  Further, mycotoxins are an inhalation hazard for farmers and labor.  More detailed information about mycotoxins in dairy rations can be found in the article Corn Quality Challenges: Effects on Dairy Cattle.  If you have mycotoxin concerns, you should work closely with your veterinarian on feed-related issues.
• Have a “Plan B” in mind.  Talk with your feed dealer about the relative costs of various options if none of the silage harvested from your flooded fields is able to be fed.  Talk with your lender sooner rather than later if the disaster has affected your projected needs or ability to repay.

If you have any questions related to agronomy, corn silage harvest, or crop-related problems associated with Hurricane Irene, please contact any of the UVM Extension Agronomists below.

Sid Bosworth (Campus) 656-0478 sid.bosworth@uvm.edu

Jeff  Carter(Middlebury) 388-4969 jeff.carter@uvm.edu

Heather Darby (St. Albans) 524-6501  heather.darby@uvm.edu

Daniel Hudson (St. Johnsbury) 535-7922 daniel.hudson@uvm.edu

Lessons from the Lowly Corn Stalk

By Daniel Hudson, UVM Extension Agronomist

It is relatively easy to see the cost-benefit relationship associated with measuring milk production and/or quality in your dairy herd.  When you learn that things are not going as well as they could be you identify the problem, fix the underlying issue, and get paid for your work with a larger milk check.  In crop production, however, we have only a few chances to learn from soil or tissue measurements and make changes based on what we learn from testing.  Properly practiced, these will also pay you back, most immediately in the form of reduced costs or improved crop yields.

• The first opportunities to identify agronomic problems come prior to planting the crop.  If the fertility, drainage, and other soil quality parameters measure up, we are well on our way to a great crop.  If not, we can take steps in the right direction.  If we have good information about the quantity of nutrients that were applied in the manure, even better.
• Another opportunity comes when the corn is 6-12” tall and we can collect soil samples for pre-sidedress nitrate testing so we have a better idea if and/or how much additional nitrogen will be necessary to optimize our crop yield.
• In crisis situations, plant tissue testing can sometimes give information that can be used to make profitable mid-season nutrient applications.
• There is another very valuable opportunity that is overlooked by most farmers, and it comes just prior to silage harvest:  the ‘late-season stalk nitrate test.’ 

What is the late-season stalk nitrate test and how might it enhance my bottom-line?

The late-season stalk nitrate test is an ‘almost-post-mortem’ look at the concentration of nitrate in the sections of corn stalks between 6” and 14” above ground level. This test gives farmers and agronomists insight into how soil/fertilizer/manure nitrogen was supplied to the corn plants under the conditions and management practices used in a particular year. The results of the test will indicate yield-limiting deficiency, an optimal concentration, or excessive nitrate levels.  Stalk nitrate levels above the optimal range indicate that nitrogen was supplied at levels well above what the plants needed to give an optimal yield under those conditions.  Because the conditions and practices used from one year to the next are often different, the optimal rate and ultimate fate of nitrogen often varies from year to year.  Thus, the farmer’s task is to identify the lowest cost management practices that consistently deliver the results they need to have.  Studying how stalk nitrate concentrations change under varying conditions and practices will help farmers refine their management and should increase profitability over time.

Why don’t more farmers use the late-season stalk nitrate test?

This test differs from other types of soil and plant testing that farmers are accustomed to.  Unlike normal soil tests and pre-sidedress nitrate testing, this test yields an indication rather than a prescription.  It is roughly analogous to testing milk for milk urea nitrogen (MUN) in the sense that it can help crop producers identify financial inefficiencies associated with supplying more or less nitrogen to the crop than is needed to consistently attain a ‘full’ yield.  Using the results of these tests over several years, farmers can improve their understanding of how nitrogen behaves in their soils, which can help them make better decisions about fertilizer rates, timing, form, or incorporation practices and ultimately increase their net income via reduced expenses or higher crop yields.

As useful as this test is, it sometimes does not capture the farmer’s imagination as much as it could.  The foremost reasons for this seem to be 1) ‘why start keeping score when the ball game is already over?  i.e., ‘it is too late to do anything for this year’s crop anyway’; and 2) ‘I am getting ready for silage harvest and don’t have time to be walking around out in the corn(!).’  As true as these statements are, they overlook the fact that once an inefficiency is identified, it can later be avoided.  If the ball game did not go well this year, it is better to know than not to know, because you are going to play the same game on the same soils next year and for years into the future.

What exactly does the stalk nitrate test report tell me?  While several land-grant universities have slightly different interpretations of the test, the Penn State interpretation is the most conservative (from the perspective of the farmer) and is less likely to result in farmers concluding that they should reduce their nitrogen input rates when they really should not. Using the Penn State  protocol, samples can be taken from 1/4 milk line through three weeks after black layer formation (physiological maturity).  Penn State data suggests that optimal range for stalk nitrate concentration is between 700 and 2000 ppm.   Nitrate concentrations below 700 ppm indicate that nitrogen deficiency probably limited economically optimum crop yield, while concentrations over 2000 ppm indicate that the crop almost certainly had more nitrogen available than was needed to produce a full crop. In contrast, Purdue and Cornell suggest that the ideal range is 450 to 700 ppm.  Until we have more comprehensive data in the Northeast that suggests otherwise, I am more comfortable with the Penn State recommendations.

When it comes to using the late-season stalk nitrate test results, I often encourage farmers not to learn too much from a single year.  Very rarely would it be appropriate to radically change a fertilizer program due to observations from a single year.  Soil nitrogen is dynamic and a farmer’s goal should be to learn about its behavior on their farm over time so that they can be confident in and comfortable with future adjustments to their practices.

How to do the test:  Do not think of doing this test on the comprehensive scale often used for routine soil testing of pH, P, K, Mg, etc.  I recommend that farmers start by testing three fields or sections of fields.  Test one field where you think you got the nitrogen rate was about right, another field where you think the plants might have been nitrogen deficient, and a third field where you think the nitrogen might have been applied at a higher rate than the crop needed.  You might also consider testing sections of fields where you suspect leaching, denitrification, or think another important agronomic difference exists.  The tests will give you an unbiased measurement of the nitrogen status of the corn plants in each of those fields.

The area tested should have had the same nitrogen fertilizer rates/timing, same (or very similar) hybrids, and be of a relatively uniform soil type and topography.  Take stalk segments from 15 healthy plants in the area of interest, avoiding plants that are not normal (double-seed drop, skip, wide guess row, edge of field, unusual injury, etc).  Segments from each plant should be collected by cutting the plant off 14 inches above the ground and again at 6 inches above the ground.  Remove any portion of the leaves that remain attached, and place the resulting 8-inch segment in a paper bag with the other segments from the same field.  Refrigerate the stalk segments if the sample cannot be sent or delivered to a test lab within 1 day.  Do not use plastic bags as this will prevent drying and may cause spoilage.  The testing lab will oven dry and grind the stalks prior to analysis.  While several labs in the region offer this service at some limited level, the Cornell Nutrient Analysis Laboratory advertises this as a service they offer.

If you choose to send the samples to Cornell, send them to Cornell Nutrient Analysis Laboratory, G01 Bradfield Hall, Ithaca, NY 14853.  The cost for one stalk nitrate test is $11.00.  Make checks payable to Cornell University.

More detailed sampling and submission instructions and a submittal form can be found at: http://cnal.cals.cornell.edu/forms/pdfs/CNAL_Form_SN.pdf

For more information about the end of season stalk nitrate test visit:

End of Season Corn Stalk Nitrate Test (Purdue):

Agronomy Facts 70: Late Season Corn Stalk Nitrate Test (PSU):

Agronomy Fact Sheet 21: Corn Stalk Nitrate Test

Questions?  Contact me at daniel.hudson@uvm.edu or 802-751-8307 ext

Is Pre-Sidedress Nitrate Testing Worth Your Time? A Case Study from the Northeast Kingdom of Vermont

In earlier articles on the subject of pre-sidedress nitrate testing (PSNT), we discussed how this testing process can help farmers make informed decisions about whether particular corn fields need more nitrogen fertilizer to optimize their yield, rather than guessing (see past articles below).  As the corn starts to grow and the flurry of spring farming activities subsides, it is not uncommon for farmers to start wondering exactly how much nitrogen they lost from their fields due to leaching, volatilization, or denitrification.  It is reasonable to suspect that some was lost, but you cannot tell just by looking.  It is not uncommon for farmers to have the local fertilizer dealer dribble on a fixed number of pounds of 32% UAN per acre between the rows.  At about $1/pound of actual N, this can be very expensive.  If all of those pounds are needed on every acre, it is worth it; if not, the money is wasted.   Just yesterday we received the PSNT results for one local farmer who decided to test 13 fields before ordering fertilizer.  The results are below.  To interpret the results, understand that the yield goal, in this case, is about 20 tons of silage per acre.  If soil nitrate levels are 25 ppm or more, no additional fertilizer is necessary, even for 25+ ton yields per acre. Notice that the results describe the level of nitrate in the soils of each field tested and give a sidedress nitrogen recommendation specific to each field.  What would have happened if this farmer did not take the PSNT and act accordingly?  If they decided not to sidedress anything, they would probably see significantly reduced yields in 8 of the 13 fields.  If they used an alternative strategy and applied 70 pounds of nitrogen on everything, how close would they have been to the optimal rate?  If we make the conservative assumption that each of these fields is 20 acres in size, they would have wasted a total 8,600 pounds of nitrogen fertilizer on 180 acres by putting it on at rates greater than the crop needs!  Further, they would have still been short on nitrogen in four of their fields (80 acres), likely with a significant yield penalty.  In this case, and in many others, pre-sidedress nitrate testing is a very profitable activity. 

If it is too late to take PSNT samples on your farm this year, keep the practice in mind for next season.  Over time this type of testing will help you understand nitrogen dynamics on your farm and probably save you a bundle of money.

If you are not sure if it is too late to use the pre-sidedress nitrate test on your farm or have other agronomic questions, do not hesitate to call me or your local Extension office.

Daniel is an agronomist and nutrient management specialist for University of Vermont Extension in St. Johnsbury.  You can contact him by e-mail at daniel.hudson@uvm.edu or by calling 802-751-8307.  He also maintains a website with research-based time-sensitive information: http://agronomator.wordpress.com/