!8-Lancaster Farming, Saturday, September 15,2001 k2l Penn State Cooperative Extension Capitol Region Dairy Team TRADING CORN SILAGE Traditionally, farmers traded corn as dry shelled or dry ear and priced it by the bushel, either 56 or 70 pounds. This is simple when the commodities are in these stable and uniform forms. But in the Capitol Region of Pennsylvania, now more than half of all corn acres are harvest ed as corn silage and high-mois ture grain. This creates some pricing challenges. Some Questions To Be Answered • How do growers and feeders arrive at a price which is fair? If there were an auction where will ing buyers could meet willing sellers of silage and high mois ture com, then that market could establish a “going price” at that location. But these commodities are unstable and subject to rapid spoilage, so they cannot practi cally be run through an auction. This characteristic reduces the market options and value for com in these forms. Then there is the transport cost of all that water. Also, there is no standard or required moisture content for these products, so they need to be reduced to a dry matter (DM) basis and traded accordingly. But there is also an ideal moisture range outside of which feed qual ity suffers. The “market price” for dry shelled corn should be an impor tant component of any silage pricing calculations. But which “corn price” to use can also be debated. Should it be the local mill price on the day of harvest or should it be the contract price for grain delivery to the mill in November or December? Then this raises the question of how the added value of cob and/or stem in the product will be valued? Also, how will price be adjusted for draughted silage or long stem, low-energy silage? • How is quantity to be mea sured? Weighing an occasional wagonload and doing one mois ture test can be very misleading when applied to the entire har vest. Using reliable dry matter capacity tables for silo or bag storages are usually more accu rate over the normal ranges in moisture. • How are adjustments to value to be computed? If the buyer pays for harvest and deliv ery to storage, how much less should the grower get than if grower harvests and delivers? " LANCASTER FARMING SCHEDULES FAMILY FARM SEMINAR With holidays approaching, families can take time to discuss farm transition and marketing. Lancaster Farming will provide a forum to begin those types of discussion with our “Family Farm Survival Seminar; Management and Marketing,” Tuesday, Nov. 13, at the Farm and Home Center in Lancaster. Watch the paper for details, including schedule of events. m ■■ Roland P. Freund Cora Silage Spreadsheet We can do the complex calcu lations to answer many of these questions quickly using a spread sheet to arrive at values for com silage. To illustrate, here are some expected figures for 2001 based upon the following input assumptions: Shelled Com yield (Bu./ac.) Com Silage yield (Tons / acre) Com Silage Moisture % Com Silage NEL Shelled com harv. cont. $/Bu Grass hay price / Ton Field to Grain Mill - miles Field to Silage Silo - miles Grower harvests and delivers Normal Silage Grower’s viewpoint. After har vesting, hauling, and drying the shelled, the corn grower could be left with $2ll per acre. But his si lage harvest and hauling costs, plus his stover losses, add up to $l2O an acre. To break even with shelled com, the grower needs $331 per acre or $16.57 per ton of 35 percent DM com silage. Buyer’s viewpoint. It would cost the buyer $6OB for ear com and hay to furnish the feed equiv alents from one acre of com si lage. But buyer has ensiling costs and losses estimated at $B3 which makes an acre of the delivered si lage worth $525. This calculates to $26.26 per ton for the 35 per cent DM of silage. Buyers need to realize that if this material were 30 percent DM (70 percent mois ture), the value would be $22.51, while at 40 percent DM it would be worth $3O. Price negotiation. In this case, the parties have a range between $16.57 and $26.26. This suggests that a price of $2l per ton green delivered 35 percent DM silage would be a good deal for both. If the buyer absorbs the cost of har vesting and hauling, he/she should get it for $4 per ton less or $l7 in this example. Draughted Silage In a droughty situation, the field might return $l6 per acre for shelled com after costs. To break even on com silage, the grower should get $7B per acre or $ll.ll per ton. However, the buyer gets silage which has only 77 percent of normal feed value. This is based on NEL and DM according to the latest Penn State adjustment tables. After ensiling costs and losses, this calculates to a maximum price for the buyer of $24.23 for 58 percent moisture silage. The range for negotiation is now wider. The supply and demand for such silage will determine what the price will be. If buyers have the option to buy good si lage, they should do so. Other wise seek to get draughted silage for $l4 rather than $24. Normal Droughted 120 0.74 $2.20 $BO Yes Need Help With Calculations? If you would like to have a spe cific situation computed, please call your extension agent. For a copy of this simple Excel spread sheet, visit http:// capitaldairy.cas.psu.edu. Corn Silage Whole-Plant Dry Down Rates* Tim Beck, Capital Region Dairy Program Coordinator Com silage harvest proceeds at a rapid rate throughout the region as com dries down quickly. Even the later planted com tested has progressed past desirable moisture levels for bunker silos. Sugar levels in the well-eared, later planted com are in the expected range of 8%—30% for com. Sugar levels vary with the dry matter content of the com and are considered sufficient above 4% of DM when the com is 60% moisture. Wetter com would be expected to have higher soluble sugar content. The early planted samples are low in sugar content based on this guideline, while the later planted com shows desirable sugar content. Low sugar content could result in incomplete fermentation due to poor microbial growth or sugars may be depleted by bacterial growth during fermentation, resulting in low energy silage with reduced feeding value. We’ll continue to monitor sugar levels for the planting dates over the coming weeks. Whole Sugar Predicted Days Moisture Kernel Plant as % Plant to Harvest 0 Test Milk Moist of Firing Bunker Tower Date Line % DM % b Silo J Silo e 110-day corn planted May 1. Well eared and good ear fill: Aug 14 1/4 I 73 3 I I 33 I 5 I 13 Aug 21 1/3 69 5 3 9 33 -1 7 Aug 28 1/2 63 8 40 -10 -2 Sep 4 . 2/3 64 5 2.9 50 -8 0 Sep 11 7/8 38 3 90 Too dry Too dry Same hybrid and field, but droughty, small ears, 75% ear fill: Aug 14 1/4 72.8 I I 50 I 4 I 12 Aug 21 1/4 69 3 4.3 50 -1 7 Aug 28 1/3 65.0 60 -8 0 Sep 4 1/2 59 5 3.6 50 Too dry -8 Sep 11 3/4 37.8 95 Too dry Too dry Same hybrid planted May 25. Well eared and good ear fill: Aug 28 None 76 0 9 17 Sep 4 None 76 8.1 0 9 17 Sep 11 1/4 68 10 -3 5 Footnotes: a-Conducted at the Penn State Field Research Farm at Landisville. b-Percent of stalk fired from the ground upward. c-Based on 0.65 drop in % moisture d-Based on a target moisture of 70% for blinker silos’atliarvest time, e-Based on a target moisture of 65% for tower silos at harvest time. Conservation Districts Host ‘Ag Days’ 58.0 HARRISBURG (Dauphin recent decision by the Supreme Co.) In an effort to educate Court of Pennsylvania in June municipal officials about the 2001: Kneeler v. Township of ever-changing face of agriculture, Hellam, determining that a town conservation districts in Pennsyl- ship had no actual or incidental vania have hosted “Ag Days” for power to impose a moratorium municipal officials and (heir fam- on building approvals. This par ilies. The free program included a ticular decision could affect family dinner and children’s ac- townships considering moratori tivities. . urns on large-scale agriculture. The Chester County Conserva- At the Chester County pro tion District hosted 100 township grani) Mat thew Hickey, with the officials and their families at the Chester County Economic Devel- Brandywme Valley Association opment Coundl ke about the Mynck Environmental Center on chan of agriculture Aug. 21, and the Berta County while fanns attempt t 0 stay pros . program took place at Blue Falls and Kevin Baer> speaking Grove, Aug. il. for the County Agricultural Pr es . Bntided Agricultural Growth ervation Board addressed the In the New MiUenmum - A ro i e of the municipal agriculture Fresh Look At the Changing secu rity area advisory committee. Famdy Farm and How it Affects The concluded with a panel the Local Municipality, the pro- ,™ . . .. . .. , t gram offered tods to township of offi^' als the ro eof officials to deal with agriculture agriculture m their communities. in their communities. At the Berks Count y Program, At the Ag Day programs. Dr. Donak * Reinert ;. " utrient man ; ChristineKellett, professor of law specialist, encouraged at Penn State Dickinson Agricul- townships to work with the con tural Law Research and Educa- servation district on agncultural tion Center, spoke on “Agricul- 1881,68 to P rom Pt under tural Law Zoning, Farmland standing of agriculture and its Preservation, Nutrient Manage- changes. Concluding the pro ment, and Local Ordinances.” gram was a panel discussion on 0.68 $2.20 $BO Yes Kellett encouraged township officials to consult the agricultur al community, the conservation district, and township solicitors when formulating agricultural ordinances to stay within the realm of the law and avoid con flict. She informed officials on a water quality led by moderator John Ravert, manager of Berks CD. panelists were Tom Swee ney, sdjl scientist, Pennsylvania DEP SCRO; Jineen Boyle, water shed manager, Pennsylvania DEP SCRO; Dr. Christine Kel lett; and Donald Reinert.
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers