The term relative forage quality (RFQ) has been around for about a decade, yet not everyone understands the difference between RFQ and relative feed value (RFV). “Whenever RFV and RFQ are different, RFQ is the better value to use,” says Dr. Dan Undersander, extension and forage agronomist with the University of Wisconsin.

When was the last time you Googled the name of your farm or business? Chances are something appeared in the results. In agriculture circles, you often hear about the importance of online and social media presence in the context of advocacy and connecting with consumers for conversations centered on our food supply.

Farming has been a very profitable business for the past decade. When there is a period of farm prosperity, the main asset farmers own – land – becomes more valuable as demand for farmland increases.

Based on the title, you might be wondering if prognostication is some kind of new forage management practice – and in a way, it is. Prognostication means “to predict, using current indicators as a guide.”

The U.S. farming sector has exhibited very strong financial performance during the past five to seven years in terms of income generation, cash flow and debt servicing capacity, and equity accumulation, but that strong performance has been accompanied by increased volatility.

“It’s hard to find any help that isn’t as confused as we are.”

For Mark Davies, the middle-generation son in this farming family, it was a dubious beginning for what should have been a major step on the road to a more certain future.

Assuming fertility is not limiting, and the alfalfa stand is not in decline, the difference between an 8-ton and 12-ton-per-acre crop boils down to water management: simply the right amount at the right time.