Tis the season! No, not that season, mud season. For a lot of cattle producers throughout the USA the spring and fall months typically brings concerning the dread of muddy pens or tons. That is very true in elements of the U.S. that obtain better ranges of precipitation within the type of rain and/or snowmelt. As well as, animal stocking density, soil sort, and floor drainage additionally affect the severity of mud challenges. Many people can relate to the struggles of strolling by way of the mud and making an attempt to not lose our rubber boots to the suctioning power that challenges us with every step. What concerning the cows and calves? What sort of stress does mud have on cattle?
The mixture of mud and manure accumulation presents an inventory of potential issues for cattle producers. Further power is required by the animals to stroll by way of mud, whether or not to the feed bunk, water tank, or bedding pack. This further power demand can impression cattle habits and their willingness to maneuver all through completely different areas of the pen.
Elevated mud and manure have an effect on animal cleanliness and the insulative properties of their hair coat, which then require further power to remain heat. For fed cattle being raised for beef, this presents potential meals security considerations from carcass contamination from the disguise throughout slaughter and lowered dressing percentages with elevated mud/tag scores. Issues for cow/calf operations are soiled udders that would unfold illness and compromise the well being of younger nursing calves and trigger calf losses.
Beef heifer standing in mud on the feed bunk.
Some analysis has been carried out utilizing artificially made mud to find out the impression of mud on cattle progress and feedlot efficiency. Information collected over a 3 yr interval by Morrison and others, that was printed in a 1970 California Agriculture Bulletin, reported a lowered common each day achieve (ADG) and feed effectivity by cattle in muddy pens in contrast with concrete pens that have been cleaned weekly.
Throughout one of many years, shelters have been provided and in muddy therapy pens the shelter ground was both wooden or mud. It was noticed that cattle in muddy pens selected to face on the picket ground beneath the shelter 73% of the time noticed in contrast with solely 3% for pens with mud beneath the shelters. Throughout this experiment, muddy pens lowered ADG by 35.5% in contrast with concrete pens, however solely 12% in muddy pens the place cattle may escape the mud and stand on the picket ground.
The frequency of pen cleansing can even impact the quantity of mud or manure that accumulates. A research by Neville and others from North Dakota, printed in Livestock Science journal in contrast the feedlot efficiency of steers in open dust pens that have been cleaned with completely different frequency over the course of 195 days (October to Might). All pens have been supplied with recent straw bedding weekly. Pens have been both not cleaned, the concrete aprons have been cleaned twice, or your complete pen was cleaned twice all through your complete feeding interval. Curiously, whereas pens and animal disguise cleanliness scores have been higher for the pens of cattle that have been cleaned twice, no variations have been noticed for feedlot efficiency. These outcomes could point out that cleansing of pens didn’t happen incessantly sufficient, pens weren’t designed to empty appropriately, soil sort could have been conducive to producing mud, or the straw bedding mitigated therapy variations.
One other cattle feeding research carried out in Australia by Cowley and others was printed in Meat & Livestock Australia Restricted to find out the impacts of woodchip bedding in moist feedlot situations. Yearling beef steers have been positioned in pens both with out woodchips, 11 kilos per sq. foot of woodchips per day, or 22 kilos per sq. foot of woodchips per day. Sprinklers have been used to supply further rainfall to create moist feedlot pens. Irrigated and pure precipitation averaged 0.17 inches over the 62 days when precipitation was utilized in the course of the 109-day research. Common pen mud depth scores elevated over time for the unbedded steers (as much as 23.6 inches for some), whereas mud scores for pens with steers receiving 11 lbs./sq. foot/day woodchips solely started to extend barely the final three weeks of the research. Steers bedded with 11 or 22 lbs./sq. foot/day woodchips had better ADG than steers with no bedding and resulted in better last physique weights and better feed effectivity, since dry matter consumption didn’t differ. Steer habits was completely different between the therapies and altered over time as nicely. After the preliminary 5 weeks of the research, steers with out bedding elevated their frequency of mendacity down on the entrance of the pen versus the center or again in contrast with steers in bedded therapies. That is fascinating as cattle shifted their mendacity location to compensate for the muddy situations. This will even be a sign that these cattle turned reluctant to maneuver additional away from the feed bunk of their muddy pen.
Sadly for a lot of cattle producers, the timing of the muddy season overlaps calving season. Nickles and others from The Ohio State College introduced some work printed within the Journal of Animal Science investigating the results of a muddy pen atmosphere on the power necessities of cows and first calf heifers throughout gestation. Cows and heifers have been housed individually in pens that have been both unbedded (9.3 inches of mud) or bedded with woodchips/sawdust over the last trimester of gestation. Cows and heifers have been matched up throughout therapies so feed supply was related and designed to satisfy the animal’s upkeep necessities.
After the research, cows in unbedded pens have been 82 kilos lighter and heifers in unbedded pens have been 96 kilos lighter than bedded cows and heifers. This loss in physique weight for cows and heifers that have been housed in muddy unbedded pens corresponds to an elevated power demand of three.9 and 4.3 megacalories/day, respectively. Whereas the power calls for of a pregnant cow will increase 6.5 megacalories/day from the initiation of gestation to calving, mud could enhance the power calls for of the cow even additional if subjected to muddy pen situations.
Managing mud generally is a problem. Michigan State College Extension recommends that producers think about administration practices in your operation that permit your cattle a spot to flee from muddy situations and lie down in a cleaner and drier atmosphere. Cattle compelled to cope with mud have elevated internet power calls for to keep up and enhance their physique weight. The power calls for are more likely to enhance with the rising severity of muddy situations, in addition to different weather-related components similar to low temperatures, rain, snow, and wind. If cattle are unable to flee muddy situations in your operation, think about supplying further power within the eating regimen to compensate for the elevated power calls for from mud.
Supply: Michigan State College
