Connect with us

Farm & Ranch

[AgriLife] Texas crop, weather report for Jan. 26

Published

on

In early December, this stand of volunteer wheat near College Station was thicker than some planted stands, according to Dr. Clark Neely, Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service small grains specialist, College Station. (Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service photo by Dr. Clark Neely)

By: Robert Burns

Only about 20 percent of Blacklands wheat plante

Writer: Robert Burns, 903-834-6191, rd-burns@tamu.edu

COLLEGE STATION – Central Texas wheat growers continue to have a challenging year, said Dr. Clark Neely, Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Service small grains specialist, College Station.

“There’s a couple of different stories going on now with wheat, the first being prevented (planted) acres in the Blacklands,” Neely said.

The region was dry all summer and going into the fall, then it started raining in October and hardly stopped until just recently, he said.

By some accounts, only 20 percent of the region’s planned wheat acres were planted, Neely said. Moreover, some wheat that did get planted early has spent much of its time since emergence in waterlogged soils or even standing water.

Download or review a two-minute MP3 audio version of this report.
“Most of the rest of the state – like the High Plains and Rolling Plains — is in pretty good shape,” Neely said. “They’ve had plenty of moisture, but not so much that they weren’t able to get the crop in, though many acres were planted later than normal.”

Another issue for Central Texas wheat growers is volunteer wheat, he said. The region had a bumper crop in the works last spring. Then came record rains in April and May, resulting in head sprouting and heavy lodging. As a result many fields were zeroed out for crop insurance last year.

“So we had a lot of seed on the ground, and then it turned dry, and that seed did not germinate until the rains in October,” Neely said.

Wheat farmers are used to dealing with some volunteer wheat, he said. The common practice is to kill the spotty stands of volunteer wheat with a herbicide such as glyphosate before re-planting. In many instances, this year’s volunteer stands are much thicker.

“Because they either couldn’t get in the fields to spray it or because they couldn’t plant it, some farmers are going to attempt to take the thicker volunteer wheat to grain this year,” Neely said. “Theoretically, it can be done, but there are several concerns with taking volunteer wheat stands to grain.”

A lot will depend upon whether the volunteer wheat is a lodging-prone variety or one with pretty good straw strength and weather conditions, he said.

Another challenge wheat growers might face is rust, Neely said.

“Because we’ve had such a mild, wet winter, we could have another bad rust year,” he said. “It could be a problem for the entire state, but right now, we’re only seeing it around College Station.”

The spread of the disease will heavily depend on whether wet conditions continue through the spring, which is the current prediction. For the state, wheat acreage as a whole is estimated at 5.3 million acres this year, down 12 percent, he said.

“Part of the decrease is because of prevented plantings, but it’s also due to wheat prices being quite low right now,” Neely said.

AgriLife Extension district reporters compiled the following summaries:

The 12 Texas A&M AgriLife Extension Districts

Central: Soil moisture, rangeland and pastures were generally in fair condition across the region. Row crops were rated as being in fair condition. In a few areas, small grains were not in so good condition, having spider mites and aphid damage as well as nutrient deficiencies due to too much water. Fields remained wet and only limited work could be done. Some producers were able to topdress wheat, with a few applying anhydrous ammonia. But with clear and sunny weather forecast, farmers should be able to catch up on fieldwork. Corn acreage was expected to increase. Livestock were in good condition. Most orchard ground was dry enough for pecan producers to continue harvesting.

Coastal Bend: Wet conditions benefited some of the region’s winter pastures but prevented some farmers from preparing fields for spring planting or fertilizing. Cattle producers continued supplemental feeding of herds.

East: The region continued to be cold and wet. Subsoil and topsoil moisture were rated adequate in most counties. Pasture and rangeland were mostly in fair to good condition, with a few counties reporting poor or very poor. Trinity River levee breaches put 8,000 to 10,000 acres of land underwater. Producers were having trouble getting hay out of saturated pastures. Vehicles were sinking up to their axles if driven off roads. Small-grain cover crops were not doing well due to the warm temperatures and abundant rainfall. However, ryegrass was doing well. Livestock producers were feeding hay and supplements. Farmers continued to topdress winter pastures as field conditions allowed. Livestock were in fair to good condition. Spring calving was in progress. Weaning and selling of market-ready calves and cull cows continued. Producers were preparing bulls to turn out into herds by mid-February to early March. Area cattle market reports continued to be weaker than last year’s highs. Prices seemed to have stabilized. Feral hog activity on cropland and pastures increased as they left flooded creek and river bottoms.

Far West: Mild winter weather prevailed throughout the region. Nighttime lows were in the 30s, and daily highs were in the upper 50s to low 70s. Most producers were providing livestock with supplemental feed. Early calving herds began to calve. Rangeland and pastures were in poor condition. Topsoil and subsoil moisture were short.

North: Topsoil moisture varied from adequate to surplus. Though there was no further precipitation, fields remained saturated. Most fields of wheat, oats and winter annual pastures remained waterlogged. It was estimated that only about 11 percent of the total wheat acreage was planted last fall due to heavy rains. What was planted was put in late and has, for the most part, been standing in water since. Most producers who usually graze cattle on small grains pulled herds off to keep them from rutting up the fields so badly. This meant more hay and supplements had to be fed. Wide temperature swings continued to stress livestock. Respiratory issues, especially with confined youth project animals, continued to be common. Feral hogs became more active.

Panhandle: Though no new moisture fell across the region, producers were still waiting for fields to dry out. In most areas, wheat was in good or fair condition thanks to plentiful moisture and warmer temperatures. However, there were reports of some wheat yellowing. Pastures were in good condition, but livestock producers were still providing supplemental feed. Cattle on wheat pasture were gaining well. Spring calving began in the eastern part of the region.

Rolling Plains: Winter moisture boosted the growth of grass and forbs in rangeland and pastures. Winter wheat was also looking promising, with soil moisture sufficient to last through the spring. Cotton harvesting, however, was largely still on hold for several weeks because of the wet conditions. Some producers were getting back into fields to finish up harvesting cotton, while others found conditions still too wet for machinery. Cotton yields were about average for the area, but with low cotton prices, many producers were questioning planting cotton again this year. Livestock were in good condition with some supplemental feeding continuing. During the holidays, producers were forced to feed on a daily basis due to the heavy snows and frigid weather.

South: Mild daytime and cold nighttime temperatures continued throughout the region. Soil moisture was mostly adequate. In the northern part of the region, potato and wheat planting continued in Frio County. Range and pastures conditions declined after a frost. In McMullen County, Bermuda grass pastures had heavy weed pressure. Supplemental feeding was steady, and some cow-calf herds began to calve. Body condition scores remained mostly fair. In the eastern part of the region, rangeland and pastures were in excellent condition. Producers were preparing fields for planting. In Zavala County, the weather was favorable for cool-season crops such as spinach, cabbage and onions. Cabbage harvesting continued, as well as light spinach harvesting. Livestock producers were providing light supplemental feed to cattle on native rangeland and pastures. In the southern part of the region, spring planting continued, and harvesting of fall corn and vegetables was ongoing. In Hidalgo County, growers were harvesting citrus, sugarcane and vegetables. In Starr County, fall vegetable crops progressed well.

South Plains: Cochran County soil moisture levels were rated as adequate. Producers were preparing fields for spring planting. Pasture and rangeland were in good condition. Floyd County had warmer weather that helped fields dry out and benefited wheat. Garza County also experienced a warming trend with highs mostly in the 50s to 60s. The cotton harvest in Garza County was nearly finished. Rangeland and pastures were mostly in good condition, as were cattle. Ranchers were providing supplemental feeding on cold and damp days. Lubbock County had mild weather for the week – except on Jan. 21 when 52 mph winds brought a trace of rain. Lubbock area wheat showed some leaf burn from recent cold weather. Subsoil moisture was very good. Only a few cotton fields remained to be harvested. In Mitchell County, cotton harvesting was ongoing with lots of fields full of cotton. Yields were beginning to drop on the delayed-harvest fields as cotton was falling out of the bolls. Scurry County had warm and dry weather for the week.

Southeast: Soil moisture throughout the region varied widely but was mostly adequate to surplus, with adequate being the most common. Fort Bend, Lee and Brazos counties reported 100-percent adequate levels. Hardin and Walker counties reported 100- percent surplus. Rangeland and pasture ratings varied widely too, mostly from fair to poor, with fair ratings being the most common. In Walker County, the moisture levels continue to hold. Pasture conditions were looking good with warm weather. Cool-season crops that weren’t drowned out were doing well, though there were some reports of fungal issues. In Brazos County, temperatures fluctuated between warm and cool, which limited forage growth. In Grimes County, conditions were suitable for fieldwork. The weather in Hardin County continued to be wet, and pasturelands were saturated. There was also a lot of standing water throughout the county. In Montgomery County, field conditions were still very wet. Cold weather late in the week stressed livestock. Hay supplies were still good. Fort Bend County livestock were in good condition. Row crop producers were able to do fieldwork in preparation for the upcoming crop year.

Southwest: Weather patterns remain largely unchanged, with temperatures about normal for this time of year. Mornings were cool with some frost and occasional heavy fog. Rangeland and pastures were in good shape. Pond levels were high. Livestock generally were in average condition. There was ample forage for sheep and goats, as well as fairly high-quality grass stands for beef cattle.

West Central: The region was cool and windy. Nights were cold, and daytime highs were in the 50s and 60s. Subsoil moisture remained very good. Cotton growers were finishing harvest. Some were still unable to get into fields due to wet conditions and needed a few more warm, dry days to finish. Cotton ginning was ongoing. In some areas, wheat emerged but needed warmer weather to grow. In others, it had come along enough to allow grazing. Other small grains were slowly growing. Rangeland and pastures were in fair to good condition as winter forbs and grasses grew well. Livestock remained in fair to good condition. Cattle prices remained down, but sheep and goat prices were steady. Supplemental feeding of livestock further increased. Yearling cattle on grain were doing very well.

-30-

LikeTweet

Find more stories, photos, videos and audio at http://today.agrilife.org

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