Most folks, including Alabama cattlemen, don't like to spend money unnecessarily. However, sometimes our attempts to save a few dollars can end up costing us more (maybe much more) than we saved in the long run. A few examples which pertain to forage production are as follows.

Variety Selection

Anyone who has been involved in the purchase of forage crop seed knows that different varieties are usually priced differently. Though there are exceptions, it is generally true that the very best varieties sell for the highest price per pound. The critical question is whether a variety for which the seed is more expensive is worth the extra cost.

Sometimes a few calculations can provide a good deal of insight. As an example, let's assume there are two varieties of a given forage crop which differ in price by ten cents per pound and the recommended seeding rate is twenty pounds per acre. In this situation, the additional cost per acre of seeding the more expensive variety would be $0.10 x 20, which equals $2.00.

Let's further assume that the more expensive variety typically outyields the less expensive variety by 500 pounds of dry matter per acre. (This is a conservative assumption; many examples could be found in which the average additional production of a given variety as compared to other varieties is much higher than this.)

Now let's try to place a dollar value on the added production. If an added 500 pounds of hay is produced (which is one-fourth of a ton) and the hay is worth $60 per ton, the value of the added production is ($60 x .25) or $15. Not a bad return for an investment of $2 per acre.

If the forage crop is grazed, and if we assume that it takes 15 pounds of dry matter to produce a pound of beef gain, then an extra 500 pounds of forage would produce an added 33 pounds or so of beef per acre. Even if the beef is worth only fifty cents per pound, the extra growth would generate more $16 per acre, or eight times the extra cost of buying seed of the better variety.

Reseeding

The concept of reseeding of annual forage crops is one which is understandably quite attractive. However, there is often a penalty associated with managing a forage crop for reseeding. The penalty is that in order to get good seed production, cattle normally must be removed from a field, and thus the accumulated forage cannot be utilized for grazing.

Now let's make a few calculations regarding the economics of reseeding. Let's assume that by pulling animals off to allow a field to reseed, $20 per acre in seed costs are saved the following year. Using assumptions from the previous example, it would require the production of only 20 pounds of beef worth $0.50 per pound (300 pounds of dry matter per acre) to cover the value of the seed purchase which was avoided.

There are also other considerations which favor utilizing the forage of annuals rather than trying for reseeding. There is never any guarantee of reseeding because seed yield may be low, in some cases the seed may germinate at the wrong time, or they may be damaged by weathering. (The old saw, "a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush" applies to this situation.)

There is nothing wrong with striving for reseeding in certain situations. However, the point is that if there are hungry cattle available that a producer knows can utilize accumulated forage of annual crops, from an objective viewpoint it can be difficult to justify managing for reseeding.

Holdover Fescue Seed

It was learned years ago that holding endophyte-infected fescue seed for about a year's time is a technique which can be used to obtain endophyte-free seed for establishing endophyte- free fescue stands. However, there are several reasons why this is not a good idea.

First, these days there is little difference between the cost of infected and non-infected seed. Second, under usual on- farm storage conditions in our climate the germination of grass seed held over for a year typically drops by at least ten percent. Third, depending on storage conditions, the endophyte level may not drop to zero. If a mixed stand of infected and non-infected fescue is obtained, over time infected seed tends to out-compete non-infected seed, and may eventually dominate the stand.

Finally, even if the germination level is not affected, the seedling vigor of holdover seed is almost certain to be less than that of new crop seed. In view of the inherently lower stress tolerance and vigor of non-infected fescue, it does not need the added handicap of reduced seedling vigor resulting from prolonged storage.

Protecting Hay

Studies have shown that when round bales of hay are stored outside without protection, storage loss is likely to be at least 30%. This means that for hay valued at $60 per ton, at least $15 of weathering loss will occur per ton. It also means that for a 1,000 pound round bale, a producer could actually afford to spend $7.50 per bale to prevent storage loss. There are numerous techniques that can be taken to reduce weathering losses, but in most situations even the building of a hay barn to protect hay could easily be justified with this level of hay loss and hay value.

Conclusion

Most of us are conditioned to automatically go for the lowest price or cost whenever we have the opportunity, and in many situations this is a good philosophy. However, as the examples discussed indicate, sometimes spending a bit more initially will allow the realization of a substantially greater benefit later.