Maximize returns from pastureland | Cattle producers can save on feed costs by pasture grazing year round or reap extra income by growing forage crops for export markets
Canola may be king, but there’s still value in forages, producers were told at a recent Canadian Forage and Grassland Association conference.
However, the sector is facing challenges: grasslands must compete for acres with canola, forages can be costly to export, herd sizes have decreased and the commodity’s value can be difficult to monetize because much of it is grazed and fed on the farm.
“One of the challenges for the industry is to get a better sense of the value of that forage,” said association chair Doug Wray.
Read Also
Calf hormone implants can give environmental, financial wins
Hormone implants can lead to bigger calves — reducing greenhouse gas intensity, land use intensity and giving the beef farmer more profit, Manitoba-based model suggests.
“And I think if we can accurately describe that value, people will gain a new appreciation for what it brings and its ability to compete with the grain industry and the oilseed industry for land and resources.”
Canola production may be up, but millions of tame and natural pasturelands remain across the Prairies. Wray said it’s in the best interest of producers to maximize their returns on those acres through resourceful management.
“A lot of the land we have forages on are best suited for forages. They’re not good canola acres,” he said.
“They don’t work for canola or wheat, so that’s the reason they’re in forages. But in order to be economically viable you still have to do the very best job you can do to make it work.”
David Kerr, who grazes cattle on a wide range of soil and grass types and forages, said he has cows that remain on pasture year round and bale graze in the winter, which drives down costs. He’s had calves gain as much as three pounds a day on grass.
He told producers to be resourceful.
“A lot of guys don’t graze their hay land. They feel its a detriment to their hay land,” said Kerr.
“I don’t feel that way. As long you wait until after the ground freezes off, you can still get a lot of benefit off of that and it’s almost free.”
There are growing export markets for forages, including Japan, which is already a common destination for compressed hay, and the United Arab Emeritus.
China is also a potentially lucrative market, said Rollie Bernth, president of the U.S. National Hay Association.
“If you look at where they’re capable of growing forage crops, it’s a long ways away from where it’s utilized,” he said. “It’s going to be many years, if ever, that they’re going to be able to be able to be self sustained in forage production.”
However, different markets have different demands: what may be an acceptable product in the UAE may not be acceptable in Japan.
He said it’s important that producers study these markets and understand the requirements of customers and governments.
“It’s interesting how farmers like to grow a particular crop because it works for them, but sometimes they forget about how to sell it,” said Bernth.
Shipping provides a greater challenge because it’s expensive. Processing can cut down on costs, but there are limited facilities in Saskatchewan and Manitoba.
Consultant Allen Tyrchniewicz said prairie producers using domestic containers can pay as much as $84 per tonne to ship to ports in Vancouver, Montreal and New Orleans. Rates to Abu Dhabi run higher.
Tyrchniewicz studied the viability of using the Port of Churchill to ship forages. It is Canada’s only Arctic seaport and the closest ocean port to Western Canada. The site has potential but cannot yet meet producers’ needs.
However, he said forage prices should increase as the world’s demand for meat grows, which will cover the higher transportation costs.
“And that I think is one of those long-term things,” said Tyrchniewicz. “Same thing with the Port of Churchill: We might not be able to act on it right now, but in the long term there might be some opportunities there.”
