UtahVolume 59 Number 3 Summer 1999

A PUBLICATION OF THE UTAH AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION AT UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY

UTAH

A Publication of the Utah AgriculturalExperiment Station at Utah State University.Volume 59 Number 3 Summer 1999

CONTENTS

Gar

y N

euen

swan

der

DEPARTMENTS

14 HOTLINE

23 STUDENT SPOTLIGHT

24 EDITOR'S FOOTNOTE

5 BETWEEN A ROCK ANDA HARD PL ACE

20 IN THE COOP

A range scientist takes a close look at how animals deal with

the power of habit and the force of change.

A new survey shows rural Utah farm families are planning for

retirement, not just weathering it.

16 FINANCIAL PLANNINGDOWN ON THE FARM

2 MAKING THE BESTOF MAKING HAY

New research assesses the harvesting and storage of the

West’s most loss-prone crop.

A Kaysville farmer says despite being a thorny issue,

organic crops have a market.

A large Utah layer hen operation is managing to dispose of

manure before it leaves the coop.

11 FI NDING A NICHE BYGOING ORGANIC

2 UTAH SCIENCE

Turns out that the surest way to reduce crop yield, digestibility and profit of alfalfa is toharvest it. Making hay, even when the sun shines, is alosing prospect, and losses continue even after the hayis in the barn or silo.

In fact, by the time it is fed to an animal, hay will lose30 percent or more of the nutritional value it hadstanding in the field, according to a detailed assess-ment of haymaking methods presented at the firstIntermountain Nutrition Conference in Salt LakeCity.

Several factors can decrease the crop’s value evenmore, and not much can be done about any of them,said Alan Rotz, a USDA Agricultural Research Servicescientist in Pennsylvania.

First, between 25 and 30 percent of the crop will belost in cutting, drying and baling, Rotz said, adding

that rainfall during the normal three to seven daysrequired to dry the hay can greatly prolong the curingand can increase loss by another 30 percent.

Storage methods also decrease yields, especially ifhay is stored outside, in silos or under high-moistureconditions, Rotz’s research shows.

Rotz reported similar figures for silage production,says losses at harvest occur in two ways: detachmentof leaves and the internal depletion or degradationof plant nutrients. Soluble carbohydrates are lost inthe drying, and soluble nutrients are leached out byrain.

“Overall, the sum of these losses causes a gain in fiberconcentration, a decrease in digestibility, and a smallchange in crude protein concentration,” Rotz said.

Plant respiration rates decrease as the plant material

Claude Monet, “H

aystack in Snow

,” 1890

Making the Best of Making

Hay

The Utah Agricultural Experiment Station 3

dries, approaching zero at about 30 percent moisture,Rotz noted. (Hay is normally dried in the field to amoisture content below 20 percent.) If the crop isrewetted by dew or rain, enzyme activity is reacti-vated, which prolongs respiration and allows bacteria,yeast and fungi to develop that then cause furtherrespiration loss.

Rotz reported that the key factor in determining howextensive rain damage will be is the moisture contentof the crop at the time of the rainfall.

He said most data indicate that rain early in thedrying process causes less loss, but he added that anydelay in harvest can retard the growth of the nextcrop, thereby further reducing the yield of the entireseason.

The impact of raindrops on the crop causes leaves tobe severed from the stem and fall to the soil. Becauseleaves contain a higher concentration of importantnutrients for the animal, any loss of leaves can reduceforage quality.

“This is particularly true for legume species; less sofor grasses,” he said.

Loss caused by rain damage can greatly alter thequality of the remaining forage. Leaching loss and themicrobial respiration resulting from rain damage havea more marked effect than leaf loss on the concentra-tion of many plant nutrients. These nutrients comeprimarily from the cell contents of the plant, and theyare highly digestible nutrients for the animal, he said.

“Therefore, rain damage causes a decrease in crudeprotein concentration, a substantial decrease indigestibility, and an increase in fiber concentration.”

Cutting hay can cause about a 5 percent loss in cropyield, according to the research. The loss, whichdepends on the maturity of the crop, increases as theplants mature from a late vegetative stage to fullbloom.

Crop loss from raking varies widely with reportedvalues ranging from 1 to 20 percent of crop yield. Lossis influenced by crop moisture content and the densityof the forage swath.

Speeding up drying with a rotary windrower raketends to cause loss, Rotz said, because the sweepingaction allows plant material to become entangled with

Cutting hay can cause about a 5% loss.

Raking hay can cause anywhere from 1% to 20% loss.

Baling can cause between a 2% and 5% loss.

Losses in large round bales stored outside can varyfrom 3% to 40%. Factors with the greatest impact areweather, length of storage, and storage method.

4 UTAH SCIENCE

❂MORE INFO

Alan Rotz (814) 863-0939

Tilak Dhiman (435) 797-2155

alrotz@psu.edu

trdhiman@cc.usu.edu

An increasein fiberconcentration

Rain damage causes:A decrease incrude proteinconcentration

A substantialdecrease indigestibility

the stubble and increases the loss of high-nutrientleaves.

Crop yield loss from baling varies between 2 and 5percent, with a slightly greater loss from large roundbalers than from small rectangular balers, he said.

When hay is baled at night, leaf moisture is higher,and loss from compression in the baling chamber canbe cut in half, according to the research. Chamber lossis mostly high-quality leaf material and therefore hasthe greatest effect on the quality of the remainingforage than most other machine losses, Rotz said.

Storage can also further degrade quality. Unprotectedhay stored outside experiences the same loss as haystored inside plus an additional loss from weatheringon the exposed bale surface.

Losses in large round bales stored outside vary widely,ranging from 3 to 40 percent. Of the factors affectingthis loss, weather, length of storage, and storagemethod have the greatest impact.

Loss in stored hay is primarily caused by microorgan-isms, and the biological activity is greatest when thehay is moist and warm.

Rotz said field losses in haymaking can be reduced bybaling at a moisture content near 25 percent. Balingmoist hay reduces baler chamber losses while provid-ing a small increase in harvest yield (up to 2 percent)

and harvested quality. Raking and pickup losses alsomay be reduced slightly. Field curing time on averageis reduced one day, which reduces the potential forrain damage.

With all factors combined, harvested dry matter yieldis increased an average of 7 percent, he said. Most haydeteriorates rapidly in storage, however, offsetting thebenefit of reduced field losses unless treated toenhance preservation.

One alternative to preservation treatments would be alow-cost drying system during storage that wouldpush ambient air through the stack during the firstmonth. The air movement dries the hay and preventsheating and mold. Losses and nutritive changes aremaintained at a level similar to dry hay.

Improvements to reduce these component losses canbe helpful, but most of the improvements will notprovide a substantial change in the total system, hesaid, noting that one would be to reduce outsidestorage of hay and silo storage where losses oftenexceed 10 percent. JT

For information on the 2000 Intermountain Nutrition Conference-

John

Con

stab

le, “

Haa

mps

tead

Hea

th,”

182

4

On January 25-26, 2000, the IntermountainNutrition Conference, “Using FeedingPractices to Enhance ConsumerAcceptability of Dairy and Beef Products,”takes place in Salt Lake City, Utah. The conference is intendedto provide current information on nutrition and nutritionrelated managment issues pertinent to the dairy and beefindustries in the Intermountain West.For more information and a registration packet, contact:

Karma WoodUtah State UniversityADVS Dept.4815 Old Main HillLogan, UT 84322-4815Phone: (435) 797-2145, Fax: (435) 797-2118

The Utah Agricultural Experiment Station 6

BETWEEN

A ROCK AND

A HARD PLACE

H ow in the world did animals ever become known ascreatures of habit when the only habit the world has ischange?

That’s easy, says USU animal behaviorist and rangescientist Fred Provenza: “Habits can offer a sense ofpredictability and security in an unpredictable anddangerous world.”

The interesting question—the one that spursProvenza’s research—is why creatures will stick to oldhabits or do their best—even die trying—to hang onto something familiar when change comes along andwhat causes them to ultimately change their ways.

Life for all animals, humans included, is a rock and ahard place, says Provenza, who has been exploring theterritory in between for about 20 years. “While habitsand being careful help us cope, having the ability toconstantly adapt to change, not clinging to familiarroutines in the face of change, is ultimately how wesurvive.”

The power of habit and the force of change areconstantly colliding. It can be seen in everything fromlivestock walking a fence to get “home” after beingmoved to a new range or pasture to the relief in theface of a lost and hungry American tourist who hasjust spotted a McDonald’s in a foreign country.

The best that both the herbivore and tourist can do isact based on past experience in an attempt to findorder or comfort in a strange situation, Provenza says.

Provenza has focused his research on the behavior offoraging livestock, which to most people looks like

little more than an idle wandering search for food andplace to rest.

“It is far from a routine activity,” he says. “Foraging isas vital and dynamic to the animals as making a livingis to the guy overseeing them; life for both exists at theboundary between order and chaos.

“Animals do not innately know what to do when facedwith change and have a habit of sticking with asituation, place or food that appears to be familiar,”Provenza says. “Life teaches over and over that a lackof cautious regard for novel environments or strangefood is risky.”

However, he adds, any individual, population, orspecies that hangs on to old ways too long and cannotadapt become extinct.

Climate, soils, plants, herbivores and people areinterrelated parts of systems that change constantly.“Habit is in a way phantom comfort because eventhose we have developed to try to make order out oflife eventually must change.”

For grazing livestock, nutritional needs change, thequality, quantity and toxicity of plants change,sometimes within hours, and constantly alter foodpreferences.

Changes for both wild and domesticated animals alsooccur when they are moved by humans to unfamiliarenvironments. In an effort to hang on to what theyknow, they will walk farther, eat less food, and suffermore from malnutrition, toxicity and predation thananimals in familiar environments.

7 UTAH SCIENCE

Research shows that when moved to a new territory,sheep in an effort to find familiarity will stray as muchas 90 miles from a herd that is used to the samerangeland.

Wild carnivores will search long and hard for thefamiliar after being moved, as is being shown in theColorado program designed to reintroduce the lynx inareas near Vail and the San Juan Mountains. Many ofthe cats have strayed far from those areas and died ofstarvation.

Evidence provided by numerous controlled tests andfrom numerous ranchers and producers who areimplementing Provenza’s research indicates those thatcontinually and carefully adapt—those who learn newtricks even if they’re old dogs—manage to survive andthrive.

For managers and producers, that means beingflexible and creative and taking a systems-levelperspective of their operations rather than doingthings simply because that’s the way the ranch ordairy or farm has always done them, Provenza says.

The fact animals aren’t born with but learn food andhabitat selection behaviors creates opportunities formanagers, he says. Animals also can be selected orculled based on food and habitat they choose.

He cites riparian areas as an example. Conventionand tradition dictate that rivers and creeks are“sacrifice areas” that must be fenced to keep live-stock out, years ago with barbed wire and now withelectric fences.

Fences are expensive, they create boundaries withingrazing allotments, and they interfere with themovement of wildlife and people. And unless streamsare excluded from grazing, fences don’t limit use ofriparian areas by livestock.

Bob Budd, manager of the Nature Conservancy’s RedCanyon Ranch near Lander, Wyo., has found abehavioral alternative to fencing: herding on horse-back.

Riding is not typically used as a means to enhancecattle dispersion because most people apparentlybelieve the time and effort required to ride don’t offsetthe costs.

Budd says, however, that the costs of riding are morethan made up by the benefits from additional forage,

Bob Budd, manager of the Nature Conservancy’s Red Canyon Ranch nearLander, Wyoming, believes having a rider increases forage and improvesherd care and health, in addition to protecting fragile riparian areas.

The Utah Agricultural Experiment Station 8

Form Follows Function, Function Follows Form

The body influences the structure of experience, but it isjust as true that experience influences the structure of

the body, Provenza says.

“In other words, habits cause change,” he says, noting that, ingeneral, livestock fed nutrient-poor diets have larger rumensthan animals fed nutrient-rich diets.

Consider muscles, which all animals have. Muscle size andperformance depend on how muscles are used. Cattle of anybreed that are fit have little trouble walking steep slopes. Butcattle that never leave riparian areas lack muscle condition forhiking.

Food selection also becomes habit. Provenza’s research showsthat when two groups of 5-month-old goats were turned outon blackbrush-dominated rangeland, goats that had beenreared with their mothers on blackbrush ate twice as much ofit as goats that had never eaten it.

Nine months later, after the same groups had foraged onpasture and the goats that had never eaten blackbrush weregiven the plant for a month, the goats reared on the plant stillate 27 percent more than naive goats did when only givenblackbrush. They ate 30 percent more blackbrush when givena choice between alfalfa pellets and blackbrush.

It is important torecognize that habits,no matter how rigid,are not innate.Creatures can and dochange. But changerequires transforma-tion. The large rumenof goats reared onblackbrush decreasedas the nutritionalquality of the dietincreased.

Conversely, rumensize increased forinexperiencedanimals that werereared on concen-trates when they wererequired to eatforages.

improved herd care and health, and less-trampledcreek areas.

At Red Canyon, a single rider on horseback has beentraining adult cows in a 900-head herd and theiroffspring to use uplands more and riparian areas less.The rider identifies cows and calves that consistentlyuse riparian and upland areas so that undesirableindividuals can be culled and desirable individualskept.

Budd points out that most “wrecks” for producersoccur because animals aren’t ready to move. Cowsdon’t move well without their calves, he says, and acow without her calf moves slowly and eventuallyruns back, taking most of the herd with her.

He says ranchers can help themselves by planningmoves that coincide with a decrease in the abundanceof nutritious forage in one location and an abundanceof food in a new location. Doing so exchanges anegative motivator (lack of food) with a positive(abundant food). If the pattern is repeated enough,cattle will move readily because they have learnedthat good things happen when they move.

By encouraging cows and calves to use uplands, anddiscouraging use of riparian areas, it is possible toenhance dispersion and to obtain more uniform use ofall land.

Provenza says because adult animals have a habit ofreturning to the home ranges of their mothers, ridingcan be used to change food and habitat selectionbehaviors of calves kept as replacements in a herd.

Eating particular foods and living in particularenvironments as young animals increases the fre-

Many live blackbrush plants, like this one,only look like they are playing dead.

Fred Provemza

9 UTAH SCIENCE

quency of those behaviors when they become adults,he says.

“Calves that have learned to prefer foods in riparianareas frequent riparian areas as adults, just as peoplewho have learned to like pizza as youngsters frequentpizza parlors as adults.

He says managers who retain replacement heifersfrom their own herd use the power of experience earlyin life. They select for animals reared in the environ-ment where they will need to make a living, and savethemselves the stress of the so-called “year from hell”that occurs as replacements from other areas adapt tonew environments.

Striving for the routine

Habits or routines are patterns of acquired behaviorthat have been repeated so often they are automaticand thus often difficult to break.

Habits, by their nature, can become a deterrent toexploring new possibilities, for both foraging animaland humans, Provenza says.

“There is an on-going tension between curiosity aboutnew things and a suspicion of them,” he says. “Whennutritional and physiological conditions are adequate,familiarity breeds content and strange foods will beavoided.”

He says foraging behavior, after years of selectingparticular foods and forage in specific locations, canbecome rigid to the point that the behavior appears tobe the animal’s nature. It is, in fact, habit that has beenlearned.

Change Begets Change

Animals are more reluctant to make transitions fromthe familiar to the unfamiliar as they age and become set

in their ways.

However, change is inevitable at all ages due to fluctuationsand perturbations in social and physical environments.

Nothing is more variable than the weather, and nothing has abigger impact on plants and herbivores, yet it is one of theleast predictable of natural phenomena. Weather influencesif, when and how much plants produce; it also influencesplant chemistry.

In turn, plants influence if, when and how much herbivoresproduce. Weather also influences where herbivores go. Instudies on summer range in Idaho, drought caused markedchanges in home ranges of cattle. During a drought, cattlethat typically spent the summer in one valley were forced towalk to water in an adjacent canyon. They then returned tothe home area to forage and rest.

Experiences early in life and drought interacted to influencecattle use of the environment.

Individuals preferred the home range of their mother, butdrought caused them to move at least temporarily tounfamiliar locations.

Animals learn many things from their mothers, including food andhabitat selection behaviors.

This goat learned to eat blackbrush . . .and like it.

Research by Provenza’s group shows that sheep inunfamiliar environments prefer food they know overfood they don’t, even if the familiar food has previ-ously made them sick. The studies also show thatwhen animals become ill after eating both familiar andnovel foods, they will avoid the novel foods but not thefamiliar ones in ensuing meals.

If they become ill after a meal of novel foods, theyavoid the foods whose flavors are most unfamiliar.

“Collectively, these results show the cautious regardanimals have for new foods specifically and anythingnovel generally,” Provenza says.

Typically asconditions inthe environ-ment worsen,animals areforced toexplore newoptions. In away, necessitybecomes themother ofinvention, hesays.

“The key is notto let short-

The Utah Agricultural Experiment Station 9

Calves reared by cows during a drought learned differenthabitat selection behaviors than calves reared during yearsof ample moisture.

Different experiences early in life help explain why someadult cows had home ranges that encompass several valleys,whereas others had home ranges that include only onevalley.

The tendency to explore options that may or may not payoff is higher in animals that are nutritionally deficient thanin animals that are meeting their nutritional needs.Ruminants experiencing deficits readily eat novel foods,including items that well-fed animals avoid.

Angora goats deficient in protein sample novel foods,including woodrat houses because chambers inside thehouses contain a cake of urine-soaked (nitrogen-rich)vegetation that helps rectify the goats’ nitrogen deficit.

Horses deficient in selenium eagerly eat supplementalblocks that contain selenium for similar reasons. Lambs fed abasal diet inadequate in macronutrients quickly ingest novelfoods high in protein or energy while lambs fed a basal dietadequate in macronutrients are neophobic.

These cows of Jim Winder’s in southwest New Mexico deal withdrought conditions on a daily basis.

Fred Provemza

Mar

y D

onah

ue

Homebodiesand wanderers

Homebodies stick with whatworks; they don’t readily get “fed

up with” what is familiar to them.Wanderers behave in a whimsicalway. They are satiated readily.

Provenza’s research shows that somelambs are homebodies and some arewanderers. Experiments on mother-offspring interactions show that mostlambs are homebodies—they go withmother and do what she does.However, roughly 10 to 20 percent are adventurers—theygo their own way and do their own thing.

Likewise, most lambs areneophobic—they regardnovel foods with caution.But some lambs have littlefear of eating novel foodsor being in novelenvironments. Adventur-ers with little fear of theunknown either end updead or they discover newresources.

The percentage who trynew things actually allowfor the group to adapt.

It is the same withhumans, Provenza says.People who weighinformation carefully andseek to optimize theirbehavior provide stabilityand efficiency in society.However, the smallernumber who behaverandomly and ignoreconventional rationality,enable the system toadapt creatively to newchallenges.

10 UTAH SCIENCE

❂MORE INFO

Fred Provenza (435) 797-1604stan@cc.usu.edu

sightednessblind us toopportuni-ties tochangebehavior—our own andthat of thecreatures wemanage.”

New Mexicorancher Jim Winder uses a creative combinationof supplemental food, water, sirens and motorbikes tomove livestock.

The cattle learn that there will no longer be wateravailable in the “old” area—the fence around thewater will be closed—and there will be food and wateravailable in the “new” area.

The key is to train the animals to recognize that thesiren means positive reinforcement (food, water, salt)in the new area, and punishment (lack of water andsalt) in the “old area.”

Winder, a 4th-generation rancher, says he is generallytrying to move toward change and innovation insteadof bucking it because he considers ranching in theWest “a house on fire. We have to find ways toinnovate or we’ll lose a way of life.” JT

What these lambs eat out in the fieldon their own depends, in large part, ontheir early experiences in life.

Fred Provenza, Jim Winder (center), and hisranch hand discuss new ranching methods onthe Winder ranch in southwest New Mexico.

Mary D

onahue

S

FINDING A NICHE

BY GOING

ORGANIC

ome call it organic or alternative farming.Some call it crazy. John Borski, president of theNorthern Utah Organic Group, calls it “respon-sible farming”.

Beyond the search for what to call it, finding aconsistent definition of organic farming can beproblematic as well. And the issues that crop upwhen discussing organic farming are often farmore complicated and deeply felt than what’s in aname.

In general, organic farming refers to agriculturalsystems that produce food and fiber without theuse of synthetic pesticides, fertilizers and otherchemicals. Organic farmers rely on biologicaldiversity, heavily composted soils, informationshared with each other and a market comprisedof consumers who believe that organic meanssafer, healthier and tastier.

But what is ‘organic’ in one place may not besomewhere else. There are currently no federalregulations defining organic for the country. TheUSDA began drafting regulations after theOrganic Food Production Act of 1990 was passedby Congress. But the proposed rules were notpublished until 1997, and then met with criticismfrom growers and from state agencies that wouldbe charged with enforcing the regulations. Theystill have not become law.

At this year’s Utah Green Industry conference,Ed Bianco of the Utah Departmentof Agriculture and Food explained that the statehas not moved forward drafting rules of its own

to define and regulate organic food productionbecause local rules will have to comply withfuture federal regulations. And state agricultureleaders had plenty of concerns with the federalregulations proposed in 1997.

Bianco said language in the regulations wasfrequently unclear. Among the more seriousambiguities were not quantifying “insignificant”amounts of chemical residues that could bepermitted, or the “small portion” of non-organicfeed that could be given to organically raisedanimals “as necessary”, nor did they limit howoften the non-organic feed might be deemed“necessary.” There were also big financialconcerns among state agencies that would beresponsible for monitoring organic certificationbut without compensation from the federalgovernment, Bianco said.

At the conference, Borski said the Northern UtahOrganic Group and organic grower organizationsin other states were also unsatisfied by theUSDA’s proposed rule. Among their objectionswere provisions allowing use of some syntheticchemicals, irradiation during food processing anduse of hormones and antibiotics in cattle thatcould still be certified organic.

So for now, private certification groups offer theirservices, for a fee, but regulations vary fromgroup to group, Borski said. Currently, theNorthern Utah Organic Group has 25 growersseeking certification and 15 certified farmers.While Borski grows a wide variety of vegetables,fruits and flowers at his Kaysville farm, mostgrowers in the group are grain farmers.

The Utah Agricultural Experiment Station 12

Gar

y N

euen

swan

der

With precarious profit margins haunting growers,organic or not, why do people take on the addedchallenges of organic farming? Many have analmost evangelical zeal about promoting organicmethods and very strong beliefs about the kindsof food they put into their bodies. They also havegrave concerns about the effects of syntheticchemicals on human health and the land, Borskisaid. Some see the organic food market as agrowing and highly profitable niche, causingBorski to stress the importance of ethics inaddition to simply meeting certification require-ments. Issues of being good stewards of the land,open space preservation and the importanceof supporting small, local farms are also issuesBorski and his colleagues promote.

In addition to a lack of consistent rules andguidelines, organic farmers often find a frustrat-ing lack of information coming from sources thattraditionally assist agriculture. Because research

done on organicmethods andoutcomes is onlya tiny pieceof the agricul-tural research pie,Borski said heand othergrowers relylargely on sharinginformation witheach other,reading whatever

they can about plants, insects, soil and water,experimenting with their own ideas.

USU plant scientist Larry Rupp, an organizerof this year’s Green Industry Conference, saidthere is increasing interest in organic farmingamong growers, but little solid research on whichto report. There are people willing to shareanecdotal information about their practices, butscientists don’t base presentations and papers onstories of what may or may not have worked in asingle, specific incidence. Scientists design andconduct experiments, study their colleagues’sfindings, analyze data then write and presentpapers in hopes that others will validate theirwork by repeating the experiment and reachingthe same conclusion.

Utah Agricultural Experiment Station DirectorPaul Rasmussen said there have been relativelyfew requests for scientists to spend time onorganic methods, with the exception of someintegrated pest management techniques such astrapping, disrupting mating and using insectpredators to control pests.

13 UTAH SCIENCE

John Borski, president of the Northern Utah Organic Group, checks somestriped eggplant on his organic farm in Kaysville.

“There is also a misconception among manypeople that if it’s organic it’s safe,” saidRasmussen. “But there are many toxic compoundsin plants that occur naturally.”

He added that price is what drives most consum-ers. While some are willing to pay a higher pricefor organic foods and accept produce thatsometimes appears less than “perfect”, the largerpart of the market wants to pay a lower price forproduce with a predictable taste and appearance.

That raises the problem of making things difficultfor farmers and processors in the United Stateswho do use synthetic chemicals so that they leavethe market and leave price-conscious consumersdependant on imported foods with lower pricetags and unknown pesticide histories.

Borski said he has no problem marketing hisproduce, in part because selling things has alwaysbeen one of his strengths and in part, he believes,because people search out good, organic food andflowers. His produce stand in Kaysville staysbusy from late spring through the fall with astream customers, though early on he sometimestook less than an “organic price” for the produce.He sees educating consumers about his methodsand the results as part of being an organic farmer,and has developed a base of devoted customerswho willingly look past an occasional worm to getto the sweet corn they desire and who know thatthe best tomatoes aren’t always uniform in sizeand color.

— Lynnette Harris UAES Information Office

❂MORE INFO

John Borski (801) 546-5221

Larry Rupp (435) 797-2099

The Utah Agricultural Experiment Station 14

larryr@ext.usu.edu

“People wonder why I do this, but to me it’s justmore practical to pay closer attention to my soiland water, treat my soil like a living thing andcompost right than to spend thousands of dollarson chemicals and equipment,” Borski said.“Chemical companies and big farm operations canpromote their products to death. It’s up to allof us in organic farming to tell our story and tryto make a difference ourselves.” LH

Gary N

euenswander

Organic product sections are starting to appear in local grocery storesand many consumers are willing to pay the higher prices for the organicproducts.

HOTLIN

E TRANSPLANTED TREES AND SLOWER GROWTH RATES

In arid climates such as the Intermountain West, trans-planted trees can recover fairly quickly from water stressafter being moved, but their growth rates are much slower tocatch up, new research shows.

The USU Department of Plants, Soils and Biometeorologyreports that 18 weeks after the April 1995 transplanting ofthree Norway maples and three littleleaf linden the treeshad recovered leaf water potential of nontransplanted trees.

However, even after two years, neither of the transplantedtree species had recovered to nontransplant apical growthrates .

The study was undertaken because the establishment rate oftransplanted trees in low-humidity regions is not known.Research has primarily been conducted in areas where humid-ity is high and evaporation demand is much lower.

All six trees in the study survived, but researchers advisearea arborists, landscape contractors and horticulturistsworking with transplanted field-grown trees with limitedirrigation to be aware that the length of time required fortrees to establish could be much longer than research inother parts of the country indicate.

14 UTAH SCIENCE

S A G E B R U S H X A S X F O R A G E ?

Although it’s widespread, nutritious and dominates manyplant communities, big sagebrush is all but ignored bygrazing animals.

It is a nutritious plant but considered so toxic that it detersfeeding by herbivores. Despite that, interest in increasing itsvalue as a forage plant as well as suppressing its spreadremains high.

New research with lambs shows that they will increase theirintake of sagebrush by 50 to 100 percent if they are givensupplements of barley and activated charcoal.

More info

Rich Koenig (435) 797-2278richk@ext.usu.edu

continued on next page

USU’S DAIRY BREEDING PROGRAM TOPS

The Utah Agricultural Experiment Station 16

The study indicates that barley provides macronutrients thatmay facilitate detoxification of the terpenes and other poisonsin sagebrush.

Activated charcoal may absorb the toxic compounds, allowinganimals to increase sagebrush intake. Because it is highlyporous and absorbent, activated charcoal is commonly used inpoison control centers to counteract drug overdoses and acci-dental poisonings.

Increased use of sagebrush as feed would not only provide anew food source, grazing it would increase types of vegetationin those areas.

More info

Roger Banner (435) 797-2472

More info

Jonathan Merriam (435) 245-6067jonm@ext.usu.edu

Utah State University’s breeding program has beendubbed best in the nation by several prominent repre-sentatives of the dairy industry from several states.

At the Spring Western National Holstein show, which waspart of Richmond’s Black and White Days, more than150 dairy cattle from seven states were entered.

USU dairy received the Premier Breeder award, whichwas considered the top honor at the show. The CaineDairy, a farm operated by USU, tied for Premier Exhibi-tor and exhibited Reserve Champion Bull and ReserveChampion Cow. First Place was also given to best threefemale cows.

There was also an All Utah Dairy Show in Plain City on April23. USU placed first in six classes.

These awards are noteworthy because they let other peopleknow about the breeding program, said Jonathan Merriam, aninstructor in the dairy herdsman program. The goal is todevelop highly productive cows through careful breeding andselection. Now the program is beginning to grow in enroll-ment, thanks to increased faculty, but there are still threetimes more jobs than there are graduates, he said.

At the rate the population is growing, there is less land onwhich to raise cattle—forcing the industry to become moreefficient and productive. Research is focused on increasingmilk flow and nutritional value such as calcium and butterfat perounce of milk.

Frank Robinson

17 UTAH SCIENCE

U tah farmers have a long history of regard- ing retirement much like the weather—aforce pretty much beyond their control.

The attitude has been changing during the past 15years, according to a new survey showing thatfarmers today look at retirement as something toplan for, not something to just try to get through.

The survey, which was sponsored by the UtahAgricultural Experiment Station and conductedby the Department of Human Environments inUSU’s College of Family Life, shows that 80percent of farmers in Utah now have a savingsinvestment plan for retirement.

The survey, which addressed several aspects offinancial planning, also shows that farmers are lessindebted, with 35 percent reporting they are nowdebt-free, and another 11 percent saying they willbe by the end of 1999.

The survey polled 280 working farmers across thestate by mail this past year; results were compiledin May.

The survey clearly shows that farmers are makingtheir financial plans almost in the same propor-tion as people in other businesses, said JoanMcFadden, department head and co-coordinatorof the survey. “This was not the case, even as lateas the 1980s.”

Some farmers (23 percent) are banking on thesale of the farm as a source for retirement income,a figure that reflects the current pace at whichfarmland is being sold for development in thestate.

That figure is counter to what farmers say theywould like to see happen to their farm: 80 percentwould like the farm to stay in the family and touse the income from the farm during retirement.

FinancialPlanning

Downonthe

Farm

The Utah Agricultural Experiment Station 18

The survey also reconfirms the notion that farmersin Utah supplement their farm incomes to a largedegree: 33 percent of those reporting they workedfull time on the farm also said they worked full timeoff the farm.

Additionally, 44 percent of those that said theyworked full time on the farm said they worked part-time off thefarm.

Fifty-eightpercentof those whosaid theyworked parttime on thefarmreported thatthey also worked fulltime off the farm.

By reporting you are afarmer you also reportyou are something else,Smith said. Obviously,not everyone chooses tofarm full-time, but thelong tradition of havingto supplement theactivity with other jobsshows through, she said.

Seventeen percent saidtheir spouses also farmfull-time; 42 percent said their spouses are part-timefarmers. (Ninety-two percent of farmers in thesurvey were male.)

Just over half said farming represents about 25percent of the family’s income.

For farmers 40 years old or younger, only 40 percentsaid their total gross family income is made by

Of those who said they plan to sell their farm, 19percent said they would sell to the highest bidderregardless of intended use. Fifteen percent said theywould sell the farm only if it were used as a farm.About 6 percent said they would subdivide theproperty.

Most of the farmers (93 percent) said they considerSocial Security a prominent source of income inretirement. Half said they have a pension plan.Roughly 60 percent said they plan to lease or renttheir farmland.

The most common form of savings among farmers,according to the study, is the Individual RetirementAccount (IRA)—42 percent said they have an IRA.

The survey shows that farmers not only match thedesire of other American workers to make personalfinancial plans, they are saving at about the same orslightly less rate.

About 11 percent said they have savings accountstotaling between $75,000 and $100,000; 9 percentsaid they have IRAs at that level, and 15 percentsaid they have stocks totaling that amount.

The largest grouping of farmers (27 percent) saythey have savings accounts totaling between $1,000and $10,000. The next largest group (19 percent)reported they have IRAs in that range.

According to Stacy Smith, co-coordinator of thesurvey, while most farmers report using a profes-sional financial planner to map out retirement, theplanner’s influence was not readily apparent in theirresponses of what they planned to do with the farmin retirement.

However, those who did/do not use financialplanners, most do not plan to sell their farm forincome in retirement. Of those who did/do usefinancial planners, 33 percent said they are planningto sell their farm property for retirement income.

19 UTAH SCIENCE

Sources which contribute to farm income. . .

Percentage of farmers who only grow or produce. . .

Grain

Forage

Beef

Sheep

Dairy

Vegetables

Fruit

Other

0% 5% 10% 15% 20%

Grain

Forage

Beef

Sheep

Dairy

Vegetables

Fruit

Other

20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

The Utah Agricultural Experiment Station 20

❂MORE INFO

Joan McFadden (435) 797-1570mcfadden@flcl.usu.edu

Percent of annual grossfamily income earned byfarming. . .

Total gross family incomebefore taxes in 1996. . .

farming. Almost the same number of farmers inthat age group said only a quarter of theirfamily’s income is from farming.

For those between 41 and 50, 31 percent said allof the family’s income is made farming. Only 13percent of farmers between 51 and 60 said all ofthe family’s income is from farming. The same istrue for farmers 61 to 70 years old.

Other findings in the survey:• 70 percent of all farmers surveyed plan toremain living at their current location afterretirement. Those most likely to move and retirecompletely from farming are those reportingincomes of between $50,000 and $80,000.• 93 percent of those who earn all of their family’sincome from farming operate dairies. Most ofthose who report making 50 to 75 percent oftheir income from farming also operate dairies.• 70 percent of those who want to sell the farmand invest the money for retirement had 50percent or more of their income from dairyfarming.• Half of those farmers making $80,000 per yearare between 61 and 70 years old.• More than half of those in the 40 years old oryounger age group made between $25,000 and$50,000.• Asked about their financial activity in 1997, thelast complete year prior to the survey, farmerssaid they invested between $1,000 and $5,000 inan IRA plan; 17 percent said they contributed thesame amount into savings. Only 4 percent saidthey invested between $5,000 and $10,000 and 2percent said they had saved between $10,000 and$25,000 in 1977. JT

25% of grossfamily incomefrom farming

50% of grossfamily income

75% of grossfamily income

100% of grossfamily income

Less than$10,000-$25,000

37%$50,000-$80,000

$80,000-$95,000or more

$25,000-$50,000

21%

27%

15%

10%

55%14%

20%

21 UTAH SCIENCE

little straw or sawdust, some turning and sometime are helping poultry producers dispose ofmanure even before it leaves the coop.

In-house composting is replacing the traditionalscrape, haul and spread method of manure disposal,and in the process, flies, odor and complaints from theneighbors are being kept to a minimum.

Because it is a relatively new option for high-rise layerfacilities, many questions remain to be answered andoperating parameters developed for in-housecomposting.

Local producers who are trying this new form ofcomposting have had varying success, mainly becausethe type and amount of carbon source and turningfrequency, plus how to adjust for the different ages ofbirds and time of year, are yet to be determined.

A 390,000-layer hen operation near Provo became thefirst facility in Utah to try in-house composting twoyears ago. Manager Mike Shepherd said he wasinitially interested in trying it to control flies, and wasinitially skeptical.

He said flies have been controlled much better thanhe had expected, the volume of manure has beenreduced by 50 percent through composting, and muchof the compost produced is sold to area urbanresidents as fertilizer.

Shepherd says the large amount of manure producedis the result of being what is considered a largeoperation in the West, and that size of the operation isdictated by competition by producers in the Midwest,some of which have 10 million chickens.

He noted that 40 years ago there were 500 eggproducers in Utah. There are now four, even thoughthe number of birds has not decreased.

Shepherd and Sons has experienced common prob-lems related to fly control, odor and limited manuredisposal options, problems that have been aggravatedby urban encroachment

Solving some of these problems was the goal ofseveral trials requested by the company. They askedUSU for help in determining specific schedules tosuccessfully compost inside their facilities.

A

IN

THE

COOP

Gary N

euenswander

This 390,000-layer hen operation near Provo is the first facility inUtah to try in-house composting. In the bottom photo, mechanicalturning of manure in the layer house generates temperatures highenough and moisture low enough to inhibit fly reproduction andlarvae development.

The Utah Agricultural Experiment Station 22

Most research into composting has been conducted inhumid climates in other parts of the country, saidDean Miner, Utah County Extension Director. But ifthe process can ultimately be implemented here,many manure-related problems faced by egg produc-ers would be eliminated, he said.

After conducting a series of trials at the plants, Minerand USU colleagues Rich Koenig and Bruce Millerreport that the addition of a carbon source coupledwith mechanical turning of manure in the layerhouses generate temperatures high enough andmoisture low enough to inhibit fly reproduction andlarvae development.

Temperatures exceeding the lethal level for houseflies can be achieved by composting manure insidelayer houses with carbon-to-nitrogen ratios much

lower than those recommended for standardcomposting operations. This increases allowablemanure collection times before material volumeexceeds the capacity of the compost turner, accordingto the report.

The growers have traditionally used a feed-basedlarvicide for fly control. Also, they removed manurefrom the buildings only for a few weeks during springand fall when field use and weather conditions wereconducive to land application.

Frequently, as much as eight months of manure wasremoved at one time. Neighbor complaints about fliesand odor were common during those times.

The growers moved to in-house composting inFebruary 1998 as an alternative.

According to the report, aftersix weeks of in-housecomposting there was less odorand flies were adequatelycontrolled with a single topicalapplication of a larvicide to thewindrows.

The composting was unsuccess-ful in a building that housedpullets just beginning eggproduction. Adequatecomposting temperatures werenever reached probably becauseof the greater moisture contentin the pullet manure.

Utah County Extension Director, Dean Miner, and some of the in-housecomposting in progress. The chickens are above, hence the wide-brim hat.

Gar

y N

euen

swan

der

❂MORE INFO

Rich Koenig (435) 797-2278

Bruce Miller (435) 797-2232

richk@ext.usu.edu

23 UTAH SCIENCE

The compost was uniform,granular and had a dark color.

Researchers also found:

•In-house composting is incomplete, and additionalcomposting of materials in the absence of continuedadditions of fresh manure will be required to com-plete the process.

•There are few differences between the sawdust andwheat straw used as carbon sources in these trials.Sufficiently high composting temperatures wereachieved with either carbon source and whereavailable, the lower cost material could be used.

•In-house windrow temperatures decline rapidly afterturning, and proper turning frequency is critical tomaintaining critical temperatures for fly control.Turning frequencies of two to three days are neces-sary for layer manure in the first two weeks ofaccumulation, while 3 to 4 days are adequate for layermanure later in the accumulation cycle.

•Increasing the carbon source may facilitate in-housecomposting of pullet manure, however, this alsoreduces the duration of manure collection beforevolumes exceed the capacity of the compost turner.

•Ammonia was not a problem in these trials, likelybecause high ambient air temperatures and ventilationof the buildings. However, under conditions ofinadequate ventilation ammonia may be a problem forbirds as well as workers. Ammonia concerns during in-house composting bear further research.

•The operators indicated that the switch fromLarvadex in the feed to topical applications ofPyrenone when required to control flies saved enoughmoney to equal the purchase cost of the compostturning machine in a little more than two years. (Thecompost turner attaches to a skid steer loader used formany other purposes on the farm. The two-yearpayback would cover only the turner.) JT

bemiller@cc.usu.edu

MineralsLiquid/Water

Fresh Organic Matter

Humus or Aged Organic Matter

MineralsWater

Compost PileOr Windrow

Microorganisms

Raw Materials Finished Compost

O2

Water Vapor CO2 GasHeat

Gary N

euenswander

One oftheShepardfamily,who runthe Provolayer henoperationgiving in-housecompostinga try,displays abag ofthepackagedcompost.

The Composting Process

Composting is the aerobic, or oxygen-requiring, decomposition of or-ganic materials by microorganisms under controlled conditions. Factorsthat affect the compost process are oxygen and aeration, the carbon tonitrogen ratio, moisture, particle size, temperature, and time.

The Utah Agricultural Experiment Station 24

Erin Naegle

Gar

y N

euen

swan

der

S t u d e n t S p o t l i g h t

Erin Naegle can’t say for sure, but her native chlorophyll-deprived landscape in eastern Utah might have had as much to dowith her choosing plant science as the challenge she saw in thefield.

“Maybe it was the stark beauty around Helper that made greenplants so interesting to me,” says Naegle, the 1998-99 scholar ofthe year in the College of Agriculture. “But I’ve just always beenintrigued by plants; they may not walk around, but they arecomplicated and vital and we still don’t know everything aboutthem.”

Naegle’s award-winning work the past two years at USU hashelped science learn a little more about them. She, along withmentor and plant scientist William Campbell, helped determinethe reason why wheat in experiments aboard the space stationsMir and Svet didn’t grow. The NASA-supported research showedthat an excess of ethylene gas in the space stations dwarfed thewheat as well as prohibited normal pollen development.

She received the best poster award and first place in biologicalsciences at the 1998 Pacific Division meeting of the AmericanAssociation for the Advancement of Science. The work is aimedat finding ways for astronauts to grow their own food on extendedspace flight missions.

Naegle has been studying plant structure by means of a electronmicroscope about the size of a washing machine. She said she wasreluctant at first to spend so much time with amicroscope because it was so foreign. But she soondiscovered a whole new world in there. “It was likethe first time I went snorkeling. The detail andintricacy in a plant on a microscopic level isastounding, just to see how much work a plantputs into itself.”

This microscope works with a higher resolutionfor a closer view, using an electron light instead ofthe usual white light. Magnets are used wherenormally glass lenses would be to bend electronsto a point of focus. The cylindrically shaped lensis kept under a high power vacuum to keepoutside elements from interfering with thedelicate electrons.

Naegle, who already has three papers published, this summerbegins a graduate program at North Carolina State University.She will be part of a new research project investigatingstructure and stress of weeds on soybeans.

She says after graduate school she wants to teach as well as focusher own research on the effects of chemical and othernonbiological stresses on plant structure, noting that suchfundamental scientific research would improve the efficiencyand quality of field crops.

She says that the mixture of fundamental and applied sciencecourses at USU gave her a firm foundation in the fundamentalsciences along with an appreciation of how basic science is anintegral component of field crop production.

“From my own undergraduate experience, I know the influ-ences that motivating professors can have on students’ lives,” shesays. “There is a need for professors who show through examplehow stimulating the sciences are and what a tremendousmeasure can be accomplished in one lifetime.”

“I want to feel like I know a philosophy of science inside andout so I don’t need a textbook to give correct answers whenstudents come knocking. I want to ask those questions andpursue answers that will advance society’s understanding of thefascinatingly complex world in which we live.”

The world is full of unanswered and unasked questions, shesays. “I want to ask some of those questions and pursue answersthat will advance society’s understanding of the fascinatinglycomplex world in which we live.”

By Laura Anderson

25 UTAH SCIENCE

Answer to last issue'sphotoquiz (left): Thisis a PrecisionHerbicide Applicatorused to sprayherbicide on small testplots on the Experi-ment Station's farms.The applicator wasinvented, designed,and built at USU.G

ary

Neu

ensw

ande

r

PHOTOQUIZ Clue: This object does a lot ofscientists’ work for them.

James Thalman (JT), Editor(435) 797-2189jamest@cc.usu.edu

EDITOR'S FOOTNOTE

The Rock of Ages and the ages of rocks collided again inKansas this summer when the state board of publiceducation there decided that students will no longerneed to know about evolution or the Big Bang theory inorder to graduate.

The new standards do not forbid the teaching ofevolution, but students won’t be tested on it. Thereaction of many scientists around the country and onthis campus has ranged from indifference to aggravation.Some have said the decision is like making studentsstudy chemistry without the periodic table or discussliterature without including Shakespeare.

The general scientific community’s response aside, thegeneral public, which probably hasn’t followed thedebate and has only a vague association with thesciences, can’t help but wonder what it is about evolutionthat threatens religious tradition or other human ethicalvalues. They must be getting the notion that scienceinherently runs counter to religion and might even befaith’s anti-matter.

The real question, however, is why does this debatecontinue. The nature of science—hypothesis, carefulobservation, evaluation and peer criticism—does not

dictate or devalue whatever purpose in life or religiousorientation people choose.

Stephen Jay Gould, the noted Harvard paleontologist,puts it this way: “They are the two great tools ofhuman understanding and endeavor and ought to beable to operate in complementary—not contrary—fashion in their own realms. Science and religionshould be equal, mutually respecting partners, each themaster of its own domain, and with each domain vitalto human life in a different way.”

Before other school boards become emboldened tochange their own science standards they shouldunderstand that at the center of the debate in Kansas isthe question of how the world originated, less aboutwhat has happened since. Because no one can turnback the giant clock, that question ultimately becomesa matter of faith to both the fundamental creationistand to the fundamental evolutionist. Deep down, oneview or the other or a combination of the two justseems to be true.

The more advanced approach in the evolution of thereligion vs. science debate would be to move pasttelling students what to think (or what not to think, inthis case) and toward teaching them how to think.Instead of bickering over the man-ape questions, amore evolved approach here would be to teachstudents the role of science in life today, such as thedramatic new understanding of plant metabolism orhow evolution is the process by which microbesbecome resistant to antibiotics.

RODNEY J. BROWN

DEAN OF THE

COLLEGE OF

AGRICULTURE

H. PAUL RASMUSSEN

DIRECTOR

UTAH AGRICULTURAL

EXPERIMENT STATION

GEORGE H. EMERTPRESIDENT

UTAH STATE

UNIVERSITY

UTAH SCIENCE is a quarterly publication devoted pri-

marily to Experiment Station research in agriculture

and related areas. Published by the Utah Agricultural

Experiment Station, Utah State University, Logan, Utah

84322-4845.

This publication will be sent free on request in the

United States and to libraries and other public institu-

tions in the U.S.. Subscriptions mailed to individuals

and institutions in other countries cost $35.00 annu-

ally which includes shipping and handling. Please in-

clude a mailing label from a recent issue of UTAH

SCIENCE with any request for change of address.

To avoid overuse of technical terms, sometimes trade

names of products or equipment are used. No

endorsement of specific products or firms named

is intended, nor is criticism implied of those not

mentioned.

Articles and information appearing in UTAH SCIENCE

become public property upon publication. They may

be reprinted provided that no endorsement of a spe-

cific commercial product or firm is stated or implied

in so doing. Please credit the authors, Utah State

University, and UTAH SCIENCE.

Equal Opportunity in employment and education isan essential priority for Utah State University, and one

to which the University is deeply committed. In

accordance with established laws, discrimination based

on race, color, religion, national origin, gender, age,

disability, or veteran’s status is prohibited for

employees in all aspects of employment and for stu-

dents in academic programs and activities. Utah State

University is dedicated to providing a healthy equal

opportunity climate and an environment free from

discrimination and harassment.

GARY NEUENSWANDER

MEDIA SPECIALIST

JAMES THALMAN

EDITOR

MARY DONAHUE

GRAPHIC ARTIST

FEATURED RESEARCHERS

Utah Science is on line.Check out our Web page at:http://agx.usu.edu/agx/

LYNNETTE HARRIS

RESEARCH WRITER

Fred Provenza Joan McFadden

Rich Koenig Bruce Miller

Utah Agricultural Experiment Station

Logan, UT 84322-4845

Director