Field Crop News

Website Address: http://fcn.agronomy.psu.edu/

June 23, 2009 Vol. 09:16

IN THIS ISSUE:

Weather Outlook
Insect Update
Haylage Harvest
Marketing Update
Small Grain Harvest Considerations
Midseason Weed Control Issues
Taking Care of Our Soils
Upcoming Events

Weather Outlook — Paul Knight, Pennsylvania State Climatologist

A noticeably warmer and much less rainy week is expected. There will be two opportunities for showers/t-storms. The first will come later Thursday into early Friday with about 85% of the region receiving between –.01 and .25”. Another chance of showers and thunderstorms is expected on Sunday with only about 50% of the region receiving rainfall. Expect good drying conditions on Wednesday and Thursday with some readings approaching 90 degrees F on Thursday. Another warm day is likely east of the Appalachians on Sunday. The first half of next week will be cooler than average with some 40’s overnight in the northern valleys. The timing now favors the return of warm, humid air with some showers during the 4th of July weekend.

A notable wet period is still possible in the latter half of July or August. The hurricane season should have most of the storms develop after August 20. Very cool conditions are likely during September, with perhaps an unusually early end to the growing season in the northern counties. The development of a weak El Nino conditions in the Pacific portend a wetter winter in the state.

Insect Update — John Tooker, PSU Entomology Specialist

Compared to past years, 2009 has been a fairly quiet year for insect problems in Pennsylvania. This lack of substantial activity is reflected in large portions of the Midwest. There have, of course, been occasional issues with some species such as alfalfa weevil, cereal leaf beetle, and, of course, slugs. Most of the current insect issues being faced by growers have been addressed recently in this newsletter, but I thought I would return to them briefly.

Potato leafhoppers have arrived in Pennsylvania and are now common in alfalfa fields. In some places their populations are large and active enough to be causing “hopperburn” where foliage turns yellow (or even red) at the tips and this color spreads toward the base of the leaf as feeding continues. If hopperburn is occurring in the first cutting of alfalfa, harvest rather than chemical treatment might be a good option, but then the stubble of the second cutting would need to be watched carefully and monitored for possible treatment. Growers who have already taken the first cutting should keep a close eye on their second cutting for development of hopperburn. Details on scouting and thresholds are on a webpage of Penn State’s Department of Entomology (http://ento.psu.edu/extension/factsheets/potato-leafhopper-alfalfa). For future years, growers should keep in mind that there are lines of alfalfa that have good levels of resistance against potato leafhopper. These lines have glandular hairs that reduce leafhopper feeding.

We are hearing of more true armyworm troubles. Armyworms tend to be a problem in reduced tillage or no—till systems, particularly when corn is planted after a small—grain cover crop or when corn is adjacent to recently harvested small grains. If you have fields that fit these scenarios, it is probably a good idea to scout those fields because armyworm populations can develop quickly. Control is best achieved before caterpillars are one—inch long. The Penn State Agronomy Guide lists has details of some control options: http://agguide.agronomy.psu.edu/pm/sec2/sec2toc.cfm

Lastly, European corn borer and western corn rootworm are active in PA corn fields. Refer to the PA—PIPE system (http://agsci.psu.edu/news/spotlight/pa-pipe or http://pa-pipe.zedxinc.com/cgi-bin/index.cgi) for an estimate of their life stage and then scout non—Bt refuges for associated damage. These refuges can be protected with rescue treatments should economic thresholds be exceeded.

Haylage Harvest — Paul H. Craig, Dauphin County Extension Educator

Suddenly the weather has changed and finally another period of forage harvest weather has presented itself. Everywhere you look mowers are running non—stop. Second cutting, new seedings and even many older stands of Orchardgrass and late Timothy are being harvested. The commercial hay market is targeted for dry hay harvested in small square, round, or all sizes of large square bales. However, a large majority of forages harvested in Pennsylvania for the dairy industry are harvested as haylage and stored either in wrapped bales or silos.

Dry matter contents for optimum haylage harvest vary by the crop and the storage type. In general, optimum fermentation of haylages occurs at dry matter contents of 32 to 35% DM for grass forages and slightly drier, 40 to 45% DM for alfalfa crops. During the different fermentation stages many changes occur in the forage mass. The first phase occurs when aerobic bacteria rapidly consume plant sugars and oxygen and initiate a drop in pH. Hopefully, within hours, these bacteria will die off as a result of no more oxygen in the forage mass and a second type of bacteria, called anaerobic, develop under conditions in a forage mass without oxygen. These second bacteria feed on plant carbohydrates, produce acids, and further lower pH until the forage mass pH is too low for these anaerobic bacteria to survive. The process stops until oxygen is again introduced to the haylage. Once oxygen is available then yeasts, fungi and other bacteria will begin the spoilage period of the haylage.

To produce optimum haylage or silage multiple factors must be coordinated in the forage pile. Plant carbohydrates must be available; rained on hay makes poor silage. Moisture of the forage must be considered. Water is a buffer that slows down fermentation rates, but adequate moisture must be present for microbial growth. And, an oxygen free environment must be present for the desirable anaerobic bacteria to survive.

In round and square bales, wrapping must occur as soon as possible to densely packed bales. In upright silos and ag bags rapid filling and sealing is important. In bunkers and piles proper packing must be considered. Delivery rates to bunkers, with larger harvesters, can often exceed packing capacities.

A general rule for meeting weight needs of a packing tractor is this: A producer needs 800 pounds of packing weight per ton/hour delivery rate of forage. For example: Harvesting alfalfa haylage at 60 tons/hour, you would need 60 x 800 = 48,000 pounds or 24 tons of packing equipment. How do you compare?

In the Capital Region of PA, a bunker silo density study has been conducted since 2004. Since then 147 bunkers on 65 different farms have had their corn silage bunkers measured for packing density. Results reveal a wide variation in density levels across bunks and piles on both small and large farms. A target density of 14 pounds of dry matter per cubic foot is recommended. Of the 147 bunkers sampled, only 25% have achieved this target.

Three management practices can be easily be incorporated into packing piles and bunkers. The first would be to add as much weight to the packer as possible. Many managers have made concrete blocks to hang on the back of the tractor. The second change would be to over—inflate radial tires while packing. Over—inflated tires produce a smaller foot print which benefits surface compaction. And finally layer thickness: Packing a thin layer, less than 6 inches, results in better packing than thicker layers.

Marketing Update — John Berry, Lehigh County Extension Educator

I have always watched the dollar but now am paying more and more attention to oil price quotes at the Board of Trade as part of my information gathering on grain price trends. Somewhere above $70 per barrel crude, corn starts to be an energy commodity as much as a food and feed commodity. Oil seems to be heavily dependent on the strength of the dollar lately. Did you see the comments from the Russian president about taking a mix of currency as a gauge of price, not just the US dollar? So, not only are grain price movements responding to the strength of the dollar for value as an export item, but also as far as value as an oil substitute. Something to also think about: If the US reduces purchases from Chinese manufactures and distributors, how will China continue to demand US grains?

Looking at today’s market signals — any combination of reduced corn acres planted and reduced yield because of late planting, takes 2009/10 marketing year carryover stocks of corn to levels low enough to trigger supply rationing price increases. As an example, one million less acres with just a one bushel decrease in national average yield would reduce 2009/10 carryover stocks to about eight percent of usage. For the past ten years, carryover supply, as a percentage of usage, has been 10 to 12 percent. Two million acres less corn (a likely outcome) combined with a three bushel per acre decrease in yield, would leave the U.S with a carryover of only five percent of usage.

We are seeing improved weather in much of the bread—basket states. The eastern corn belt (IL, IN, OH, PA and southern coastal states) is uniformly wet and cool with the resulting challenges to crop production. This suggests a “good” basis for grain producers with little competing bushels locally. I’m still wondering how significant the current milk prices are for determining our grain price levels. This may not be the year to aggressively pre—price too many expected bushels. Nationally, wheat harvest is in full swing in many areas. We can expect lower price offers for delivery through early fall.

Funds were big—time sellers in Friday’s Commitment of Traders Report, dropping a massive 36,852 net corn contracts on the week ending last Tuesday, by losing over 22k longs and adding over 14k shorts. Beans lost over 4k net, while CBOT wheat by 6,718, and KC wheat by 1,801 net contracts. Index funds, meanwhile, were strong buyers, with net weekly gains in corn (+7,301), beans (+1,680), oil (+3,594), CBOT wheat (+2,877), and KC wheat (+885). Friday’s USDA Cattle on Feed Report was slightly supportive to the cattle market, with all on feed numbers coming in at 96.2% of last year, below the average 96.7% trade estimate. Placements were also shy of estimates, coming in at 86.2% of last year versus the average 88.3% guess, while marketings edged out 91.0% trade estimates, at 91.2% of last year.

For the grains; there is no margin for less than normal conditions to occur. When the dropping value of the dollar, rising oil price, increasing interest in commodities by non—commercial investors, recovering global demand, and simmering global political unrest are factored in, the stage is set for volatile commodity prices for the rest of this year and next.

Remember the August 14 deadline for signing an ACRE agreement at the FSA office. Now is the time to calculate how appropriate this program is for your farm enterprises.

Small Grain Harvest Considerations — Del Voight, Interim Grain Crop Specialist

Barley harvest is underway and as expected is suffering from low test weights. I am sure this will vary depending on stands that were treated for disease, varietal resistance and weather factors. Reported test weights range from a low of 31 lbs./bu., up to 41 locally in the Lebanon area. Dick Cole of PACMA reported some surprising 43lb test weights in Upper Dauphin. I am sure that wheat may follow this same course. However, if the weather moderates out of the alternating rains perhaps some test weights may be maintained. While PACMA still plans to take wheat in each load will receive a stick test for Deoxnivalenol (DON) and then separated accordingly.

What is DON? Deoxnivalenol (DON), sometimes referred to as vomitoxin, is a mycotoxin that may be produced in wheat and barley grain infected by the Fusarium head blight (FHB or scab) fungus, Fusarium graminearum. The occurrence of FHB in the field does not automatically mean that DON is present in the grain, but a high level of infected kernels in the harvested grain means DON likely will be present. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has established DON advisory levels to provide safe food and feed. In addition, the grain and malting industry may have more rigorous standards for DON levels in their purchased grain.

How is DON determined? DON is measured in grain via several laboratory methods, such as ELISA (Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay), a FluoroQuant test, or gas chromatography— electron capture (GC—EC) and gas chromatography—mass spectrometry (GC—MS) analytical methods. Grain elevators, private labs, grain industries, and university testing labs may provide these tests. Regardless of methods used for analysis, the key to getting reliable and representative DON results lies with grain sampling. Sampling error can be a significant source of variation in DON levels. More information about DON at: http://scabusa.org/home.

The major concern right now is scab. Extension Specialists to our south are reporting high levels of scab. In my plots I am finding the same incidence, however highly variable. In some plots the average head samples revealed about an 8–15% level of infection. These were fields that received a late application of fungicide. Some plots were as high as 40% infection that did not receive a fungicide application. Yield losses as high as 60% may occur in severely affected fields. Some reports from the south also validate the use of fungicides with a 70% suppression rate of head scab in plots. I also can find limited scab infection in my test plots that were fungicide treated late. Many growers had the products to protect, however due to excessive rains could not get the treatments on and thus scab infection occurred and are visible now. Here are some tips for management:

First of all here is a link for scab harvest management. It contains recommendations for testing services for infected wheat and numerous background factsheets. http://scabusa.org/home

Assess your stand. Count heads and determine the infection rate. If you get more than .2( a partial head)(2%) out of ten heads showing scab then concern is minimal and a plan to adjust the combine air speed to blow the light kernels out the back of the combine will suffice. Producers also may want to consider harvesting grain at 20 percent moisture, then artificially drying and cleaning the grain to enhance quality this season.

If the stand is moderate to severely infected, 1–2 out of ten (10%–20%), then in addition to combine adjustment a commercial cleaning might be needed before marketing. This could cost as much as $0.80/but is an option to ensure to blow the light kernels out of the mix. Combine the headlands and low lying areas separately. These areas typically have higher levels of DON due to higher plant populations and the fact that low areas can remain moist for longer periods.

Sampling the lots and testing for DON:
A quick “Stick Test” available from testing labs such as BioGen can be done to quickly determine the relative presence of DON, however it does not determine the actual amount. This test could be useful to determine storage locations and separation.

It takes time to sample lots without a Stick Test. For growers with on farm storage, consider storing wheat on the farm and sending samples to be tested to either a lab of your choice or your marketing source. If you choose to make a pile in the barn or storage area keep in mind that mixing infected wheat with clean wheat can add to the total DON levels and thus, infected wheat should be handled separately. Depending on the infection levels, most wheat can be fed to livestock but the producer still needs to get the wheat tested to be sure it is a safe levels for feeding.

Finally, Dr. Erick DeWolf from Kansas State wrote this article recently regarding scab management: http://www.oznet.ksu.edu/news//story/wheat_infected061808.aspx The lesson to be learned out of the last two years is to plant resistant varieties, avoid planting wheat in rotation with corn or other small grain susceptible to fusarium, and to utilize fungicides according to weather conditions.

Midseason Weed Control Issues — Dwight Lingenfelter, PSU Weed Science

As we proceed through the growing season, there are a few issues surrounding weed control and herbicide use. Below are some items to consider:
Rescue applications: We are receiving calls about weeds breaking through pre herbicides. With all of the recent rainfall and especially if reduced herbicide rates were used, a postemergence herbicide may be necessary to clean up some of the escaped weeds. However, keep in mind there are crop height restrictions on many of the post herbicides. Application restrictions can be found in the PSU Agronomy Guide or online at http://agguide.agronomy.psu.edu/pm/sec2/table2-2-14.cfm (corn).

Be cautious of herbicide drift: Certain herbicides especially, glyphosate and the PGR herbicides (dicamba, 2,4–D, etc.) can cause problems outside the field boundaries. To help reduce drift, use drift reducing nozzles such as venturi or air—inductions (AI) style tips. Most manufactures now make these tips as extended range models in order to reduce the spray pressure down to 15 psi. Also consider the difference between particle drift and vapor drift. Particle drift occurs when small droplets actually move and deposit onto leaf surfaces (this can be prevented by choice of nozzle, pressure, spray volume, application time, etc.). Vapor drift is related to the function of the herbicide formulation (e.g., ester vs. amine) and does not matter what kind of tip or pressure is used. It is impacted by temperature and relative humidity. For a more detailed discussion on spray drift and ways to reduce it, see: http://www.btny.purdue.edu/weedscience/2009/ReducingDrift09.pdf However, keep in mind, if using herbicides that require good spray coverage (e.g., Ignite, Gramoxone, Aim, etc.), AI tips may not be the best option unless certain adjustments are made to allow for better coverage including, higher spray volume, pressure, and boom height.

Sprayer cleanout: Proper sprayer cleanout is important especially when moving from one crop to another. There are still many reports of PGR herbicide injury on soybeans when applicators don’t properly clean out the sprayer after a corn application. Dicamba residues left in the sprayer still pose one of the biggest threats to soybean (and certain vegetable crops) when not thoroughly cleaned out. Dicamba—containing products include: Banvel, Clarity, Sterling, Distinct, Status, Marksman, Require Q, NortStar, Yukon and others. To get the most effective sprayer cleanout, simply rinsing with water will not work especially with plastic tanks and rubber hoses. Usually it requires a few steps with inclusion of ammonia and/or tank cleaner. For more details on sprayer cleanout see: http://www.extension.iastate.edu/Publications/PAT30.pdf

Hot weather and crop injury: Since the past week or so has been rainy and cloudy and the upcoming forecast is for hot weather, there is the potential for crop injury when post herbicides are applied. The general rule of thumb is to allow a few sunny days to pass after coming out of a rainy, cool period before applying herbicides. Since the plants are stressed, this allows them time to build up a thicker leaf surface and to get their metabolic processes functioning at a faster pace to detoxify the herbicide. Also, with all the moisture and sunlight the plants will be growing very quickly and are succulent, so consider using nonionic surfactant (NIS) instead of crop oil concentrate (COC) or methylated seed oil (MSO) as the spray additive.

Taking Care of Our Soils — Sjoerd Duiker, PSU Soil Management Specialist

“The history of every Nation is eventually written in the way in which it cares for its soil. The United States, as evidenced by the progressive public opinion and vigorous demand which resulted in the enactment of this law, is now emerging from its youthful stage of heedless exploitation and is beginning to realize the supreme importance of treating the soil well.” President F.D. Roosevelt, Statement on Signing the Soil Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act, March 1, 1936

With a tanking economy, we are going through another period of trial in the United States. But fortunately, the economic troubles are not accompanied by the level of environmental degradation occurring when the above was written. Significant progress has been made in conservation on working farmland as well as in preservation of natural areas. This stewardship ethic that is engrained in the American mind needs constant reminding, however. It is easy to become sloppy and negligent and start focusing on the ‘bottom line’ alone, especially in times of economic hardship. But we cannot allow a repeat of the early part of the 1900s. Farmers have a responsibility to themselves and other citizens now and in the future to manage the land to limit or eliminate soil erosion and other forms of soil degradation.

This year Pennsylvania’s farmers have encountered a spring that was wet and cold. The crops started slowly and canopy cover was delayed. Last week some areas of the state were impacted by severe storms that caused significant soil erosion. Some roads were closed until sediment could be removed from the pavement. These occurrences remind us that the job is not finished: Soil erosion is still a significant threat to our Commonwealth’s heritage. With today’s technologies, farmers can almost eliminate soil erosion from the land while meeting their production goals. The best soil erosion technique is to keep soil covered at all times, and have living root systems anchoring the soil. Soil erosion fighting practices available to farmers include: no—till or reduced till crop production that maintains at least 30% residue cover after planting; cover crops that occupy the soil in fallow periods; rotating annual crops with perennial crops that keep the soil vegetated for many years; growing closely—spaced crops such as small grains; planting on the contour; growing crops in contour strips; fighting gullies with grassed waterways, terraces and diversions; keeping cattle out of the stream with stream fences and improved cattle—crossings; reducing stream bank erosion by re—enforcing banks. Farmers can get help from several government and non—government agencies to implement these practices. Among them are USDA—NRCS, the Conservation Districts, the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture, and Penn State Cooperative Extension. If you experienced significant soil erosion on your farm, please contact these agencies to improve your environmental stewardship.

Another soil degradation threat with the wet soil conditions is soil compaction. Farmers have had great difficulty cutting hay on time and may go into the field when the soil is susceptible to rutting and compression. Manure may be spread after forage harvest when conditions are sub—optimal for traffic. Soil compaction can have a long-lasting effect on your production and also affects environmental performance (for example, infiltration will be reduced, and nitrogen losses by denitrification will be enhanced). Rutting, of course, makes future forage harvests problematic because of the unlevel field conditions. It would therefore be better to wait for dryer conditions before entering the field. In principle, the soil is too wet for field entry if you can make a ball out of the soil. However, there are also other things you can do to reduce compaction. One is to use traffic lanes for field entry instead of trafficking the whole field. A simple thing you can do is to use the field lanes for trucks that haul forage away. Another practice to avoid compaction is to use smaller equipment. Tire configurations also impact compaction. Road tires are the worst, and using farm or flotation tires inflated to lower pressures increases the footprint and reduces compaction by spreading the weight. Tracks are another option to reduce compaction.

Upcoming Events

Register now for Farming for Success Field Day: SE Field Research and Extension Center, Landisville, June 30

Whether you are an experienced crop producer, are interested in learning more about no—till farming systems, or want information on soil quality and fertility, this field day is for you! Come listen to informational speakers, discuss your needs with local Ag industry professionals, or catch a no—till planter demo in the field. The Farming for Success field day is an opportunity not to be missed and it’s here in your backyard! Join us on June 30^th and expand your knowledge!

June 30th, 2009 – 8:30am to 4:00 pm

No-Tilling Tips
Nitrogen & Manure Management
Soil Quality & Fertility
Equipment Expo & Demonstrations
Cover Crops
Fungicides: Costs and Benefits
And much more!

Questions or for sponsorship info: Jeff Graybill, 717–394–6851, jgraybill@psu.edu

Cost: $3.00 Pre—registered (by June 29th) $5.00 At-the-door

Mailed in checks should be made payable to: PSCE Program Fund

To Register: Contact Lancaster County Cooperative Extension 1383 Arcadia Road, Room 140 Lancaster, PA 17601 717-394-6851 LancasterExt@psu.edu (or call 717–394–6851) by noon, June 29^th

Register Now for the Rock Springs Agronomy Weed Tour — July 9, 2009

Attend the Annual Agronomic Weed Control Research Tour at Penn State — July 9, 2009 at the Penn State Agronomy Research Farm, Rock Springs, PA (Meet at the Agronomy Farm, Rock Springs, Rt. 45 west of State College, enter Gate D). A number of experiments will be showcased and available for viewing including new corn, soybean, sweet corn, and potato weed control trials. New herbicides include Balance Flexx, the Kixor products (Sharpen, Integrity, and Optill), Corvus, Capreno, Envive, Halex GT, Ignite, Authority Assist and First, Sonic, and Valor XLT to name a few. You will have the opportunity to see Dupont’s GAT corn and potential programs for that. In addition see how the roller/crimper is working on cereal rye and hairy vetch in reduced and no herbicide systems.

Pest Management CCA CEU’s and Pesticide Recertification Credits will be available.

Agenda:

8:30–9:00 am - Registration
9:00 am–12:00 noon - Tour
12:00 noon–1:00 pm - Catered lunch

PreRegistration for this event will be $20.00 and includes lunch and a tour book. Walk-in Registration the day of the event will be $25.00. To register by credit card, go to http://guest.cvent.com/i.aspx?5S,M3,ea617e7d-a373-4a32-8029-ff1a08fb0b49 or contact Lisa Crytser in the Dept. of Crop and Soil Sciences at lac8@psu.edu or 814-865-2543.

Register Now: Penn State Agronomic Diagnostic Clinic, July 28–29 — Dwight Lingenfelter, PSU Weed Science

We are about a month away from the annual field Clinic. Below, please find information about the upcoming Penn State Agronomic Field Diagnostic Clinic held on July 28 and 29, 2009, 9am – 4:30pm at the Penn State Agronomy Research Farm near Rock Springs, PA.

This year’s Clinic will include sessions on:

Controlling ammonia volatilization
Detecting planter errors
Insect pest monitoring and management
Forage grass identification and fit
Alternative cover crops

(CCA, NM, and pesticide credits will be available.)
Visit http://cropsoil.psu.edu/extension/clinic.cfm for more information about each topic.

The cost is $60/person. ($80 after July 21)

To register, please visit: http://cropsoil.psu.edu/extension/clinic.cfm and use the “on—line” registration system or complete the hard—copy form and fax or mail it. Credit card payments will be accepted. Phone—in and email registrations are discouraged. (Note: when using the registration system, please make sure to complete all the necessary steps.) If you have questions about the Clinic please contact Dwight Lingenfelter (dwight@psu.edu). We look forward to seeing you at this year’s Clinic!

Contributors: Extension Educators: Paul Craig (Dauphin), Greg Hostetter (Juniata), Kevin Fry (Armstrong), John Rowehl (York), Mena Hautau (Berks), Grant Troop (Lebanon), Jonathan Rotz (Cumberland), Del Voight (Lebanon), Dwane Miller (Schuylkill). State Specialists: Sjoerd Duiker, Dwight Lingenfelter, John Tooker, Paul Knight.

Editor: Dwane Miller, Schuylkill County

Upcoming Events

Wednesday, February 10, 2010

Northeast PA No-Till Conference

Location: Harford Volunteer Fire Company, Harford, PA

Time: February 10, 2010

Details: Contact: Ryan Koch at ryan.koch@pa.usda.gov

Thursday, February 11, 2010

5th Annual North-Central PA No-Till Conference

Location: Bloomsburg, PA

Time: February 11, 2010

Details: Contact: Ryan Koch at ryan.koch@pa.usda.gov

Tuesday, February 16, 2010

Professional Crop Producers' Conference

Location: Holiday Inn, Grantville, PA

Time: February 16 and 17, 2010 (2 day event)

Details: The conference features Dwayne Beck from South Dakota on crop diversity in continuous no-tillage, Ray Archuleta with presentations on soil quality and nutrient management, and Charlie Sniffen on forages and animal nutrition. CCA CEUs will be available. Contact Sjoerd Duiker sduiker@psu.edu for more information.

Wednesday, February 17, 2010

Professional Crop Producers' Conference

Location: Holiday Inn, Grantville, PA

Time: February 16 and 17, 2010 (2 day event)

Thursday, February 25, 2010

Grazing School

Location: Berks County Agricultural Center, Leesport, PA

Time: February 25, March 4, March 11, 2010 — 7:00 pm to 9:00 pm (3 part series)

Details: Contact: Mena Hautau, +1-610-378-1327. This is a three-part series. You must attend all classes to receive credit. (4 Grazing)

Thursday, March 4, 2010

Grazing School

Location: Berks County Agricultural Center, Leesport, PA

Time: February 25, March 4, March 11, 2010 — 7:00 pm to 9:00 pm (3 part series)

Details: Contact: Mena Hautau, +1-610-378-1327. This is a three-part series. You must attend all classes to receive credit. (4 Grazing)

Thursday, March 11, 2010

Grazing School

Location: Berks County Agricultural Center, Leesport, PA

Time: February 25, March 4, March 11, 2010 — 7:00 pm to 9:00 pm (3 part series)

Details: Contact: Mena Hautau, +1-610-378-1327. This is a three-part series. You must attend all classes to receive credit. (4 Grazing)

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

Northwest Grazing Conference

Location: Dubois, PA

Time: March 16, 2010

Details: Contact Adam Dellinger at adam.dellinger@pa.usda.gov