Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Al Ulmer, LaMoure County Agent
    Karl Hoppe, CREC Livestock
                     Specialist
 LaMoure   County has
  12 feedlots
 Approximately
  40,000 head capacity
 Approximately 15,800
  cow/calf pairs
 Two ...
 Use   a lot of low quality feeds
  • Corn stover
  • Prairie hays
  • Straw
A lot of co-products available in the area
...
 Contacted
          by producers about feed wagons
 wondering if they were getting good mixes
  • Concern's were mixing ...
 Feed  costs have dramatically increased
 Obtaining maximum feed conversion in to
  cattle weight is a necessity
 Impro...
 Education   was needed to guide feed lot
  operators and provide the tools needed to
  make improvements in their operat...
 Making  a Total Mixed Ration (TMR)
  requires adequate mixing
 Program was designed to evaluate on farm
  mixing perfor...
A  “hands on” on-farm mixing evaluation
 Follow up farm visits with a written
  evaluation to include:
  • feed sample n...
 One on one feedlot visits with “hands on”
  mixing evaluation
 Used edible markers
  • Candy corn
  • Good and Plenty
 Not all candies work well
  • Looked at M&M couldn’t afford them
 Used Candy Corn and Good & Plenty     (G&P)
 Goal wa...
   Wet feeds coated the candy making it harder to
    find (G&P) candy corn was much easier to find
   With dry feeds candy was much easier to find
 Had producer loaded feed wagon in their
  normal fashion
 Added candy into feed wagon with feed
  mix
 Mixed feed for ...
 Set 3 dish pans in bunk line
  • One at the beginning
  • One in the middle
  • One at the end
 Collected the pans (bef...
 Measured      and calculated co-efficient of
 variation
 • Candy
 • Dry Matter
 • Crude Protein
 • ADF (Acid Detergent F...
Candy                Dry matter          Crude Protein
                Coefficient of variation Coefficient of variation C...
 The  wide range of candies counted at the
  beginning, middle and end of the feed bunk
  indicate improvements can be ma...
 Mixing   Suggestions:
  • increase mixing time
  • blend ingredients of
   smaller quantities (like
   minerals) with ot...
 Mixing Suggestions:
  • repair damaged or worn parts in the mixer
  • don’t over fill the feed mixer, it does the best j...
 Candy    was a great way to get the
  producers interest in the project
 Candies are a great method to visually see
  t...
 We   got operators to:
 • look at their feeding operations
 • find ways to reduce costs
 • better utilize their resources
 Created   awareness of how a total mix
  ration of conventional & alternative feed
  sources and management changes can
...
 Relationshipbuilding, trouble
 shooting, opportunity to discuss other
 production issues, and having producers
 see the ...
Feed mixing evaluation program 1
Feed mixing evaluation program 1
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

of

Feed mixing evaluation program 1 Slide 1 Feed mixing evaluation program 1 Slide 2 Feed mixing evaluation program 1 Slide 3 Feed mixing evaluation program 1 Slide 4 Feed mixing evaluation program 1 Slide 5 Feed mixing evaluation program 1 Slide 6 Feed mixing evaluation program 1 Slide 7 Feed mixing evaluation program 1 Slide 8 Feed mixing evaluation program 1 Slide 9 Feed mixing evaluation program 1 Slide 10 Feed mixing evaluation program 1 Slide 11 Feed mixing evaluation program 1 Slide 12 Feed mixing evaluation program 1 Slide 13 Feed mixing evaluation program 1 Slide 14 Feed mixing evaluation program 1 Slide 15 Feed mixing evaluation program 1 Slide 16 Feed mixing evaluation program 1 Slide 17 Feed mixing evaluation program 1 Slide 18 Feed mixing evaluation program 1 Slide 19 Feed mixing evaluation program 1 Slide 20 Feed mixing evaluation program 1 Slide 21 Feed mixing evaluation program 1 Slide 22 Feed mixing evaluation program 1 Slide 23 Feed mixing evaluation program 1 Slide 24 Feed mixing evaluation program 1 Slide 25
Upcoming SlideShare
Nutrient Management
Next
Download to read offline and view in fullscreen.

3 Likes

Share

Download to read offline

Feed mixing evaluation program 1

Download to read offline

Related Books

Free with a 30 day trial from Scribd

See all

Related Audiobooks

Free with a 30 day trial from Scribd

See all

Feed mixing evaluation program 1

  1. 1. Al Ulmer, LaMoure County Agent Karl Hoppe, CREC Livestock Specialist
  2. 2.  LaMoure County has 12 feedlots  Approximately 40,000 head capacity  Approximately 15,800 cow/calf pairs  Two dealers in county selling mix wagons  Approximately 105 producers with mix wagons
  3. 3.  Use a lot of low quality feeds • Corn stover • Prairie hays • Straw A lot of co-products available in the area (within 100 miles) • Spuds • Corn syrup • DDGs and WDGs
  4. 4.  Contacted by producers about feed wagons wondering if they were getting good mixes • Concern's were mixing antibiotics, minerals and vitamins and other feed additives  Al and Karl do a lot of on farm beef trouble shooting
  5. 5.  Feed costs have dramatically increased  Obtaining maximum feed conversion in to cattle weight is a necessity  Improving feed efficiency involves using feeds in right combinations  Totally mixed rations improve fermentation efficiencies
  6. 6.  Education was needed to guide feed lot operators and provide the tools needed to make improvements in their operations  Producers need to reduce the cost of inputs in their operations and become more efficient particularly in the trends and marketing of calves
  7. 7.  Making a Total Mixed Ration (TMR) requires adequate mixing  Program was designed to evaluate on farm mixing performance  Program benchmarks mixing performance and then developing solutions to improve mixing  Consequently animal performance should improve
  8. 8. A “hands on” on-farm mixing evaluation  Follow up farm visits with a written evaluation to include: • feed sample nutritional reports • coefficients of variation (CV) report • letter with suggestions on how to fine tune their feed mixing operation
  9. 9.  One on one feedlot visits with “hands on” mixing evaluation  Used edible markers • Candy corn • Good and Plenty
  10. 10.  Not all candies work well • Looked at M&M couldn’t afford them  Used Candy Corn and Good & Plenty (G&P)  Goal was to have 1 piece of candy for every 1 pound of dry feed or 2000 pieces of candy (5 pounds) into two tons of 50% moisture feed  Add at 2.5 to 5 pounds per ton of mix • Candy corn = 220 pieces/pound • Good and Plenty = 390 pieces/pound
  11. 11.  Wet feeds coated the candy making it harder to find (G&P) candy corn was much easier to find
  12. 12.  With dry feeds candy was much easier to find
  13. 13.  Had producer loaded feed wagon in their normal fashion  Added candy into feed wagon with feed mix  Mixed feed for their normal mixing time
  14. 14.  Set 3 dish pans in bunk line • One at the beginning • One in the middle • One at the end  Collected the pans (before the calves got to them)  Sorted and counted markers  Evaluated mix wagon effectiveness of uniform mixing of feed ration  Then suggest changes to make mix wagon to get a better uniform feed mix
  15. 15.  Measured and calculated co-efficient of variation • Candy • Dry Matter • Crude Protein • ADF (Acid Detergent Fiber) • Calcium • Phosphorous • Sample Weights
  16. 16. Candy Dry matter Crude Protein Coefficient of variation Coefficient of variation Coefficient of variation observations observations observations First 1/3 of bunk 4 57.77 11.19 Second 1/3 of bunk 1 57.38 11.91 Last 1/3 of bunk 4 56.62 13.89 Standard Deviation 1.732 dev 0.585 dev 1.398 mean (Average) 3.00 mean 57.26 mean 12.33 Coefficient of Variation 57.74 CV 1.02 CV 11.34 CV=DEV/Mean*100 CV=DEV/Mean*100 CV=DEV/Mean*100 Goal 10% Goal 10% Goal 10% Best 5% Best 5% Best 5% very accurate 1% very accurate 1% very accurate 1%
  17. 17.  The wide range of candies counted at the beginning, middle and end of the feed bunk indicate improvements can be made in mixing  There is always a need to be vigilant in doing a good job of feed mixing  Upon review of the nutritional components of the ration, mixing appears to be adequate (or not for those not meeting the mixing goal) for • Crude protein ADF, Calcium and Phosphorous
  18. 18.  Mixing Suggestions: • increase mixing time • blend ingredients of smaller quantities (like minerals) with other dry feeds and mix thoroughly before adding hays and/or silages
  19. 19.  Mixing Suggestions: • repair damaged or worn parts in the mixer • don’t over fill the feed mixer, it does the best job when filled no fuller than 85% of capacity
  20. 20.  Candy was a great way to get the producers interest in the project  Candies are a great method to visually see that mixing can always be improved  Reviewing the chemical analysis of the ration, is a good way to determine if they were doing a good job of mixing both the forage based and grain based rations
  21. 21.  We got operators to: • look at their feeding operations • find ways to reduce costs • better utilize their resources
  22. 22.  Created awareness of how a total mix ration of conventional & alternative feed sources and management changes can improve feedlot animal performance  Operators learned how better feed mixing can positively affect their operation
  23. 23.  Relationshipbuilding, trouble shooting, opportunity to discuss other production issues, and having producers see the value of NDSU extension
  • KhalilBrown

    Aug. 1, 2019
  • rajeshsinghvet1995

    Oct. 25, 2015
  • drmangesh23

    Oct. 20, 2015

Views

Total views

1,396

On Slideshare

0

From embeds

0

Number of embeds

1

Actions

Downloads

24

Shares

0

Comments

0

Likes

3

×