KENNEDY, Sask. – Producers who use bale grazing, swath grazing and other winter feeding or extended grazing methods can’t exactly tell their cattle to clean up their plates or they won’t get dessert.
There’s a tendency to move on to a new, fuller bale or plumper swath.
But producers say the level of waste is minimal and cattle will go back and clean up what they’ve left. Besides, what some consider waste, others view as fertilizer.
Read Also
Agriculture ministers agree to AgriStability changes
federal government proposed several months ago to increase the compensation rate from 80 to 90 per cent and double the maximum payment from $3 million to $6 million
“That used to bother me, to see what was left over,” said Chad Ross of Estevan, Sask., who corn grazes. “I’ve gotten over that. That’s not waste, that’s fertility.”
Kevin Dorrance of Wawota, Sask., said waste in his bale grazing operation is less than 10 percent.
He said cows seem to come in three types: those who start the bales and then move on, those who consume the opened bales, and the clean-up crew.
In a paddock containing 70 to 80 bales, the cows will generally work on 10 and then move to another set. Weather and wind can determine where they go.
Once down to the small piles, they will clean them up, he said.
“If your feed quality is decent there’s virtually no waste there,” he said.
Allan Whitrow of Yellow Grass, Sask., said he is surprised at how much cows will eat if feed is just lying on the ground and easy to get at.
“There’s not 10 pounds of bale left,” he said. “There’s nothing left.”
Owen Pekrul of Grenfell, Sask., said he also views the waste as fertilizer. Something put back on the land shouldn’t be considered a loss, he said.
One producer attending a recent winter feeding tour asked if those who have adopted different feeding methods have calculated the cost compared to what the land or product could be worth.
For example, if Ross took off silage instead of grazing the cattle in the corn, he would get more tonnes.
But Ross said getting that silage off costs about $100 per acre and getting it back to the cows costs about $16 a tonne.
Les Johnston, who grows greenfeed and yellowfeed near Fillmore, Sask., swaths the crops for grazing at lower bushel weights than if they were mature.
He said he is losing on weight but the soil fertility is improving.
Putting a value on the nutrients going directly back to the soil is difficult.
“On my operation, it’s worth $2,000,” said Whitrow. “That’s what it doesn’t cost me to haul it out of the shed and spread it.”
Johnston said he saves about $7,000 in a corral cleaning bill and $6,000 on moving feed and baling. Those savings have to count toward the value of the nutrients.
Pekrul said the difference he can see on land where the cattle are urinating and defecating is “astronomical.”
Lorne Klein, a regional forage specialist with Saskatchewan Agriculture, said research at the Western Beef Development Centre has found the value of nutrients to be about $5 per bale.
The research looked at feeding 1,400-pound alfalfa-grass bales in a corral and then spreading the manure on a pasture, compared to feeding the bale in winter on the pasture.
Klein said for each bale fed on the field instead of a corral, producers capture $5 worth of fertilizer.
