If you are feeding livestock, you probably have the corn price blues. Maybe you are submitting song lyrics to country music producers about the high price of corn and the low price of meat. It might get good play on every radio station with feedlots and pork operations in the broadcast signal. But instead of country wails and barnyard blues, take a look at your feed ration and see where changes can be made to ensure survival, and return to profitability.

Extension livestock specialists at South Dakota State University have offered their thoughts to producers whose feed bill is 50 to 70% of their cost of production and the bulk of that is in the form of $4 corn. Many producers have opted to alternative sources of energy for their livestock, and while that is expected, management of the new ration is necessary.

Beef cattle
Brood cows are not going to consume a lot of corn, but corn prices have impacted the feeder calf market. The cow-calf operator is advised to keep costs in check and use good management practices. If that choice switches to barley, sorghum, or distillers’ grain, each feed has to be judged on its cost per unit, whether that is crude protein or total digestible nutrients. The origin of the feed will also determine its cost because of transportation expense. A potential risk management tool is to forward contract your feed so cost increases will be covered. Also consider costs for creep feeding, extending the grazing season, changing the dates of calving and weaning, and look at your marketing options. Compare your expense and revenue for each variable to determine your most profitable course of action

Cattle feeders need a strategy that allows them to replace a portion of corn in the ration and maintain a competitive feed cost of gain. Alternatives might be silage, distillers’ grains, oilseeds, or other cereal grains. But those alternatives will provide less energy and that reduces feed conversion. If silage replaces corn at more than 30% of the dry matter, feed conversion drops about 10%. The ratio needs to drop $10 per ton in cost to have the same feed cost of gain.

In addition to the cost of the feed, look at management issues, such as reducing spoilage or shrink by improving storage facilities, or processing the grain so there is better nutrient utilization that improves profitability. Look at other inefficiencies in your feedlot to minimize loss, such as bunk management, labor, energy used for feed mixing and delivery, and ensure your scales are accurate.

Lactating dairy cows
For dairies, corn will be 30-35% of the total dry matter in the ration, corn from silage is 10-15% and distillers’ grains are 5-15% on a dry matter basis. Silage provides nutrients, but balances the ruminants’ needs as well. Silage will probably always be in the dairy ration despite corn prices. Displacement of corn with distillers’ grains means higher dietary nitrogen content in the ration. If corn grain and corn silage were to be replaced by alfalfa hay and (or) silage and distillers grains, there would be a need to dilute the crude protein with low-nitrogen feeds that otherwise might not be included due to either dietary or economic constraints. With high corn prices, the use of highly digestible forages to replace part of the grain becomes attractive. Whatever the decision, it should be based on feed efficiency measured by pounds of milk producer per pound of dry matter consumed.

Sheep
Corn would commonly be 80% of the ration in a ewe flock and 75% of the corn consumed would be for finishing lambs. Distillers’ grains and soy hulls can be substituted for forage or energy feeds. Your decision to modify the ration, based on economics, should also consider management of health issues, as well as feed storage and handling. Any change in feed ration needs to accommodate production stages of the lambs, ewe productivity, and how much feed is being wasted. Since lambs have the greatest feed efficiency at lower body weights, so match the cost of the last pound gained with the value of the last pound gained when considering feed efficiency of an alternative feed. When feed costs rise, your profit margin is impacted for every pound gained, thus your marketing weight should be calculated by feed efficiency in times of high feed costs. Refine the crude protein in the diet, which allows you to reduce the cost per ton by $10 for each 1% change in dietary crude protein.

Swine
Pork producers spend 70% of their operational costs on feed, but there are ways to manage that in time of high corn prices by using alternative grains, but only if you match the cost with the energy value. Since barley has 95% of the relative feed value of corn, barley will be a lower cost alternative if it is less than 95% of the market value of corn on a pound for pound relationship. The same is true for sorghum at 96% and oats at 90%.

While soybean prices have increased, meal values have not risen as much and since it is your primary source for amino acid evaluate alterative source if meal prices increase further. Those might include distillers’ grains and synthetic lysine. Good management of your swine ration, and the decision to incorporate alternative ingredients, may warrant consultation with a veterinarian or swine nutritionist as well as negotiation with a feed supplier for the best deal.

Consider also feed efficiencies resulting in phase feeding and split sex feeding programs which save feed and money. The optimal feed grind will reduce waste and lighter weight marketing means avoiding costly feed inefficiency at heavier weights. Other management issues to target greater profitability may include feeder adjustment, environmental controls and other feeder related mechanical issues.

Summary:
High corn prices have impacted hundreds of thousands of livestock feeders, challenging their profitability as they compete for a product that is in wide demand. However, you can meet some of the challenge by exploring alternative feeds, carefully calculating energy and protein values for efficient gain, and looking for ways to reduce other operational costs.