Title: Cattlemen's field day program ...
ALL VOLUMES CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00076928/00004
 Material Information
Title: Cattlemen's field day program ...
Physical Description: Serial
Language: English
Creator: Florida Everglades Experiment Station
Publisher: Everglades Research Station, University of Florida
Place of Publication: Belle Glade, Fla.
Publication Date: October 13, 1960
 Notes
General Note: Everglades Station mimeo report 61-3
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00076928
Volume ID: VID00004
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 166141474

Full Text



Cattleman's Field Day Program
Everglades Experiment Station, Belle Glade, Florida

October 13, 1960

Morning Kent Price, Presiding


Registration
Welcome and introduction
Veterinarian problems prevalent in this area
Function of Florida Livestock Diagnostic
Laboratory
Cattle research program at Everglades Experi-
ment Station
Recess
Discussion panel on chemical residues

Chairman
Cattle
Pastures
Veterinarian

Pasture weed control
Feed additives in drylot feeding programs
Report on West Palm Beach Cattle Association
Report on Palm Beach County Jr. Cattle
Association


W. T. Forsee, Jr.
Howard Hill

W. L. Sippel

H. L. Chapman, Jr.



F. E. Myers
Jim Pace
Dave Jones
C. B. Plummer


J. R. Orsenigo
Sloane Baker
Fritz Stein

Kent Price


NOON
Barbeque lunch will be served by Palm Beach County Cattleman's
Association
Afternoon H. L. Chapman, Presiding


1:20 Tick quarantine program
1:30 Present status and future outlook of pellets and
wafers, for beef cattle.
1:50 Pros and cons of silage making
2:05 Possibilities of hay making in the Everglades
2:15 Production possibilities of home grown forages
and grains
2:30 Pasture research progress report
2:45 Basis for pasture fertilization recommendations
2:55 Recess
3:05 Panel on cow and calf management practices for
South Florida, EXP




3:55 Field trip 8 1960
5:00 Adjourn


J. 0. Pearce, Jr.


V. E.
C. E.
W. T.


Cunha
Allen
Kidder

Green
Haines
Forsee, Jr.


M. Koger Chairman-
20 min.
Harold Brough 10 min.
Dick Kelly- 10 mia.
Mike Melicevic-lO min.


Everglades Station Mimeo Report 61-3


9:00
9:30
9:35
9:50

10:05

10:35
10:45


11:15
11:25
11:45
11:55









Field day speakers


R. J. Allen, Jr., Assistant Agronomist

F. S. Baker, Associate Animal Husbandman

H. B. Brough, Manager

H. L. Chapman, Jr., Associate Animal Nutritionist

T. J. Cunha, Head, Department of Animal Husbandry

W. T. Forsee, Jr.,Chemist in Charge

V. E. Green, Jr., Associate Agronomist

C. E. Haines, Assistant Animal Husbandman

H. E. Hill, Veterinarian

D. W. Jones, Agronomist, Agric. Extension Service

Dick Kelly, Manager

R. W. Kidder, Animal Husbandman

Mike Melicevic, Superintendent

F. E. Myers, Assistant Director, Agricultural
Extension Service

J. R. Orsenigo, Assistmt Horticulturist

J. E. Pace, Animal Husbandman, Agricultural
Extension Service

J. O. Pearce, Jr., Cattleman

C. B. Plumner, Extension Veterinarian

Kent Price, Assistant County Agent

W. L. Sippel, Head, Livestock Diagnostic Labor-
atory

Fritz Stein, President, Palm Beach County
Cattlemen's Association


Everglades Experiment Station.

North Fla. Experiment Station.

Sawyer Ranch, Belle Glade.

Everglades Experiment Station,

University of Florida.

Everglades Experiment Station.

Everglades Experiment Station.

Everglades Experiment Station.

Belle Glade, Florida.

University of Florida.

Monreve Ranch, Stuart, Fla.

Everglades Experiment Station.

Sugarland Ranch, Clewiston.


University of Florida.

Everglades Experiment Station.


University of Florida.

Okeechobee, Florida.

University of Florida.

West Palm Beach, Florida.


Kissimmee, Florida


Belle Glade, Florida


*






Animal Husbandry projects


Project
Number

818



820



922



924


990


1013



1014



1015


1016





1028



Misc.

Misc.


Leader

H. L. Chapman, Jr.



H. L. Chapman, Jr.



R. W. Kidder



R. W. Kidder


J. R. Crockett


H. L. Chapman, Jr.



C. E. Haines



C. E. Haines


H. L. Chapman, Jr.


C. E. Haines


H. L. Chapman, Jr.



0. E. Haines

H. L. Chapman, Jr.


Related projects


F. Le Grand
C. E. Haines


Investigation of sugarcane as a forage.


Title

Investigation of mineral interrelation-
ships of beef cattle through use of the
artificial rumen.

Apparent digestibility of nutrients in
silages, pasture forages and feeds
produced in the Everglades.

Angus, Brangus and Angus x Brangus cross-
breds for beef production in the Ever-
glades area.

Feeding value of vegetable by-products,
silages and sugarcane.

Breeding beef cattle for adaptation to
South Florida conditions.

Growth and reproduction of beef cattle
as affected by various mineral element
and their interaction.

Comparison of the major perennial pas-
ture forages of the Everglades with and
without supplemental feed.

Antibiotics and other feed additives in
rations for weaned calves.

Value of feed additives for beef steers
on fattening rations.

Supplemental feeding of yearling steers
on pasture.

Blackstrap molasses and other energy-con-
taining feeds as a supplement to pasture
for beef cows.

Value of reserpine for cattle being shipped.

Value of cobalt bullets under field condi-
tions.


960











Publications


Information pertaining to pasture, cattle and related subjects which
has been published by Everglades Experiment Station personnel since the
previous field day, is listed below.

E.E.S. Mimeo Series

59-15 Pasture weed control
59-32 The effects of limited concentrate and antibiotic supplement-
ation to yearling steers wintered on pasture.
60-14 A preliminary report on the value of Serpasil (Reserpine) in
fattening rations for beef steers on pasture.
60-15 A preliminary report on the value of Zymo-Pabst in fattening
rations fed to steers, on pasture.
60-16 Results of grazing experiments with yearling calves on four
major pasture grasses of the Everglades for one year.
60-17 Fattening of steers on pasture and in drylot.
61-2 Calibration suggestions for dry and liquid herbicide applica-
tion.
61-4 Results of field tests with the Cobalt "bullet".
61-5 Progress report on the value of blackstrap molasses for beef
cows.

Agr. Expt. Station Circulars

S-117. Growing sugarcane for forage.


Journal Series

Cattle grub control with Bayer 21/199 in the Everglades. The
Florida Entomologist, Vol. 42(4) pages 155-157.

Sugarcane as a pasture supplement during the winter for year-
ling cattle. The Sugar Journal, Vol. 23 (4) pages 21-26.

Chemical weed control in agronomic crops on Florida organic
soils. Proc. Soil and Crop Science Society of Florida,
Vol. 19. IN PRESS.








Chemical Weed Control Suggestions for the Everglades Cattleman

J. R. Orsenigo

Chemical Treatments:

1. For common broadleaf weeds in pastures; butterweed, stickerweed, and
other succulent broadleaf weeds; USE:

2,4-D, 1 1 Ib/A acid equivalent (amine salt or low volatile ester)

2. For brushy broadleaf weeds in pastures: Jerusalem oak or wormseed,
milkweed, teaveed as well as succulent broadleaf weeds; USE:

2,4-D & 2,4,5-T mixture, 1 1 lb/A acid equivalent (at a 1 to 1
ratio of the amine salt or the low volatile ester).

3. For brush and woody plants along ditches and fences; castorbean, elder-
berry, redbay willow as well as succulent br-oadleaf weeds; USE:

a. 2,4-D & 2,4,5-T mixture, 1 a Ib/A acid equivalent (at a 1 to 1
ratio of the amine salt or the low volatile ester)

b. 2,4,5-T, 1 2 Ib/A acid equivalent (amine salt or low volatile
ester).
Apply either of the above in about 50 gpa of water to wet foliage
and thoroughly wet the trunk and branches.

4. For control of Paragrass, Napiergrass, and other grasses along ditches
and fences; USE:

dalapon, 6 8 Ib/A of "Dowpon" or "Radapon" per application; apply
2 or 5 times with one week interval between application. Spray to
wet grass leaves only in about 50 gpa of water.

5. For control of mixed grass and broadleaf weeds along ditches and
fences; USE:

a. Where grasses and succulent broadleaf weeds are most common:
Combine I and IV above.

b. Where grasses and brush weeds are most common: Combine III and
IV above.

6. For control of water hyacinth; USE:

2,4-D, 2 Ib/A acid equivalent (amine salt or low volatile ester).
Apply in a thorough wetting spray of 50 to 100 gpa.








Method of Application:

For pasture weed control: A low mounted brush boom adjusted so that
flat-fan nozzle tip spray patterns overlap at top of weed growth.
Operate at low spraying pressure 20 to 30 psi and at low spraying
volume 10 to 30 gpa.

For ditches and fences: Use orchard-type spray gun attachment to
sprayer and operate at not over 100 psi. Apply in large droplets
with spray directed at vegetation. Do not try to get long-distance
coverage. Wet foliage and move on.

Conditions of Application:

Drift hazards of 2,4-D and 2,4,t-T herbicides are minimized by using
the amine salt formulations and the above application methods. In
general, 2,4-D type materials should not be applied less than one-
half mile from sensitive crops if wind is more than a light breeze -
1 to 2 mph or if wind is toward sensitive crops. Constant caution
is necessary near vegetable operations.

OBSERVE APPROPRIATE TIME INTERVALS WERE LACTATING DAIRY COWS AND CATTLE
FOR SLAUGHTER ARE INVOLVED.

Available Information:

General: Florida Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. 532
Pastures: Everglades Station Mineo Report 59-15
Calibration: Everglades Station Mimeo Report 61-2





Pros and Cons of Silage Making
R. J. Allen, Jr.

PRO

1. Silage is insurance. It is available when needed. Definite plans
for winter feeding can be made months in advance.

2. Most nutrients preserved at least cost. Good silage preserves more
nutrients than good hay and is exceeded only by pasture or green chop which
cannot be preserved as such, and by dehydrated forage at much greater cost.

3. Surface spoilage and other losses can be reduced to a minimum with
plastic covers. Various types of cover costing 3 to 8 cents per sq. ft. can
save 10 to 20 cents per sq. ft.

4. Plastic covers can eliminate need for silo structures, except that a
fence is needed if stored in a pasture. Reduces storage cost to 25 to 35 cents
per ton.

5. Platform self-feeding gates make self-feeding possible froa any width
stack or bunker silo. Up to 64 head have been fed from one end of a 14 foot
wide bunker silo. At least 120 to 130 should feed from both ends and more
from a wider silo. Use of platform and removal of fence as feeding progresses
aids in bogging problem on organic soils.

6. Silage making benefits pastures. Removal of excess summer grass is
beneficial to pastures, especially on organic soils. Sufficient winter feed
prevents serious overgrazing during winter months, pastures recover quicker
in early spring and more gains may be made from spring grazing.

7. Silage making takes advantage of summer moisture. Sandy soil pastures
fertilized in spring and summer can produce silage for winter and reduce need
for much pumping and irrigation.

CON

1. Expense of special equipment.

2. More difficult than other feeds to handle and may have disagreeable
odor.

3. Higher in moisture than other preserved feeds, but not higher than
most pasture forage.

4. Grass silage usually requires additives.

5. Corn or sorghum requires tillage and takes land in January or February
which may be needed for winter grazing. Harvesting of crops for silage must
be done prior to rainy season on organic soils.

6. Silage harvesting program will require more fertilizer on pastures.

7. Silage cannot be readily sold if not needed. It is more difficult
to transport if needed elsewhere.
QtRSTION
How much expense and work is it worth to be your own insurance agent?








Possibilities of hay making in the Everglades


R. W. Kidder


The major limiting factor in the production of quality hay in Florida is
the difficulty in curing. The high rainfall, long growing season and warm
weather are well suited for growth of hay forages with high nutritive value
but very poor for either natural or artificial curing of hay.

Efforts to field cure hay in the Everglades, have been generally less
successful than in other parts of Florida although the forage on the basis
of per acre yields may have been more plentiful. Parsons and Raulerson have
made some field cured hay at the Glades State Prison Farm and a few others
have tried with limited success. To consistently produce high quality hay
in South Florida some method of drying other than field curing must be used.

Many attempts have been made to dehydrate Everglades-grown forages. The
earliest we are aware of was the attempt to make hay from peanut vines, by
the Brown Company, thirty or more years ago. Mr. W. C. Lord was active in
this program. The drier was a chain conveyor type with hot air blasts dir-
ected from both sides under the chain. The length of time the material was
exposed to hot air was determined by the forward movement and the length of
the chain.

The first cylindrical rotating dehydrator in this area was operated by
Mr. F. L. Williamson at Moore Haven. Napier grass was most successfully
dehydrated by his process. The bulk forage was hauled to the plant where
it was chopped with an ensilage cutter and blown into the dehydrator. Some
shallu was dried in the Williamson drier and other crops such as Para grass
were tried with very limited success. Mr. Williamson was the first operator
in this area to incorporate molasses in the dehydrated forage to reduce dusti-
ness and improve palatability.

The United States Sugar Corporation at one time had a considerable acreage
of Lemon grass. Lemon oil was extracted from this grass by a distillation
process.and an attempt was made to dehydrate the residue for livestock feed.
To prevent spontaneous combustion in the hot forage when removed from the
distilling apparatus it was necessary to cool the material with water, which
then had to be removed by dehydration.

During 1946-48 there was renewed interest in the production of ramie
fiber with the tops and leaves being dehydrated for cattle feed. Newport
Industries at Canal Point produced quantities of dehydrated ramie leaves.
This material was also found to be an acceptable source of chlorophyll.
However, it became more economical to defoliate ramie in the field and
this material was no longer available.











Indian Trails Ranch became interested in the need to furnish dehydrated
material for chlorophyll and built the dehydrating plant near Loxahatchee.
This plant is not in operation at the present time. The Bell-Vita Corpora-
tion of Belle Glade began producing dehydrated forage about this time under
the leadership of Sam Loughridge. In spite of several severe setbacks this
plant continues to operate.

Tropical Farms at Brighton now have the largest dehydration program that
has been attempted in the area. This employs two processes not previously
tried commercially around here: Mechanical dewatering and pelleting.

Mechanical dewatering is a process of passing the forage through a screw
press. This removes about half of the water from the forage and reduces the
moisture content from 80-85 percent to less than 70 percent. One hundred
pounds of grass at 85 percent moisture contains 15 pounds of dry feed. When
15 percent of this moisture has been removed, the material is 70 percent
moisture and contains 30 pounds of dry feed, in each 100 pounds. At 70
percent water the material is comparable in moisture content to alfalfa as
it is commercially dehydrated in the western states.

Studies have indicated that the "press cake" from the screw press can be
fed, used for ensilage making without added preservatives, or dehydrated
economically in a conventional drum-type drier. It is felt that hay making
in the Everglades may become more economically feasible by the use of com-
binations of other mechanical devices.















Production Possibilities of Home Grown Forages and Grains

Victor E. Green, Jr.

Available literature

Corn for Grain

1. Field corn production in south Florida. Fla. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul.
582. 1957.

2. Field corn tests Everglades Area, 1959. Everglades Station
Mimeo Report 60-6. 1959. Back numbers for the fiscal years involved are
59-7, 58-10, 57-5, 56-2 and 55-4.

Sorghum, Sorgo, Corn and Millet for forage

1. Sorghum, millet and field corn forage crop tests, 1959. Everglades
Station Mimeo Report 60-1. 1959.

2. Sorgo varieties for forage use on Everglades soils, Spring 1959.
Everglades Station Mimeo Report 60-2. 1959.

3. The yields of successive cuttings of sorgo varieties grown on the
muck soils of the Everglades, 1959. Everglades Station Mimeo Report 60-12.
1960.




















3IG JOE--------


)ORADO TIQUISATE--


C3RNELI 54----.

FUNK G-7O0----


fELLOW IUXPAN-

)IXIE 18---.


- - - - - i a


FUNK G-737A -----....--- o

IOCAMEX H-503.---------------- --0


LOCAMEX H-501


?OEY PT-23--

?OEY PT-18--


KEYSTONE 257.


ne fl n 0-- UI I~~IUIIII


AVERAGE YIELDS, BUSHELS PER ACRE SHELLED CORN


The Average yields of Field Corn Varieties Planted at Belle Glade,
Florida in February for the Indicated Number of Years. 1952-600


110
X


130
x


Figure 1.


.LLU


_ __ I __


~~~~~~~I~UIUIYUII_

~.~~~UIIIIIUIIII~I~HU O


AYCRBELA--------....----- --.-o


----- --- -----re--lrr~rm-- mn


i --YllrrZIUrr~Urr~UIl~UII~~~


I~UIII- ~HIIII C--l~l~~~,~~~I~DYUllle~I~


_ 7CI -iS-~ -~IA


r1.t









Table. Comparison of Field Corn, Hybrid Sorghums, Open-pollinated Sorghum, Combine Sorghum,
Sorghum grasses, Pearlmillet and Grain Millet as Sources of Forage. Belle Glade, Fla.
1959.

Tons Fresh Forage Percentage Dry Matter Tons dry forage
after weeks growth after weeks growth after weeks growth
Group Entries 12 14 16 12 14 16 12 14 16
Field corn 3 43.2 34.3 32.1 16.3 22.3 32.3 7.5 8.4 11.5
Pearlaillet 2 35-3 26.2 27.3 17.3 22.6 15.9 6.8 6.5 6.9
Sorgrass 5 23.6 21.2 20.1 21.1 28.5 29.6 5.3 6.5 6.4
Hybrid sorghum 10 23.1 19.8 18.2 19.3 25.1 23.8 4.9 5.5 4.8
O.P. sorghum 8 19.8 18.9 13.3 16.9 27.0 22.0 4.7 6.2 4.2
Combine sorghum 10 19.9 16.9 11.3 22.0 26.8 29.6 4.7 5.0 3.6
Grain millet 2 8.0 3.7 3.7 22.1 32.3 37.4 2.0 1.3 1.5

Crops planted February 25, 1959.
Table. Relation of age of Corneli 54 field corn to yield, moisture and crude protein
percentage. Belle Glade, Fla. 1958.

Age in Height Yields/acre Yields dry
months feet fresh-chop Forage/acre Percentage Crude protein Pounds Protein
tons tons dry matter percentage per acre
2 7 17.13 + 2.56 2.40 + 0.49 14 15.58 748
3 9 22.18 + 2.75 4.23 + 0.81 19 10.14 858
4f 11 19.40 + 1.55 6.67 + 0.50 34 6.88 918

Planted February 28, 1958.








Progress in pasture research at the Everglades Experiment Station

C. E. Haines


Studies on grasses for the organic soils of the Everglades have been
conducted for many years (since 1924). However, the grasses under investi-
gation and the methods for determining their productivity have changed
through the years.

In the most recent years, yearlings have been used to compare the
annual productivity of pasture grasses most prevalent in the Everglades
area. Test cycles begin in November and terminate the following October.
The test blocks are two acres in size and contain Roselawn St. Augustine,
paragrass, pangolagrass and Fensacola and Argentine bahiagrass. Product-
ivity is determined by the live weight gains produced per acre for the
period of one year. The results of last year's study are summarized below:



Grass Animal grazing Total annual Average daily gain
days per acre gain per animal (ibs.)
(Ibs/acre)
Para 829 1,070 1.29
Pangola 707 861 1.22
St. Augustine 960 1,053 1.10
Bahia 1,117 1,077 0.96


This year's study, using the same grasses as above, will be completed
within a few weeks. During the winter, a constant stocking rate of two
yearling per acre was maintained on each grass. For a 10 week period,
during the winter, fifteen pounds per animal of chopped sugarcane was
supplied daily to one half of the yearlings grazing each of the different
kinds of grass. A comparison of the gains recorded for the 10 week period
is illustrated in the following table:


Kind of Average weight change (ibs.) Difference
grass Chopped No between
grazed Sugarcane Sugarcane groups

St. Augustine 42.5 8.1 34.4
Pangolagrass 14.4 -1.9 16.3
Paragrass -10.0 -55.6 45.6

Average 15.6 -16.5 32.1







Suggestions for pasture fertilization


W. T. Forsee, Jr.

Because of the relative uniformity of the virgin soils presently being
planted to pasture, fertilization of such pastures can usually be accomplished
by application of basic recommendations without the benefit of a soil test.
Under such circumstances the general fertilizer recommendation is 500 lbs.
per acre of an 0-8-24 mixture containing 3% CuO, 2% MnO, 1% ZnO and 0.80 B203.
Such an application will afford the necessary amounts of copper and other
minor elements along with a basic application of potash and phosphate to take
care of the needs in establishing the grass. This fertilizer should be broad-
cast and disced into the soil prior to planting.

Subsequent applications for the next three or four years should consist
of annual applications of 300 to 500 pounds of an 0-8-21 mixture containing
1% CuO. After approximately five years a soil test might be recommended in
order to establish the best fertilizer program for the next period of years.
If it is not convenient to take advantage of soil testing, subsequent annual
applications after the first five years should be 300 to 500 pounds of 0-10-20
or 0-12-16.

In establishing pastures on old land that has been previously used for
cultivated crops, a soil test is recommended. Usually such areas have been
fertilized repeatedly with various fertilizer mixtures and the crop removal
of mineral nutrients has varied considerably with the crop grown. A soil
test will indicate whether or not additional fertilizer is needed for pas-
ture and will suggest the best analysis. In many cases following vegetable
crops, no additional fertilizer is required for pasture grasses.

In all cases where soil samples are collected from areas prior to estab-
lishment of pastures the routine procedure involves a composite sample of 12
to 15 cores collected randomly over the field in question. Such an average
sample is usually a good representative of the field. The sampling of areas
in existing pastures, however, is usually not quite so simple since concen-
trated spots of potassium are present in the soil as derived from animal
droppings. The distribution presents a heterogeneous situation which is
likely to introduce considerable error if the generally accepted composite
sample is taken. For example, if the average potash level in the field is
40 pounds per acre and two borings out of a total of fifteen are taken from
a urine spot where potash could be as much as 300 pounds per acre, the average
of the composite would be 75 pounds K per acre instead of 40. The fertilizer
recommendation made on the basis of this ermparatively adequate level for
pasture would be insufficient to meet the general needs of the overall grass
area.

In order to eliminate this error as much as possible, we suggest that
a sample from any given area consist essentially of three samples labeled A,
B and C. Each of the samples A, B and C consists of five to seven cores six
inches deep taken from a single small location in the field. The area from
which each sample is drawn may be no larger than 10 to 12 inches in diameter
and care should be exercised that these selected spots are from areas where
a grass is growing normally and, as far as can be determined, no animal con-
tamination is present. Since the presence of any animal contamination is









readily recognized by a very high potash level, any contamination becomes very
noticeable in that analysis of that sample will show a potash level inconsis-
tent with the other sub-samples. Our experience has been that fred~ently as
many as two out of the three samples may indicate contamination. Fertilizer
recommendations are made on the basis of either the samples showing the lowest
potash analysis or an average of two or three samples showing relatively low
readings. Any samples showing a high potash reading are automatically elim-
inated from consideration unless all samples are high and the fertilization
history indicates that such high levels are Warranted.

At best this method is subject to considerable error but it is safer to
apply than the composite sample method. It will be used and recommended until
further refinements can be determined and suggested.

In many cases for pastures a routine fertilizer recommendation is suf-
ficient without the benefit of a soil test. Such a routine recommendation
can be derived from a fertilizer history of the area in question. Under
grazing conditions fertilizer need be applied only once each year, prefer-
ably during the month of October. If grass clippings are removed for hay
or silage, fertilize immediately with about 500 pounds of an 0-12-16 mixture.




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs