Archive for February 2018

Bottom Line: Who Is Responsible For This Mess?

How often do dairy managers stand in their offices and, with some kind of report in hand, deliver this frustrating news to their staff? Once is too often, if it’s your bottom line that is headed south. No one needs a winter vacation from financial success.

“Successful Dairies Don’t Make Excuses! They Make Changes!”

“It’s not my fault.” “It’s the economy.” “It’s the weather.” “It’s the government.”

Any or all of these might used to shift blame.  What does this mean?  No one really cares.  No one accepts responsibility.  The owner is the only one asking, “Who is responsible for this mess? When push comes to shove, messes are only eliminated when changes are initiated.

“What Does Accountability Look Like?”

It isn’t simply a case of taking the blame when the you-know-what hits the fan.  It’s not about who is guilty.  Being accountable means delivering on a commitment.  Milk production.   It is about being responsible to the targeted outcome, not just the daily routine of completing a set of tasks.  You can’t sit in an office and know what is working in the barn. You can’t hide in the barn and have any idea what is happening in the office. It is about initiative, action, and follow-through.

“Motivation Starts at the Top …. And After That… We all Know What Runs Downhill!”

When life throws a curveball, we are tempted to assign blame. We all know the routine.  Bad news is received at the top.  And bad news like it’s pungent neighbor in the manure pit runs downhill.  Soon there is a sh*t storm brewing that is delivered to the all within earshot.  Some listen stoically.  Others run for cover.  Then what?  Life goes on the same as before until the next bad news day.

WAIT!! Turnarounds mean you don’t talk AT staff.   You talk WITH staff.

Getting angry when people fall short is not productive. It simply reduces motivation and performance.  Success is about finding alternatives that change a negative into a positive.

  • Good managers know how to get a two-way conversation going. Employees need to feel
  • comfortable speaking up about their side of the situation. They shouldn’t be afraid to claim a
  • role in the problem for fear of even more criticism raining down on them.

Talk Up the Positive Too!  Who Is Responsible When Everything Goes Right?

Face to face conversation may not be the only way of communicating, but it is the best way. Both sides must participate and be understood. And then move on.  But don’t forget to share the good news too.  Does your team know enough about your dairy’s successes?  Big or small, knowing what’s going well on the dairy can make a big difference in preventing problems and learning how to deal with issues.  If the boss claims all the successes and staff bears the burden of problems, it kills motivation. Honest recognition motivates.  

Too Often It Becomes One Side VERSUS the Other Side. 

Here are five ways dairy operations dissolve into a tug and pull and what to do about it. 

  1. “It is Obvious What is Required” versus “It’s not obvious from where I see it.”
    Because you, as owner or manager, have benchmarks to reach, bills to pay and animals to raise, you may be very clear, in your own mind, about what needs to be done. To the person further away from the center of things it’s likely that it isn’t clear why things need to be done or even how they need to be done. Dairy staff may perform completing repetitive tasks without knowing how it affects the outcome.  If the job is not only repetitive but boring shortcuts or changes may creep in that negatively affect the outcome. How do you measure success? How do the workers measure success?  There needs to be alignment between the two. Some of the best modifications and improvements can come from skilled people who feel the work they do is worthwhile, the opinions and suggestions they have are heard and appreciated. If you don’t want lowest common denominator results don’t treat the working staff like they don’t count.
  2. “It’s Not Rocket Science” versus “I’m Not Paid to be A Brain Surgeon”
    New science, new economics, and a continually shrinking work face have resulted in the loss of people with skills. Has brought in new unskilled labor.  Has necessitated upgrading of skills. New equipment.    Digital inputs and monitoring. All of these could mean that the person doing the jobs needs training to be able to meet the rising expectations.  Are you ready and able to provide the skilled training?  Do you know where to get skilled instructions?  You must realize that if your staff doesn’t know how to do what they are being asked, then you are setting them – and yourself — up for failure.
  3. “Your Success is Tied to Results” versus “Results Don’t Mean Anything to Me!”
    When the milk check arrives or payment checks are sent, owner-managers have readable feedback and exact numbers on how successful the dairy operation is. When there is a sudden fall in production and or payments, it should not come as a surprise to anyone who is paying attention to the day to day operation. Sometimes problems seem sudden when, in reality, it is the result of lack of communication. Someone is afraid to ask for help. There isn’t any buy in to the necessity of reaching measurable Any movement in a negative direction needs instant attention.  In modern dairying, it is counterproductive to wait until the month end, year end annual review. What can be done now? How can it be fixed today?  What new and improved schedule do we need to put in place? A slip off track can become a major detour if it isn’t dealt with promptly.
  4. “You Didn’t Do What Was Asked” versus “So What? Not my stink. Not my ”
    This is the second time in the management staff dialogue where there is a disconnect between the reasons for the rules or operational procedures and the lack of incentive felt by staff to carry them out. Even when expectations are clear and proper training has been provided, it’s possible that the level of buy-in remains low or is even declining. A turnaround could be as simple as a regular positive acknowledgment.  An open dialogue about how routines are either well done or not working also raises the level of buy-in. Provided success is recognized.
  5. “There Isn’t Any Room for Your Mistakes” versus “Accidents happen. Live with it!” Even when you have a good idea, a well-formulated plan, and a willing team, there are enough variables on a dairy farm that things can go wrong. Somehow, a feed formula is incorrectly mixed. Medication is forgotten. Scheduling of follow-up is overlooked. A staff member misses the training session and, unwittingly changes things back. Anyone of these and many more can be the reason for problems. Once again it isn’t who is blame but who can fix it that is important. The only wrong answer is the one that says maintaining the status quo is okay.

The Bullvine Bottom Line – From Mess to Success in Two Steps!

Whether you are management or staff, it is essential to recognize that there is no gain in falling into a pattern of blame and shame. When everyone learns how to accept responsibility and is willing to be held accountable, the operation has found the two building blocks that are the foundation of a successful dairy.

 

 

Get original “Bullvine” content sent straight to your email inbox for free.

 

 

 

 

 

Why Inbreeding is a good thing!

Much has been written and talked about in the global dairy cattle breeding industry on the need to avoid inbreeding. The focus has been on the negatives resulting from mating related animals. These negatives can include reduced fertility and lower disease resistance. In cows, this may mean health issues and thereby reduced profitability. For calves, it can be both health and livability issues.

Breeders are focused on genetic advancement and using the very best sires. In the last decade, two things have raised the attention paid to inbreeding and its possible negative effects. First is the extensive use of genomically evaluated related animals, which eliminated lower ranked unrelated animals as breeding parents. Secondly, which is a result of the first, is the much more rapid turning over of generations. All this has led to breeders often searching sire listings for lower ranked ‘outcross’ sires to avoid the negatives.

Let’s review inbreeding in dairy cattle and look at the possibilities for the future when mating related animals.

A Quick Review

Definition:

Inbreeding is the mating of related animals. In dairy cattle, this can be mating half-brother and half-sister and often as close as first or second cousins matings.

Current Inbreeding Levels:   

In US Holsteins: (1) Four of the top five proven TPI sires all have the sire stack Mogul x Robust x Planet; (2) Fifteen of the top twenty-five proven TPI sires are sons of Mogul; (3) Proven TPI sires #1, #3 and #5 are Mogul sons out of Miss OCD Robst Delicious; (4) Delicious also has a Cashcoin son at #11 TPI; (5) Of the top twenty-five proven NM$ sires ten are Mogul sons, and eight are Supersire sons; and (6) So Mogul and Robust are close-up in the pedigree of 72% of the top proven NM$ sires.

In Jerseys, one sire does not dominate, but Implus, Berretta, and Duncan Belle breeding appear in many proven North American Jersey sires (Read more – Jersey Sire Usage: What Bulls Are Breeders Actually Using).

Inbreeding levels are increasing in North America in all breeds.

Table 1 – Inbreeding %’s – US Dairy Breeds – 1967-2017*

Year   Ayrshire Brown Swiss Guernsey   Holstein      Jersey
1967 0.46 0.46 0.53 0.69 0.29
1977 2.49 1.02 1.26 1.31 1.58
1987 4.02 2.24 2.79 2.56 3.01
1997 5.18 3.72 4.76 5.31 4.09
2007 5.76 5.43 6.24 6.77 5.56
2017 6.81 6.88 7.63 7.78 7.16

* Source: CDCB Files. Based on 1960 being 0% Inbreeding.

 Table 2 – Inbreeding Level and Change in Average Inbreeding by Canadian Dairy Breeds*

Avg % Inbred  -2016 Avg Annual Increase in % Inbred
Breed   1970-1980 1980-1990 1990-2000 2000-2010 2010-2016
Ayrshire 6.43 0.24 0.2 0.06 0 0.15
BrownSwiss 6.96 0.07 0.26 0.12 0.12 0.08
Canadienne 9.71 0.16 0.22 0.3 0.19 0.13
Guernsey 6.45 0.06 0.12 0.15 0.22 -0.1
Holstein 7.34 0.11 0.09 0.26 0.08 0.22
Jersey 6.36 0.15 0.08 0.13 0.06 0.06
Shorthorn 2.54 0.01 0.02 0.28 -0.14 0.06

* Source: CDN Files. Based on Females Born in Canada since 1970.

The increase is 1 to 2 % every ten years.

Once not a Concern: 

Before breeder co-ops providing artificial insemination service (approximately 1940), inbreeding was not a matter that garnered much attention. But A.I. was followed by frozen semen, genetic index based young sire sampling programs, E.T., IVF, semen sexing and genomic indexing. All of these contributed to narrowed breed gene pools in the current dairy cattle populations, especially in North America.  However, on a global basis, a broad pool of genes in dairy animals still exists in the form of frozen semen and embryos. It should be noted that it is not just the introduction of genomic, genetic evaluations that can be centered out for increasing the levels of inbreeding.

It is All About Looking Forward Not Backwards:

Breeders can find individual animal inbreeding coefficients (%INB) readily available on-line at breeds, GE centers and A.I. companies based on pedigree, aka looking backwards.  But when making a mating, it is all about the inbreeding coefficient of the resulting progeny, aka looking forward. Modern mating programs take into consideration the inbreeding level of the resulting progeny when making sire recommendations.

Other Details:

Seven points of interest relative to inbreeding include:

  • Linebreeding is based on making matings tracing back to a specific common animal and is a form of inbreeding. It has been used for generations by breeders to stamp good genes into a herd. However, it also can stamp in the not so good genes that the common ancestor may have.
  • The published inbreeding coefficients for animals can be one of the following: (a) pedigree-based (%INB); (b) future based that considers animals in the population in the future (EFI); and (c) genomic (gene) based that starts with EFI and adds in the DNA makeup of an animal. The latter one will become more commonly used in the future.
  • The breeding families used to produce North American Holsteins A.I. sires over the past fifty years had superior production and type but were too often inferior for fertility traits including calving ease. As a result, the concentration of the breeding lines, by the 2000’s, resulted in major breed problems for inbreeding and infertility in milking cows.  Cows that do not retain body condition score after calving often crash when it comes to conceiving when bred.
  • Conversely, until this decade, in Jerseys, the cow families used had very good fertility and even though inbreeding increased the fertility did not suffer, at least as much as it did in Holsteins.
  • To overcome the negatives of inbreeding, some breeders either: (a) alternated sires from diverse families that they used in their herds; or (b) used sires from other breeds. The latter group of breeders were more concerned about the effects of inbreeding than they were on maintaining breed purity. However, a large proportion of breeders were not concerned about inbreeding, and so they mated related animals.
  • A high percent of females are not genomically evaluated, and as a result, it is not possible for mating programs to factor in genomic information on inbreeding when making mating recommendations.
  • I. companies are now either not entering into a stud or openly reporting sires that are known to be carriers of a group of haploids, often associated with embryonic death or lower fertility. Breeders are protected from some of the negatives associated with inbreeding.

Planning for Positive Outcomes from Inbreeding

Improving a population so that only the most desired genotype occurs is something dairy cattle breeders aim to do for all traits under selection. Both constructive breeding and inbreeding can be used to achieve that end. When a single locus is involved in expressing a trait, the goal is to have both loci on the two-gene pair be identical (homozygous).

Some homozygous and desired genotype examples readily known to breeders include: PP polled; BB kappa casein for increased cheese yield; A2A2 beta casein thought to improve milk digestion by humans and bb red coat color (where BB and Bb are black).

For over a century corn breeders have inbred lines and then crossed the inbred lines to produce the superior corn we have today. The same applies to poultry breeding. Inbreeding is the foundation of their programs.

Of interest to dairy cattle, breeders will be the fact that it has been recently determined that the DGAT1 gene is a major determinant of milk fat percent (DGAT = diglyceride acyltransferase). And in addition to fat percent, in a 2007 study by A Schennink and Associates found that DGAT1 gene accounted for about half of the fat composition attributed to genetic variation that was present in the animals they studied. In humans, DGAT1 is important in triglyceride synthesis and essential for intestinal absorption. Having animals homozygous for DGAT may be one way to increase the rate of genetic advancement for both fat percent and yield.

Just think about what breeders can expect to learn in the next five to ten years on the effect of genes. Inbreeding can be one tool to fix the desired genes in a population and eliminate the undesired gene. If that is the case, there would be no need to insert certain genes or to edit genes, both of which may not pass the consumer acceptance test. Simply use inbreeding to get the job done.

Canadian Research into Inbreeding

Dr. Christine Baes, named in 2017 as the Semex-CDN-Holstein Canada Professor in Dairy Genomics at the University of Guelph, recently told The Bullvine about the focus of her and her associate’s research into the understanding of the genetic architecture of North American dairy cows. Part of their plan is to study the use of inbreeding to advantage. Another interesting part of their study also involves how many generations the desired genotype has been fixed in an animal’s ancestry. Dr. Baes terms this as determining the “run of homozygosity “or ROH.  It sounds like we can expect to learn much from this study including how to get to and maintain the most desired genotypes.

The first report on this Guelph research was reported to the October 2017 CDN OIS Presentation – “Examining Genomic Inbreeding and Homozygosity in North American Holsteins.”

The Bullvine Bottom Line

Even though our industry has traditionally thought of inbreeding in negative terms, apart from linebreeding, there are positives in using inbreeding to fix the desired genes in our dairy cattle.  The bottom line at this point is to stay tuned as further research takes place throughout the world on gene effects and then how inbreeding can be used as one of the tools to eliminate the undesired gene and have only the desired gene in our cattle.

 

Dairy Breeders – Stop the Insanity

Blame it on low milk prices, or genomics or whatever you want, the dairy genetics industry has changed drastically in the past ten years.  Gone are the days where a sweet young cow scoring VG-85 as a two-year-old was something you would run a print ad in a magazine, and fellow breeders would be calling you up asking about her.  Not only has what breeders are interested in changed, thanks to genomics, etc. but so has how people buy.  Where and how breeders show, share information and buy has dramatically shifted.  However, most breeders are still trying to advertise and wasting their money on marketing that no longer delivers a return. Simple question to you, when was the last time you can directly attribute a sale to an ad you ran in a print magazine?   As Einstein says doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results is the definition of Insanity.   My fellow dairy breeders it’s time to stop the Insanity.

There is no question the dairy genetics marketplace is a tough game just now.  With AI companies dominating the genomics marketplace (Read more: Should A.I. Companies Own Females?, Why Good Business for A.I. Companies Can Mean Bad Business For Dairy Breeders, and How Genomics is Killing the Dairy Cattle Breeding Industry) and low milk prices killing the market for good dairy cattle (Read more: Who Killed The Market For Good Dairy Cattle?) things are terrible.  These changes and challenges are not limited to the genetics game either; advertising has its own difficulties.  It seems like every day you hear reports about how one print magazine has gone bankrupt, or another one has staff that is leaving to take jobs elsewhere cause they can not pay the bills anymore and even fake announcements about new staff who have actually been working for the publication for years.  This does not happen in a medium that is thriving. 

There is a simple rule in marketing, get your message to where your ideal customer is.  Thanks to Facebook, Snapchat, and Instagram, most breeders no longer use out of date print magazines as their #1 source for information.  On any given week more dairy breeders are online searching for the latest show results, genomic test results or classification highlights than read a print magazine in a whole month.  It’s simple to explain why digital news is faster and less expensive.   It also is much cheaper to advertise in digital, hence why so many advertisers are shifting their dollars from print to digital.  The rise of digital media in preference to print comes down to four key factors: cost, flexibility, accountability, and demographics.

  • Print is Expensive
    Beyond space costs, creating print ads can also require significant In contrast to online ads are relatively inexpensive or, in the case of social media, often free.
  • Print isn’t flexible
    There are fixed closing dates for materials, and once in print, the message cannot be changed until the next issue. In contrast, digital media is much more flexible.
  • Print results are tough to track.
    In comparison to click-throughs, open email rates and a host of other digital metrics, print’s ability to provide ROI data is limited without well-planned campaign execution, which often requires an expensive ad agency to set up for you.
  • Print does not attract many breeders under 40
    In this age group, someone put a cell phone in his or her hands when they were 9, a laptop when they entered middle school. Print is not their media of choice or experience. 

In comparison to spending thousands of on prints ads, a simple ad on a Facebook page with a spend of under $50 can reach over 108,000 dairy breeders in Australia, Brazil, Canada, Switzerland, Colombia, Spain, France, United Kingdom, Italy, New Zealand and the US (Based on metrics provided by Facebook) that is more than double any reach of a print ad.  Now I am sure you say, but there are thousands of fake accounts, and yes there is, that is why you need to create target markets such as the countries listed above instead of just spending to put up a bunch of fake metrics (Read more: The Truth about Dairy Genetics Publications Facebook Fan Page Statistics and  The fakebook – Our Secret is Exposed).  Facebook marketing is not just a simple as “post it, and they will come.”  Just like any effective marketing plan you need to have a strategy that identifies who you ideal customer is, and what motivates them to spend their hard-earned money. 

To learn how to get your farm on Facebook download this free guide, and once you are up and running be sure to check out The Top 10 Dairy Breeder Facebook Fan Pages and Why They are Successful as well as How to Make the Facebook 10 Most Wanted List.

The Bullvine Bottom Line

Let’s face it; times are tough in the dairy industry just now.   But It’s in these tough times that we can make some of the most impactful decisions.  That is very true when it comes to promoting your dairy farm to the world. There are more dairy breeders on Facebook than read all the dairy print publications combined.  Take a look at who is buying, where are they spending their time?  According to Facebook statistics, 50% of dairy breeders log in every day.  Most cannot go without at least checking their Facebook page once or twice a day. That is nearly 1 hour per day, per user.  That is longer than it takes most dairy farmers to read most monthly dairy magazines.  The message is simple: “In these tough times don’t advertise for the sake of advertising.  Market to win!”

Suntor Holsteins – Breeding Goals Revisited

Many factors can lead herd owners to change their breeding goals. They may have bred to participate in shows but haven’t got their animals placed near or at the top of the class. Perhaps their herd is not producing enough milk or milk solids. Others may find that their herd needs to be genetically better for health and fertility reasons.  It could be that the next generation of owners has decided to go a different route in dairy farming. Whatever the reason the implementation of a new selection scheme, with the same breed or by using cross breeding, takes a plan with defined goals in mind.

Suntor Holsteins, Ormstown Quebec, has reached the point where changes are being made in their breeding program. Recently, The Bullvine produced an article on the planning and building of new housing and robotic stall milking at Suntor (Suntor Holsteins – New Baby, New Robot, New Perspective). This article will cover the thoughts of Kevin Sundborg as he decides on the direction of Suntor’s future breeding program.

Suntor’s Past Breeding Program

As described in the previous article, Suntor has been housed in a typical Canadian tie stall barn and has won two Master Breeders Shields. That was after Fred and Ruth Sundborg had started with a grade Holstein herd in 1973 and were fully purebred by 1981. If a proven bull did not leave high type daughters, he did not get used in the Suntor herd and only young sires from high type families were sampled in the herd. Kevin, who is Fred (herd founder) and Ruth’s son and the current co-owner with wife Amanda, told the Bullvine that back in those days, “the goal was to get VG 2year-olds producing 80 lbs at their peak because that is what got the attention of cattle buyers and other breeders”.

Now move forward to the 1990s when TPI and LPI were created.  Initially both these total merit indexes placed approximately 50:50 emphasis on type and production. Suntor adopted the use of LPI when selecting sires both proven (70%) and unproven (30%). With time LPI placed 40:60 emphasis on type and production. When health and fertility traits were added to the LPI, Suntor again followed the breed recommended LPI and considered production, type and health/fertility when selecting sires.

Why Breeding Needs Have Changed

It’s now 2017 and Suntor has two robots milking their herd and Kevin and Amanda have plans for 80 cows producing 140 kgs of fat per day. It does not matter that a first calf heifer is not 60” tall or that she needs to be stylish, but it does matter how much high-quality milk she produces. It also matters that she is fertile and goes about her work without creating issues that require Suntor owners’ attention.

These factors have resulted in Suntor commencing to use sires with a different mix of attributes than the sires that they had used in the past.

New Ideal Young Cow

Kevin described to The Bullvine two first calf heifers currently in their herd. One is 61” tall and the classifier scored her VG86 with a shallow VG87 udder. She is producing 37 kgs (81 lbs) of 3.7%F 3.0%P milk after calving at 25 months. The other heifer is 57” tall, classified GP80, has a GP80 udder, has excellent mobility, and will produce 13,000 kgs of 4.0%F, 3.3%P milk in 305 days after calving at 22 months. In Kevin’s words – “In the past we would have preferred the first heifer, but now we also appreciate the second heifer as well. Today Kevin and Amanda are finding that the robots had no trouble in milking the second heifer and her moderate frame size means a lower body maintenance requirement for feed. Her excellent mobility greatly improves her chances of a long trouble-free life in their free stall-robot operation. (Read More – She ain’t pretty she just milks that way)

Based on what Kevin is seeing in the cows that do the best job in their new set-up, he has modified his sire selection criteria. He says he still wants balanced cows and has added good milking speed, positive indexes for wellness traits and high component production to his must haves in the sires he uses.

Other Breeders Have an Ideal for Young Cows

But Kevin is not the only breeder to be breeding for a different type of young cow than they did in the past.

Alan Andersen of the well-known SeaGull Bay Dairy in Idaho considers their ideal first calver to be 54-56” tall, classifying GP80-82 with an udder capable of producing 110+ lbs of milk (3x) per day. They want cows that will breed back on 1st or 2nd service and have zero health or metabolic problems. The Andersen Family milks 2,400 cows, 25% Holsteins and 75% crossbreds (Holstein x Montbeliarde x Viking Red).  Their Holsteins must keep up with the crossbred for fertility, health and longevity. The picture below is one of their first calvers, 6-7 months fresh, that classified GP81 (2yr). She represents that kind of Holstein young cow that SeaGull Bay wants to breed and work with. In her first lactation she stood 56” tall and produced on 305 days (3x) 29,350 # milk, 4.3%F 1264#F and 3.3%P 966#P. That’s 2230 # (1010 kgs) of fat + protein. She peaked at 121# milk per day. On a relative basis she was 130% compared to her contemporaries for yield.

Aardema Cabriolet 7820

Mark Yeazel, Ja-Bob Holsteins in Ohio, gives serious consideration to his operation’s needs when selecting sires for his 120 cow free stall robot milked herd. Mark wants the productive trouble-free kind of cow. Wide chested, moderate stature, functional udders (good milking speed, no reverse tilt, wide at rear to allow for easy robotic teat cup attachment, teats of moderate length and well-spaced and good udder texture), excellent mobility and wide and properly located thurls. Mark says, ‘If their rear teats cross or they are slow milking, I must sell them as I run my robots to capacity and I cannot tolerate cows that cannot be milked properly or take too long in the robot”. Mark considers all genetic indexes and aAa when mating his cows. In his opinion “high TPI sires often only get to be high because they sire daughters that have short teats, are overly tall, likely lack udder depth and capacity and will lack adequate body width”.

Jotan (Red) x Burket Falls Poll Pledge PP x Lawnboy average cell 101 2-09 305 28829 4.8% 1379 3.6% 1051 365d 31640 4.8% 1525 3.7 %1174 true protein 3 -9 now Bred first service on first lactation, took a couple extra this time. she is GP 81. Her dam was 2nd high cow for protein in state as 4 year old.

The Truth Is

Every day more and more breeders are fitting their breeding goals to their plans and operation rather than just following what was used in the past or that their neighbor use.

Try These Breeding Thoughts on For Size

During our discussions with Kevin Sundborg, he mentioned to us some thoughts that are guiding him as he changes his breeding program. We share Kevin’s points with Bullvine readers, so that they can consider refining or changing their sire selection criteria to more nearly fit the cattle needed in their own operations.

Kevin’s thoughts:

  • “Milk production (milk and milk solids) will be generating our revenue in the future.”
  • “Heifers that calve at 21-22 months and are 55-57” do a lot of growing and easily make 59-61” cows. That’s tall enough.”
  • “Shorter and medium stature cows tend to have fewer problems in free stalls than do taller cows.”
  • “We feel that +5 to +9 CONF or +1.0 to +2.0 PTAT sires with high production and good health & fertility are the ones we need to use.”
  • “We have been and will continue to use Pp and PP (polled) sires.”
  • “We will be using the genetic indexes for health traits when selecting sires in the future.”
  • “We are interested in the sire genetic indexes soon to be available for feed conversion.”
  • “It comes down to how much dry matter a cow can take in rather than how tall or how wide she is.”
  • “In our robotic operation we will likely continue to use type classification and DHI programs.

The Bullvine Bottom Line

Do you agree with Kevin’s thoughts? Or do you lean toward the way SeaGull Bay or Ja-Bob are breeding for the future? Do you have additional thoughts?

Eventually, from your semen buying pattern, your semen suppliers will know your future genetic requirements. However, in the mean-time, you can help them by sharing your thoughts with the representatives who service your farm.

Breeding dairy cows is dynamic. It won’t be the same tomorrow as it was yesterday or ten years ago. Not every type of cow is the best for every system or environment.

The important thing is that each breeder decides what’s best genetically for their operation and then selects sires that produce daughters that conform to their future herd’s needs.

17th European Open Holstein Show

Location: Verona Italy
Judge: Adam Liddle, NY, USA

f

ALL.MULINO DOORMAN MELODY
Grand Champion – 17th European Open Holstein Show
Caravati

ALL.MULINO DOORMAN MELODY
Grand Champion – 17th European Open Holstein Show
Caravati

Grand Champion – ALL.MULINO DOORMAN MELODY, DoormanXJordanXFinley,  Soc.Agr. Caravati S.S. – Ispra (VA)
Reserve Grand Champion: SABBIONA FUTURA ET, WindbrookXMillionXGoldwyn,  Sabbiona AZ.Agr. di Ciserani Ireneo e Francesco S.S. (LO)
HM Champion: CITYVIEW GOLDWYN ADEENA 1, GoldwynXGibsonXRudolph, Allevamento Nure Soc.Agr. S.S. (pc)= Schlegel Sabrina (PC)

SABBIONA FUTURA (Windbrook)
Senior Champion – 17th European Open Holstein Show
Sabbiona

Senior Champion: SABBIONA FUTURA ET, WindbrookXMillionXGoldwyn, Sabbiona AZ.Agr. di Ciserani Ireneo e Francesco S.S. (LO)r
Reserve Senior Champion: CITYVIEW GOLDWYN ADEENA 1, GoldwynXGibsonXRudolph, Allevamento Nure Soc.Agr. S.S. (pc)= Schlegel Sabrina (PC)
HM Senior Champion: WYNDFORD ATWOOD GREY 90 ET, AtwoodXJamesXIndro, Errera Holsteins di Davide Errera (mn)= Agriber (pc) (MN)

WYNDFORD ATWOOD GREY 90
Senior Best Udder
17th European Open Holstein Show
Errera & Agriber

Senior Best Udder: WYNDFORD ATWOOD GREY 90 ET, AtwoodXJamesXIndro, Errera Holsteins di Davide Errera (mn)= Agriber (pc) (MN)

ALL.MULINO DOORMAN MELODY
Intermediate Champion – 17th European Open Holstein Show
Caravati

Intermediate Champion: ALL.MULINO DOORMAN MELODY, DoormanXJordanXFinley, Soc.Agr. Caravati S.S. – Ispra (VA)
Reserve Intermediate Champion: CASTELVERDE ATWOOD PERLIE, AtwoodXGoldsunXSpirte, Quaini Giuseppe Castelverde Holstein – Castelverde (CR)
HM Intermediate Champion: M.E.DAL LONG P DANDY, Long PXBraxtonXGoldwyn, Errera Holsteins di Davide Errera (mn)= Ladina Marcello (cr) (MN)

Intermediate Champion Udder: ALL.MULINO DOORMAN MELODY, DoormanXJordanXFinley, Soc.Agr. Caravati S.S. – Ispra (VA)

C.M.E. Atwood Jasmy
Junior Champion – 17th European Open Holstein Show
Errera Holsteins, Ladina, Agriber.

Junior Champion: C.M.E. ATWOOD JASMY, AtwoodXGoldwynXRedman, Errera Holsteins Soc.Agr.S.S.(mn)= Agriber(pc)= Ladina M.(cr) (MN)
Reserve Junior Champion: ELLE ATWOOD SECRETLY ET, AtwoodXWindbrookXAlexander, Societa’ Agricola Ferrarini S.P.A. (campolungo) – Albinea (RE)
HM Junior Champion: ELLE SOLOMON MATTI ET, SolomonXWindbrookXAlexander, Societa’ Agricola Ferrarini S.P.A. (campolungo) – Albinea (RE)

Zaira Prosecco Nela
Junior Champion of the Junior Show
17th European Open Holstein Show
Luzzeri

Premier Breeder: Sabbiona AZ.Agr. di Ciserani Ireneo e Francesco S.S. (LO)
Premier Exhibitor –  Errera Holsteins Soc.Agr. S.S. di Davide Errera
Premier Sire – Doorman

Class 1- 6 to 9 months of age

Valrose Diamondback Ilary
1st place 6 to 9 months of age
17th European Open Holstein Show
Nuzzi Domenica

Valrose Diamondback Ilary
1st place 6 to 9 months of age
17th European Open Holstein Show
Nuzzi Domenica

  1. VALROSE DIAMONDBACK ILARY, DiamondbackXMr TopXStormatic, Nuzzi Domenico (ta)= Ma.BI.Farm Holstein (TA)
  2. CAVITELLA SOLOMON KATE, SolomonXGolden DreamsXPlanet, Mozzi Carlo – Busseto (PR)
  3. BELIA, DoormanXLet It SnowXSquare, Societa Agricola Tenuta di Rimale S.S. – Fidenza (PR)
  4. VENTURO SOLOMON ROMILAY, SolomonXMccutchenXAtwood, Ganaderia Casa Venturo, S.C. – Spagna ( )
  5. CUDANA AMORAK SOLOMON, SolomonXExplodeXChampion, Cudana – Spagna ( )

Class 2 – 9 to 12 Months 

Elle Atwood Secretly
1st place 9 to 12 months of age
17th European Open Holstein Show
Societa Agricola Ferrarini

  1. ELLE ATWOOD SECRETLY ET, AtwoodXWindbrookXAlexander, Societa’ Agricola Ferrarini S.P.A. (campolungo) – Albinea (RE)
  2. ELLE SOLOMON MATTI ET, SolomonXWindbrookXAlexander, Societa’ Agricola Ferrarini S.P.A. (campolungo) – Albinea (RE)
  3. CASTELVERDE BEEMER BIGBANG ET, BeemerXDundeeXLeader, Quaini Giuseppe Castelverde Holstein – Castelverde (CR)
  4. SCHONHOF’S ATWOOD DELICIA, AtwoodXDamionXStormatic, Schonhof Holsteins (Rupert Wenger) – Austria
  5. HANDY 9560ET, Mr Lr Edg Arvis 18196-ETXDoormanXHero, Societa’ Agricola Olza S.S.(lo)= Stefano Ciceri (LO)

Class 3 – 12 to 15 Months

Gloria Solomon Irina
1st place 12 to 15 months of age
17th European Open Holstein Show
Gloria Holsteins

  1. GLORIA SOLOMON IRINA, SolomonXAtwoodXBolton, Gloria Holstein – Spagna ( )
  2. BE BE ADRIA, BeemerXAtwoodXAlexander, Carnica Holsteins (austria)= Bb Holsteins ( )
  3. SABBIONA BUTTERFLY ET, BeemerXGoldwynXStorm, Sabbiona AZ.Agr. di Ciserani Ireneo e Francesco S.S. (LO)
  4. SOLOMON ALESSIA, SolomonXSparklingXGeneva, AZ.Agr.Rinascente di Lovato R. e C. (mn)= Samuele Lovato (MN)
  5. ELLE OCTANE LILLYBET ET, OctaneXDoormanXGoldwyn, Societa’ Agricola Ferrarini S.P.A. (campolungo) – Albinea (RE)

Class 4 – 15 to 18 Months

Zaira Prosecco Nela
1st place 15 to 18 months of age
17th European Open Holstein Show
Luzzeri

  1. ZAIRA PROSECCO NELA, Zaira Brawler ProseccoXDolmanXLadino Talent Baldo ET, Societa’ Agricola Luzzeri G. e A. S.S.(cr)= Marika Contesini (CR)
  2. SEM-FARM MCCUTCH. OTTAVIANA ET, MccutchenXAtwoodXBlitz, Semeraro Carlo Maria – Mottola (TA)
  3. FANTASY ARTICA, SpringXMascaleseXMaestro, Soc.Agricola Oitana Guido e Ezio S.S. – Scalenghe (TO)
  4. OLZA AL SOLOMON LUCILLE 884, SolomonXMeridianXAtwood, Agrilat Soc.Agr.(mi)= Olza Soc.Agr.= Steval= Simone Invernizzi (MI)
  5. CASTELVERDE ATWOOD SNUG, AtwoodXDempseyXAllen, Quaini Giuseppe Castelverde Holstein – Castelverde (CR)

Class 5 – 18 to 21 Months

Ellie Gold Chip Martina
1st place 18 to 21 months of age
17th European Open Holstein Show
Ferrarini

  1. LLE GOLD CHIP MARTINA ET, Gold ChipXWindbrookXPagewire, Societa’ Agricola Ferrarini S.P.A. (campolungo) – Albinea (RE)
  2. CUDANA ICOW BEEMER, BeemerXExplodeXChampion, Cudana – Spagna ( )
  3. ZIAL FONTAINE NAVE, FontaineXVigorXEnd-Story, Azienda Agricola Bertoletta di Zilocchi Omero & C.SS Soc.Agr (MN)

Class 6 – 21-24 Months

C.M.E. Atwood Jasmy
1st place 21 to 24 months of age
17th European Open Holstein Show
Errera Holsteins, Ladina, Agriber

  • C.M.E. ATWOOD JASMY, AtwoodXGoldwynXRedman, Errera Holsteins Soc.Agr.S.S.(mn)= Agriber(pc)= Ladina M.(cr) (MN)
  • SABBIONA BARALA, DoormanXAtwoodXZenith, Sabbiona AZ.Agr. di Ciserani Ireneo e Francesco S.S. (LO)
  • ELLE GOLDWYN HARRIET, GoldwynXJasperXCousteau
  • Societa’ Agricola Ferrarini S.P.A. (campolungo) – Albinea (RE)
  • VISTAHERMOSA DOORMAN MERY, DoormanXGold ChipXSid, Gloria Holstein – Spagna ( )
  • ALL.BERG FIONA, MontereyXMascaleseXGoldwyn, Bergamin Mario Roberto Angelino e Marco S.S. – Arborea (OR)

Class 8 – Junior First Lactation

Blondin Goldwyn Be Happy
1st place Milking Yearling
17th European Open Holstein Show
Errera, Agriber, Ladina, Magnolia

  1. BLONDIN GOLDWYN BE HAPPY, GoldwynXAdventXMetro, Errera Holsteins S.S.(mn)= Magnolia= Agriber= Ladina Marcello (MN)
  2. GLORIA BRADNICK ALBANA ET, BradnickXLavanguardXRubens
    Gloria Holstein – Spagna (
  3. AGRILAT DOORMAN NON, DoormanXDamionXCousteau, Societa’ Agricola Olza S.S.(lo)= Alberto Locatelli (LO)
  4. COTO BEEMER LAUSSANNE, BeemerXShottleXSanchez Casa Coto – Spagna ( )
  5. OLZA DOORMAN LANA RAE 749 ET, DoormanXBradnickXAdvent, Societa’ Agricola Olza S.S. – Cavenago D’ Adda (LO)

Class 9 – Intermediate 1st Lactation

SEM FARM DOORMAN NIAGARA
1st place Junior Two Year Old
17th European Open Holstein Show
Semeraro, Carlo Maria

  1. SEM FARM DOORMAN NIAGARA, DoormanXAcmeXDolman, Semeraro Carlo Maria (ta)= Az.Agr.Zoot. Posticchia Sabelli (TA)
  2. FANTASY ZAIRA, OlympianXLarsonXClassic, Soc.Agricola Oitana Guido e Ezio S.S. – Scalenghe (TO)
  3. ELLE MCCUTCHEN JASMINE ET, MccutchenXDamionXCut, Societa’ Agricola Ferrarini S.P.A. (campolungo) – Albinea (RE)
  4. CASTELVERDE SEAVER JODIE, SeaverXSidXGibson, Quaini Giuseppe Castelverde Holstein – Castelverde (CR)
  5. ZIAL ZOOM MIXATA, ZoomXZelgadisXStormatic, Azienda Agricola Bertoletta di Zilocchi Omero & C.SS Soc.Agr (MN)

Class 10 – Senior First Lactation

CASTELVERDE ATWOOD PERLIE
1st place Senior Two-Year-Old
17th European Open Holstein Show
Casterlverde Holsteins

  1. CASTELVERDE ATWOOD PERLIE, AtwoodXGoldsunXSpirte, Quaini Giuseppe Castelverde Holstein – Castelverde (CR)
  2. M.E.DAL LONG P DANDY, Long PXBraxtonXGoldwyn, Errera Holsteins di Davide Errera (mn)= Ladina Marcello (cr) (MN)
  3. CARNICA DOLLY, Ladd P-RedXCousteauXJotan Red, Carnica Holsteins= Il Castagno-Tjr Portea-Ladina M. ( )
  4. CASTELVERDE GOLDWYN SUZIE ET, GoldwynXDamionXAllen, Quaini Giuseppe Castelverde Holstein – Castelverde (CR)
  5. DOORMAN NESTA, DoormanXAlexander Facepack ETXGoldwyn, AZ.Agr. di Mansueto P.A. Giovanni (ta)= Simeone Francesco (TA)

Class 11 – Junior 2nd Lactation

Modolino Doorman Dori
1st place Junior Three Year Olds
17th European Open Holstein Show
Negro Antonio Christiano E Roberto

  1. MODOLINO DOORMAN DORI, DoormanXAlexanderXO-Man, AZ.Agr.Negro= SchÚnhof Holsteins (MN)
  2. FANTASY VANITA, DoormanXDestryXPicolo Red, Soc.Agricola Oitana Guido e Ezio S.S. – Scalenghe (TO)
  3. DOTTI MOGUL CHANEL, MogulXShottleXBolide, AZ.Agr. La Corte di Dotti e C. S.Agr.S. – S.Possidonio (MO)
  4. SABBIONA TIFANNY, AtwoodXDudeXMerchant, Sabbiona AZ.Agr. di Ciserani Ireneo e Francesco S.S. (LO)
  5. CASTELVERDE SHOTTBOLT MAUDE, ShottboltXShoutXPower, Quaini Giuseppe Castelverde Holstein – Castelverde (CR)

Class 12 – Senior Second Lactation

ALL.MULINO DOORMAN MELODY
1st place Senior Three Year Old
17th European Open Holstein Show
Caravati

  1. LL.MULINO DOORMAN MELODY, DoormanXJordanXFinley, Soc.Agr. Caravati S.S. – Ispra (VA)
  2. SABBIONA OLIMPA, Golden DreamsXRoyXOutside, Sabbiona AZ.Agr. di Ciserani Ireneo e Francesco S.S. (LO)
  3. ELLE ALEXANDER BEATRIX ET, AlexanderXSidXGoldwyn, Societa’ Agricola Ferrarini S.P.A. (campolungo) – Albinea (RE)
  4. ALL.NURE FEVER ENERVIT ET, FeverXBoltonXRoy, Allevamento Nure Soc.Agr. S.S. – Piacenza (PC)
  5. FANTASY VIROSTA, Kanu P RedXLarsonXBogart, Soc.Agricola Oitana Guido e Ezio S.S. – Scalenghe (TO)

Class 13 – Four Year Olds

WYNDFORD ATWOOD GREY 90
1st place Four Year Old
17th European Open Holstein Show
Errera & Agriber

  1. WYNDFORD ATWOOD GREY 90 ET, AtwoodXJamesXIndro, Errera Holsteins di Davide Errera (mn)= Agriber (pc) (MN)
  2. MOLINO SUDINA ET, LauthorityXSudXArpagone, Errera Holsteins di Davide Errera(mn)= Molino Terenzano(lo) (MN)
  3. GENESIS IDYLLE, BradnickXGoldwynXLeduc, Allevamento Nure Soc.Agr. S.S. – Piacenza (PC)
  4. CHIZZOLA OV RBURST AMERY R ET, RedburstXRedliner RedXGoldwyn, Bollati Antonio e Figli Soc.Agr.(pc)= Olivo Viani (PC)
  5. SABBIONA MAIORCA, O-CosmopolitanXOutboundXShottle, Sabbiona AZ.Agr. di Ciserani Ireneo e Francesco S.S. (LO)

Class 14: Five Year Olds

SABBIONA FUTURA (Windbrook)
1st place Five Year Old
17th European Open Holstein Show
Sabbiona

  1. SABBIONA FUTURA ET, WindbrookXMillionXGoldwyn, Sabbiona AZ.Agr. di Ciserani Ireneo e Francesco S.S. (LO)
  2. OLZA DUDE PROSPERA, DudeXTalent-ImpXAllen, Societa’ Agricola Olza S.S. – Cavenago D’ Adda (LO)
  3. SABBIONA IVANA, GoldfarmXDrakeXStormatic, Sabbiona AZ.Agr. di Ciserani Ireneo e Francesco S.S. (LO)
  4. NEW FLOWERS FARM DORY, DempseyXWestXFord, AZ. Agr. New Flowers Farm S.S. di Traversi e Comini – Noceto (PR)
  5. CIOLIFARM ARTIGLIA, Golden DreamsXMillerXRudolph, AZ.Agr.Volpere di Cioli Stefano – Remedello (BS)

Class 15: Mature Cows

CITYVIEW GOLDWYN ADEENA 1
1st place Mature Cow
17th European Open Holstein Show
All.Nure, Schlegel Sabrina