Dairy Profitability

By Rebecca White

Do you utilize technology to improve your dairy production or fall back on it when your management techniques are inadequate?

Today at the Penn State Dept of Animal Science Seminar, Dr.  Kathy Soder from the USDA-ARS-Pasture Systems and Watershed Management Lab, presented “Opportunities, Challenges, and Research Efforts in the Northeastern Organic Dairy Industry”.  Dr. Soder discussed why dairy producers chose to transition to organic and some of the pros and cons. One of the pros was producing milk under organic standards and regulations  forced the dairy operators to become better managers, or at least the ones who were able to succeed.

Some of the rules that are included in organic dairy production include exclusion of chemicals in crop production and “no” antibiotics for animals. I use “no” because if an animal continues to be sick, antibiotics must be used for welfare concerns however, they are not allowed back into the herd.

Because of the limited amount of technology you can use on an organic operation, the managers are forced to address issues immediately or prevent them from happening in the first place in order to succeed and stay in business. By no means does this indicate conventional dairies are not addressing issues or preventing them but I raise the question: are some dairies relying on technology to fix mistakes rather than enhance productivity?

Technologies have helped the dairy industry and will continue to allow more opportunities to produce abundant, healthy and affordable food for years to come. Utilizing these technologies should allow dairy operations to produce milk more efficiently and improve profitability. However, if the technology is fixing poor management, where have we gained on efficiency? If you utilize a product that will increase your milk production by 10 lbs but cows aren’t being bred back in a timely manor or age at first calving is 28 months, did you gain profits or was your investment a wash?

I fully support the utilization of products that can help dairy producers. But I remind you to always bring it back to the basics: if your management is not meeting your full potential how will a band-aid fix a bullet wound?

I often get questions about types of feed or new products to increase milk production and I usually answer back with questions about their cow comfort. The bottleneck or the most limiting factor that is inhibiting maximum production is usually a management issue on these farms. Access to water and feed, clean stalls, bunk space, sprinklers and fans,  and quality forages are all areas that can be improved on these dairies but often overlooked especially when the promise of a quick fix is an option.

I hope all farmers will be allowed to make decisions on their own farms without being over regulated but with the current atmosphere I fear that more regulations will be put in place deciding what technology can be utilized. I urge all dairy producers to be the most effective managers and utilize technology as an enhancement to their profitability, not a crutch.
Tweet

PSU Herd IOFC – June 2012 “Making Corn Silage Last”

by Virginia Ishler

June was filled with a lot of ration adjustments. There was the addition of new hay-crop forage into the diets. Corn silage inventory was still a very big concern as the bagged conventional silage ended and the BMR corn silage began. We struggled to keep fat test above 3.50% and there was the heat wave starting the third week of the month.
At the beginning of June I increased the concentrate dry matter to 40%. We had been at 35% and then 38% but the concern about having enough corn silage until the fall is still lingering. We incorporated first cut alfalfa haylage into the ration going 50/50 with the 2011 haylage. The first cutting tested very well and was comparable to the material we had been feeding, at least on paper. However, right after the inclusion of the first cutting, fat test dropped from 3.60% to 3.35%. Cows were still holding at 88-89 pounds. Just as I was considering making an adjustment, the bagged corn silage was almost gone. It lasted only 4 weeks. I had hoped the bag would get us to the beginning of July but as it turned out we had to start BMR corn silage on June 22nd.
Looking back, starting the BMR when we did was advantageous because it timed with the heat wave and for the cows was a benefit in keeping them milking. However, now more than ever was I concerned about keeping the BMR corn silage viable well into August. For this summer I changed my approach completely on feeding the cows. Typically the cows would get 29-30 pounds of BMR corn silage dry matter and 6 pounds of haylage dry matter. If I fed this level of corn silage it would not last much past July. The other concern was we had only one bag of alfalfa haylage and that needed to last until second cut was ensiled (especially to accommodate research projects), so the decision was made to incorporate grass silage. For the last part of the month cows were started on BMR corn silage at 22 pounds dry matter and 7 pounds grass and 6.5 pounds alfalfa dry matter. It should be noted that the grass silage tested 65% neutral detergent fiber and 10% protein. Because of the high fiber content in the grass silage, all the cottonseed hulls were removed from the ration. To help improve the fat test we switched from all coarse corn to 50/50 coarse/ground. So the big question was – how will cows respond to this diet?
To continue with the rest of the story, the BMR corn silage was very wet (30% dry matter) compared to the bag corn silage which was 43% dry matter. The ration change with BMR started on Friday June 22nd. When I went to the barns on Monday I noticed the cows had dropped below 80 pounds, which seemed extreme. I updated the dry matters on all feeds and checked the amounts of TMR being fed to the groups. Even though the feeder was increasing the amounts of TMR each day, it was not enough and there were zero refusals. When I checked the cows at 1:30 in the afternoon I observed how little feed was left and I knew they would have it cleaned up well before the next day. I calculated that a pen of cows getting 7800 pounds as-fed should really be getting 8400 pounds. At the Penn State Dairy, cows are fed in the morning and the crew working the p.m. shift never has to feed. So credit to our afternoon employees and assistant manager, they were able to mix and feed several hundred additional pounds of TMR to the cows that day. A message was left for the feeder so he would know how much to mix for each pen the following morning. Cows bounced back on production immediately. Also, the ration change boosted fat test back to 3.60%. For the last 2 weeks in June the cows averaged 83 pounds.
In previous articles about the dairy farm I have written about the impact of the simple change of corn grain particle size on components and production. The following video illustrates the difference between the coarse and fine particle size of the corn grain fed to the Penn State dairy cows.

For the month of June the herd averaged 86 pounds with a 3.53 % fat, 2.98 % protein, 246,000 SCC and 7.8 mg/dl MUN. Milk price took a major down turn this month and with the continued high feed costs resulted in a low IOFC.

For more information visit http://extension.psu.edu/animals/dairy/business-management/income-over-feed-cost

PSU Herd IOFC – May 2012 “What do you  do with different quality 1st cutting forage?”

by Virginia Ishler

Forage inventory was still a concern going into May. The assistant manager went out with the Farm Operation crew to evaluate the fields of alfalfa and grass. The feedback I got was they looked pitiful. There were several issues I needed to address: 1. Limited tonnage of first cutting hay-crop, 2. Questionable quality of first cutting hay-crop,  and 3. Stretching out the current hay-crop silage until the middle of June. The decisions made at this point will have long lasting implications for the upcoming summer months.

Historically, we receive the majority of our alfalfa haylage needs from first cutting. It was estimated that we would only get about a quarter of our request. Due to the weather conditions most of the fields had been taken over by grass. The last thing I wanted to do was fill a silo with a lot of different quality forage ranging from primarily alfalfa to mostly grass. Knowing the intermittent storms we get, it was highly probable it could take a week or more to fill a silo, which from a fermentation standpoint is unacceptable and would create more problems for me and the cows. After lengthy discussion with the assistant managers, we decided that all first cutting would go into bags. This way we could segregate the best quality forage into a bag and the grassier material into the other bags. Assuming we would get adequate rainfall after this first cutting, then all second cutting hay-crop (alfalfa) would go into the uprights. We got one bag of alfalfa stored and the rest of the bags were all grass silage.

I am a firm believer in allowing silage to ferment for a good two to three weeks. To ensure that this could happen I adjusted the herd diet again. The added challenge to our forage inventory is not being able to utilize pasture. We don’t have enough low producing cows to make a low group, which typically would go out on pasture. The other reason, we decided to harvest the pasture grass as silage since we desperately need this quality forage for dry cows and heifers.

The major ration change this month was increasing the cottonseed hulls to replace several pounds each of forage dry matter from corn silage and alfalfa silage. I also increased the concentrate dry matter from 35% to 38%. I kept the corn grain particle size course. The cows responded very well to this change. They increased milk production and the components held steady. In summarizing the intake data for the various pens it was shocking how much the cows increased. The two high groups went from averaging 63.5 pounds in April to 69 pounds in May. The two year olds went from 58 to 62 pounds. In the past when several pounds of cottonseed hulls were fed we would see an increase in dry matter intake. The surprising part to me was how consistent the intakes were for the month and they never missed a beat even with the hot humid temperatures we experienced. At the end of month I calculated our current hay-crop silage inventory and it is going to last well into June

For the month of May the herd averaged 90 pounds with a 3.60% fat, 3.00% protein, 250,000 SCC and 8.45 mg/dl MUN. Feed prices remained high and the higher dry matter intakes really increased our feed cost/cow compared to April. Coupled with the lowest milk price this year and IOFC took a big hit.