November/December 1999
The
University of Georgia
|
November/December 1999 |
|
Table of Contents
Tim Schell
Extension Specialist - Swine
As the swine industry prepares to enter another year of poor prices, swine producers are looking for more ways to reduce production costs. No area of production should be beyond evaluation. Listed below are some production areas that can be quickly reviewed for potential savings.
Feed costs. Reducing feed costs can have a major impact on profitability in a swine operation. Feed costs represent anywhere from 50 to 70% of the costs of an operation. Eliminating waste and fine tuning a feeding program can result in substantial savings. Some general recommendations for evaluating a feed program are:
Feed waste - Too often, feeders in an operation are adjusted improperly. Producers who want to maximize intake often open feeders too much and the result is feed waste. A properly adjusted feeder will be tightened so that only about a third of the feeder opening has feed on it. Healthy hungry pigs will always work a little for more feed. Feeders with the entire feeder covered with feed will create a high level of feed waste. Feed on the floor is also a good indicator that feeders are adjusted improperly. Special care should be taken to make sure that nursery feeders are adjusted properly because these feeds are the most expensive. Waste in the nursery, can be costly.
Feeding program. A feeding program should be designed to match as closely as possible to the nutrient needs of the animal. Feeding excesses or deficiencies in nutrients especially energy and protein can result in waste or inefficient growth. Feeding gilts and barrows separately and utilizing a phase feeding program can greatly reduce the wasting of costly nutrients.
Fat feeding. Fat is a very expensive ingredient. A feeding program that utilizes fat should be carefully scrutinized for ways to reduce fat feeding or eliminate fat. In most cases, fat can be eliminated from finishing diets, especially during winter months. It is important to remember that if fat levels are changed, changes in other dietary ingredients may be necessary to compensate for changes in feed intake. Always make diet changes in consultation with your nutrition supplier to prevent potential reductions in performance.
Nursery feed. Complex nursery diets can be relatively expensive. Changing to a more simple nursery diet may reduce nursery costs. However, changing the complexity usually results in a reduction in growth rate. Careful evaluation of the expected performance of each type of diet relative to the price and animal flow of a unit may show an advantage to switching to a less complex diet. Simple changes such as reducing plasma protein or whey levels may be cost effective.
Culling rates. Breeding animals that are not fully productive can be costly. Sows that are difficult to breed can take up space that could be occupied by more productive animals. Additionally, maintaining animals that spend excessive time out of production can increase feed and semen costs. Sows and gilts that consistently recycle after breeding should be culled.
Utility costs. An operation should also be evaluated for its energy efficiency. Heat lamps should be positioned for optimal heat supplementation. Ventilation rates should be checked and optimized. Fans should be clean and free from obstructions. Lights should be on timers where appropriate. Curtains should operate efficiently and timely.
Transportation costs. Optimizing transportation costs can often be difficult. Sometimes animal groups do not grow evenly. The price of sending animals to market early should be compared to the cost of sending trucks that are not full. Often sending animals early and losing a premium will off set the cost of shipping the animals with another load. Sharing loads for shipping with other producers can often result in reduced shipping costs.
These are just a few areas that can be evaluated for potential production
cost savings. Again, all aspects of an operation should be subject to review
for potential savings.
Send in Comments on Minor Species Drugs
Gary J. Burtle
Animal & Dairy Science, Tifton, GA
The Food and Drug Administration is proposing to extend the use of medicated feeds to some minor use animal species. A comment period was opened recently and ends September 30, 1999 on the proposed changes through the Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM). The proposal is to allow extra-label use of medicated feed treatment of minor species when the health of the animals is threatened and suffering or death would result from a failure to treat the affected animals. If these conditions exist, the CVM would NOT ordinarily take regulatory action against the veterinarian, animal producer or feed mill.
In order to comply to the extra-label use regulations, a set of guidelines
developed by CVM must be followed or regulatory action could be taken against
the veterinarian, animal producer or feed mill. These guidelines include:
Veterinarians that recommend extra-label use of medicated feed must
make clear determination that the use of the medicated feed is the only
way a drug can be administered to prevent the disease. An extensive list
of conditions that the veterinarian must follow includes:
The animal producer must also comply in a special manner with guidelines
for extra-label use of medicated feed. These guidelines include:
These proposed recommendations are a step to increase access to
medicated feed that may be approved for one species, such as channel catfish,
but may not be approved for another, such as largemouth bass. In aquaculture,
only two antibiotics are approved for medicated feeding of catfish and
salmonids. One antibiotic is approved for use in lobsters. Also one specific
use of an antibiotic is approved for Pacific salmon and one for rainbow
trout. That is all. All other food fish are subject to death from systemic
infections of bacteria with no legal treatments available.
Veterinarians have been able to recommend other extra-label drug uses for aquaculture but not as medicated feed. Other drug uses that are not allowed for recommendation through the extra-label use program include chloramphenicol, clenbuterol, diethylstilbestrol, dimetridazol, ipronidazole, nitroimidazols, furazolidone, nitrofurazone, or fluroquinolones. Veterinarians are not allowed to recommend drugs for disease PREVENTION, growth promotion, induction of spawning, sex reversal or other conditions for which a distinct disease cannot be identified. In order to use drugs for non-labeled uses, a compassionate Investigational New Animal Drug (INAD) application may be filed.
For further information, contact George Graber, Center for Veterinary
Medicine, Food and Drug Administration, 7500 Standish Place. Rockville.
MD 20855. email: ggraber@cvm.fda.gov.
Single Batch vs. Multiple Batch Catfish Production
Gary J. Burtle
Animal & Dairy Science, Tifton. GA
As winter grows near, catfish farmers should evaluate their stocking programs for earnings potential and risk avoidance. Two stocking patterns are common in the catfish industry, multiple batch and single batch. In multiple batch stocking, catfish fingerlings are added to replace the catfish harvested after several partial harvests during the year. Single batch stocking usually occurs in the late winter and catfish fingerlings are not restocked until the following winter even though partial harvesting occurs through the year. Research has supported the single batch method but the multiple batch stocking still predominates as the managers choice on commercial catfish farms.
Characteristics of multiple batch stocking include spreading cash flow out over the entire year as fingerlings are purchased at intervals, the standing crop of catfish is greater than single batch stocking at any point in time, and the number of catfish in the pond is greater than single batch stocking. With multiple batch stocking, fingerlings are needed at all times during the year including the hottest part of the summer and during Enteric Septicemia seasons. However, by stocking later in the year, larger fingerlings may be available. Although producers hope that the fingerlings stocked will quickly begin to feed and grow, research has shown that is not the case. Small catfish stocked with large catfish tend to be submissive and do not compete with the larger catfish during feeding time. Careful feeding over the entire pond surface must be practiced in order to coax the small catfish to feed.
In single batch stocking, the entire crop of catfish must be stocked and paid for at one time, the standing crop is greatest just before the first partial harvest, and catfish density declines steadily as partial harvests occur. Single batch stocking would result in very few fish of harvestable size available during the months of February through May. Since stocking takes place in the late winter, handling of the catfish during hot weather is avoided. Catfish harvested from single batch stocking programs are significantly smaller on the average than from multiple batch programs. The reason for the smaller weight has been attributed to the fact that almost all of the catfish are removed after one growing season. Since few catfish are carried over in a single batch stocking program, there are fewer very large catfish harvested. That could be an advantage or disadvantage depending on the market preference for large catfish.
Survival of catfish depends on stocking practices. It has been shown that survival is better at 4,500 catfish per acre than at 8,000 or more catfish per acre. The difference could be as much as 14% between a single batch stocking of 4,500 catfish per acre and a multiple batch stocking of 8,000 catfish per acre. Survival can be a direct result of the time a catfish is kept in the pond. Short growing periods result in better survival rates. Larger catfish fingerlings at stocking have better survival than smaller catfish over the same time period. The practice of using "stocker" sized catfish is common in some parts of the Mississippi Delta. Some catfish producers have set aside ponds for production of "stocker" catfish because they recognize the higher mortality rate of small catfish and they want to maximize survival in foodfish production ponds. By the time the "stocker" sized catfish are put in production ponds, they have reached a size of 9 to 12 inches in length. In order to produce a "stocker" sized catfish ponds should be stocked with no more than 50,000 small catfish fingerlings per acre in June or July to have the fish ready to stock in February of the next year.
After reviewing the multiple batch and single batch stocking methods, a modified single batch method may be suitable for continuous production of catfish. The modification would require that a group of catfish be held over the winter for harvest during the months of March through June. A single stocking of catfish fingerlings would take place in February or March of each year. This system would depend on a reliable market to buy harvestable catfish from at least two partial harvests the first year and at least one harvest in the spring or early summer of the following year. The goal would be to gain the growth on catfish during March through June during the time when the new crop fingerlings contribute only a small portion of the fish biomass. Because the fingerlings were stocked only once and at the start of the growing season, mortality would be reduced in proportion to the shorter time that crop was in the pond. A study of overwintered fingerlings at Tifton seems to bear this out. Survival was similar in ponds stocked with only fingerlings and ponds stocked both fingerlings and large catfish. However, only 90% or less fingerlings were harvested after three months. The losses during the winter would be added to any losses during the growing season.
An economic calculation can be made to compare fingerlings stocked in the fall and carried through the winter versus fingerlings stocked in the spring. If 7,500 fingerlings costing $.12 per fingerling were stocked in November, assuming 10% loss during the winter, the fish would cost $.15 each in March ($90.00 loss + $23.00 interest + $900.00 initial cost divided by the 6,750 remaining fish). Since little if any growth would occur between November and March, an additional burden is placed on the catfish producer when fingerlings are purchased in the late fall.
Additional risk is associated with longer residence time in catfish ponds. Although diseases occur in catfish ponds at any time during the year, winter has the highest incidence of parasitic diseases. When water temperatures cool down and warm up parasitic diseases of catfish take advantage of weaker immune response in catfish to establish heavier infestations that result in catfish losses. Ich, Trichodina, Trycophyra, PGD and fungus are more frequently observed when water temperatures are below 70°F.
The health of fingerlings must be carefully considered when stocking
at any time of the year but particularly in the Spring. Catfish fingerlings
that have been crowded during the winter or are stressed during shipment
may not survive after stocking. Compare catfish hatchery success with other
catfish producers in your area. Visit the hatchery to check on growing
conditions. Purchase the largest catfish fingerlings you can afford and
at least four inches in length.
Winterizing Your Horse Barn -- Prevention of Barn Fires
Gary Heusner
Extension Equine Specialist
We often spend a great deal of time "winterizing" the horse. We become
concerned about respiratory diseases, special foot care, making sure plenty
of water and forage are available and providing adequate shelter. Sheltering
horses usually involves putting them in some type of barn. When you think
about winterizing your horse you should probably think about winterizing
your barn also. A major consideration in winterizing your barn is emphasizing
fire prevention. One rule of thumb is that a fire involving combustible
materials (wood, straw, hay, shavings, etc.) doubles in size every minute.
Therefore, in ten minutes, the fire will increase in size by 4,086 times.
What should a person do to winterize a barn to prevent fires? Following
are some practices or items to check:
Horse barn fires can be devastating. It does not take long for an
entire barn to burn down with major economic loss as well as the loss of
horses.
Ronnie Silcox
Extension Animal Scientist
With the year 2000 on top of us, it's a good time to look back at the cattle industry. At the beginning of the 20th century, Shorthorn, Hereford, and Angus cattle had been imported into the U.S. and the grading up of Longhorn and other local cattle was well underway. Slaughter ages for steers were declining from 4 or 5 year olds to yearling and two year old cattle.
The International Stock Show opened in Chicago in 1900. Breed associations were on the rise, the show ring was becoming the popular method of determining breeding direction and pedigrees were the key tool for purebred breeders.
In the 1920's, the first American breed was developed at the King Ranch in Texas. The Santa Gertrudis was developed as 518 Shorthorn and 3/8 Brahman.
By the 1930's and 1940, beef cattle breeding research was being done by USDA and Agricultural Colleges. Heritability estimates for traits were calculated and the basic formulas for breeding values were developed. The first All. cooperative was established at Rutners in 1938.
In 1941, the first central bull test station was started in Texas and in 1955, Virginia organized the first state Beef Cattle Improvement Association in the same year that bull semen was first successfully frozen. The Red Angus Association in 1954 became the first association to require performance data for registration.
In the 1960's, breed associations began buying computers and developing performance record programs. The late 60's and 70's was the era of importation when many of the European breeds entered the country. Before this time most U S. cattlemen had never heard of such exotic breeds as Simmental, Limousin or Gelbvieh. During the 1970's embryo transfer techniques were developed.
During the 1980's, Expected Progency Differences gained widespread acceptance and methods of freezing embryos were developed. Embryos were split to produce clones.
In the 1990's home computers became common place. In fact, the price of a home computer system today in inflation adjusted dollars is less than the cost of a T.V. in the 1960's. DNA testings is an accepted practice and a sheep named Dolly became the first mammal cloned from adult cells.
What will the next 100 years bring? There is no way anyone could guess. In 1900, electricity and indoor plumbing were novel concepts. If someone in 1900 had started talking about men walking on the moon or people have boxes called computers in their homes that would allow them to connect with any place in the world over something called the Internet, they would have been called crazy.
There are some things that are fairly easy to predict to have some input on beef cattle breeding in the future. The genetic code is being broken and cattle DNA will someday be completely mapped. Over time we will be able to identify specific DNA that controls specific traits. Over the short term, maker-assisted selection will probably be used. In the future, it may be possible to determine the breeding value of an animal simply from a DNA analysis of a blood sample
Methods of cloning animals have been developed and research in this
area is moving rapidly. Genetic material can now be inserted into an egg.
In the future, it should be possible to cut and paste DNA to create animals
with specific characteristics. These animals can then be cloned. Currently,
this type of work is in its infancy, but it is where All. was 50 years
ago or where embryo transfer was 30 years ago. What does the next 100 years
hold in store? Who knows?
1999 Winter Feeding Strategies for Cow-Calf Producers
Mark A. McCann
Extension Animal Scientist
The inconsistent and spotty rains have provided cattlemen with a variety
of hay qualities and quantities for the upcoming winter. An unusual factor
this winter, is generally economical feed prices. Compound this with improving
cattle prices and there is no excuse for not supplementing cattle. Past
experiences tell us to do otherwise is false economy. Producers with controlled
breeding seasons could suffer reduced conception rates while herds without
a breeding season could face a more spread out calving pattern. Either
option is undesirable and costly. The goal this winter should be to feed
what is necessary and do it as cheaply as possible. The first and most
important step is to
forage test your hay. This will inform
you as to exactly where you stand in terms of hay quality. Table 1 contains
the crude protein (CP) and total digestible nutrient (TDN) content of three
different hay samples.
| Table 1. Forage Test Results (DM basis) | |||
| Samples | |||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | |
| % Crude Protein (CP) | 6.6 | 8.5 | 10.5 |
| % Total Digestible Nutrients (TDN) | 47.5 | 52.0 | 56.0 |
Table 2 contains a comparison of how the three hay samples meet the
requirements of a 1000 lb. Iactating cow. Another item to note in the table
is hay intake differences between hay samples. As the hay becomes more
digestible (higher TDN), cows will consume more. The impact of the poor
quality hay is lower nutrient content compounded by a lower daily intake.
The table also contains the deficiency for each hay in meeting a lactating
cow's requirements.
| Table 2 | |||||||
| Provided by hay (lbs) | Deficiency (lbs)a | ||||||
| Daily hay
intake |
Daily dm
intake |
CP | TDN | CP | TDN | ||
| Hay 1 | 20 | 16.7 | 1.1 | 7.9 | 1.1 | 4.6 | |
| Hay 2 | 22 | 18.3 | 1.5 | 9.5 | .7 | 3.0 | |
| Hay 3 | 24 | 20.0 | 2.1 | 11.2 | .1 | 1.3 | |
Finally, Table 3 contains a comparison of the three hay samples using
four different supplementation programs. The amount of each supplement
and an estimated cost ($/hd/d) are included for each hay. These costs can
and will vary according to location and time of the year. The most accurate
cost estimates should include feed costs from your respective area.
| Table 3. Comparison of Supplements for a Lactating Cow | ||||||
| Hay 1 | Hay 2 | Hay 3 | ||||
| Supplement | lbs. | ($/hd/d) | Lbs. | ($/hd/d) | Lbs. | ($/hd/d) |
| Corn/SBM (70/30) | 6.0 | .37 | 4.0 | .25 | 1.5 | .09 |
| Range cubes | 7.0 | .77 | 4.0 | .44 | 2.0 | .22 |
| Corn gluten feed | 6.0 | .27 | 4.0 | .18 | 1.5 | .07 |
| Litter-corn (50/50) | 7.5 | .28 | 5.0 | .19 | 2.0 | .08 |
| Whole cottonseed | 5.0 | .20 | 3.0 | .12 | 1.5 | .06 |
The comparisons in Table 3 should be used in one of two ways: 1) to
compare a particular supplement across all three hay qualities or 2) compare
all the supplements against each other at one level of hay quality. The
first comparison allows you to see the impact of hay quality on winter
feed cost. Another way to visualize it would be as an example of how much
good hay is worth. At today's grain prices, good quality hay is quite valuable.
An example of this difference in value:
800 lb. bale of hay will feed 35 cows for 1 day
35 x .24 (supplement difference between Hay 1 & 3 for corn/SBM)
= $8 40/roll
Due to supplement saving, Hay 3 should be worth $8.40 a roll more than Hay 1. On a ton basis it would be $21.00/ton difference. The difference between Hay 2 and Hay 3 would be about $5.60 a roll or $14.00/ton.
The second comparison is most valuable in shopping and comparing winter supplement choices for a particular hay quality. For example, if you are planning to feed Hay 1 to lactating cows, the range in supplement cost are over 200%. Traditional feeds are more competitive than in other past years. The addition of broiler litter will reduce costs, but it can require additional equipment. Freight, handling costs and availability all have a role in deciding on the correct choice for a winter supplement. These will change for each location in the state.
The bottom line for winter feeds is that grain prices cheaper than normal this year. This has also lowered the costs of many by-products. Winter grazing, liquid feed, and protein blocks can also be utilized. Following the same steps used above, compare costs for your operation.
The take home message is that we must meet a cow's nutritional needs.
Test your hay, shop around and supplement as cheaply as possible.