Alfalfa winterkill may be caused by a combination of factors, including harsh and long winter conditions, plant stress due to drought and, possibly, over-harvesting during the previous summer. Reports have indicated that late cuttings in 2012, even before Sept. 1, resulted in very little regrowth; observations of late summer cuttings have been reminiscent of alfalfa cut in mid-October.

In March, alfalfa fields looked to be in decent shape. The damage appears to have occurred after the slight temperature warming in March followed by the slushy snow in April. Southern Minnesota locations have reported a considerable amount of winterkill.

Forage selection and seeding strategies
Producers already face high feed prices. The last two years of dry weather resulted in a shortage of feed, especially forage.

Key attributes of successful forage options are that they establish quickly, grow rapidly, and provide good yield and quality per acre. Experts have made many suggestions, including ryegrass, sorghum-sudan grass, BMR sudan grass, clover, wheat, barley, oats, peas and oats silage. Some producers decide to replace alfalfa acres with corn or soybeans.

Availability of seed may be a concern that dictates which forage option works best for each producer. Dan Undersander, University of Wisconsin, recommends simply drilling Italian ryegrass into the dead areas with no tillage. Tillage would disturb the field and delay seeding. Undersander recommends seeding 10 lbs. /acre (55 seeds/sq. ft.).

If producers decide to plow their alfalfa fields, they should consider long-term needs for cow diets and decide if they will select alternative forage or use those acres to plant other crops.

Additional strategies
This is a great time to evaluate your options for storing forages to prevent shrink and increase efficiency of forage feeding. Lactating cow diets in 2013 may reflect alfalfa shortage because producers will likely be feeding greater than 50 percent of the dry matter diet as corn silage.

Consider forage conservation options such as restricted feeding of growing heifers and exploring alternative non-forage fiber sources, such as whole fuzzy cottonseed, soyhulls, corn gluten feed, beet pulp, and sweet corn silage. Try to maximize forage quality for high-producing cows, and avoid making decisions that save money in the short-term but cost money in the long term.

Finally, evaluate potential cull cows, including excessive numbers of replacement heifers, to reduce forage needs. As always, consistency within the nutrition program is always a positive. Make necessary changes gradually and work to minimize variation in nutrient supply to dairy cattle.

Visit www.extension.umn.edu/agriculture/crops/spring-issues for more Extension information about the forage shortage situation. Visit www.extension.umn.edu/dairy for more information for dairy producers.

Media Contact: Allison Sandve, U of M Extension, (612) 626-4077, ajsandve@umn.edu

U of M Extension Ag News Wire is a service of University of Minnesota Extension, Communications, 240 Coffey Hall, 1420 Eckles Ave., St. Paul, MN 55113.

To unsubscribe from U of M Extension Ag News Wire, please email extnews@umn.edu.

For more news from U of M Extension, visit www.extension.umn.edu/news or contact Extension Communications at extnews@umn.edu.

University of Minnesota Extension is an equal opportunity educator and employer.

The Commodity Challenge game (www.commoditychallenge.com) features real-time cash, futures and options quotes for corn, soybeans and wheat. It offers a one-of-a-kind approach to learning about commodity markets and price risk management. It is used in high school and college classrooms, and by farmers to learn about marketing strategies. Players will find it to be intuitive and easy to navigate. Commodity Challenge was used last year by more than 1,500 people in 12 states.

For newcomers to the world of grain marketing, Commodity Challenge offers a hands-on opportunity to learn about futures and options terms and pricing tools. Commodity Challenge also introduces players to the basics of trading grain: placing orders, unwinding positions, and accounting for gains and losses.

"Commodity Challenge asks players to put themselves in the shoes of a grain producer, allowing players to experience the pain and glory of trading decisions in a risk-free environment," said Edward Usset, Extension economist and grain marketing specialist with the Center for Farm Financial Management.

Usset adds that it's different from other online trading games. "Other games concentrate on a speculative approach to trading—a 'buy low, sell high' approach. This game focuses on the use of futures and options contracts to manage price risk."

Some decisions players face include: How will you manage price risks associated with producing grain? Will you sell grain today, or store grain to sell later? Will you establish a price using futures contracts, or buy put options to set a minimum price? Commodity Challenge offers great way to explore pricing tools and marketing strategies.

The redesigned website improves upon a successful learning experience, featuring a great new look with links to social media and a game dashboard. Game leaders will be able to monitor player decisions and progress.

The new version also features a broad selection of local cash markets. Commodity Challenge games can be customized to display nearby prices and quotes on forward contracts. Cash and forward prices are provided by GeoGrain, a service that gathers daily grain quotes from thousands of local cash markets. Futures and options quotes are provided by the major exchanges and by Telvent/DTN.

The best way to experience Commodity Challenge is to register and join an open game (a game without password protection). Players can place orders, check account actions and develop a feel for how the game works. Creating a Commodity Challenge game for groups is very easy. Send an email to Usset at usset001@umn.edu and specify the group's location, a start date, an end date, and specify the grains to trade (corn, soybeans, HRW wheat, SRW wheat, HRS wheat). If you have specific questions or inquiries about Commodity Challenge, direct those to Usset as well.

The first version of Commodity Challenge was launched in February 2002, as a joint project of the Montana Grain Growers Association and Kevin McNew, president of GeoGrain.com. Commodity Challenge games remain free thanks to sponsorship support from Minnesota Soybean, Farm Credit and the North Central Risk Management Education Center.

For more information on agricultural business management, visit www.extension.umn.edu/AgBusiness and www.cffm.umn.edu.

Media Contact: Allison Sandve, U of M Extension, (612) 626-4077, ajsandve@umn.edu

While most growers prefer to get their crops off to an early start, early planting is not a requirement for high yields. In 2008 and 2011, when it was mid-May before half of Minnesota's corn acres were planted, state-average grain yields ranked third and fifth among Corn Belt states, respectively.

This is supported by University of Minnesota Extension corn planting date studies conducted at the University's Research and Outreach Centers. In a study from 1988 to 2003 at Lamberton, planting dates ranging from April 21 to May 6 produced grain yields within 1 percent of the maximum. In another study from 2009 to 2011 at Lamberton, Morris, and Waseca that was funded by the Minnesota Corn Growers Association, grain yield was within 1 percent of the maximum when planting occurred between April 25 and May 10. In both studies, rapid decline in corn yield did not occur until planting was delayed beyond mid-May.

Corn requires soil temperatures of 50 degrees Fahrenheit or higher for germination. However, once the last week of April is reached, corn planting should generally occur as soon as soils are dry enough, regardless of soil temperature. If corn is planted into soils that are too wet, the advantages of an earlier planting date can be negated due to soil compaction around the seed zone, which can result in poor growth of nodal roots and reduced uptake of water and nutrients.

A planting depth of 2 inches is generally optimal for most planting dates and soils, but can be deeper on coarse-textured soils to ensure that the seed is placed in moist soil. Avoid the temptation to plant corn shallow when soils are cold, as planting depths less than 1.75 inches increase the risk of poor nodal root development and root lodging later in the season.

In order to maximize economic return, a general guideline for growers in Minnesota is to stick with the planned seed choices until May 20 to 25. When planting occurs after May 20 to 25, it is wise to switch to hybrids that are 5 to 7 relative maturity units earlier than full season for the region.

For more resources on corn production from University of Minnesota Extension, visit www.extension.umn.edu/corn.

MINNEAPOLIS/ST. PAUL (April 11, 2013) — Minnesota farmers were largely spared from the drought that severely impacted much of the Corn Belt during the summer of 2012, according to an analysis conducted jointly by Minnesota State Colleges and Universities (MnSCU) and University of Minnesota Extension.

The analysis found that drought-induced high crop prices coupled with above average yields resulted in a profitable year for farmers who participated in the analysis. Overall, median net farm income (the farm's contribution to family living expenses, income taxes, retirement and business growth) was up 47 percent from 2011.

The analysis used data from 2,200 participants in MnSCU farm business management education programs and 110 members of the Southwest Minnesota Farm Business Management Association (the total number of farms in Minnesota is approximately 80,000). In farm business management programs, producers learn how to maintain, interpret and use quality business records to develop business plans, make key decisions and execute marketing plans throughout the year. The producer's personalized annual whole business and enterprise analyses, which become the "textbooks" used for making business decisions throughout the year, provided the source data for the analysis.

"Agriculture continues to be one of the bright lights in the Minnesota economy. A thriving ag economy is essential for the economic health of rural Minnesota," said Ron Dvergsten, Dean of Management Education at Northland Community & Technical College in Thief River Falls. "We were not surprised that Minnesota crop producers had a good year. We were surprised at how well livestock farms did, given record high feed costs. Minnesota livestock farmers generally produce a large portion of their own feed, which gives them an advantage in years like this."

The analysis found that, despite developing drought conditions during the growing season, corn yields improved over 2011 for these Minnesota producers. Corn averaged 170 bushels per acre, slightly higher than the 10-year average of 166 bushels for participating farms. Soybeans yielded 46 bushels per acre compared to a 10-year average of 41.

"We started the growing season with very adequate rainfall and the crops were able to go down and find moisture as we dried up later in the season," said Dale Nordquist, Extension economist in the University of Minnesota Center for Farm Financial Management. "But we are heading into 2013 planting season with a serious lack of soil moisture. We dried up the soil profile by the end of the year."

Crop prices were also higher than most producers had ever experienced. The average price for corn sales was $6.08 per bushel, compared to $5.17 in 2011 and $3.67 in 2010. Soybeans brought $13.08 per bushel compared to $11.35 and $9.66 the two previous years. Spring wheat sold for $8.18 per bushel compared to $7.24 and $5.03 in the two previous years.

While crop prices were up, so were production costs. For corn, land rental rates increased by 17 percent. Fertilizer was up 26 percent. The total cost to grow an acre of corn was up $88 an acre from 2011, an increase of 13 percent.

Livestock farms were somewhat more profitable than in 2011, but much of this profitability was due to the cropping side of their operations. Milk sold for $19.60 per hundredweight compared to $19.96 in 2011. With a cost of production of $19.19, dairy farmers made 41 cents on every hundred pounds produced. Market hog prices declined from $66 per hundred pounds in 2011 to $63 in 2012. Market beef prices increased from $113 per hundredweight in 2011 to $122 in 2012. However, the cost to produce 100 pounds of beef increased by $16.

Inflation-adjusted incomes for these Minnesota farms increased to levels that have not been experienced in almost four decades.

"We are in the middle of one of those golden ages of agriculture," Nordquist said. "The last period we had like this was in the 1970's. Those of us who are old enough remember that period ended with a hard landing. We don't expect another hard landing, but we know this will end sometime."

The statewide results are compiled by the Center for Farm Financial Management into the FINBIN database which can be queried at www.finbin.umn.edu.

University of Minnesota Extension is a 100-year-old partnership between the university and federal, state and county governments to provide scientific knowledge and expertise to the public. Through Extension, the University of Minnesota "extends" its resources to address critical public issues in priority areas, including food and agriculture, communities, environment, youth and families. For more information, visit www.extension.umn.edu.

The Minnesota State Colleges and Universities system includes 24 two-year community and technical colleges and seven state universities serving more than 430,000 students. It is the fifth-largest higher education system of its kind in the United States.
# # #
The Minnesota State Colleges and Universities system and the University of Minnesota are Equal Opportunity employers and educators. This document can be made available in alternative formats upon request.

------
For more news from U of M Extension, visit www.extension.umn.edu/news or contact Extension Communications at extnews@umn.edu. University of Minnesota Extension is an equal opportunity educator and employer.

ST. PAUL, Minn. (4/8/2013) —The increasing cost of forages, continuing fear of drought conditions, and extending winter season have many producers wondering about the productivity of their hay fields in 2013. While temperatures have been colder this winter, the good news is that an insulating layer of snow has persisted across most of the state for an extended period of time.

Overwintering success of forages is typically a combined function of climatic conditions and management decisions. Environmental factors such as snow cover, lethal temperatures, ice sheeting, and air-temperature fluctuation play important roles in plant survival from one growing season to the next. These effects are heavily influenced by stand age, variety genetics, fertility programs, and harvest schedules.

Some of the significant management factors affecting winter injury include species and variety selection, soil fertility, and cutting management.

Assessing alfalfa winter survival:

Stem counts (versus plants per square foot) better represent total production in a given area and account for variability in plant performance. Use stem counts to estimate current yield potential and assess root and crown health to determine future yield potential. Stand health based on stem densities per square foot can be assessed in the following manner:

1. Greater than 55 stems indicates density will not be a limiting factor,
2. The range between 40 and 55 stems is understood to represent some reduction in yield but probably more than adequate in years of low inventories and high value, and
3. Fewer than 40 stems indicate a poor stand and consideration for termination.

We suggest making the same assessments on second crop regrowth. Watch for slow green-up, uneven stands, or additional plant mortality. Winter injury and/or death can be delayed by the shock of cutting a weakened plant, resulting in additional stand losses. Whenever stand diminishes to the point of needing corrective measures, take time to determine the cause. Troubleshooting problem fields and identifying the cause of stand reduction can lead to better management decisions.

For a more detailed version of this column, visit University of Minnesota Extension's Crop News website at http://z.umn.edu/d29. For more information on forages, visit www.extension.umn.edu/forages.