Connect with us

Farm & Ranch

Vegetable study targets water saving in the high plains

Published

on

By: Kay Ledbetter

Writer: Kay Ledbetter, 806-677-5608, skledbetter@ag.tamu.edu
Contact: Thomas Marek, 806-677-5600, t-marek@tamu.edu

AMARILLO – Vegetable production is not new in the Texas High Plains, but it is being re-examined in a Texas A&M AgriLife Research study to see if it might offer a water-savings alternative to some cereal grain production.

Okra-and-peas-2
Texas A&M AgriLife Research student workers harvest peas from a study plot at the AgriLife Research James Bush Farm north of Bushland. (Texas A&M AgriLife Research photo)

“Everybody knows we are generally water short in the Texas High Plains and can no longer meet 100 percent of all crop water needs,” said Thomas Marek, AgriLife Research senior research engineer for irrigation water conservation and management in Amarillo. “We grow a tremendous amount of corn for the cattle industry. And we know from our regional water plan that corn production is going to have to be reduced in the future.”

Marek said production changes, preferably to higher valued crops such as certain types of vegetables, may be a partial solution to sustaining future profitability for Texas High Plains’ producers, particularly those within the northwestern area facing water shortages.

“Water is the largest input factor in economically feasible crop production, so numerous water management strategies have been proposed by the region’s water planning committee, the Panhandle Water Planning Group,” he said. “One of those strategies being considered is that of crop changes to reduce irrigation water use.

058-300x225
Cantaloupe grown in a Texas A&M AgriLife Research field study shows quality is reduced under deficit water conditions. (Texas A&M AgriLife Research photo)

“While water use for vegetables may not be less per acre than that of some currently produced cereal grains, less overall regional acreage may be required to potentially maintain or even increase existing profit levels for producers,” Marek said.

He conducted a relatively small demonstration in 2014 with several categories of vegetables at the AgriLife Research James Bush Farm north of Bushland. This study was supported by the U.S. Department of Agriculture Agricultural Research Service’s Ogallala Aquifer Program, AgriLife Research and the USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture.

Marek said they grew the higher value runner-type vegetables such as squash, zucchini, cucumbers, as well as peppers, onions, melons, tomatoes, black-eyed peas and okra.

“We have a pretty definite range of what we are evaluating at this point,” he said. “The potential has been promising to date.”

All vegetables were grown under a single irrigation level targeted at a high evapotranspiration, known as ET, level. A weather station, which is part of the Texas High Plains Evapotranspiration Network, was located near the plots and was used to compute daily reference ET to know what the actual water demand was.

Plots were planted on May 29 and again on June 10. This was later than desired, but scheduling conflicts prevented earlier operations. Irrigation was applied using surface-flow irrigation. As the total plot area was relatively small, Marek said irrigation efficiencies were very high, and the total amount of irrigation applied from planting to harvest was 17.46 inches. The in-season rainfall in 2014 was 12.61 inches.

Each vegetable was evaluated on a bedded, two-row, 20-feet long plot size. Row spacing was 30 inches. Vegetables were hand-harvested on a two-to-three-day basis. Data regarding plant count, harvested fruit number, total harvested weight per picking and water use were recorded for each harvest event.

Several things Marek said they determined with the first round of the study were: earlier planting would help increase yield output per plant; and plant establishment with transplants needs to be augmented by the use of protective wind cylinders due to early season high wind speeds in 2014.

“We had area folks driving by the field who asked ‘what are all those white things out there in the field and what are y’all doing?’ so I knew the local community was paying attention to what we were doing,” he said.

Marek said they will need to look at the heat unit requirements to be sure vegetables can be routinely produced. Also, more research is needed regarding production water use and management within the region before adequate assessment can be made with vegetables as a viable water-saving alternative to current cereal grains production.

The demonstration-type assessment is planned again for 2015 and will be complemented with related projects in the Texas A&M AgriLife cropping system program with wheat stubble involving AgriLife Research scientists and Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service specialists, he said.

“The results so far have been promising that we can produ
ce vegetables,” Marek said. “What’s going to be needed ultimately is to develop the needed market structure again. What we will continue to determine are the production aspects and water-use efficiency of various vegetables and determine what is most efficient over time.”

-30-

Continue Reading

Farm & Ranch

Forage Needs in the Fall

Published

on

By

By Savannah Magoteaux

Two bales can look almost identical and feed very differently. Color, smell and leafiness tell part of the story, but a forage test tells you what your cattle are actually being offered. If you buy hay by the ton or are trying to stretch winter feed, that little lab sheet can be one of the cheapest management tools on the place.

Reading the report

Start with dry matter. Hay contains water, and labs report nutrients either “as fed” or on a dry-matter basis. Feeds are easiest to compare on a dry-matter basis because it takes moisture out of the comparison. Hay that is 90 percent dry matter is about 10 percent water.

Crude protein, usually abbreviated CP, is the number most people recognize. It estimates protein from the forage’s nitrogen content. Higher isn’t automatically better. The goal is to match the hay to the animal. A dry, mature cow in mid-gestation doesn’t need the same protein as a lactating cow, a growing replacement heifer or a young calf.

Energy matters just as much. Beef cattle forage reports commonly estimate energy as total digestible nutrients, or TDN. Low-TDN hay may fill a cow up before it supplies enough energy, particularly when her requirements rise late in gestation or during lactation. That is when you may need better forage, an energy supplement or a different feeding plan.

Fiber numbers explain why some hay looks coarse and why animals may not be able to eat enough of it. Neutral detergent fiber, or NDF, is closely tied to intake. As NDF climbs, cattle generally eat less because the forage moves through the digestive tract more slowly. Acid detergent fiber, or ADF, is tied to digestibility. Higher ADF generally means lower digestibility.

Some reports also include relative feed value or relative forage quality. These indexes help compare lots of forage, particularly alfalfa and mixed hay, but they aren’t a complete ration. They don’t replace looking at protein, energy, minerals, animal class and expected intake.

Then come the numbers you hope are boring. Nitrate testing matters when drought, heavy nitrogen fertilization, cloudy weather or other conditions have stressed the forage enough to cause nitrate accumulation. Sorghum-type forages, johnsongrass, corn and some weeds deserve particular attention. Nitrates stay in hay after it is cut and baled, so a risky crop doesn’t become safe just because it dried.

Minerals deserve a look, but this is where a hay report gets harder to interpret. Calcium, phosphorus, potassium, magnesium and other minerals may be listed, yet a complete mineral program depends on water, other feeds and local conditions. A high number isn’t always an advantage. Excessive potassium, for example, can interfere with magnesium use under some circumstances. If you are balancing a ration for high-risk animals, work with a nutritionist or Extension specialist rather than treating the lab sheet as a stand-alone mineral prescription.

Moisture tells another story. Hay baled too wet is at greater risk of heating and mold, and very wet hay can become a fire hazard as microbial activity raises its internal temperature. A test taken months later can’t reconstruct every storage problem, so inspect the stack, too. A musty odor, visible mold, unusual heat and dark discoloration are all reasons to investigate.

Getting a good sample

A hay test is only as good as the sample, and sampling is the step most likely to ruin a good analysis. A handful pulled from the outside of one convenient bale doesn’t represent a stack of 100 bales. Round bales aren’t uniform from the outside to the center, and one bale may not represent the whole cutting.

Texas A&M AgriLife recommends using a hay probe and collecting cores from multiple bales in a lot, then combining them into one representative sample. A coring probe reaches through the layers of the bale and gives the lab a much better cross-section. Test different cuttings, fields or hay types separately, and don’t blend samples from separate fields or cuttings to save the cost of a test if you will feed them as separate lots.

Putting the numbers to work

The most useful way to read the report is backward from the cattle. What class of animal will eat this hay, at what stage of production, and how much is she likely to eat? Once you answer those questions, the lab numbers start to mean something.

A mature dry cow in good body condition can often use lower-quality forage than a first-calf heifer nursing a calf. Young cattle need nutrients for growth on top of maintenance, and cold stress raises energy demand. A hay test becomes valuable when you pair it with those real-world differences.

Remember that price per bale isn’t the same as price per unit of nutrition. A cheap bale with very low energy and protein may require expensive supplementation, and better hay can turn out to be the lower-cost feed once you count waste and supplements.

Before buying, try putting two hay reports side by side. Compare dry matter, crude protein, TDN and fiber first. Then add delivered cost and likely feeding waste. A heavier, denser bale isn’t automatically more economical, and a greener bale isn’t automatically more nutritious. The numbers make the comparison fair.

Testing is especially valuable after a hard weather year. Drought hay may be lower in yield and higher in nitrate risk. Mature, rain-damaged hay may test lower in protein and energy than it looks. Hay cut from a fertilized field after stress may deserve a safety screen before it ever reaches a feeder.

A forage test won’t make poor hay better. It shows you where the gaps are before your cattle show them through lost condition or lower performance. One report can’t answer every feeding question, but it replaces several guesses with measurements, and that makes winter nutrition planning much more accurate.

Continue Reading

Farm & Ranch

When Acorns Become a Problem

Published

on

By

By Savannah Magoteaux

A heavy crop of acorns under an oak tree usually looks more like a sign of fall than a livestock problem. For most cattle in most years, that is all it is. Trouble starts when acorns stop being an occasional bite and become a meaningful part of the diet.

Oak leaves, buds and acorns contain tannins that can damage the digestive tract and kidneys when cattle eat enough of them. Green acorns are generally considered more toxic than mature brown ones, but either can cause problems if cattle eat too many.

The risk climbs when forage is short and cattle go looking for something else to eat. Drought, overgrazed pastures or simply a heavy acorn crop can set up that situation.

Cattle aren’t equally interested in acorns. A few animals in a herd may eat far more than the rest, which helps explain why cases can appear scattered.

Early signs can be vague. Affected cattle may go off feed, look depressed or become constipated. As the damage progresses, you may see dark or bloody manure, abdominal pain, frequent urination followed by reduced urine output, dehydration and weakness. Kidney failure is the most serious concern.

You can’t remove every acorn from a wooded pasture, so prevention comes down to keeping cattle from relying on them. Adequate forage and supplementation take away the incentive to eat large amounts.

You can also fence cattle away from heavily producing oaks for a while, especially when pasture conditions are poor. If several animals seem to be seeking out acorns, take a close look at the rest of the ration instead of assuming they will quit on their own.

If you suspect oak poisoning, call a veterinarian early. Treatment is supportive and does much more good before severe kidney damage sets in. Moving unaffected cattle away from the source and providing good-quality feed and water may prevent more cases.

Acorns are an important fall food for deer, squirrels and other wildlife, and a few acorns generally don’t spell disaster for cattle. The concern is quantity. A pasture full of oaks becomes a different management problem when grass is short, cattle are hungry and the ground is covered with something they are willing to eat.

Oak toxicity comes up most often in cattle, but other livestock can be affected, too. And the risk isn’t limited to acorns. Oak buds and young leaves also contain tannins, so spring can occasionally bring problems as well. In fall, though, the obvious temptation is lying on the ground where cattle can eat it quickly.

Watch where your cattle spend their time. If cows that normally graze open grass start camping under oaks and hunting acorns, that behavior tells you something.

Walk the pasture, estimate how much usable forage is left and check whether a few dominant animals are eating more than the rest. Hay or supplemental feed may help, but place it where all the cattle can reach it rather than assuming one feeder will solve the problem.

Oak poisoning can look like other illnesses, and no one can diagnose kidney damage from pasture observation alone. A veterinarian may use history, clinical signs and lab work to separate it from dehydration, digestive disease or other toxicities. That is another reason to mention a heavy acorn crop when you call. A detail that seems like an ordinary part of fall can be an important part of the history.

Your pasture plan doesn’t have to be complicated. If one wooded trap has a much heavier acorn crop than the rest, use another pasture while you still have the choice.

If you can’t move the herd, make sure hay and supplement are adequate before the animals get hungry enough to seek out acorns aggressively. Salt or mineral by itself won’t make up for a shortage of forage.

The problem usually fades as cattle eat through the crop or the acorns weather or get covered. Don’t return cattle that have already shown signs as soon as they look better, though. Kidney injury can be serious. Follow your veterinarian’s recommendations and reassess the pasture before turning recovered animals back out.

Continue Reading

Farm & Ranch

Land Market Report

Published

on

By

By Jared Groce

Late summer has been brutal on our livestock, our grass and the rural land market in North Texas. We currently have an astounding 42 months of inventory on hand in our report area, and the only properties selling are the ones priced right. Overpriced properties aren’t even getting looked at, much less receiving offers, so pricing your property correctly matters more than ever right now.

Many sellers are still picturing the daily price increases we saw in 2020 to 2023, but those days are behind us, and agents need to be more realistic with listing prices to get any activity for their clients. Hopefully the rains will come soon and bring more land buyers with them this fall, but right now it is still very much a buyer’s market. No one knows how long this dry spell will last, but it will likely take a flood to end it. The same is true of the weather!

They say the best time to plant a tree, or buy land, was 20 years ago, and the second-best time is today.

CountyAreaAcres$/AcreList PriceSold PriceSale/ListDOM
ClayHenrietta120.07$5,150$714,000$618,30986.60%434
ClayBellevue159.44$6,184$981,000$985,959100.50%48
ClayHenrietta293$4,982$1,538,250$1,459,60094.90%212
ClayAverage190.84$5,438$1,077,750$1,021,28994.00%231
CollinAnna11.08$84,356$1,200,000$935,00077.90%634
CollinAverage11.08$84,356$1,200,000$935,00077.90%634
CookeMuenster11$18,000$209,000$198,00094.70%250
CookeGainesville19.3$16,580$345,000$320,00092.80%541
CookeValley View96.23$15,500$1,679,215$1,491,56588.80%194
CookeAverage42.18$16,693$744,405$669,85592.10%328
DentonSanger16.46$39,422$649,000$649,000100.00%47
DentonCross Roads10.35$97,575$1,200,000$1,010,00084.20%40
DentonSanger300$14,000$4,999,999$4,200,00084.00%1,327
DentonAubrey74.09$57,684$4,815,525$4,273,55088.70%302
DentonAverage100.22$52,170$2,916,131$2,533,13889.20%429
GraysonCollinsville11.61$46,516$600,000$540,00090.00%280
GraysonVan Alstyne18.8$58,511$1,175,000$1,100,00093.60%280
GraysonWhitesboro30$37,984$1,170,000$1,139,50697.40%277
GraysonAverage20.14$47,670$981,667$926,50293.70%237
JackNo sales reported——————
MontagueMontague485N/A$5,566,000N/AN/A333
MontagueBowie26$12,244$323,500$318,35298.40%743
MontagueMontague37.3$10,327$428,950$385,19589.80%1
MontagueSaint Jo1,185$7,764$10,000,000$9,199,82992.00%19
MontagueAverage433.33$10,112$4,079,613$3,301,12593.40%274
WiseSunset12$19,027$234,000$228,32097.60%16
WiseSunset12$19,027$234,000$228,32097.60%14
WiseChico11.44$24,476$299,000$280,00093.60%24
WiseChico10.25$29,265$315,000$300,00095.20%12
WiseAverage11.42$22,949$270,000$259,16096.00%17

DOM = days on market

Continue Reading
Ad
Ad
Ad

Trending