Consider both energy and protein during drought supplementation

Traditionally, when cow-herd supplementation is discussed we focus on meeting the protein needs of the cow, with goal of maximizing forage intake by supplementing protein, the most limiting nutrient in the available forages. However, this year drought has severely limited the supply of both grazed and harvested forages in many regions. In this scenario both energy and protein are limiting cow performance and therefore, supplements should be evaluated on both their energy and protein contributions to the nutrition program. When evaluating potential feedstuffs as supplements consider both the cost per unit of energy (TDN, net energy maintenance or metabolizable energy) and of crude protein.

The major concern regarding energy supplementation in a non-drought situation, when forage supply is adequate is the “substitution effect”; essentially the energy supplement (starch or grain-based) reduces grazed forage intake which compromises overall energy balance. Under non-drought conditions, fiber-based as opposed to starch-based energy sources are recommended. However, in a drought situation when forage supply is critically low, meeting the energy requirements of the cow using the most economical feedstuffs available (cost per unit of energy basis) is our first priority and the source of supplemental energy (fiber vs. starch) is of less importance.

If a commercially blended supplement is used (e.g. range cubes), consider the inclusion of an ionophore. The use of ionophores (Rumensin and Bovatec) has become a standard practice in growing cattle diets. Rumensin is the only product approved for use in mature beef cows and must be delivered in at least 1.0 pounds of feed per day. Research conducted with cows indicates that cows fed 200 mg/d of monensin (Rumensin) required 5 to 10 percent less feed to maintain the same weight and body condition as cows that did not receive Rumensin.

During a drought situation, non-traditional grazing opportunities often present themselves. The high price of forages often makes baling look attractive, However, in almost every, if not every situation, grazing forages presents a lower cost alternative to haying. There are a number of different opportunities that may be available (grazing re-growth in wheat stubble, failed corn, milo, soybeans, etc). However, some of these grazing opportunities may carry risk (nitrates). If you have questions regarding any of these non-traditional grazing opportunities consult your local K-State Extension professional.

1. Vilsack: Taking time to remember the fallen
2. Livestock Marketing: Beef prices remain strong, cattle pressured
3. Farm Bill progress
4. Feeder cattle review: Choice beef prices keep rolling higher
5. Ag markets diverge just before the long holiday weekend
6. Armyworms eat fescue pastures, hayfields

1. Commentary: New rules un-COOL
2. Former Eastern Livestock CEO, CFO sentenced for federal crimes
3. TSCRA works with sale barns to catch Houston cattle thief
4. More beef cows in worst drought regions than a year ago
5. NASA backs 3D food printer to feed growing population
6. Post-tornado composting a solution for disposal of dead livestock

1. Commentary: New rules un-COOL
2. Commentary: In praise of animal foods
3. What’s on America’s grill this weekend?
4. NASA backs 3D food printer to feed growing population
5. Meat industry associations quick to attack the new MCOOL rule
6. Commentary: Message to Occupy Monsanto: Occupy yourself