U of M Extension News Releases

Scout fields now to stay on top of weed management problems

2012-05-22T15:27:53Z

Media contact: Catherine Dehdashti, U of M Extension, (612) 625-0237, ced@umn.edu

ST. PAUL, Minn. (5/22/2012) —Improved rainfall patterns and an early spring have provided corn and soybean producers with opportunities for planting and the application and activation of soil residual herbicides.

Soil residual herbicides that target your most troublesome weeds provide an excellent start in managing herbicide-resistant weeds by targeting them when they are most vulnerable. They also provide the added benefit of reducing crop yield-loss due to weed competition from delayed postemergence herbicide applications.

"Remember, Minnesota is noted for its diverse weather patterns," said Jeff Gunsolus, an agronomist with University of Minnesota Extension. "Extreme shifts to wet, hot, dry or windy weather patterns can result in untimely postemergence application and poor weed control."

Some weeds will escape control even under ideal rainfall activation conditions. Gunsolus advises checking your fields for such escapes 10 to 14 days after herbicide application. "Weeds that are susceptible to the herbicide can still escape control by emerging from deeper in the soil profile or they may be present at high densities in the soil," he said.

Your next step will be targeting postemergence herbicides to small weeds, ideally weeds 1-3 inches in height and no more than 4 inches tall, to ensure good weed control and limit weed-crop competition.

For all postemergence herbicide applications, use: full rates, high quality adjuvants, and always add ammonium sulfate with glyphosate and Liberty. Due to difficulties in controlling early-emerging common lambsquarters, include additional nonionic surfactant at 0.25 percent volume/volume to all fully loaded glyphosate formulations to improve lambsquarters control.

Use the proper spray volume, based upon the type of herbicide(s) being applied. For example, glyphosate is a translocating herbicide (glyphosate moves within the plant) and should be applied at less than or equal to 10 gallons per acre of spray volume for maximum effectiveness.

Liberty and Flexstar are contact herbicides (they do not move within the plant) and should be applied at greater than 15 gallons per acre of spay volume for maximum effectiveness. If contact herbicides are mixed with translocating herbicides, apply the spray volume for contact herbicides.

Scout your fields for effective control five to 10 days after your postemergence herbicide application. Scouting will allow you to determine if any timely rescue management practices will be necessary.

For those of you discouraged by dry soil conditions that resulted in poor activation of soil residual herbicides, Gunsolus asks you to remember that later rainfall events will activate the herbicide and reduce the likelihood of late-emerging weeds (waterhemp, for example) from emerging and going to seed in the fall.

"Keep in mind that the long-term goal of weed management is to deplete weed seed reserves and to reduce selecting for herbicide-resistance by diversification of weed-control tactics," Gunsolus said. This would include timely rotary hoeing as weeds begin to germinate in the spring and inter-row cultivation of weed escapes.

For more information, visit http://appliedweeds.cfans.umn.edu.

Source: Jeff Gunsolus, Agronomist and Weed Scientist, University of Minnesota Extension

Understanding direct payments on the farm

2012-05-21T17:18:05Z

ST. PAUL, Minn. (5/21/2012) —Direct payments to farmers under the current farm bill have been a small, but stable and important part of farmers' income. These direct payments are cut in the draft farm bill from the Agriculture Committee of the U.S. Senate.

In the last few years, those direct payments have been essentially the only government payments made to farmers on the basis of their crop acreage. Crop prices have been higher than the levels that would create payments under the counter-cyclical and Average Crop Revenue Election (ACRE) programs.

Based on the Minnesota farms in the FINBIN sample at the University of Minnesota, direct payments have been a fairly stable source of income for farmers: a five-year average of $13,044 for all farms in the sample and $17,980 for crop farmers. For all farms, the highest average payment was $13,873 per farm in 2010; the lowest was $12,399 per farm in 2011.

These direct payments have been a small part of gross cash farm income: 2 percent over the past five years for all of these farms and 2.8 percent for crop farmers. However, direct payments have been an important part of net farm income: 8.8 percent for all farms and 9.8 percent for crop farmers. These percentages have declined slightly over the past five years except for 2009 which was a low-income year for farmers. For crop farmers, direct payments as a percentage of net farm income ranged from a low of 7.7 percent in 2011 to a high of 19.1 percent in 2009.

Direct payments are a fixed payment in contrast to counter cyclical payments that vary with price levels, and ACRE payments which vary with price and yield levels. The policy draft from the committee replaces these three payment systems with a new program called Agriculture Risk Coverage (ARC) and expanded insurance subsidies. These proposals will move federal farm support into more of a risk management program with coverage levels moving with changes in yields and market prices over a moving five year time frame.

To view tables illustrating and comparing these programs, click on the link to the (pdf) tables at the end of the article found at http://z.umn.edu/7u8. For more information, visit www.cffm.umn.edu.

Any use of this article must include the byline or following credit line: Kent Olson is an economist with University of Minnesota Extension.

Media Contact: Catherine Dehdashti, U of M Extension, (612) 625-0237, ced@umn.edu

Rural Minnesota lures middle-aged newcomers, U of M study of U.S. Census data shows

2012-05-15T21:21:26Z

Continued research into 'brain gain' shows 30- to 49-year-olds migrating to rural areas

Media contacts: Julie Christensen, U of M Extension (612) 626-4077, jrchris@umn.edu
Joyce Hoelting, U of M Extension (612) 625-8233, jhoeltin@umn.edu

MINNEAPOLIS/ST. PAUL (5/16/2012) —Rural Minnesota continued to attract new residents aged 30 to 49 between 2000 and 2010, according to a new study of U.S. Census data from University of Minnesota Extension.

The news that people are moving into rural areas may seem counterintuitive, especially when headlines and book titles proclaim a "brain drain" and the supposed demise of rural America when 18- to 25-year-olds leave. But, according to Ben Winchester, University of Minnesota Extension rural sociologist and author of the study, the rural in-migration of 30- to 49-year-olds who bring with them educational achievements and established earning power creates a "brain gain" for these rural areas. The notion builds on research he first published in 2009, examining 1990 and 2000 Census data.

"It's the rule that young people move to pursue educational and career goals, not the exception," said Winchester. "Instead of labeling that loss as 'doom and gloom' for rural, I've examined the population trends more deeply. Acknowledging the brain gain allows rural places to focus on their strengths and opportunities, which is the work of any community striving for a brighter future."

In the new report, "Continuing the Trend: The Brain Gain of the Newcomers," Winchester updates Minnesota's population shifts as captured by the 2010 Census and provides an examination of the trend at the national level.

One new finding reveals that Greater Minnesota's micropolitan counties, or those with core urban populations of 10,000 to 49,999, are taking on metropolitan profiles—with middle-aged Minnesotans leaving for less densely-populated areas. The pattern is most prevalent in the southwest part of the state, around cities such as Willmar (Kandiyohi County), Marshall (Lyon County) and Mankato (Blue Earth County), according to Winchester.

The new study also shows that a brain gain has continued in the 30-49 age group across the rural Midwest, but at a slower pace than was found from 1990 to 2000. External forces such as housing debt and the Great Recession slowed overall migration rates, according to Winchester. The Brookings Institution reports that in 2007-2008, the U. S. migration rate was found to be the lowest since World War II.

Recent Extension research on 30- to 49-year-olds shows they are choosing rural areas for a higher quality of life, specifically citing a slower pace, the low cost of housing, and safety and security. A study of 99 newcomer households in west central Minnesota showed that the average newcomer household contributed $92,000 in economic activity to the region in 2009 and 2010.

"In rural areas, little changes make a big difference," Winchester said. "And these numbers certainly change the story."

To access the study (in PDF format), visit www.extension.umn.edu/go/1107. To learn more about the brain gain in rural Minnesota, visit www.extension.umn.edu/community/brain-gain.

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.

U research guides growers on cover crop selection, planting date

2012-05-14T14:37:53Z

ST. PAUL, Minn. (5/14/2012) —Cover crops are any green crops grown between cash crops. They come in many different varieties, but until recently little information was available to help growers decide which varieties to select and exactly when to plant them.

Common uses of cover crops include reduction of soil erosion, weed prevention, nutrient scavenging and alleviation of soil compaction. They are most easily used after small grains, canning crops, and silage, but can also be used in the corn-soybean rotation.

The difficult growing conditions of 2011 provided a unique circumstance for collecting cover crop data. Researchers and educators from University of Minnesota Extension, University of Minnesota Southwest Research and Outreach Center, and Albert Lea Seed House partnered with North Central Region Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (NCR-SARE) on the establishment of cover crop plots to be used for education and outreach.

The cover crop plots were established in areas that were too wet for spring 2011 planting; conditions were similar to those for prevented-plant acres. The year's weather extremes allowed us to study the agronomics of cover crops under both wet and dry conditions.

Cover crops included: tillage radish, oats, field pea, winter rye, sudangrass, sorghum-sudangrass, pearl millet, cowpeas, tillage radish-oats-field pea mixture, oats-cowpea mixture, oats-berseem clover mixture, and oats-crimson clover mixture. Site conditions included: after corn with standing water that prevented planting, after alfalfa with soil too wet to plant, and after oat harvest. Two planting dates were used: Aug. 17 and Sept. 9, 2011. Plant cuttings were taken Oct. 27, 2011.

Data showed that under the 2011 growing conditions in Lamberton, Minn., cover crops had the most above-ground growth when planted in mid-August with the previous cash crop of field corn, except in the tillage radish. No single cover crop species consistently had the most above-ground plant matter for each planting date or site.

The top plant-matter producer was the oats-cowpea mixture planted Aug. 17 with the previous cash crop of corn (4,539 pounds dry plant matter per acre). The lowest plant-matter producer under all plot conditions was the cowpeas (zero pounds dry plant matter per acre). No samples were taken from the plots planted in the 2011 oat field. Conditions were too dry for growth.

University of Minnesota researchers and Extension educators contributed to a cover crop decision tool that can be found at the Midwest Cover Crops Council website: http://mcccdev.anr.msu.edu. To join the Minnesota Cover Crop Listserv, email me at sacke032@umn.edu.

Any use of this article must include the byline or following credit line: Jill Sackett is a conservation agronomist with University of Minnesota Extension and Rural Advantage.
Media Contact: Catherine Dehdashti, U of M Extension, (612) 625-0237, ced@umn.edu

Healthy baitfish support Minnesota's $4.8 billion sport fishing industry

2012-05-09T14:25:24Z

Media contact: Catherine Dehdashti, U of M Extension, (612) 625-0237, ced@umn.edu;

ST. PAUL, Minn. (5/9/2012) —Many of the 1.4 million Minnesotans who hold fishing licenses might not realize how much fishing takes place before the state's May 12, 2012, opener.

All spring, Minnesota's baitfish farmers have been busy raising and harvesting hundreds of thousands of minnows, a popular baitfish used to catch walleyes, northern pike and muskies. Keeping minnows healthy is crucial to the Minnesota's $4.8 billion sport fishing industry, due to their ability to spread diseases. Mounting pressures like disease and aquatic invasive species are threatening and changing the state's aquaculture and baitfish industries.

"Baitfish culture, combined with wild baitfish harvest, has made Minnesota's baitfish industry the second largest in the nation," said Nick Phelps, a University of Minnesota Extension aquaculture specialist who conducts research on Minnesota's baitfish industry—including new production methods and biosecurity plans—to help protect the state's sports fishing and fish farming industries.

"This is important to maintain because all fish used for bait in Minnesota must be raised or harvested in Minnesota," said Phelps. "Importing live fish for use as bait has been prohibited here since the 1960s." Originally the baitfish ban was intended to protect the industry in Minnesota, but it was kept in place to prevent the spread of invasive species and disease.

Phelps works with baitfish and other fish farmers in the state to teach them how to keep their ponds and facilities disease-free. Producers have faced higher standards for training and inspections due to increased threats, but Phelps says they all see the value in ensuring sustainable natural resources. Phelps also reaches out to educate anglers about how they can make sure their actions don't accidentally cause the spread of invasive species and diseases, like viral hemorrhagic septicemia. Early detection would be a key to preventing further spread.

"We're in a better position now than we were five years ago," said Phelps. "Increased cooperation among the university, DNR, and the fishing and fish farming industries have paid off."

There is a lot to celebrate with each fishing opener. Phelps says taking a break to fish his favorite lake helps remind him why his work matters. "The industry is working hard," he said. "Risks exist, but there are safe ways to keep enjoying the sport of fishing as well as the food, tourism and business that fish bring to our state."

For more information on how U of M Extension works to help protect Minnesota's aquaculture, visit www1.extension.umn.edu/food/small-farms/livestock/fish/.

Source: Nick Phelps, Aquaculture Specialist, University of Minnesota Extension

U of M Extension examines production costs, profitability connection

2012-05-07T13:54:02Z

ST. PAUL, Minn. (5/7/2012) —University of Minnesota Extension economists and educators have been researching the question of which costs have the largest impact on farm profits. A significant difference in profitability exists among farmers. A few categories of production costs, also known as inputs, vary significantly across levels of profitability.

The farm profitability levels can be broken into five groups (bottom 20 percent, 20-40 percent, 40-60 percent, 60-80 percent and the top 20 percent profitability by crop). The 2011 numbers were just made available through a farm income analysis carried out in partnership between Minnesota State Colleges and Universities (MnSCU) and the University of Minnesota.

The cost of production varies by group, starting at $5.36 per bushel of corn produced in 2011 in the bottom group, declining to $4.63 for the 20-40 percent group, $4.30 for the 40-60 percent group, $3.91 for the 60-80 percent group and $3.45 per bushel for the most profitable group. There is a significant difference of $1.91 per bushel in cost of production between the top and bottom groups in profits.

The most significant impact on this cost of production is the yield per acre produced, which ranged from 139 bushels per acre in bottom tier to 177 bushels per acre in the top group, a difference of 38 bushels per acre.

One of the top five costs was seed, varying slightly among groups from $102 to $105 per acre. Fertilizer is the second-highest cost and the bottom three tiers had similar costs at $154, $152 and $151, while the top 20 percent spent $118 per acre.

The highest cost was rent, which varied, but not significantly among groups.

Overall direct expenses varied significantly with the low group's cost at $625, declining incrementally in each group with the top 20 percent spending $533 per acre, or $92 per acre less. Total expenses also varied significantly with the low group at $745 and the top group at $611, a difference of $134 per acre. After accounting for direct expense variation of $92 per acre, overhead expenses varied by an additional $42 per acre. Other top expenses were repairs, fuel and oil in direct costs, and depreciation in overhead costs. Soybeans had similar results, except for fertilizer.

The quality of land might be one factor resulting in better yields. Some farms may utilize manure, lowering their fertilizer costs.

Net return to labor and management income started at $63, increasing quite dramatically in each group until reaching $509 for the top 20 percent. The top 20 percent farmers are managing much higher net returns to labor and management by $446 per acre over the bottom 20 percent.

To be profitable, you must be the best at managing cost without hurting yields. Farmers can use University's Center for Farm Financial Management FINBIN website at www.finbin.umn.edu to examine costs in any area of the state.

Any use of this article must include the byline or following credit line: David Bau is an agricultural business management educator with University of Minnesota Extension.

Media Contact: Catherine Dehdashti, U of M Extension, (612) 625-0237, ced@umn.edu

Minnesota museums contribute $674 million in economic impact, U study finds

2012-05-02T13:41:52Z

May marks Minnesota Museums Month, the country's first monthlong, statewide celebration of museums

Media contact: Julie Christensen, U of M Extension, (612) 626-4077, reuve007@umn.edu

MINNEAPOLIS/ST. PAUL, Minn. (5/2/2012) —Museums preserve our heritage, inspire artists, entertain and educate children, conserve the natural world and capture scientific advancements. But what kind of economic value do they bring to Minnesota?

The state's documented 562 museums provided an economic impact of $674 million in 2011, according to a new study by University of Minnesota Extension community economics researchers. This included $250 million in wages paid to an estimated 5,300 employees, and $157 million in capital improvements.

Museum tourists also generated $53 million in economic activity last year, and direct spending by museums had ripple effects across the state's construction, restaurant, health care and real estate industries.

This economic boon is yet another reason May is heralded as Minnesota Museums Month, the first monthlong, statewide celebration of museums in the nation.

"This study documents not only the economic value of museums in Minnesota, but reinforces the vital role museums play in our civic lives--bringing tourists into our communities and enriching our volunteer opportunities," said Brigid Tuck, Extension community economics educator and a lead researcher on the study.

The study by Extension's economic impact analysis team, conducted in partnership with the Minnesota Association of Museums and University of Minnesota Tourism Center, surveyed Minnesota's museums, collecting information about their operations, expenditures and visitors. The response rate was 43 percent.

Minnesota's tourism industry also benefited from museums, the study found. An estimated 1.7 million people visited museums outside of their home regions in 2011, spending an average of $24.35 each.

"Museums play an important role in the tourism attraction mix for a community and our state's $11 billion dollar tourism industry," said Ingrid Schneider, director of the University of Minnesota Tourism Center and professor in the Department of Forest Resources. "This groundbreaking research for Minnesota is the first step to understand the cumulative impact of museums in our lives, economically and beyond."

The economic impact of museums in Minnesota has never been measured before, according to Tuck. Each of the state's 87 counties is home to at least one museum.

For more information on Extension's economic impact analysis program, visit www.extension.umn.edu/economicimpact. To access the study, visit z.umn.edu/7km.

The University of Minnesota Tourism Center is a collaboration of the College of Food, Agricultural and Natural Resource Sciences and University of Minnesota Extension.

Check fields for alfalfa weevil populations

2012-04-30T15:28:55Z

ST. PAUL, Minn. (4/30/2012) —A mild winter and early spring has sparked speculation on what may happen with different insects, such as alfalfa weevil, around the region. Alfalfa weevil is one of Minnesota's early-season insect pests. It can reduce hay yields.

This single-generation per year insect normally affects alfalfa around the timing of the first cut for hay, although the actual timing varies from year to year as influenced by temperatures.

Daily temperatures are recognized as playing a significant role in how fast insects develop. Scientists have developed models for insects capable of causing large-scale economic losses. The models are referred to as degree day (DD) models. They use the daily average temperature and the experimentally determined lower developmental threshold temperature.

This knowledge is used to estimate the rate of physiological development and to forecast egg hatch and other biological events. They tend to be more accurate in predicting biological events than calendar dates, though not always.

An alfalfa weevil predictive model has been available for many years. University of Wisconsin Extension summarizes the model at www.soils.wisc.edu/uwex_agwx/thermal_models/alfalfa.

Alfalfa farmers who become familiar with the model will gain insight about when weevils, particularly the larvae, are most likely to be feeding. The goal of these models is to alert the crop manager to the need for timely field checks and to avoid missing an infestation.

Field observations from southern Minnesota indicate that the overwintering adult weevils began moving into alfalfa fields the week of April 15. The adults are there to feed and females to lay eggs in stems. The models would suggest that early larval hatch is underway and checking fields to determine population levels would be wise.

These early checks can provide an indication as to whether infestations at the field level are significant enough to warrant early cutting or insecticide treatments. Early cutting to avoid foliage loss is preferable when timing permits so beneficial insects that naturally suppress weevils are conserved.

As crop managers monitor alfalfa and weevil development, remember that warmer temperatures will accelerate development; cooler temperatures will slow it down. Moisture stress may also interact in the plant-insect relationship. If plants are not actively growing due to stress, the feeding injury can be significantly increased.

Using as many of the available tools as possible will help crop managers better understand the timing of biological events in the fields and lead to better management decisions.

More educational information for on forage crops can be found at www.extension.umn.edu/forages.

Any use of this article must include the byline or following credit line: Phillip Glogoza is a crops educator with University of Minnesota Extension.

Media Contact: Catherine Dehdashti, U of M Extension, (612) 625-0237, ced@umn.edu

Handle treated soybeans with care to avoid costly contamination

2012-04-23T14:37:25Z

ST. PAUL, Minn. (4/23/2012) —Approximately 70 percent of the seed soybeans planted this year in Minnesota will be treated with fungicides. This is a dramatic change from 10 years ago when most farmers planted untreated soybeans. This change requires increased care to keep seed soybeans separate from harvested soybeans headed to market.

Federal law provides a zero tolerance for treated soybeans at market. That means that a single treated seed can contaminate a truck, bin or silo. Your elevator can hold you legally responsible for the contamination because of a problem that started with one treated soybean.

University of Minnesota Extension recommends that growers take these steps to avoid mistakes that can take place during the rush of planting:

Make sure nobody on your farm dumps leftover soybean seed into a storage bin.
Do not use the same equipment to transport treated seed and soybeans sold for grain.
Clean all equipment that comes in contact with treated seed.
Manage treated seed before and after planting to reduce the potential for problems.
Buy only the seed you need to minimize dealing with leftover treated soybeans.
Work with your seed supplier to develop a plan to dispose of any leftover treated seed.

A Chinese buyer could reject a ship loaded with millions of dollars of soybeans because of contamination that may have started on your farm. One out of every four rows of soybeans grown in the U.S. are exported to China. Mixing treated and untreated soybeans can cause a trail of contamination stretching from your farm through domestic elevators and ending with a rejected shipment and a damaged reputation for soybeans grown in the U.S.

In addition to avoiding costly penalties because of soybean contamination, handling treated soybeans with care is the right thing to do. Fungicides have a place in seed beds, but not on a dinner plate, which is why it's important to keep treated seed soybeans separate from your soybean harvest.

Take time this spring to pay attention to farm safety, both your personal safety and the safety of the crops that you grow. For more information for soybean growers, visit www.extension.umn.edu/soybean.

Any use of this article must include the byline or following credit line: Seth Naeve is a soybean agronomist with University of Minnesota Extension.
Media Contact: Catherine Dehdashti, U of M Extension, (612) 625-0237, ced@umn.edu

Naturalize your shoreline

2012-04-19T15:53:36Z

Media contact: Catherine Dehdashti, U of M Extension, (612) 625-0237, ced@umn.edu

ST. PAUL, Minn. (4/19/2012) —A natural shoreline is a healthy shoreline, benefiting the water quality of lakes and streams, the surrounding wildlife, and the people who live on or near your lakeshore property.

"If your property hasn't been developed yet, you can plan ahead to leave it in its natural state," says Karen Terry, a water quality educator with University of Minnesota Extension. But what if your property is already developed?

If you have developed property with little or no natural shoreline, Terry recommends that you follow these steps:

Make a sketch of your property, including buildings, decks or patios, lawn, trees, paths, dock, and swim area. Think of how you use the land now and how you'd like to use it in the future. Would it make sense to relocate your dock or reduce the size of your beach? Draw in the area you'd like to naturalize; aim to naturalize at least one-half of your shoreline frontage.
Identify the three shoreland zones within your proposed naturalization area: the aquatic, which is all under water; the wet meadow, which may be seasonally flooded or near the water table; and the upland zone, which is rarely flooded.
Prepare the site. If you have invasive plants, such as purple loosestrife or reed canarygrass, you may need the advice of a natural resource professional to help you get rid of them. You may also need to move a dock, realign a path, or grade slopes. If you expose or move soil near your shoreline, be sure to secure required permits and take action to prevent erosion and transport of soil to the water.
Finally, get native plants established. There are two ways of doing this:

Do nothing. If you stop mowing, weeding, or raking your shoreland area, many native plants will likely reestablish. If your property has mucky or silty soil along the shoreline, seeds from plants that lived there in the past may still exist in the bottom sediments. Plants such as spike rush, sedges, and arrowhead have grown on some shorelines that were not planted, simply because people stopped cutting and raking.
Plant your shoreline. To speed the process or feature particular plants, plant seedlings. Select appropriate plants, native to your area, for each of your shoreland zones.

More information for lake home owners—including septic system management, rain gardens, woodland and wildlife management, and more—is available on Extension's Shoreland website, and in Extension's Lake Home and Cabin Kit.

More day-tripping, fewer vacation days for families managing four-day school weeks, study says

2012-04-16T15:08:13Z

Media contact: Catherine Dehdashti, U of M Extension, (612) 625-0237, ced@umn.edu;

ST. PAUL, Minn. (4/16/2012) —As of 2012, 13 Minnesota school districts have implemented a change to a four-day week. More districts are considering the switch. A study funded by the University of Minnesota Tourism Center's Carlson Chair for Travel, Tourism and Hospitality sought to help the tourism industry understand the implications of this change, so that businesses can better adapt.

It's reasonable to expect that the four-day school week is here to stay, at least for some districts. Under the new schedule, students attend school for a few more hours four days each week and get one additional day off. Summer vacation schedules remain the same as those in other districts.

For families, this means more three-day weekends. But what does this mean for Minnesota's fun spots, hotels and the entire tourism industry?

"We wanted to get beyond guess work and assumptions," said Elton Mykerezi of the University of Minnesota's Department of Applied Economics, principal investigator for the study. "We wanted to find out what was really happening with family's travel patterns—how they change when kids' schedules change."

The results are a mixed bag, with both good and bad news for the tourism industry. The good news? The four-day school schedule caused sizable increases in "day trips" —trips that are at least 50 miles away from home but require no overnight stay. The number and nature of weekend trips stayed the same. But parents reported significantly fewer trips of five days or more. In fact, one in three families took one fewer long trip over a two-year period. This resulted in fewer nights spent in hotels, and lower overall expenditures. Among households that traveled at least once, one in five took one fewer trip (a 49-percent change from the sample).

The study surveyed parents from four school districts with four-day schedules and five districts with traditional school weeks. The five-day districts chosen were contemplating four-day schedules. The survey collected information about travel patterns before and after the change, comparing those to the same time period in districts that hadn't changed to a four-day week.

This study did not address other school-year scheduling proposals or practices.

Parents were asked to describe the type of travel, the destination, the frequency of travel, the number of overnight stays, the number of travelers and expenditures during trips. Care was taken to control for other factors, such as household or economic circumstances.

"The tourism industry must constantly adapt to the changing circumstances of travelers," said Ingrid Schneider, Director of the University of Minnesota Tourism Center. "As schools and our Department of Education adapt to new circumstances, there will be ripple effects. We wanted to shed some light on those changes, in order to help the industry plan their marketing, staffing and development."

The University of Minnesota Tourism Center is a collaboration of University of Minnesota Extension and the College of Food, Agricultural and Natural Resource Sciences. For more information on the Tourism Center, visit www.tourism.umn.edu.

Plan for possibility of forage shortage for cows

2012-04-16T14:32:19Z

ST. PAUL, Minn. (4/16/2012) —Will the April showers bring May forage? As the moisture deficit continues across much of Minnesota, University of Minnesota Extension educators are hearing the question: What if the drought pattern continues?

On top of that is another question: Has the frost set the alfalfa back? As cattle producers, both beef and dairy, consider that possibility, Extension has been recommending steps to prepare for forage and pasture shortages. This becomes as much of a risk assessment as it does a planning session. We already have high feed costs. What is your capital reserve situation?

This is an excellent time to do an accurate inventory of all forage on hand and categorize it by quality and future use. Every year, forage quality is critical to profitability and it has to be a priority. Get your own Predictive Equations of Alfalfa Quality (PEAQ) stick, if you don't have one already, so you know when you need to cut. If you are doing any grazing, are you set up for rotational grazing management?

If you need to stretch your hay supply by feeding less per cow each day, what will you use to replace the hay?

Increasing corn silage in the diet is one alternative in Minnesota and might be a strategy to consider. Current supply, carryover amounts and acres available for planting need to be considered. Is there an older or poorer stand of hay that you could double-crop corn for silage after taking the first crop off?

Other alternatives may be some summer annual crops to stretch supply like BMR sorghum/sudan grass, small grains or small grains mixed with peas.

One final consideration will be the price of milk, the price of feed and the price of cull cows. It appears we are moving to lower milk prices for 2012. Producers need to take a critical look at marginal cows that may need to be culled. Do you have enough heifers? You may need to consider heifer diets first and possibly sell excess animals.

For more information about livestock feed requirements for dairy and beef cows, visit the Extension website at www.extension.umn.edu/dairy and www.extension.umn.edu/beef.

Any use of this article must include the byline or following credit line: Jim Paulson is a dairy educator with University of Minnesota Extension.

Media Contact: Catherine Dehdashti, U of M Extension, (612) 625-0237, ced@umn.edu

Research leads to tool for managing reduced-oil animal feed products

2012-04-09T16:34:29Z

ST. PAUL, Minn. (4/9/2012) —Currently, there are 207 ethanol production facilities in the U.S. which produce over 36 million metric tons of wet and dried distillers grains, which has become a popular, economical partial replacement for corn and soybean meal in animal feeds.

Dried distiller's grains with solubles (DDGS) is the predominant ethanol co-product fed to swine, and its energy value is about equal to corn even though most of the starch is removed to produce ethanol.

This is due to the fact that all other nutrients, including corn oil, remaining in the co-product after ethanol distillation, are concentrated by a factor of three. Corn oil has a much higher (about 2.25 times) energy value compared to starch, and is the main reason why DDGS is considered such a valuable energy ingredient in swine feeds.

However, due to the high price of crude corn oil and the relatively low capital investment required by ethanol plants to install centrifuges to extract some of the corn oil prior to making DDGS, the profitability and return on investment of oil extraction from the ethanol co-product stream is high.

As more of the industry extracts more oil before making DDGS, reduced-oil DDGS has created a lot of anxiety in the feed, livestock, and poultry industries because some of the energy value of DDGS has been taken away. The question is: "How much?" Up until recently, no one knew the answer to this question.

I'm a University of Minnesota Extension animal nutritionist. Anticipating this change in DDGS composition, I teamed up with Brian Kerr, USDA-ARS in Ames, Iowa to determine the impact of oil extraction on energy content for pigs using 11 different DDGS sources. The project was funded by the Minnesota Corn Research and Promotion Council and USDA. Cenex Harvest States assisted in providing DDGS samples for the project.

Here's a summary of what we have learned: The change in oil content of DDGS had much less of an effect on energy value than the change in fiber content. This was initially surprising because of the high amount of calories in corn oil compared to the calorie concentration in corn fiber. In fact, many people were expecting a simple answer, such as "removing 1 percentage unit of corn oil reduces energy value by x-number of calories." This relationship does not hold true because of the variable concentrations of other nutritional components that either contribute to increased energy or reduce the energy value.

By conducting this research, Kerr and I have developed accurate energy prediction equations to give nutritionists, pork producers and DDGS marketers to tools needed to determine changes in energy value of any source of DDGS, and negotiate price based on changes in energy value.

For more information, visit www.ddgs.umn.edu.

Any use of this article must include the byline or following credit line: Jerry Shurson is an animal nutritionist with University of Minnesota Extension.

Media Contact: Catherine Dehdashti, U of M Extension, (612) 625-0237, ced@umn.edu

Interest in farm to school builds as documentary is shown across Minnesota

2012-04-09T13:59:25Z

Media contacts: Andrea Cournoyer,andrea@plaindepth.com; Catherine Dehdashti, U of M Extension, (612) 625-0237, ced@umn.edu;

Media Note: Media members interested in attending the events RSVP to Andrea Cournoyer, (651) 343-8220, andrea@plaindepth.com

ST. PAUL, Minn. (4/9/2012) —A new documentary titled "Farm to School: Growing Our Future" showcases Minnesota success stories, as well as challenges that stunt the growth of farm to school. The documentary is sparking new conversations about growing farm to school partnerships. People who attended screenings last week described it as an important educational tool, and are helping to boost attendance at future screenings across Minnesota this spring.

Farm to school connects schools with nearby farmers so that schools can buy fresh fruits, vegetables and other foods directly from local farmers. Such initiatives have been shown to increase young people's consumption of fresh produce while also boosting local economies. During the last four years, these types of partnerships have increased more than 10-fold, but some fear that obstacles are making it difficult to expand these partnerships to new communities.

The 30-minute television documentary was produced as a partnership among University of Minnesota Extension, the Minnesota Department of Health and Twin Cities Public Television (TPT), with funding from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Interested members of the public are invited to attend one of the 10 additional regional screenings and discussions scheduled around Minnesota this spring in:

Bemidji, Minn., April 10
Fargo, N.D., April 12
Baudette, Minn., April 18
Thief River Falls, Minn., April 18
Fergus Falls, Minn., April 18
Waite Park, Minn., April 23
Olivia, Minn., April 24
St. Paul, Minn., April 25
Duluth, Minn., May 1
Minnetonka, Minn., May 14
Waseca, Minn., May 24

Registration is required. Details and online registration are available at www.extension.umn.edu/go/1103.

The documentary project and scheduled screenings are part of a statewide effort to expand farm to school partnerships. Those who are unable to attend the scheduled screenings may order a DVD copy of the documentary from Extension and organize smaller screening in their communities. The documentary is available for less than $10 and comes with printed resources to assist in facilitating discussions and getting more involved with farm to school.

For more information, to order a copy of the documentary, and for a complete list of regional screenings, visit www.extension.umn.edu/farm-to-school.

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.

Managing nitrogen in corn this spring

2012-04-02T14:23:55Z

ST. PAUL, Minn. (4/2/2012) —This unseasonably balmy weather has allowed for earlier field work to begin. How does this, coupled with an extremely dry fall, affect your nitrogen management program for corn?

If you applied nitrogen last fall
Field conditions were less than optimum for nitrogen application last fall. The dry soil conditions made it difficult for fall anhydrous ammonia application and the incorporation of urea. At this time, we would not expect a large amount of conversion of ammonium to nitrate within the soil if the fall applications were done according to nitrogen best management practices.

Soil sampling for soil nitrate-nitrogen at this time is unreliable and will likely not give an accurate picture of what is still contained within the soil.

If you made fall nitrogen applications and are concerned about how much nitrogen is left, our recommendation at this point is to wait until late May to early June, then use the supplemental nitrogen decision tool found at www.extension.umn.edu/go/1102 (pdf) to determine if a side-dress application is necessary.

If you did not apply nitrogen last fall

For sandy soils, you should not consider early application. The best practice for sandy soils is to apply nitrogen as part of the starter and a side-dress application.
For heavier textured soils, you may want to consider using a soil test for nitrate this spring to determine the suggested nitrogen application rate. Since we had a dry fall and winter, there is a good chance that there is a significant amount of soil nitrate left that the corn crop could use. This is particularly true if the previous crop was corn or small grains.

Soil conditions do appear to be ideal for application, but there is risk associated with application this early in the season. Nitrogen loss can occur with heavy rainfall events in April or May. The majority of the crop uptake occurs after the V5 growth stage, or when the plant is about a foot tall. Having most of the nitrogen in nitrate form when the plant is not actively growing does present some risk of loss.

The weather is warm now, but it is hard to tell what may occur a month or more later.

You can find details on soil nitrate testing, calculating supplemental nitrogen, and nitrogen application on the University of Minnesota Extension website at www.extension.umn.edu/nutrient-management/nitrogen-management.

Any use of this article must include the byline or following credit line:
Daniel Kaiser and John Lamb are soil fertility specialists with University of Minnesota Extension.

Media Contact: Catherine Dehdashti, U of M Extension, (612) 625-0237, ced@umn.edu