# Questioning future demand for alfalfa in dairy rations



## IAhaymakr (Jun 4, 2008)

The trend in recent years is less alfalfa for dairy cows, and it is accelerating recently with the advent of shredlage corn to provide adequate effective fiber without alfalfa hay. Many cows get less than 3 lbs alfalfa per day. 
Just something to chew on while you hook up the seeder this spring...
Is alfalfa hay worth the price?

by Chad Mullins and Barry Bradford
The authors are a Ph.D. student and assistant professor of dairy cattle nutrition, Kansas State University, Manhattan.

The lower milk prices are generally, the harder it is to justify high-priced alfalfa. Having by-product feeds nearby is a key.

Dairy hay prices have climbed in recent years as hay acreages have declined.
People are beginning to reconsider alfalfa's role in rations.
Because traditional feeds can be costly, more people are looking towards co-products. Many of these commonly fed are derived from corn milling and fall into a broad category referred to as nonforage fiber sources. Most of these are relatively inexpensive compared to cereal grains.

But, results from feeding high levels of nonforage fiber sources in place of forages or concentrates have been mixed. Success depends a lot on other ration ingredients. Our challenge is to incorporate these nonforage fiber sources effectively in an effort to limit the use of expensive ingredients.

Alfalfa hay, in particular, has become more expensive. Because of greater pressure for land use, the amount of land devoted to alfalfa has declined by nearly 4 million acres since 1995. Not surprisingly, as alfalfa supplies have become tighter, its cost has risen by nearly 50 percent in the last 20 years.

Looking at alfalfa's value
Recently, we examined the possibility of cutting back on alfalfa or eliminating it altogether, with the use of nonfiber forage sources. Because of the mechanical stimulation provided by alfalfa hay, our primary concern was that feeding diets without alfalfa hay could lead to rumen problems or milkfat depression. The trial was reported in the July 2009 Journal of Dairy Science, page 3510.

Our study evaluated four diets formulated to contain 21, 14, 7, and 0 percent alfalfa hay (all on a dry matter basis) as shown in the table. Alfalfa hay used in this study was of typical quality for dairy use (relative feed value: 147). We balanced the rations for similar concentrations of crude protein, neutral detergent fiber, nonfiber carbohydrate, and starch. As a result, rations containing more alfalfa had less corn silage and less soybean meal but more corn grain. We included wet corn gluten feed at 31 percent of dietary dry matter (DM) as the nonforage fiber sources.

Cows consuming more alfalfa hay produced more milk and had less body weight gain than those fed less alfalfa. Cows fed more alfalfa also had greater feed intake. Surprisingly, treatments did not affect milkfat yield or level.

When we calculated the energy used for body weight gain and milk production, the total net energy for productive use actually dropped with more alfalfa in the ration despite greater milk production and intake. This relationship strongly suggests that adding alfalfa hay lowered diet digestibility.

Although feeding higher levels of alfalfa hay improved milk production, it also led to greater feed intake. We evaluated the potential economic effects of such a response to determine the theoretical value of alfalfa hay relative to corn silage. We incorporated changes in milk income, feed consumed, and feed costs in a model to determine the relative difference in alfalfa hay versus corn silage value (on a dry matter basis). We fixed the price of alfalfa and milk, but changes to these numbers had little effect since the model was based on the milk:feed price ratio. Adding 21 percent alfalfa hay also allowed the exchange of 5 percent soybean meal for corn grain. So, the model was somewhat sensitive to the soybean meal to corn grain price differential. We set the soybean meal to corn price differential at $188 per ton which was a typical value for the summer of 2009.

According to our analysis, the breakeven price that can be paid for alfalfa hay substantially drops with lower milk:feed ratios. When the ratio is low, the added milk you get from alfalfa hay does not offset the cost of this feed.

For example, at a milk:feed price ratio of 1.45 (June 2009 which was a record low), alfalfa hay is worth no more than $35 per ton of dry matter over the price per ton of corn silage (on a dry matter basis). Thus, if corn silage is worth $100 per ton of dry matter, alfalfa hay is worth $135 per ton of dry matter or $120 as-fed. As the milk:feed price ratio goes up, the value of alfalfa hay compared to corn silage becomes greater. At a milk:feed ratio of 2.5, alfalfa hay is worth $50 per ton of dry matter more. Consequently, if corn silage is worth $100, then alfalfa hay should be worth $150 per ton of dry matter ($135 as-fed).

The value of alfalfa hay determined by our model is below typical on-farm prices and considerably less than the average price in 2008 ($172). If the soybean meal to corn price differential is $188 per ton or less, alfalfa hay never should demand more than a $60-per-ton of dry matter premium over corn silage.

Because our research demonstrated little economic return from including alfalfa hay in the diet when the milk:feed price ratio is low, we used a partial budget model to evaluate responses from a similar study where rates of feeding alfalfa hay varied, but treatment effects on milk production and feed intake were more dramatic. This data was reported by a group of researchers at South Dakota State University. That group fed diets with 15 percent distillers grains as a nonforage fiber source instead of wet corn gluten feed. In their study, protein values were kept similar by adding corn gluten meal (instead of soybean meal) as alfalfa was pulled out.

In that situation, the effect of milk:feed price ratio on breakeven alfalfa hay to corn silage price differential was far greater (range minus $20 to $100 per ton dry matter). The model demonstrates that, with a low milk:feed price ratio, it is hard to justify alfalfa hay in similar diets, but during periods with a high milk:feed price ratio (such as 4.0) alfalfa can demand a premium of up to $100 per ton of dry matter over corn silage.

What this means
Dairy nutritionists traditionally have relied heavily on alfalfa. However, based on these studies, adding alfalfa hay to diets with large proportions of nonforage fiber sources may not be profitable, especially when milk:feed price ratios are low.

The relative value of alfalfa hay presented here is calculated from intake and production variables. It does not include costs associated with feed storage or predicted increases in manure output or impacts on body weight change when more alfalfa is fed. On most farms, commodity storage is limited, less manure output is desirable, and cows that gain weight (in early to midlactation) generally breed back more easily.

The strategy of reducing alfalfa hay feeding rates may only work if your farm is located in an area where nonforage fiber sources are readily available. In that case, feeding less alfalfa hay may help you improve return over feed cost. On the other hand, if the nonforage fiber source has to be hauled a considerable distance, you probably have little to gain. Also, cows require a certain amount of forage fiber, and, if alfalfa hay is replaced partially by corn silage, you will need enough corn acres to grow the additional forage.


----------



## Teslan (Aug 20, 2011)

A neighbor feeds his dairy cows a lot of grass hay. I should ask him if it makes a difference. Although here grass costs more then alfalfa. He grows his own so it's totally his choice on feed more then economic.


----------



## IAhaymakr (Jun 4, 2008)

Here it seems like the extremely high prices of last year really pushed them to find alternatives. Gluten pellets that test very similar to good alfalfa, are more consistent than hay, and are of course much cheaper than hay, seem to be the ingredient of choice. They can be had for about $90 per ton. They can make up an even larger portion of a ration when a dairy has harvested its corn as shredlage, which provides the necessary effective fiber. This essentially drives down the price a dairy will pay for hay to around $120 per ton, and they don't care as much about the quality.

If you aren't familiar with shredlage, it would be wise to educate yourself about it. I could post links, there are too many to pick from. Just be aware that in '12 there were a few more than 30 spfh running with shredlage processors. Last year there were well over 200. This year one can only guess how many machines will be retrofitted to accommodate the demands of profit-minded diaries. The world is changing all the time, and it might be wise to look this deal over and try to get in front of it before it rolls right over you.


----------



## Gearclash (Nov 25, 2010)

Being in the dairy business, here are a few thoughts.

First, the shredlage idea is not fully worked out. I hear that the trend is to cut shredlage shorter to the point that it doesn't seem to have much TLC difference from conventional processed silage. This makes me wonder if there is a real difference in shredlage beside some digestability improvement.

Second, I know dairies that feed (or have tried to feed) only haylage for their hay, no dry hay in the ration, and it seems as though their production isn't quite what it could be. It also seems as though these herds have more digestive health issues.

Just my opinion, but I wouldn't care to milk cows without alfalfa; combination of corn silage, haylage and dry hay really seems to make em tick.


----------



## IAhaymakr (Jun 4, 2008)

You are right on here gearclash. Shredlage is a new concept that is still under intense scrutiny, and will continue to be for years to come. I personally haven't heard of anyone reducing cut length as that would kind of defeat the purpose, except for likely still achieving better processing.

From where I sit, your assessment sounds great. But unfortunately my biggest customers have made huge cuts in their alfalfa consumption, apparently not at the expense of milk production.

The past couple years of economic conditions in your industry have put so much pressure on a lot of dairy farms. What a crazy ride from low $ milk to decent milk then high $ feed. It kind of makes my head spin and I don't milk cows.


----------



## Gearclash (Nov 25, 2010)

> But unfortunately my biggest customers have made huge cuts in their alfalfa consumption, apparently not at the expense of milk production.


My guess is that it comes at the expense of more intense management, and higher vet bills.

I was under the impression (from college days) that the chemical compostion of the fiber in corn silage and alfalfa is different.


----------



## IAhaymakr (Jun 4, 2008)

First and foremost, I am not a dairyman nor a dairy nutritionist. So my knowledge is limited to what I absorb from dealing with both of the aforementioned groups and from what I can read online and glean from attending seminars etc. I hope I don't come across as confrontational to your viewpoint, and I truly do appreciate your thoughts on this subject. It's always beneficial to get perspective from a dairy guy, especially one who isn't a customer as that changes the relationship.

Recently I had the opportunity to visit with a very prominent nutritionist who cares for the needs of one of the nations largest dairies. I won't give names here, but I am willing to bet you are familiar. They are able to achieve excellent production on no more than three pounds of average test hay. That being said, I agree with you that they are missing a nutritional component here, and will suffer some consequence of that in the future. However, the farm he was visiting with insisted that he cut the feed bill in half and raised production for them. All with gluten pellets, shredlage, and just a little hay and straw in leu of the usual high quality alfalfa. This is by no means an isolated case, just one where I had the chance to get into details about their specific management of the ration.

Again, I am just a hay guy. But part of my responsibility if I am to remain viable is to answer the needs of my customers. I would welcome your continued thoughts on this matter


----------



## swmnhay (Jun 13, 2008)

I am not a nutritionist either.But I've seen so many times that some nutritionists also are selling the byproducts that they want you to feed instead of the hay.Glutten pellets for example.Well the nutritionist is more then likely getting some commission or markup pushing those products.

Or in fat cattle feed more disstilers and cut out the alfalfa and feed straw or stalks instead.The alfalfa has more then just protein but the nutritionists will sell you more mineral and distillers to make up for it and pad his pocket doing so.

I agree that the alfalfa hay demand is way down because of all the above.


----------



## IAhaymakr (Jun 4, 2008)

In some respects Cy, it's not relevant that a nutritionist does or does not get a kick back for promoting more byproduct use. Their job is to put more milk in the tank for less money. That's really what this is about. They have figured out how to do it with less alfalfa, replaced by cheaper ingredients that are readily available. Now, it's not unreasonable to expect that if every dairy cow in the country were fed this way the price of gluten pellets would certainly increase, and eventually a balance is reached between the two ingredients. What I am really trying to establish here is the specific relationship between the price of good hay and other ingredients that are substituted for hay. Obviously we will take less for our product than last year. $325 hay isn't any more sustainable long term that $7 corn. I am concerned that while corn has dropped about 40% in price since last year, hay may see a much larger decrease that can't be tied to supply as much as to the sharp decrease in demand that we are witnessing for the reasons I discuss here. 
The market dynamics are different now too, because of the shredlage system. It allows those who have successfully employed it reduce alfalfa inclusion far more than they could have before it arrived just a few years ago.
I am cautious about over reacting here, because we all know that everything in agriculture runs in cycles, magic powders come and go, weather messes up the best of plans, etc etc...I just don't see a way to reverse the trend that we are in. A market that we could always count on to consume vast amounts of alfalfa just keeps slipping away.


----------



## Waterway64 (Dec 2, 2011)

"Putting more milk in the tank for less money" will be the driving force for any good dairyman and alfalfa price cycles will effect its usage. While we were a dairy area dairyman drove hay prices. Now that the Darius are gone hay producers have redirected production to other uses and often at better prices. Mel


----------



## hog987 (Apr 5, 2011)

So here is my question. All this was directed at the milking cows. Now what about the diets of the dry cows and the replacement heifers?


----------



## swmnhay (Jun 13, 2008)

hog987 said:


> So here is my question. All this was directed at the milking cows. Now what about the diets of the dry cows and the replacement heifers?


A lot of the alfalfa that used to be in hfr rations has been replaced with cornstalks/beanstraw/grass hay and DDG's


----------



## swmnhay (Jun 13, 2008)

IAhaymakr said:


> In some respects Cy, it's not relevant that a nutritionist does or does not get a kick back for promoting more byproduct use. Their job is to put more milk in the tank for less money. That's really what this is about. They have figured out how to do it with less alfalfa, replaced by cheaper ingredients that are readily available. Now, it's not unreasonable to expect that if every dairy cow in the country were fed this way the price of gluten pellets would certainly increase, and eventually a balance is reached between the two ingredients. What I am really trying to establish here is the specific relationship between the price of good hay and other ingredients that are substituted for hay. Obviously we will take less for our product than last year. $325 hay isn't any more sustainable long term that $7 corn. I am concerned that while corn has dropped about 40% in price since last year, hay may see a much larger decrease that can't be tied to supply as much as to the sharp decrease in demand that we are witnessing for the reasons I discuss here.
> The market dynamics are different now too, because of the shredlage system. It allows those who have successfully employed it reduce alfalfa inclusion far more than they could have before it arrived just a few years ago.
> I am cautious about over reacting here, because we all know that everything in agriculture runs in cycles, magic powders come and go, weather messes up the best of plans, etc etc...I just don't see a way to reverse the trend that we are in. A market that we could always count on to consume vast amounts of alfalfa just keeps slipping away.


Well said!!


----------



## stack em up (Mar 7, 2013)

My opinion . There will always be a market for alfalfa. By products are great, I use them, however, there are many times when I price a ration, they are not as great of deal as everyone thinks. Many dairies near me rely heavily on alfalfa, be it chopped or dry simply because of drastic variability in protein content of DDGs. And no e plants are milling more oil out, dropping protein content more, while charging the same $/lb. That's my opinion, and you know what they say about opinions...


----------



## IAhaymakr (Jun 4, 2008)

hog987 said:


> So here is my question. All this was directed at the milking cows. Now what about the diets of the dry cows and the replacement heifers?


If want to be successful as a hay grower you generally need to produce high quality, and sell it for a high price. Heifers and dry cows gotta eat too, but no one spends big money on high quality for their diets. Many of them live on by products as well.


----------



## IAhaymakr (Jun 4, 2008)

stack em up said:


> My opinion . There will always be a market for alfalfa. By products are great, I use them, however, there are many times when I price a ration, they are not as great of deal as everyone thinks. Many dairies near me rely heavily on alfalfa, be it chopped or dry simply because of drastic variability in protein content of DDGs. And no e plants are milling more oil out, dropping protein content more, while charging the same $/lb. That's my opinion, and you know what they say about opinions...


I like your opinion. Used to be that thinking was the rule. But the reality is the game is changing. New products like the gluten pellets I spoke of previously are actually far more consistent than hay as they are being made to specific requirements of the dairy industry. It adds value to the by products to insure and guarantee consistency. I do appreciate your feedback though, and if you are a purchaser of alfalfa hay you should be able to source some darn nice stuff that won't beat up your checkbook very much.


----------



## stack em up (Mar 7, 2013)

I realize that there are gobs more options out there than 20 years ago. Which is why feedlots are moving more towards the corn/Ethanol belt than ever before. My point is alfalfa will never be replaced, maybe reduced, but never replaced. At is always changing, adapting, growing. We must do this as well. Which is why you see more alfalfa fields with orchard grass than you did 20 years ago. It doesn't have to have 190 RFV like it used to, because we can supplement with something with higher protein, but there still needs to be the fiber in the rumen or cows will get so out of whack digestively there will be cows that can $h!t thru a screen door and not touch a wire. Corn silage and shredlage fills some of the fiber void, but can also turn the rumen too acid. Maybe I'm way off here, I feel like I'm wrong, but my wife isn't here to correct me...


----------



## hog987 (Apr 5, 2011)

stack em up said:


> I realize that there are gobs more options out there than 20 years ago. Which is why feedlots are moving more towards the corn/Ethanol belt than ever before. My point is alfalfa will never be replaced, maybe reduced, but never replaced. At is always changing, adapting, growing. We must do this as well. Which is why you see more alfalfa fields with orchard grass than you did 20 years ago. It doesn't have to have 190 RFV like it used to, because we can supplement with something with higher protein, but there still needs to be the fiber in the rumen or cows will get so out of whack digestively there will be cows that can $h!t thru a screen door and not touch a wire. Corn silage and shredlage fills some of the fiber void, but can also turn the rumen too acid. Maybe I'm way off here, I feel like I'm wrong, but my wife isn't here to correct me...


Hey now your a grown man, You dont need your wife to correct you.

Now as long as my wife does not read this I will be ok 

Around here a lot of the dairies feed as little good hay as they can get away with without upsetting the cows stomach. But they do feed good hay to dry cows and replacements. I guess they try to save the good stuff for the milking cows. Some of these byproducts depend on location. I got a friend who worked on a dairy in Europe by a cookie factory. They feed the cows the broken cookies and straw for the fiber. Said those were some of the highest producing cows there were.


----------



## stack em up (Mar 7, 2013)

When my great grandpa dairied, he used to feed bakery leftovers and day old stuff to the replacement heifers. Milk never tasted sweeter though...


----------



## Gearclash (Nov 25, 2010)

I am not in a management or ownership position at the family dairy, nor am I a nutrition expert. I am on the "pointy end of the stick, trying to get things done", so take my observations for what they are worth.



> However, the farm he was visiting with insisted that he cut the feed bill in half and raised production for them.


If this did in fact happen, I'm willing to bet that there was some other problem that was hampering their feed efficiency. There are only so many feed stuffs that will make good milk production and they are all comparatively expensive.

I see a number of dairies in NW IA that clearly still feed alfalfa hay, ranging in size from 85 hd to multi thousand hd.

For what its worth we feed about 5lbs/hd/day dry alfalfa, and about 16lbs/hd/day of haylage out of a total ration weight of about 120lbs/hd/day. These are as fed numbers. I realize this is not a high percentage, but it also has been steady for many years. We do raise our own hay.

We do not feed any dry alfalfa to heifers or dry cows, but both do get haylage.

IAhaymakr, I can PM you the contact information of our nutritionist if you wish. He is local, and we have worked with him for more than 15 years. He has a fairly conservative approach to dairy feeding, and he should be a good person to give you an insiders view of the current and future dairy feeding trends. There is nothing wrong with trying to gauge where an industry in which you make your living is headed.


----------



## swmnhay (Jun 13, 2008)

I have a dairy I sell to that has a nutritionist that is a constant pain.Seems like a constant change.The owner calls and I sell him 200 ton @ 149 rfv.They feed 50 ton then say its not good enough.The next yr I sell them 120 ton @ 185,they feed 30 ton and say its to good.The next yr hay was scarce and he bought everything I had available at my asking price.

Before you say 149 is not good enough you should see some of the hay he buys at the salebarn.Some is below 100rfv.

It's just easier for me to deal with feedlots it seems.I can get within 20 a ton for good feedlot hay as I can get from the local dairy for dairy hay.Shipping becomes a issue to go farther away.


----------



## aawhite (Jan 16, 2012)

We milked in SE Ia, about 300 head up until 2007. Good alfalfa was always a part of our rations. Some of the issues we ran into we related to consistency and delivery of gluten. Cargill was switching to their branded feed line, and really changed what they did. They would only guarantee a range of protein and moisture, and started charging a premium for it. Logistically, we could no longer order a straight truck of feed, had to be a semi. We didn't like to push the gluten that hard, and during the summer it would mold so fast, we started seeing waste. We even offered to buy in 17-18 tons and pay extra, but they wouldn't do it.

Something to keep in mind, the target production of some of these dairies is very different. We've talked to some of the 1000+ head farms that were shooting for 26,000 or so rolling herd average. Our average pushed 32,000 lbs for years. We would be looking for problems in the ration if our production dipped that low.


----------



## Bgriffin856 (Nov 13, 2013)

Our cows don't even know what alfalfa is... All grass or grass clover mix here. Cows only get a few pounds of dry hay with their corn silage and oatlage and a simple grain mix of ground corn soy and distillers grain with minerals. Can't justifying buying alfalfa or growing it due to wet ground. No nutrionalist here everyone says we should have one.....i say well most of them are former dairymen who couldn't make it on their own so why should i hire them? Plus most work for feed companies anyhow so what do you think they are gonna try to do?.....


----------



## deadmoose (Oct 30, 2011)

They are going to try and make some money. The ones that are going to stick around will make money by making you more money.


----------



## deadmoose (Oct 30, 2011)

Same as a financial advisor. I like you cannot bring myself to pay one...


----------



## hog987 (Apr 5, 2011)

lol about the financial advisor. The first question I have for them is what is there net worth. If its lower than mine I won't waste my time. If it higher than mine than maybe. But than it will depend on how old they are and how much more net worth than I have, cause someone 30 years older should have more than me.


----------



## Gearclash (Nov 25, 2010)

After a conversation yesterday with my brother, a little more to ponder about the future of alfalfa.

One of the local midsize dairies has said that *now *it is costing them more to feed shredlage than a more conventional ration. A shredlage/no alfalfa ration requires more supplemental protein, and the cost of that more than offsets the cost of alfalfa.

I also learned that one of our milkers is doing a college research project on the use of shredlage. I will follow that if possible.

A local bto is doing some gov'ment funded research about water quality in the same river tributary that our dairy is in. They have found that alfalfa has the ability to pull nitrogen (nitrates) out of the soil to a depth of at least 6 feet. Small grains can only take up nitrogen for a depth of less than a foot. Nitrates are a major source of water contamination here, both in shallow wells and natural surface water. The point here is that alfalfa has conservation benefits that should not be ignored.


----------



## swmnhay (Jun 13, 2008)

So is shredlage the latest fad that some have jumped on after the farm publications proclaimed the best thing since sliced bread?

It also goes with my thinking that SOME feed salesmen/nutritionists pushes and then they sell more of their product instead of feeding alfalfa for the protein source.I'm not a dairyman but I think a independent nutritionist that is not also selling feed,protien etc.is more open minded then one that is trying to sell more of what he is selling.


----------



## Gearclash (Nov 25, 2010)

My opinion is that shredlage will be useful as better utilization of corn silage, just as processed corn silage was a great improvement.

Finding a truly indepentant nutritionist is nearly impossible. Even ours has "products" to sell, but he is focused on getting good production instead of being a salesman. The most important thing in any business, dairy in particular, is that you know enough about all aspects of your business to call BS on bad advice.


----------



## IAhaymakr (Jun 4, 2008)

More good information today, and that was essentially the goal when I started this thread. Since the beginning of this discussion I have had the opportunity to visit with a handful more people whose expertise in dairy nutrition far exceeds my own.
It has become apparent to me that in order to stay ahead of the demands of this industry I will need to continue to educate myself, largely by maintaining these contacts.

For what it's worth, I can assure you all that shredlage is far more than a fad, and will very likely continue to increase in its use in the coming years. And it will continue to varying degrees to have an impact on both the price of hay and the amount that is fed. But just like every other new concept or product it has it's own set of obstacles to overcome. Gearclash hit the nail squarely in that shredlage processors are at the very least the next step up in better processing, so for those who were lacking previously due to no KP or poorly adjusted KP the impact of shredlage will be far greater than for others.

As for feeding less alfalfa, it is still an undeniable trend. Some farms, especially those who were hit the hardest by low milk $$ then decent milk and super high feed cost, seem to have the strongest desire to cut back on purchased hay. They are for the most part able to achieve good production with cheaper by products as a protein source. Only time will tell what impact this could have on herd health, and cow longevity, which are both of far greater importance now that replacing dairy cows is so expensive (like it used to be). I have had very credible people tell me that that kind of diet tends to "burn out cows" compared to one where alfalfa plays a larger role. Adding to this theory is a local organic dairy who feeds a very high percentage of alfalfa in order to provide economical protein and has experienced excellent herd health as a result.

Yet another angle as referenced by Gearclash is the environmental one. Alfalfa hay as part of a rotation is likely the best way to interrupt the corn after corn cycle that is the leading cause of that big dead spot in the gulf. As the BIG end users like Walmart and mcdonalds continue to place demands on their suppliers for ag products from "sustainable sources" it might some day be a requirement that milk come from farms that can show a lighter environmental footprint, as well as humane treatment of their animals. If you aren't sure how this might look, they have already dictated that eggs come from more humane chicken farms and pork from farms without gestation crates. I believe this is only the beginning and it will impact all of us in some way.


----------

