 All right, it's 11 o'clock, so we're going to get started with our final session in our Raising Covered Crops webinar series. Today's session is going to be focused on some more of our traditional orange crops. This webinar series is sponsored by the North Central Region Sustainable Agriculture and Research Education and Grant Through Them. Just a few reminders before we get started, please keep your mics and cameras off to help keep the quality or ensure the quality of our streaming by reducing our bandwidth that way. If you do miss any part of today's recording or if you missed any of the other webinars, they are all recorded and are available on our NDSU Extension live staff website under the Grazing Management tab. Again, thank you for joining us, and if you have any questions or comments, please put those in the chat box, and we're going to get started with our first speaker, Megan VanEmmen, and she's going to be talking about grazing alfalfa, winter grazing, and alfalfa production. Okay, helps if you unmute. Can everybody see the slides? Yes. All right, thank you. Not used Zoom for an actual meeting before, so as Miranda said, I'm going to speak on our impacts of winter grazing on alfalfa production. I would like to add just a little caveat in here. This was a project from Dr. Emily Message, and I took over for her a lot of her grad students and some of her projects when she left Montana to move back to Pennsylvania. So just adding that in there, I'm not the actual PI. I guess I am the actual PI, but I was kind of on the periphery as this project was finishing up, so hopefully I can answer your questions as best as possible, but we'll go ahead and get going here, maybe, maybe. Okay, there we go. So especially here in the Northern Plains, as well as even some other parts of the country, fall and winter grazing alfalfa is pretty common practice. However, there's limited research available on how that's actually impacting the subsequent years alfalfa production. There has been a few studies, one of them actually just grazed alfalfa and then provided an additional supplement while those cattle were grazing alfalfa. So the impacts of if alfalfa was actually doing any sort of impact on production was pretty minimal. That was just kind of a secondary measure in that study. And then Dr. Message also grazed alfalfa during the winter of 2017 and 2018 as I'm sure a lot of our North Dakota folks remember, as well as here in Montana, that was the winter that never seemed to quit as well as the winter that was just awful in general with snow and temperatures, but that grazing did actually have a positive impact on alfalfa production. She hasn't published that work yet. We did see those positive impacts with actual grazing as well as with our cattle growth. So with that, there were two objectives with this study. One was to evaluate the impacts of winter grazing and feeding on alfalfa production and persistence. And then the secondary objective was to basically disseminate this information to our producers here in Montana and alfalfa growers and the surrounding region at some of our field days this summer. So how these fields were chosen, they had to be at least a two-year-old stand of alfalfa with greater than 90% alfalfa still in the field. They had four exclosures during the grazing period and then that was paired with none or excuse me, that was paired with grazing plots. So measurements were taken in both April and June of 2019 and April, the soil penetrometer, plant height, stem and plant density and root scores were all collected. And then in June, plant biomass and plant height were collected right before the first harvest. So this was done in two counties. So one in the very far southwestern part of Montana in Beaverhead County. This was an irrigated patch or excuse me, irrigated field and they grazed 81 head. Those cattle weighed roughly 1,100 pounds and they grazed them from November to January. So more of a stocker-based operation on that irrigated alfalfa. And the second being here in Custer County where I'm located in Miles City and that's a dry land operation and 142 head were grazed and those were freshly-weaned calves weighing about 600 pounds and they grazed from November to February. We did have a producer here in Custer County. However we had to eliminate his alfalfa pasture because he terminated his alfalfa stand without actually alerting us. So we were down to just the one field here in Custer County. So just to give you an idea of what those plots looked like, I think everybody can see the mouse here. So here in Custer County we have our field, which obviously with my lovely artistic skills here is pretty simple rectangle, but we had our four exposures in that field and then those were paired out in the grazing area with those paired grazing plots and similar in our Beaver Head County are four exposures with another four paired grazing plots. So moving right into results, I know moving pretty quick here, but just to give you an idea we just have our analysis completed through SAS. We had to run each location separately due to the differences between irrigated and non-irrigated fields. So up at the top we have our grazed versus ungrazed and our p-values. On the left we have our measurements, so April and then June. And then here I have the metric measurements in plants per meter squared and then I converted everything to English units. So this is stems per foot squared, mouse keeps disappearing here, and then height and centimeters and inches, the penetrometer data, and then the root score data. So as we can see from each location there weren't any significant differences in April based on our winter grazing periods. So that's actually a very good sign is showing that we aren't having any negative impacts by grazing cattle on alfalfa fields during the winter months. During those times when those, you know, especially those calves are rapidly growing and they need that extra nutrition, that alpha can be there to provide an additional protein and energy source during those cold months. And then in June here we have our height production. We didn't have any data from the height production for our Beaverhead County location but we did have height data for our Custer County location, excuse me, basically showing there was a slight tendency for the ungrazed plots to have grown to a greater height than our grazed, however this was only about an inch difference so not sure that that's actually showing a biological significance where we would actually see a negative impact on production and that is shown although not statistically different, we do see some numerical differences here between the actual production weight and noting that our grazed plots were numerically greater than our ungrazed plots. So even though we don't have, even though there isn't a large difference in height, we did see a numerical production difference. If we look over at our Beaverhead, similar here, you know, not statistically different but we are seeing a slight difference numerically in those ungrazed versus grazed plots in the Beaverhead location as well. So overall just noting that there aren't, or we didn't observe any negative impacts on production of alfalfa for that subsequent year after grazing. So this I think can give our producers a little bit more confidence when they're grazing their alfalfa to allow those animals out there to graze instead of holding them off and trying to feed a harvested forage during some of these winter months. I forgot I put a box in there, I apologize to draw your attention to that slight tendency between that height. So as the data has shown, there weren't any significant differences between the April data in either location, which I know we all assigned to sometimes where, you know, no differences. But I think in this instance, it's actually a good thing, you know, we're showing that there weren't any negative impacts of grazing on our alfalfa production fields. And so we don't have to worry about any negative impacts on that production while we're baling. And so we're not going to see those differences in bale weights or the number of bales coming off of those fields. Plus, it allows those calves to be on a high quality diet during those winter months. And maybe we aren't feeding as much as that harvested forage while they're grazing the alfalfa so we can save on some economic costs there for those livestock producers turning in onto those alfalfa stands. So there's that we're we're working on hopefully getting this into our ag economics department to get some economic analysis completed on this as well. And, you know, for our second objective, we were hoping to share our results this year at our field days at our research centers here in Montana, as well as then putting out an extension bulletin. I put a question mark between the by the field days because, well, as we are all aware, those decisions haven't been made on if those are actually going to continue this summer based on COVID-19. So we're unsure of that, but we are going to get this published in an extension bulletin to get this information available to our with our livestock producers and our alfalfa growers. So with that, I just want to thank the US alfalfa farmer research initiative as a part of the National Alfalfa and Forage Alliance, the Midwest Forage Association, USDA ARS for Keough, which is where our Custer County field was, and then Paphousen's producers in Dillon, Montana at our Beaverhead County location. And then to grad students, Kylie guardhouse and Tristan Benson and then one of our undergraduate workers for collecting all of these samples for analysis last April and June. And then Jess Murray is our Beaverhead County agent who helped us find that location. And then Mike Schultz who aided us in providing us with the producer location here in Custer County, even though that didn't work out, but identifying those producers that were willing to be a part of this project. So I know that was fairly quick, but not a lot of significant results there statistically. So with that, I will open it up to any questions. Yeah, we'll take a couple questions now and then if we have any additional ones, we'll wait until the end until the end. There is one question from Lucinda, who has an old alfalfa field that she plans to terminate and plant to Milo. It got alfalfa weevils and doesn't want to spend and she doesn't want to spend thousands to spray them. Can she graze to set it back alfalfa and then either spray to terminate or replow? So that's a good question and I'm just going to add that I'm not a forage expert or specialist, so I'll do my best. So you can graze to help with that alfalfa weevil infestation, however, when we typically see weevils we're not turning in our cattle during that timeframe. So harvesting can also help. How best to terminate and replant into Milo? I'm going to apologize, I'm not a forage specialist and I can't best answer that question. So I would suggest contacting a forage specialist on that and I apologize for not having that knowledge. Marisol, is that something you could jump in and answer? No, you're muted Marisol. There. There we go. Okay. Yeah, Lucinda, I think with the weevils we always recommend either harvest or in this case graze. If you, so you would want to do that grazing before you plant the Milo, I don't see there will be a problem. It's not something I do either because we don't grow Milo here, but it should work. I don't see why it shouldn't work and yeah, I would, you know, you should save, you should save the, don't apply any insecticide because as costly and also you're going to have a time that you cannot graze or cannot use the forage, you know, as a harvest interval of the application depends what insecticides you use. So I think a big idea to stay away from this exercise and graze Afafa before you terminate it and then don't spend the money on insecticide this year. As all I know, but I don't know much about, you know, the rotation. So that's all I can help with. Thank you, Marisol. We have time for one more question for Megan if anyone has one. Okay, well, if you think of something else, just type it in the chat box and or email it to me and we'll make sure it gets addressed at the end. With that, I'm going to turn it over to our next speaker, Kylie Gardhouse, and she's going to be talking about sandflake quality, yield and condensed tanning content. Okay, can you see my screen? Good. Yes, you look good. Okay, perfect. Thank you. Like she said, I'm Kylie Gardhouse. I'm a master's student at Montana State University. I'm working under Megan Veneman and today I'm talking about the effects of sandflake quality, yield and condensed tanning content. So a little bit of just an outline. I'm going to go over some background, our materials and methods, and then our results and discussion. So sandflake is a high quality perennial forage comparable to the nutrient value of alfalfa. It's also highly palatable. It's been shown to have anthalmentic properties. Meaning that it could be used for a dewormer. Has no auto toxicity effects. Kind of like alfalfa does. You can't keep planting that. So that could be a positive with this variety. It's non-bloating. Research has shown that. It can decrease. Bloat by 93% with feeding 20% alfalfa in a mix without, sorry, excuse me. A 20% sandfoil. In a mix with alfalfa. And this is because it has a high condensed tan and content. And these can condense tannins bind to protein. Causing them to be less soluble. Which decreases the production of alfalfa. Which decreases the production of foam within the room in. So materials and methods, we had three locations. Moccasin and Bozeman and Montana and then Logan, Utah. We had a split plot design. And we had four different varieties of standpoint. Our AC Mountain View, Eski, Shoshone, Delaney. And then we had a Shaw alfalfa for a check. So we did our sampling at. 10% 50% and 100% bloom. For each of our varieties. So this is just a layout of what. Our design looked like. So we had. Each row consisted of our five different types of. Varieties. And then we were. We did our sampling at again, 10, 50, and 100% bloom. And then this was replicated four times at each location. So spring, 2018. Soil samples were taken. Fertilizer and herbicides were applied. And then we seated at a rate of 74 pounds of pure live sea per hectare for sampling. And then 30 pounds for alfalfa. And then summer of 2019. We did our yield and quality samples. These were tape. These were done by taking. Two one meter squares in each of our plots and clipping to five centimeters in height. And then from that, we took our sub samples. They were. Dried and ground and then sent out for analysis. Quality samples were looking at ADF, NDF and crude protein. And those samples were sent to Harley Newman. At university of Missouri. And then we also were looking at our condensed tan and content. And those were sent to Jennifer. Mac Adams at the. At Utah State University. We used a general linear model. And then we were analyzing. For treatment and variety. And we analyze within just each location due to some differences that we had. And then we looked at each location. So far results. There were no significant differences in treatment of variety or an interaction at Utah for production. In Bozeman, we saw a treatment of variety effect. We're asking and delaying. We're performing the best for our standpoint varieties. We did see higher production in our alfalfa. And then we saw a treatment and a variety significance. At this location, Eski and Shashone were performing best for our standpoints. And then again, Shaw was performing highest. Overall. At our con for our condensed tannins. We saw at Utah that we, there was a treatment and a variety of significance. In Bozeman, we also saw a treatment and a variety of significance. Again, a decrease. With increasing maturity. And then our AC variety of standpoint and have the highest levels of condensed tannins. Moccasin, we saw a treatment and variety interaction. Similar levels of treatment. Similar levels of treatment. In Bozeman, we also saw a treatment and a variety of significance. And again, we also saw a treatment and a variety of significance. Similar levels of condensed tannin across all Sanfuan varieties. And a decrease. With maturity again. So for ADF content in Utah, we saw. A treatment. Effect. For Bozeman. And Moccasin, we both saw. A treatment and variety interaction. And the F similarly to our ADF, we saw that there was a treatment effect at Utah. And for Bozeman and Moccasin, there was a treatment variety interaction. Crew protein content. At Utah, we saw a treatment and a variety effect. And then for Bozeman, we saw just a treatment effect. And then for Moccasin, we saw just a treatment and a variety of significance. So a little summary. Shaw was more productive than Sanfuan, which is typical for what we've seen in past research. But this could also be to differences across locations. Environmental differences in wildlife factors. We ran into a few problems at our Bozeman location. We could not keep the deer out of the Sanfuan. Like we said, it's highly palatable. So we had to do alfalfa weevil, which could have influenced our Shaw production. Shaw had lower condensed tannins, which is also something that we've seen in past research. It has really low contents while Sanfuan has much higher content. We saw an increase in ADF and NDF with increasing maturity. A decrease in crude protein with increasing maturity. And then one of our last objectives that we are looking into is the economic impacts, which we are still waiting on those results for. With that, I'll open it for questions. Do we have any questions for Kylie? If you could please put them in and I'll open it up for questions, other additional questions for Megan as well. And we did have one while folks are thinking about questions for Kylie. I think that we send a follow-up regarding a felfa termination and a v-powing would terminate alfalfa. And so I don't, Megan or Marisol, if you want to, if you can jump in and answer that. Can you hear me? Yes. Yeah. Is there a falfa that you have there? It's a roundup ready? I would need to know that because usually, you know, you should be able to kill it, but the problem is you have v-plowing. Some plants are going to stay there. You won't be able to kill them all. So usually to terminate alfalfa, we use two for the herbicide and then plow it if you want, but you almost need that. And if it's roundup ready alfalfa, you need that. If it's not roundup ready, you can use glyphosate to try to kill it, but alfalfa is still very resistant to glyphosate. So we usually terminate it with two for the, and then we plow it and we need to. I don't know if that answers your question. Thank you, Marisol. So I just launched a poll just to kind of, we want, we have a few questions to see how effective this, this platform is for, for teaching and learning and extension. So if you could answer those questions for us and helps us decide if this is something we need to, is this a platform we need to use moving forward or if we need to adjust things more. And then also, if you have any other additional comments or tech, if you had technology issues, you could type that in the chat box that would be appreciated. And then the question is about cover crops and regulations. Oh shoot. I'm sorry. I launched the wrong poll. Sorry. I will get the right one this time. Here we go. This might make a little more sense. Okay. So there is a question for Kylie, the condensed cannons and standpoint have been to introduce and trick methane and cattle is standpoint a one, one substitution for alfalfa in the ration. How cost competitive is it? And do other legumes used for cow food has similar and trick reduction properties? So there's a few different parts to that. You know, I don't know much about the reduction of that methane and cattle. I don't, I don't know if Megan knows anything about that. I think the substitution would be pretty similar because it's similar nutrition nutrient value. But I don't know about that. About the methane properties. I don't know if Megan knows anything about that either. I haven't looked into that specifically. I have read some of that information. Sam, I'm trying to read through. Yeah. And I would agree with Kylie. It probably would be about a one to one substitution for alfalfa, just based on, you know, crude protein and energy. And so, you know, I don't know anything about that. But I don't know anything about the reduction of the San point, as long as it's harvested. And, and an optimum timeframe. I don't know of any other legumes that would reduce the enteric methane production similar to. San point. Lupines as an example, I. I'm a little worried about lupines just due to some of its negative impacts it could possibly have on cattle but I will yeah you just sent a link from Utah State here so yeah I'll definitely check that out and thank you. Any additional questions and again I've just launched our second poll and this is a correct one. Just a few reminders that if you if you are a certified crop consultant you can self-report and I will be sending out the agendas for these webinars as well as the link to where to find the recordings to all of our participants. As I had mentioned that all of these are recorded and are available on our NDSU extension livestock cover crop page and the link is on is up for you there if you want if you want that it's also I've also put it in the chat box a couple times and we just want to thank everybody for being flexible with us as we change to this format and for the folks that did suggest that we try doing this as a webinar since we were unable to do