It has started: New crop pricing discussions are now going in earnest. In a year of unexpected weather, on-again and off-again tariffs, political uncertainties with international trading partners, and whatever next week’s news might bring, making decisions now about perhaps year-long feed ingredient options is trickier than usual.

Since our beloved dairy cow has as much as half of her diet comprised of forage, each dairy geography probably has a different calculus for this process. To be sure, this is math you can’t do in your head, nor can you calculate cost per unit of protein and be sure you’re making the right choice. Thank goodness dairy cows have requirements for nutrients and not ingredients. This means in most cases that we are not tied to particular ingredients to feed our cows, even if they have worked well in the past.

I hear that corn silage is struggling in the Northeast. I also just visited the High Plains region where they are harvesting feed like crazy due to recent timely rains. Considering your particular forage situation is probably the place to start as new crop prices and contract period options start to come in. Many of these choices revolve around the primary protein ingredient you choose; this is usually soybean meal or canola. Secondly, what by-products might be a fit for you. Among these are distillers, corn gluten feed, soybean hulls, beet pulp, almond hulls, wheat midds, and brewers grains. Both the primary protein decision and the type and amount of higher-fiber by-products chosen are mostly driven from your forage situation, and of course, the cost of the ingredients.

In recent years, those of us feeding cows in the Southwest have gotten pretty good at building lower-forage diets that have actually worked very well. We have learned some key nutrients to watch, and we also keep our shaker box handy. In some of those areas, recent strong wheat silage harvests, abundant summer forages, and a corn silage crop that looks good might change some of the recent tendencies toward lower forage diets. Instead, the folks in the Northeast might be the ones trying to figure out this problem. There was a recent research trial published by Michigan State researchers where the experimental design for the project sounded like my limited Southwest forage formulation reality in the past few years. The point is that our diets are built from a forage base and when that is set, we figure out the rest. This base will determine what you need to buy to build the desired diet. We should note that not forgetting the success with lower forage diets could result in more modest forage levels just to stretch inventories while expecting the next drought.

So how does all of this impact decisions that need to be made on new crop protein and by-product feed options? Think about it like this. If a dairy has abundant high starch corn silage, the economics will push for maximum feed rates and thus less required feed purchases. In this case, the highest concentration of protein and carbohydrates will take up less space in the diet allowing for more corn silage. Thus, soybean meal will likely be a better fit than canola since it is higher in protein and lower in fiber. Likewise, with corn silage aplenty, a distillers product might be preferred over corn gluten or wheat midds since it is higher in protein and lower in fiber.

If forage is limited, now it is time to be creative. I must say as much as I feel the stress of drought and poor forage production results, cracking the nut of how to best feed what we have has been a fun exercise. It is here where we think about digestible fiber, for instance, and less about whether it comes from high neutral detergent fiber digestibility (NDFD) corn silage or soybean hulls. This hemicellulose is critical in making milk, but the cow doesn’t care much if it comes from a soybean hull pellet or a stalk of brown midrib (BMR) corn silage. The less forage you have to work with, the more the higher-fiber by-product choices will need to be studied. And guess what, this may actually decrease feed cost. Working with your ingredient suppliers to find options for these by-products will be the key to success in a low forage reality.

Most of what we have discussed thus far relates to fiber. What about protein and starch? In a corn silage-based diet, the amount of added protein might not change much. So, the consideration of the fiber lost in low forage availability is still paramount. If you have an alfalfa-based diet, and you have lower yields and/or lower protein in the forage, the loss of the alfalfa protein will need to be addressed. Lower protein alfalfa usually comes along with higher fiber that could limit ration inclusion making room for an ingredient like gluten or soybean hulls.

And now for starch. This nutrient risk is significant for a traditional high corn silage diet the year after a poor crop. How do we replace this ever so important nutrient that honestly is the gas that makes the whole thing go? This part is not as easy. For sure, you can’t just increase ground corn when you have limited corn silage. Since corn silage is a combination of digestible forage and high moisture corn, you can almost always build it in a different way. First, decide what is the best way to replace the roughage factor lost. Assume corn silage is 50% grain and 50% stalk. First, replace the lost grain (50% of the total) with ground or even better, high moisture or steam flaked corn. Other carbs like molasses, whey or other highly concentrated carbohydrates can help. Replace around 25% of the lost corn silage feed rate with a true, functional roughage like some combination of wheat hay or silage, wheat straw, or alfalfa hay or haylage. This leaves 25% of the loss of the corn silage feed rate for a good fiber by-product like soybean hulls.

Finding ways to feed more of an abundant forage crop in a good year or finding ways to stretch forage in a season of disappointing yields and/or quality will require careful ration formulation strategies. Use a good formulation model, an experienced nutritionist and have all of the ingredient opportunities priced and ready to compare. Often, in these situations, prices for by-products like gluten, soybean hulls or midds that just seem like “they ought to be cheaper” are actually offered at good values and can be the key to building the same ration but with less forage. Nutrients like uNDF240, physically effective NDF, that is actually measured with a shaker box are keys to success. It is easier to feed cows with abundant forage. It is easier to have higher margins with cheap feed and high milk prices. These things though, in real life, rarely line up together. Finding the best path through whichever challenge faces you this late summer will be the key to maximizing profitability in the next 12 months. Don’t be hard-headed and inflexible by trying too hard to stay in your comfort zone. We have great tools to find the right path. Lean on your advisers and as always, watch the cows. They will tell you how well your plan is working out.

To comment, email your remarks to intel@hoards.com.