The entire dairy cattle improvement industry is involved as new data points are captured and analyzed and the information is provided back to the farm level for both genetic and management purposes.

The challenge that presents for each herd genetic manager is to determine which sire information and sires need to be used starting today to produce tomorrow’s heifer and milking herds.

Sire Selection is Important and Challenging

Using top-ranked sires is and will continue to be important. It is a known fact that over ninety per cent of a herd’s genetic advancement is the result of sires used to produce the sire stacks of a herd’s females.

The on-farm decisions are no longer as simple as which breed to own and making breeding decisions based on phenotypic sire daughter averages and female phenotypes. Dairy farmers realize that sires that leave average or below average performance in their daughters are not the best choices.

Refining Sire Genetic Indexing

The global dairy cattle breeding industry is working on research and development to identify sires which have the important heritable traits for maximizing tomorrow’s milk checks and minimizing on-farm costs of production. This work is not a new initiative but the rate of change in traits with data points, in the importance of traits and in identifying superior parents is ever increasing.

What is the Scope of Future Dairy Cattle Breeding?

Until the present time in dairy cattle breeding the major focus has been on the milking cows. That has already started to change. It will continue to expand to cover both milk composition and meat production.

Breeding will include all animal lifecycle stages, starting at conception. Data definition, data accuracy, trait heritabilities and economic values will continue to be key components in male and female genetic indexing. We can expect the scope and rate of change in dairy cattle breeding information to speed up. This is called dynamic progress.

Future Breeding Themes in Sire Selection

Dairy farmers recognize that the process of genetically improving their animals is dynamic. The Bullvine offers the following four sire selection themes for the consideration of our readers:

Theme #1 – Sire Selection for Revenue Generation 

Milk composition has become a key determining factor in the size of every milk check. Ways to maximize future revenue via sire selection decisions can include shipping only A2A2 beta casein milk, shipping only BB kappa casein milk and shipping high %Fat milk.

Other revenue sources can include beef animal sales and breeding stock or genetic sales. Profit margins for these sources will depend on marketing of the product, customer availability or preference and cost-control.

Theme #2 – Sire Selection for Production and Efficiency 

Increased on-farm profit from sire selection for increased production and efficiencies will be an even more integral part of every herd’s and the dairy industry’s future success. Animal genetic indexing associated with feed conversion and methane reduction will gain in accuracy and use in the next few years.

Theme #3 – Sire Selection for Functionality and Longevity

With automated data capture occurring for more functional traits dairy farmers will be able to select sires that improve heifer performance, reduce cow cull rates and extend average female lifetimes. In a few years there will be sire indexes available for genetically improving feet, locomotion, parlor performance and heifer performance.

Theme #4 – Sire Selection for Health and Fertility

Many traits are now genetically evaluated for both health and fertility traits, but dairy farmers can expect genetic indexes for more traits coming from new data capture systems. On the health side the data will be beneficial at both the farm level and at the consumer satisfaction level.

Sire Selection Step #1 – Getting in the Ball Park

From the top 25 Jersey to 100 Holstein sires on the total merit index lists (TMI’s) select 10-20 sires for closer examination. Include in the list only sires that are breed improvers (60-99%RK) for at least three of the four above themes.

Some notes:

Sires selected can be either daughter proven or genomic.

National or company TMI’s are designed to improve a dairy cow population. However individual herds may see benefit from using a customized TMI.

Sire Selection Step #2 – Fine Tune the Selection

Narrow down the list of sires from Step #1, ensuring there is at least one breed leading sire for each theme and then purchase semen from either or both proven and genomic evaluated sires. Sires should be mated to females according to their breeding theme strength(s) and their mates breeding theme limitations(s).

Some notes:

• The number of sires from which semen is purchased will vary by herd size. Larger herds should purchase more sires, especially genomic sires. That will spread the risk.
• Some dairy farmers may choose after purchasing sires to randomly mate their females.
• Make semen purchase decisions based on cost-benefit, not lowest cost. Semen cost is only 1% of dairy farm expenses.

It is Best to Rank Sires Relative to Their Peers

A sire’s genetic index number is not informative on where a sire ranks amongst his peers. The index number does not tell what the population average or range in animal index values are for a trait.

Productive Life (PL) for USA sires, born 2015-2022, average (50% rank) 2.8 in Holsteins and 1.7 in Jerseys. Note those averages are not zero. For PL to be significantly improved in USA dairy cattle sires should be more than 84%RK. That means that a sire’s PL’s need to be greater than 4.7 (proven) and 5.9 (genomic) for Holsteins and 3.5 (proven) and 5.1 (genomic) for Jerseys.

Functional traits published by Lactanet must be 105 for a sire to have an 83%RK for a trait. Sires rate 115 and higher are 99%RK.

Analysis of the Current Top TMI Sires for %RK

Tables 1 and 2 contain twenty-seven breed leading sires (April 2023) for Holstein and Jersey breeds and their %RK’s for four currently genetically indexed major categories/traits and three milk composition assessments.

Table 1 Breed Leading Holstein Sires %RK for Breeding Themes

Rank in Population (April ’23) for Breeding Themes

Table 2 Breed Leading Jersey Sires %RK for Breeding Themes

Rank in Population (April ’23) for Breeding Themes

Some takeaway points from Tables 1 and 2 are:

• All the sires in the table are breed leaders for one or more TMI or trait indexes.
• %RK is a good and quick tool to position a sire’s indexes in the national herd for its breed.
• It is a high standard but only two Holstein and two Jersey sires of the twenty-seven are improvers or leave the desired milk components for all seven categories in the tables.
• 85% of the sires are breed improvers for production. It is the other categories that require focused consideration when selecting sires. 37.5% of the time in the six other categories the sire is not an improver or desired for milk composition.
• A TMI index is a good first sort for selecting sires, but it is necessary to dig deeper and identify a sire’s strengths and limitations.

The Bullvine Bottom Line

Dairy farmers should be prepared to select and use sires based on new functional, health and performance trait indexes once those indexes become available.

It is recommended that dairy farmers have a plan for which traits need genetic improvement in their herd.

Use all the genetic facts when making sire selection decisions, including if a sire is below average for a trait.

The saying – Select the Best (>83%RK) and Ignore the Rest (<60%RK) – should be practised when selecting sires.

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

Every dairy herd manager is well-aware of the negative effects that lameness and impaired mobility have on the bottom line. These negatives occur in the growing pen, in the milk pail, in poorer conception, and in extended days in the dry pen. Genetic progress has been made in some feet and leg areas. However, to this day, there is not an easily applied genetic-based selection formula that helps achieve a long-lived animal with healthy feet and excellent locomotion for dairy animals.

What Causes Lameness and Mobility Problems?

There are many causes for why dairy cattle suffer from lameness and impaired mobility – due to sub-par farm facilities and practices, diseases, genetics, nutrition, …etc.

To date, the focus for avoiding lameness has been on management. Regular hoof care, foot baths, animal exercise, and environment adjustments are front of mind for herd managers to minimize lame and immobile animals. As well, most farms have adopted feeding programs so that diets are balanced and do not contribute to problems.

How Do Dairy Farmers See the Genetic Improvement of Their Animals for Feet and Locomotion?

Farmers recently surveyed in the Alberta Lameness Reduction Initiative study reported that they primarily rely on their hoof trimmers and veterinarians for the hoof care of their animals. It is as if improvement through genetic selection is not considered possible. Some dairy farmers have moved to crossbreeding to improve the feet and mobility of their animals.

Clearly, farmers, at least in confined housing environments, have accepted that they must incur the added costs associated with frequently trimming all animals’ feet and the premature culling of problem animals. Currently, many Holstein farmers are also expressing concern over a recent increasing prevalence of cows with straight rear legs (side view) often also involving the lack of flex in rear leg joints (spastic paresis).

The bottom line, from a genetic perspective, is that farmers do not know which sires or bloodlines to use to genetically improve their animals’ feet and locomotion.

Does the Cost of Lameness Justify More Attention?

Both North American and European dairy industry officials estimate that every case of lameness in milking cows costs between $300 and $500 in lost net lactation income. That figure does not include the lost income for the cows that do not exhibit lameness but are not performing 100% in milk production. Nor does it include the increased replacement costs due to premature culling. Managers also must add on the lost opportunities and costs associated with calves, heifers and dry cows that are lame.

The short answer is that, with half the cows having at least one lameness case of their lifetime, lameness and impaired locomotion cost the global dairy industry big time in performance and profits as well as a negative consumer image for the industry.

Common Terms Are Not Used

Universal terms are not used throughout the dairy cattle world when it comes to defining problems associated with feet and animal movement.

ICAR uses the terms lameness and locomotion with data definitions for each. ICAR recommends that they be evaluated independently. Yet in many countries, including USA, Oceana and Nordic Countries, mobility is the term used instead of locomotion. In some cases, mobility may also be considered to cover both feet and an animal’s ability to move properly.

For this article, we will not be concerned with which terms are used but rather the steps needed to genetically index and then breed animals that are superior for their feet and their locomotion.

Is it Possible to Genetically Improve Lowly Heritable Traits like Feet and Locomotion?

Where once it was considered impossible to improve traits for which the heritability is low or for which there was no data, now much has changed. It started many years ago with the capture of data for genetic defects followed by calving ease, conception rates, udder health, … plus many more. What it took to move to eliminating these negative attributes was to implement methods of data capture either by farmer observations or laboratory analysis. Once there was an adequate amount of data, genetic evaluations were conducted. Then genetic indexes were used in animal selection with positive outcomes.

Traditional Thinking for Genetically Improving Feet and Locomotion

Having breed ideals, evaluating animals compared to those ideals, and producing genetic indexes for the ideal form for feet and legs has not stopped the downward slide in the genetic merit of animals for feet and locomotion. In the USA, the genetic correlation between Feet & Leg Composite (FLC) and longevity (PL) is zero (+0.08). In Canada, only the feet and leg descriptive traits heel depth and rear legs rear view have even a low moderate positive genetic correlation (+0.30 & +0.21) with longevity (HL). Genetically evaluating feet and legs solely on body form (type classification) should not take the entire blame that genetic improvement for feet and locomotion has not occurred. Without accurate genetic information for feet and locomotion, sires with inferior parents have not been excluded from entry into A.I.

Breeding to Avoid Hoof Disease Has Started

Data for foot diseases has recently been captured and forwarded by hoof trimmers to genetic evaluation centers which have produced Holstein sire genetic indexes for Hoof Health in Canada and Nordic Countries. (Read Bullvine’s “Put Your Best Foot Forward.”)  Therefore, the process for having more useful genetic indexes for breeding healthy feet is started.

Recently published Cornell research findings from New York dairy farms shows that cows that become thin after calving are more prone to feet problems due to the loss of fat cushioning in their feet. The condition is known as loss of digital cushion thickness. Could it be that bulls that sire cows that are able to retain body condition, while early in lactation and producing heavily, are genetically superior for avoiding hoof health problems?

How Feet and Legs Function Now Drawing Attention

Currently, studies are underway in numerous universities, companies, and countries to capture lameness and locomotion data using cameras/devices/owner reporting. There are two uses for the data – on-farm animal management and conducting genetic evaluations. Of course, as with any system where genetic indexes are produced, all animals in a herd must be monitored and reported to achieve high genetic prediction accuracy. The extent of the traits evaluated varies from study to study and includes a degree of lameness, distribution of weight to each limb, back carriage, length of stride, ease of movement, … etc. One study currently underway is a survey by Lactanet on crampiness (inherited periodic spasticity) in dairy animals.

Dairy farmers can expect to see reports from these studies for both feet and locomotion in the next couple of years. The challenge then for dairy farmers will be how to interpret and use the sire indexes for the many different traits.

A Total Approach Is Need to Genetically Address Lameness and Lack of Proper Locomotion

The time has come for the silos between organizations and disciplines to come down. Silos when it comes to analyzing and combining all the data for feet and locomotion to arrive at identifying both superior and inferior animals. The scope of that data must include body parts, health/disease and the functioning of body parts. This data could also be captured and reported to genetic evaluation centers for heifers and genomic sires.

One study currently underway that combines all data areas is being led by CDCB and includes farmers, hoof trimmers, an electronic animal monitoring company and geneticists. A full description of the study can be found at https://www.progressivedairy.com/topics/a-i-breeding/cdcb-leads-efforts-to-reduce-lameness-with-genetics.  The study has put in place a total data framework for feet and locomotion covering data from the farm to the genomic profiles.

The Bullvine Bottom Line

With dairy cattle breeding expanding to include health, animal care and efficiencies, the opportunity exists for all stakeholders in the milk production industry to address and support research and development on genetically improving the feet and locomotion of today’s dairy cattle.

Ultimately dairy farmers and the entire dairy cattle industry can be the winners. Lame animals and animals with inferior locomotion are dysfunctional.  The desirable genes exist in dairy cattle, it is a matter of identifying the superior animals for genetically avoiding lameness and locomotion problems.

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

Dairy Farmers gauge their practices and performance by comparing their herds to those of fellow farmers. In Canada one way to compare dairy herds that participate in Lactanet’s recording, testing and management services, is the annual Herd Management Score Report.

Herd Management Formula

The six criteria in this herd comparison formula are: Milk Value (50% of weighting); Udder Health (15%); Calving Interval (10%); Longevity (10%); Herd Efficiency (10%); and Age at First Calving (5%).

On seeing the results published by Lactanet early in 2021, The Bullvine asked – “So what is known about the results for top herds, especially their genetics, the improvement services top herds employ and what are top herds planning for future years?”

Top Herds Surveyed

To dig deeper, The Bullvine conducted a phone survey of twelve, top 0.5%, herds. The herds surveyed, from across Canada, were the top herds by breed (Holstein, Jersey & Ayrshire), the top herds by region (W Canada, Ontario, Quebec & E Canada), the top organic herd and four additional herds selected at random from the top ten Canadian managed dairy herds.

How Do Top Herds Perform?

As would be expected these top twelve herds on average performed at extremely high levels (Table 1).

Table 1 -Top Managed Herds (12x) Performance

The Canadian milk supply managed system is based on a herd’s daily production of kgs of fat. As a result, daily fat yield per cow per day is on the minds of farmers in all aspects of their dairy enterprise – genetics, nutrition and management. The daily fat and protein production per cow for the twelve herds are exceptional. Payment to farmers for the milk they ship is based on fat, protein and other solids volumes. Therefore, having high protein yields per cow per day, is also important.

Milk Sales have a 50% weighting in the Management Score formula. It is not surprising that the very top herds stand out for daily production of fat and protein.

With ninety milking cows being the average dairy herd size in Canada, it is noteworthy that the Holstein herds combine superior performance with the ability to take advantage of the economies of scale. Both of which significantly contribute to herd profitability. Additionally, two categories where all twelve herds stand out are Calving Interval and Age at First Calving.

Which Programs and Services Do Top Herds Use?

Dairy farmers rely on programs and services to achieve superior performance. Table 2 shows the usage rate for a multitude of programs and services for the twelve herds surveyed.

Table 2 – Programs & Services Used by Top Mananged Herds

Some additional interesting facts reported during the phone surveys include:

• 50% of the farms have a family member employed off-farm in the agricultural industry (veterinarians, veterinary technicians, cheese/ice cream store owner, chicken broiler farm owner, salespersons – seeds, equipment, farm supplies, …)
• 75% of the farms have a family member elected to serve their community or agriculture – municipal councilors, directors of local, provincial and national farmer organizations and directors of agricultural industry advisory service organizations.
• These farms often share farming machinery with neighbors. One herd has a neighbor that prepares and delivers their TMR to their herd.

Traits Top Herds Select For

 Sire selection was always mentioned by survey participants as being especially important.  Whereas cow families and awareness of female lineage were not considered in decision making by most farms. 80% of the farms reported using sexed semen on heifers. Beef semen is used on all the farms for 30% to 70% of the inseminations for milking cows. The survey did not ask if the farm had decreased the number of heifers being raised but many responders volunteered, that with sexed semen, they are now using fewer A.I. services to dairy sires.

The traits important in sire selection for these top herds are listed in Table 3.

Table 3 – Traits Top Managed Herds Use in Sire Selection

These herds have high production, yet the owners still place their primary trait emphasis on milk yield and milk components. Only three herds mentioned that they select for overall conformation. Some herd owners commented that their herds were not in need of improvement in final score and calving ease.

For these twelve herds their model cows are productive, healthy, mobile, require minimal labor and are efficient converters. Many responders reported that they do not use sire mating services and that after selecting sires that will improve their herd, they use the sires randomly.

Where Top Herds Are Headed

The responders to the survey were very forthcoming in their plans for the future. Some of the plans shared include:

• Owners plan to buy additional daily fat production quota and to bring family members into their operations. Quality of life, including time for family, was mentioned as being important.
• Some owners mentioned that they had conducted genomic testing on animals some years back, but they did not see benefit so stopped testing. It is interesting that some are now returning to genomic testing calves as they can see future benefit for both genetic improvement and improving management.
• Many owners reported planning to improve their calves, heifers, dry cows and fresh cow programs and facilities now that they have outstanding performance in their milking herds.
• Most owners mentioned plans to purchase new on-farm technology in order to have the most accurate and best data in order to make improved decisions.
• Individually owners reported considering ways to generate increased revenue or to reduce costs, including producing specialty milk (organic, a2a2, … etc.), having more cash crops, starting new livestock enterprises (i.e. broilers) and decreasing feed costs.
• A couple of responders commented that attention needs to be given by the dairy industry to producing milk the processors can make into products consumers will buy and implementing on-farm practices that consumers see as necessary in order for them to buy milk products.

The Bullvine Bottom Line

The survey of the very top managed Canadian dairy herds clarifies information that every dairy farmer can use. Discerning on-farm service providers – data capture services, business/financial advisors, nutrition programs, genetic programs, animal welfare/housing, environmental programs – can use the information from these top farmers to improve the services they provide.

It all comes down to dairy farm productivity, efficiencies and sustainability. It was very encouraging for The Bullvine to interact with twelve very progressive dairy farmers. These twelve top managed herds have both a vision and a plan for their farms and herds. They have achieved superior performance, yet they are planning to be even better dairy farmers in the future..

The Bullvine thanks Harley Nicholson for his generous time and commitment in conducting the surveys. Special thanks goes to the herd owners for their participation and for sharing their futuristic approaches for dairying in Canada.

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

For a business to be successful, it must be continually searching for new revenue sources. Profitable sales of extra breeding stock are now decimated for most North American dairy farms. The average farm gate milk price is challenged to be able to cover all costs on many farms. For these reasons dairy farmers need to be searching for ways to increase revenue using genetics. If your farm fits or will fit this scenario within the next five years – what are you considering for increasing revenue per cwt of milk shipped?

Is Increased Revenue from Cheese Milk Possible?

The Bullvine sees some dairy farmers increasing revenue by producing specialized milk for cheese production. Other farms see this as too much effort, not possible, not viable, not sustainable or having the opinion that milk processors will not pay a premium for milk from herds where all cows are superior (BB) for Kappa Casein.

Although not directly related to milk for cheese production, the other important casein (Beta Casein) also has the potential for increasing the farm gate milk price.

Kappa Casein – What is the Story?

The Bullvine published an article on breeding for Kappa Casein three years ago – (Read: Breeding for Kappa Casein to Increase Cheese Yield.)

A synopsis of key points reported in that article include:

• There are three prevalent alleles for Kappa Casein – A, B and E.
• Milk from BB cows clots 25% faster and produces cheese twice as firm as compared to milk from AA cows.
• Milk from BB cows produces 10% more cheese than milk from AA cows.
• Milk from AB cows is about midway between BB & AA cows for clotting, quality and volume.
• Milk from EE cows does not clot and is not suitable for cheese making.
• Milk for AE cows is usually considered unsuitable by cheese makers.
• Milk from BE cows is slightly less desirable compared to AA cows.
• Milk from EE and AE cows, with impaired clotting properties, is not improved by mixing it with an equal amount of well-clotting milk from BB and AB cows.

This provides dairy farmers with the information necessary to move a total BB herd of cows.

Kappa Casein Situation on North American Dairy Farms – 2020

The Bullvine studied both the current North American cows and sire populations and found the following:

Table 1 – Kappa Casein (KCN) Allele Frequency Based on Breed Registrations */**/**

* Based on Sire Allele Profiles for 20 sires with Most Daughters (weighted by # of daughters)
** In USA approximately 15% of dairy animals are registered with breed societies / in Canada – 80+%.
*** Data supplied by Holstein Canada, Jersey Canada and US Jersey.

On average the Jersey female population is superior to the Holstein population for having the B allele. The occurrence of the E allele is almost non-existent in Jersey herds. So, currently, Jersey herds can be composed entirely of BB females and are thereby able to guarantee that BB milk from their herds can be used to make cheese. Achieving all BB cows in Holstein herds will take extensive testing and culling.

Table 2:  Kappa Casein (KCN) Allele Frequency Based on Dec 2020 Sire Listings */**/***

* Based on Sire Allele Profiles for top 20 sires on national and breed total merit indexes
** Calculated as raw averages for the twenty sires as sire usage rates are not available.

The superiority of top Jersey sires for having the B allele can be seen in Table 2. It is encouraging for dairy cattle breeders wanting to use BB Holstein sires to see that A.I. (aka breeding companies) organizations have moved to selecting and marketing sires with B alleles in their breeding programs. A.I.’s genomic Holstein sires have significantly more B and fewer E alleles in their group compared to proven sires.

The exact details for current top North American proven Holstein sires are that there are 3 EE, 9 AE and 18 BE sires being marketed to dairy farms. For top genomic sires there are zero EE, zero AE sires and only 9 BE sires being sold to dairy farms. With genomic sires being used extensively (up to 70%), the conversion to all BB and AB Holstein females would be possible within a few years.

In 2021 top Jersey sires in North America are 90% BB with most of the remainder being AB. Just three of the sires are AA.

Buy and Use Only BB Sires

Even though breeding companies are leading in eliminating the E allele and minimizing the A allele, sire allele profiles do not always appear in sire promotional materials. Dairy Farmers wanting to move to a BB herd will need to work in collaboration with their semen suppliers and purchase only BB sires.

BB Sires Suggestions for Breeders to Consider

The Bullvine searched the top North American sire listings for BB sires. A sample of the Holstein and Jersey sires currently being marketed are listed in Tables 3 and 4.

TABLE 3:  Sample of North American Dec 2020 High Ranking Holstein Sires* with BB Kappa Casein Profiles

* Sires are high ranking sires on various listings and are listed in order of their CDCB Protein Yield Index (#/lbs.)
Abbreviations: KCN – kappa casein; UD – udder depth; DCA – daughter calving ability; HH – hoof health; TMI – ranking on another total merit index; BCN – beta casein.

Most of the Holstein sires in Table 3 are breed toppers for various total merit indexes. These sires are above average for all currently marketed sires for: Protein, %P; PL, SCS; DCA and HH. There is a variety of sire stacks. One caution, DPR’s for these sires are average. Over half the sires in Table 3 are A2A2.

Table 4: Sample of North American Dec 2020 High Ranking Jersey Sires* with BB Kappa Casein Profiles

* Sires are high ranking genomically evaluated and are listed in order of their CDCB Protein Yield Index (lbs.)
Abbreviations: KCN – kappa casein; UD – udder depth; DCA – daughter calving ability; HD – heal depth; TMI – supplementary total merit index; BCN – beta casein.

The Jersey sires in Table 4 have high ratings for production and functional traits as well as for CM$ and Pro$. Nine of the ten Jersey sires are A2A2. Sire stacks are not dominated by common sires.

If there are EE, AE, BE or A1A1 sires in the farm semen tank that do not form an integral part of a herd’s breeding plan it would be best to consider dumping that semen.

Further Considerations when Breeding for Kappa Casein

Consider the following:

1. To be eligible for a Kappa Casein premium all milk in a shipment must be from only BB cows. The same applies for Beta Casein – all milk from A2A2 cows.
2. Kappa Casein and Beta Casein ratings for sires are not included in total merit index calculations – so selection for these caseins will need to be an initial or final edit at time of semen purchase.
3. Genomic testing of herd replacements for Kappa and Beta Casein profiles and subsequently removing EE, AE, BE and A1A1 animals will speed up achieving elite status for females in a herd.
4. Farms with on-farm processing with only BB & A2A2 milk will have the ability to brand their product(s).
5. The question ‘will processors pay more for BB and/or A2A2 milk?’ is likely to take time to arrive at an answer. Definitely, working relationships, guarantees and closer collaboration between farmers and processors will be required in the future.
6. The cost for conducting a progressive breeding program for Kappa Casein and Beta Casein will not increase current semen costs but there will be costs for genomic testing of female replacements.

Include a Timeline Moving to Elite Casein Status

For farms planning to specialize and not to focus on a generic, least cost and high-volume basis, a decision by the end of 2021 on only selecting sires that are BB and A2A2 would be advantageous. For most herds, it will take 4-6 years of using only BB and A2A2 sires, genomic testing replacement females and culling EE, AE, BE and A1A1 heifers and milking cows to be positioned to ship premium eligible milk.

Delaying the Decision on Breeding for Caseins– Yes/No?

By now Bullvine readers should be asking themselves:

1) What will our farm’s plan be for shipping premium eligible milk?  and

2) When should our farm start breeding for Kappa Casein (BB) and Beta Casein (A2A2)?

The Bullvine Bottom Line

A decision on breeding for a BB (Kappa Casein) and A2A2 (Beta Casein) herd is an opportunity to grow revenue.

The tools to breed for the most desired alleles for both Kappa Casein and Beta Casein are currently available to be used in both sire and female selection.

 For many dairy farmers including caseins in their breeding program may seem like a chicken and egg situation – why start until you know if processors will pay a premium for Kappa Casein &/or Beta Casein? However, breeders need to remember that being prepared comes before being able to reap the rewards.

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

Feet have increasingly become a problem on most dairy farms that have their animals spending their time walking and standing on cement surfaces. Without genetics indexes to identify superior sires for problem-free high functioning feet dairy herd owners have had to rely on hoof trimming, veterinary care, specialized diets and having calves, heifers and dry cows spend time off the cement.

Do Not Ignore Foot Problems in Dairy Cattle

The realities about feet include:

1. Lameness in dairy cattle is most often associated with hoof related disease or growth issues.
2. Almost half (Lactanet reports 46%) of dairy cows will experience a foot problem in their lifetime.
3. Diseases in the feet of dairy cattle are now the leading cause of animal functional problems since dairy farmers have the means to effectively select superior sires for other functional problems. Accurate genetic indexes exist for – mastitis resistance, fertility, calving ease, daughter calving ease, milking speed and metabolic disease resistance.
4. Data for dairy cattle foot problems has not been universally defined or captured by milk recording services or herd management software. No data means that there can be no genetic indexes.

What Has Been Used to Genetically Improve Feet and Mobility?

Type classifiers evaluate and report on foot angle, heel depth and foot shape and then genetic evaluation centers produce genetic indexes. However, genetic progress for those traits has been very slow or not at all. Why is that? One reason is because routinely, before the classification visit, herd managers trim their cows’ hooves. So, the classifiers record what they see but what they see is not the natural form.

Classifiers evaluate the form of the feet but what herd owners want to know is how the feet are functioning. Only a few classification programs capture information on a cow’s mobility but genetic indexes for mobility are not produced.

Published genetic correlations between classification programs’ foot measurements and dairy animal longevity are zero or low.  So, knowing the form of feet has not proven to be beneficial to improving feet and mobility in order to increase animal longevity.

Are Black Hooves Stronger?

A theory sometimes put forward is that black hooves do not have the problems with excessive growth, lack of heel depth and presence of hoof diseases that non-black hooves have. Breeds with black hooves, Brown Swiss and usually Jerseys, may require less trimming but they are not free of abnormal hoof growth or foot diseases.

Some Holstein herds went to crossbreeding to get black hooves along with other attributes but, given the genetic improvement in Holsteins for mastitis resistance, fertility and now general animal health and the lower production of crossbreds, those herds have mostly returned to using Holstein sires.

Recurring Foot Disease – Small Problems with Big Impact 

The fact is that hoof and foot disease problems impact almost everything. Studies and field evidence from around the world report the areas impacted as: increased care/labor; increased medical-related costs; lowered fertility; decreased production; increased discarded milk; increase hoof trimming; increased culling; decreased longevity; … and the list goes on. The message is obvious – hooves/feet need much genetic improvement attention.

The Cost of Foot Problems Can Cripple a Herd

The United States reports list that the cost of foot problems per cow per year range from $100 to up to $400 (herds with more severe foot and mobility problems). In a 500-cow milking herd with moderate problems that can be US$ 1.25M to 1.5M in lost net returns. Wow – that cuts deep into profit and may even eliminate any ROI.

Reports from Nordic Countries list similar values to the US reports for cost per cow per year. The extensive Nordic study reports list the hoof disease order, form most to least occurrence, as: sole ulcer; dermatitis – digital/ interdigital/verrucose; heel horn erosion; sole haemorrhage; white line/double sole; and interdigital hyperplasia. As well claw abnormalities are reported.

Those numbers are for milking cows – and – besides cows there are cost and lost opportunities to increase performance in heifers.

These costs tell us that disease in dairy animal’s feet need attention. Immediate attention.

Hoof Health Genetic Indexing to the Rescue

Viking Genetics saw the need to study hoof disease (2003) and later (2011) to publish their first Hoof Health indexes. The data collected came from hoof trimmers and herd health recording that was captured in milk recording herds. The field evidence shows that the genetic correlation between the Hoof Health index and other traits are: longevity 38%; general health 25%; fertility 23%; calving ease 21%; udder health 11% and NTH (the Nordic total merit index) 35%. Sires with HH breeding values of 110 will have 9%- 35% less hoof disease incidences depending on the disease. For sires with HH breeding values of 120 the reduced incidences are from 18% to 76%.

 From 2014 to 2017 Lactanet collected field hoof trimmer reports and in 2018 commenced issuing sire Hoof Health indexes. The hoof disease incidence in Canada was – 16.9% digital dermatitis; 8.5% sole ulcer; 7.4% sole haemorrhage; 4.7% white line lesion; 2.9% to 1.3% for heel horn erosion, interdigital dermatitis, interdigital hyperplasia and sole ulcer. The genetic correlations for Hoof Health and other traits include longevity 49%; heel depth 47%; production 42%; feet & legs composite 35%; and rear legs rear view 21%. Average rated (EBV100) sires for Hoof Health are predicted to have 83% of daughters with healthy feet while top-rated (EBV115) are predicted to have 95+% healthy daughters.

United States dairy farmers need to know that CDCB has organized numerous industry partnerships that will develop a hoof health data pipeline from US dairy herds. This is to conduct genetic evaluations and expand management tools. The industry partners include: hoof trimmers; government; researchers; herd recording; and Lactanet (Canada). A comprehensive workshop was held in Sept 2020 where all partners signed on. US dairy herds can expect to receive Hoof Health sire indexes in the future.

Take-Home Information to Get Started on Genetically Improving Feet

It will be interesting to see how hoof health and lameness data will be captured in the future, even electronically through snap shots and continuous monitoring for both herd management and genetic purposes.

Current useful information relative to genetically improving hooves and feet includes:

• Viking Genetics and Lactanet now include genetic indexes for hoof health (HH) in their animal reports and group listings.
• HH is a component in NTH (the Viking Genetics total merit index). HOWEVER, HH is not currently included in North American total merit indexes. North American cattle breeders who want to use the HH index in their sire selection decisions need to use that index independent of other indexes.
• Animal improvement for HH can only be achieved by using sires that have a superior HH index of 110+ (Viking Genetics) and 105+ (Lactanet).
• Reliabilities (% REL) for HH are not as high as for other functional traits – daughter proven sires (max 70-75% REL) and genomic evaluated sires (max 55-60% REL). More reporting and accurate farm recording of hoof and feet problems is needed to increase reliabilities.
• Correlations for five key functional trait indexes are moderate to moderately high compared to the Canadian longevity index (HL) as follows – hoof health (46%), mastitis resistance (62%), daughter fertility (51%), daughter calving ability (54%) and metabolic disease resistance (33%).

The Bullvine Bottom Line

Having HH sire indexes adds an exciting new tool for breeders to use to genetically improve the hooves, feet and mobility of their animals.

          Start genetically improving the health of hooves and feet in your herd.

                             Select and use top rated sires for HH.

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

Only top-ranked sires should be good enough to be used in a herd’s breeding program. However, too frequently, this is not the case, when it comes to economically important functional traits. This is not because dairy cattle breeders do not consider functional traits to be important. Often it is because of not understanding the method of expressing functional trait genetic indexes. Or it might be because of a lack of awareness of current breed averages for functional traits. In some cases, it might be because of the lack of awareness of the index level needed for a sire to be an elite transmitter for a functional trait.

Know What Factors Govern Genetic Advancement

There are four components that make up the formula for determining the annual rate of genetic improvement in a herd or a breeding population. Three of the components are: 1. Accuracy of the genetic index (aka REL); 2. The amount of true genetic variability for a trait (something breeders cannot influence); and 3. generation interval (time between parents and progeny).

To calculate the annual rate of improvement the numerator (accuracy x selection intensity [see below] x genetic variability) is divided by the denominator (time in years between progeny and the average age of the parents). The accuracy or ‘REL’ can vary from 20-35% (Parent Average) to 60-75% (Genomic) to 95-99% (Progeny Proven). Generational Interval can vary from 2-3 years for animals with genomic parents to 7+ years for progeny of older and proven parents. It is a breeder’s choice if they choose lower accuracy and rapid generation turnover (using genomic indexed parents) or high accuracy and slow generation turnover (using progeny proven parents).

Selection Intensity (%RK) Matters

The fourth component in measuring the rate of genetic improvement is the intensity of selection (as expressed by %RK). It is the degree of superiority breeders require for a trait when selecting / mating parents.

Aim For Guaranteed Genetic Advancement

Sires with breed average genetic indexes (45%RK to 55%RK) should not be expected by breeders to produce a group of progeny that are superior in a trait.

To be assured of advancing a herd for a trait, the sires used must be at least +1 standard deviation (67%RK) for the trait. For more guaranteed improvement, sires used should be +2 standard deviations (95%RK).

Apply Selection Intensity to Longevity (PL USA or HL CAN)

There are many functional traits for which data is captured on dairy farms and then transmitted to national animal/herd databases. A particularly important functional trait, Longevity (PL/HL), has been selected for this article to explain selection intensity. Tables 1 and 2 contains trait averages and index values needed for improvement for twelve traits.

Most dairy farmers want as many as possible of their cows to live to produce into fourth and later lactations. The extra months that cows remain in a herd reduces the number of replacements needed and gives added lifetime production. Sires with a high PL usually achieve that higher rating because of a combination of above-average ratings for daughter fertility, livability, disease resistance and health. This is the reason why PL is a particularly important number to look at and compare when selecting sires.

It is important to note that the average PL for active proven US Holstein sires is not zero as many may expect it to be. It is +2.3. Therefore, any proven Holstein sire below +2.3 is not a breed improver for PL. For active proven US Jersey sires the average PL is +1.8.

It must be noted that those are just the averages. To be breed improvers and to be elite breed improvers the Holstein PL’s need to be +4.5 (Improver) and +6.7 (Elite). For Jersey sires those values are +3.8 (Improver) and +5.8 (Elite).

For the other US dairy breeds the PL’s values for Average, Improver and Elite proven sires are: Ayrshire — +1.3/+4.3/+7.3; Brown Swiss — +0.7/+3.5/+5.2; Guernsey — +0.6/+2.3/+4.0; Milking Shorthorn — +0.4/+2.1/+3.5; and Red & White — -1.1/+0.9/+ 2.9.

Genomic Sires Should Have Even Higher PL’s

The PL values for marketed US genomic sires are considerably higher than for proven sires. Similar, to the situation for most other traits, breeders should require higher values for genomic sires to allow for some degree of over-estimation. The Average, Improver and Elite PL values genomic sires can be found in Table 2 and are 50+% higher than for active proven sires.

Canada Publishes Functional Traits Indexes Differently Than The US

Canada publishes functional trait index on a scale where the population average is 100 with a standard deviation of 5. The average for functional traits for active Canadian proven sires is estimated to be in the range of 100 to 103.  The values for Improvers and Elite can be expected to be 106 and 111 for daughter-proven sires and even higher for sires with only genomic indexes. In short, when reviewing a Canadian indexed sire, if his index for a functional trait is less than 103, he is quite likely below breed average. Worthy of note is the fact that Lactanet/CDN publishes %RK’s for all sire indexes that are not published on the ‘100’ scale.

Pertinent US Index Levels for Twelve US Traits

Tables 1 and 2 show that there is a considerable variation between traits in Average, Improver and Elite index values for twelve important US dairy cattle traits.

 Average indexes for active proven sires (Table 1) are available on The CDCB site, yet when The Bullvine surveyed dairy farmers, few knew those averages. There were also few who knew the values for Improvers (67%RK) and Elite (95%RK) … an unfortunate situation.

Table 1: Index Levels (August 2020) For Active Daughter Proven US Sires

* Average – index average for all sires
** Improver – minimum index level needed for a sire to be 67%RK (+1 Standard Deviation)
*** Elite – minimum index level needed for a sire to be 95%RK (+2 Standard Deviations)
**** The publication scale for SCE and DCE changed in August 2020. Numbers are for both proven and genomic sires.

Given that almost 70% of dairy semen sales are for genomic evaluated sires, it is important that Average, Improver and Elite index values be known and used. Table 2 provides those genomic index levels for 3,002 Holstein and 437 Jersey sires.

Table 2: Index Levels (August 2020) For Marketed Genomically Evaluated US Sires

* Average – index average for all sires
** Improver – minimum index level needed for a sire to be 67%RK (+1 Standard Deviation)
*** Elite – minimum index level needed for a sire to be 95%RK (+2 Standard Deviations)
**** The publication scale for SCE and DCE changed in August 2020. Numbers are for both proven and genomic sires.

In Reality – Genetic Improvement Depends on Using Top Sires

The practice of only using the best sires for the important traits is a key factor in advancing an animal, a herd and a population. Using average rated sires will result in the cow family and the herd quickly falling behind. Using top genetics is paramount for dairy farmers to stay viable, competitive and sustainable.

The Bullvine Bottom Line

The intensity applied to selecting and using the best sires really does matter. The %RK of a sire’s trait index is a quick way of knowing where the sire ranks in the population for the trait. The age-old genetic improvement advice always holds true – Use the Best. Ignore the Rest.

Step #1 is to prioritize the traits a female or herd needs. Step #2 is to only purchase semen or embryos that will advance your animal or herd.  Step #3, when mating cows and heifers, use Improver or Elite sires for traits where the female is not above average.  Breeding is a numbers business. Use the numbers to your advantage.

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

Have you heard a dairy farmer say … “It is my data! … Why should I share my data? … Just so that someone else can make money from my data! … It costs me to generate my data! … What are you going to pay me for my data?”  In dairy cattle genetic improvement, these comments are often aimed at A.I. organizations or breeding companies who have access to but do not pay, as they once did, for the use of breeders’ individual animal and herd performance data.

Where is this ‘Pay Me’ Approach Coming From?

Breeders today see that their futures are threatened when it comes to revenue from their breeding stock sales. They have much less (if any) income, as a percent of total revenue, from animal and embryos sales than they had thirty years ago. No one is beating down their doors for open heifers, springing bred heifers or quality second calvers. They still participate in type classification and DHI programs, but their officially documented animal data is not being asked for. Grade females with documentation fetch as many dollars from sales agents as do purebreds. High herd performance averages (BAA, milk/fat/protein yield averages, …) do not bring buyers to farms seeking surplus animals.

Why Participate in Animal Improvement Programs?

So, breeders are saying why spend the money to participate in industry offered breed improvement programs?  These breeders know full well that they need the data for their on-farm use but question if organizations beyond their farm gate have the right to use their data without paying for it.

Nothing remains the same forever. At the farm level, animal and herd data once used to generate revenue now has the primary use of helping to keep costs under control.

But … what is the big picture of this matter?

The Data Focus is Now Value Added

The profitable cow for most dairy farmers has evolved or is evolving to a healthy, long-lived, efficient converter, high fat and protein producing cow.  As well, dairy farmers are making extensive use of sexed semen, breeding the low-end females to beef semen and buying systems and technology that enhance herd management and help cut costs.

Every piece of data, old and new, must provide a return on the investment … It must have a value added at the farm of origin level. It is no longer just how much milk, fat or protein or if she classified above breed average.   It is – does she do that and more – calved without difficulty at 22 months of age, conceives on 1^st or 2^nd service, does not get sick, does not have feet/hoof problems and remains in the herd to at least 72 months of age (completes 4 lactations). The ideal cow needs to be much more genetically and performance wise than she was even ten years ago.

Value Added Answers New Questions

Even though the focus in the press and social media is on the genomics for young animals, breeders want and need to have the profitable lifetime cow. That requires that on-farm finances need to be given a much higher priority for inclusion in data captured and reported than they have been up until now. Without including the dollars and cents relative to a trait – do the trait genetic indexes have worthwhile value?

It goes even further. Some old beliefs may not hold their perceived value. Do wide bodied cows consume more feed? Will a2a2 animals generate more revenue in the future? Are there bloodlines or breeds that are more profitable at converting feed than other bloodlines or breeds?

Viability and Sustainability are High Priority

We need to dig much deeper using more data points so cows, dairy farms and the industry can be viable and sustainable.  More production is not always better. The fact is we talk value added but we are not using the data to actually determine if it is adding value. The dairy cattle improvement industry needs expanded thinking when it comes to using all data.

How Did the Dairy Cattle Improvement Industry Get to this Point with Data?

Many often blame the introduction of genomics as the reason that breeders are unable to get back some return for sharing their data.

With the introduction of genomic sire indexes, A.I. stopped paying incentive dollars to breeders that sampled young sires. Payment in return for breeders’ data that was used to daughter prove the young sires. It so happened that, at the same time, semen prices for proven sires dropped and semen sales volume for proven sires went from 80% to 30% of the market. And so, the money was not there for A.I. to continue their young sire incentive programs.

Dramatic Expansion in Data

In this past decade progressive dairy farmers have been purchasing more tools to evaluate their herds in order to improve their herd management practices. Breeds did not change the services they provided while milk recording expanded their scope of services. New entrepreneurial service providers entered the dairy cattle improvement industry and many more services and technologies were offered to dairy farms. The result is that there has been a dramatic expansion in data and data points for cows and herds.

Who Analyzes the data?

Yet in many cases the increased data points are not linked. Dairy farmers must sort through all the data and draw their own conclusions and make decisions based solely on their herd’s data. Of course, all data capture costs money so dairy farms have incurred more expense and yet are having to link the data on their own. No wonder dairy farmers are saying, “It is my data I paid for it all. How do I get a return on my data investment? My data has a value beyond my farm. Am I seeing benefit from my data used by organizations?”

Has the dairy improvement industry not kept up with farmers’ needs when it comes to linking, analyzing and providing information for animal and herd advancement? Likely, that is partially true.  But all is not lost. Organizations are now seeing the need to link all data points to provide more complete answers for dairy farmers.

Everyone Benefits from Sharing Data

When a farm’s data is not available for others everyone looses … original farm … other farms … service providers … the industry.

Here is a partial list of the benefits of shared data for farms and for the industry:

• Benchmarking
  Broadly based guideposts for animals and herds have been and will continue to be integral for farms to be able to improve. Industry databases containing large volumes of animal and herd data are needed to develop the guideposts.
• Accuracy of Prediction and Forecasting
  Broad based animal and herd data is needed to know performance and trends. As well as for all stakeholders to predict and plan.
• Research and Development
  Innovation is critical for any industry to progress. Extensive data along with both public and private funding are needed for research and development.
• Genetic Advancement
  Large comprehensive databases are needed to expand the economically important traits for which dairy cattle are genetically evaluated. CDN/Lactanet research has shown that half of the progress in on-farm profitability comes about because of the genetic improvement of animals.
• Product Guarantees
  Databases that include monitoring of location of production, of production methodology, of product identification and of product movement are important for consumers to know that the food they buy meets standards, is safe and wholesome. In the future producers, processors and marketers will be required to guarantee their products
• Results of Industry Collaboration and Initiatives
  Dairy farmers have been asking for their service organizations to expand and link the services offered. Elimination of duplication, sharing of services and efficiencies within services are important to dairy farmers. To achieve all these animal, herd and farm data is necessary.
• New Technology and Systems
  The rate of implementation of technology and new systems is occurring at a break-neck speed. The result is more and new information to manage by and for more effective use of labor and feeds. Past animal and herd data are paramount to create the new equipment and management softwares for not only milk cows but also for calves, heifers, dry cows and farm and industry systems.

It is Check-In Time for How the Dairy Industry Deals with Data

Shared data will be the foundation on which the dairy industry will build its future viability and sustainability.

All industries (auto, medical, energy, …etc.) are changing their approach to who has access to individual organizations’ data. It is not who owns or controls the data, – it is who uses the data to implement new.

No person, service provider or industry can exist as an island onto themselves.

The Bullvine Bottom Line

All farm data needs to be used on the farm of origin and in the industry. Sharing data is not a “no way” – it is a definitely “yes do for success”. Opportunity is out there for farms that share their data but, in return, there must be ways to improve income, efficiencies, cost cutting, management improvements, and more. Sharing dairy data is sound business.

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

Dairy farmers use a total merit index (including – TPI, NM$, JPI, CM$, LPI, Pro$, DWP$, …) as their primary tool when selecting sires that they will purchase semen from. Using such indexes equates to what is commonly referred to as following a “balanced” breeding program. Balanced because the emphasis placed on the traits included in the index are proportional to the historic economic importance of the trait or balanced because the relative equal emphasis is placed on conformation and production traits with a lesser emphasis on auxiliary traits.

It is time to go beyond total merit indexes when selecting sires.

Total Merit Indexes – Too Many Masters?

Expecting total merit indexes to serve the past, present and future is an impossible situation. The past positions the ancestors in the pedigree. The present positions an animal relative to its current market worth. That leaves the future taking third place, when it comes to having progressive total merit indexes.

Animal improvement is about creating future generations. Having traits and appropriate future weightings in total merit indexes need to have higher priority for the future of dairying to be relevant.

A new concept for total merit indexes, when used to predict the future, is the need for them to be outcome-based considering both direct and correlated responses for the traits included. (For more information about outcome-based total merit indexing, read about Pro$ at www.cdn.ca/articles.)

Another weakness usually overlooked in total merit indexes is that recently developed genetic traits indexes (i.e. A2A2) are not included.

The primary reason total merit indexes are developed and published is not for breed societies animal ranking lists, bull breeders, breeding company marketers, or embryo and animal marketers … total merit indexes are for dairy farmers, who generate over 90% of their income from milk sales and who use genetics to minimize on-farm costs!

Animals for 2025+

In the past couple of years, there has been a dramatic shift in the genetic attributes that sires’ daughters must possess.  The emphasis in the past was on milk volume, average milk component percentages, breed ideal conformation and a limited number of auxiliary traits.  Dairy farmers are now seeing genetic indexes, produced by genetic evaluation centers and breeding companies, for additional traits. Traits that will either generate more income, reduce costs (i.e. feed, labor, herd replacements, etc.) or do both simultaneously.

 One example of a trait that has had a dramatic shift in emphasis is stature. Many dairy people are saying that they want mature cows that are 5+ inches ( 12.5+ cms) shorter in order to have animals that are longer lived, require less labor, are healthier, are more fertile, are more resistant to disease, are able to consume more dry matter, … yet are able to produce more fat and protein volumes each day.

This author’s current read is that dairy farmers have increased their demands for expanded genetic sire information before they purchase semen. For almost 75% of the doses purchased the decision is based on genomic indexes. The shift has been made and not all total merit indexes are now futuristic enough. Breeders now want to know the outcomes they can expect for the sires they use not just the weights applied to the traits in the total merit indexes.

Just last week the author had a conversation with an eager young dairyperson asking why breeding companies do not produce and publish more genetic information on what their sires’ daughters are capable of from birth to first calving,

It is a new era for what must be known about a sire’s genetic abilities for an expanded array of traits.

What’s Not in Current Total Merit Indexes

All total merit indexes are different in the traits included. However, here are eleven of the areas where additional trait information may be of benefit by increasing revenue or reducing expenses.

As you read these, consider which ones would make a dramatic difference to your specific situation.

These traits are not presently included in most of the current total merit indexes.

• Significantly Positive Deviation for % Fat (Reasons: lower cost associated with storing, transporting and processing less water; consumers now buying based on full fat; and less milk volume demands on milking cows to produce high fat yield.)
• Casein Composition (Reasons: consumers want A2A2 milk; and processors get higher cheese yields from BB milk.)
• Optimal Animal Health (Reasons: every farmer wants cow wellness [WT$]; heifer wellness [CW$]; disease resistance [MDR & MR]; and immunity[I+].)
• Genetic Ability for Nutrition Matters (Reasons: feed conversion efficiency [FE & EcoFeed]; optimal dry matter intake; maximization of income over feed costs [IOFC].)
• Functional Feet & Legs (Reasons: hoof health [HH]; hoof growth; and locomotion)
• Heifer Performance (Reasons: calf vigor; weight gain; growth pattern; age to first calving [AFC].)
• Milking Parlor Performance (Reasons: milk let-down; milking speed [MS]; milking temperament [MT].)
• Reproduction (Reasons: age at first heat; embryo viability; metritis; retained placenta; hormone levels post calving.)
• Transition Time (Reasons: ability to perform without problems in transition and fresh pens.)
• Environments (Reasons: ability to perform at an optimal level in cold, temperate and hot climates; performance in confined or pasture situations; robot/parlor ready.)
• Labor Costs (Read Bullvine article – “Don’t Waste Time! Choose Sires that Save on Labor”)

Decide on the Additional Trait Information that You Need

The Bullvine recommends the dairy farmers identify three to five traits that are important to their farming operations but that are not currently included in the total merit index that they use when selecting sires.

How to Consider Additional Traits when Selecting Sires

First off, shortlist the sires that meet and exceed your minimum requirements for traits that are included in the total merit index (i.e. 70 lbs. fat yield, PL 4.5, DPR 2.5, above average mastitis resistance, ..etc.). For dairy farmers not sure which is their preferred total merit index, The Bullvine recommends using NM$, CM$, JPI or Pro$.

Secondly, using your shortlist of sires, check each sire to make sure they are significantly above breed average for the three to five additional traits that you identified above and that are not included in your preferred total merit index. Do not purchase semen from the sires on your shortlist that are below average for your additional important traits. (i.e. If a sire’s daughters are below average for resistance to metabolic diseases do not purchase his semen.)

The Bullvine surveyed the top twenty Holstein and Jersey sires in all the major total merit indexes and found very few sires that were significantly above average for all current and new novel traits. So, dairy cattle breeders will need to do extra homework when selecting sires. More than simply ranking, buying and using sires based on total merit index.

Sire Selection Assistance

Breeding companies have staff members that can assist dairy farmers in identifying if a sire is superior or inferior for all traits. Breeding companies want dairy farmers to be successful. They can also offer programs in which farm breeding goals are established and mating recommendations are provided. 

The Bullvine Bottom Line

Future dairy cattle genetic improvement is more than production and conformation. Breeders need to determine the additional areas in need of improvement in their herd.

The best scenario is to use only sires that are significant improvers (i.e. 70+%RK) for the health, milk composition, feed conversion, fertility and body functioning traits that need improvement in a herd.

The tried and true method applies – identify the traits in need of improvement in your herd. Only buy and use sires that are superior for those traits.

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

The entire world has dealt with restrictions because of the COVID 19 pandemic. People are now facing the “new normal” for living their lives. The outcomes of COVID 19 are many and include distancing, hygiene, isolating, operating from home (work, education, meetings, childcare, socializing, communicating, telemedicine, …) and more.

Is life changed forever? Is it time to realize and re-organize for tomorrow’s success? Time will tell. Of course, the immediate challenge also includes how to move forward with business, employment and social interaction. We must develop strategies and practices for the human population to establish robust and dynamic immunity programs.

Professor & Author Brene Brown Puts Going Forward This Way (April 20, 2020)

“We will not go back to normal. Normal never was. Our pre-corona existence was not normal other than we normalized greed, inequity, exhaustion, depletion, extraction, disconnection, confusion, rage, hoarding, hate and lack. We should not long to return, my friends. We are being given the opportunity to stitch a new garment. One that fits all of humanity and nature.”

Only One Alternative – Plan and Move Forward

The dairy farming industry, like all of agriculture, needs to take what has been learned from COVID 19 to produce safe healthy food for a changed world.

The Bullvine offers some ideas for readers to consider as they adapt. It amounts to engaging opportunities in the new reality.

Agriculture Has Always Implemented

Challenges taken. Opportunities met.

The dairy and agricultural industries have always taken the opportunity to move to new levels of excellence. Four advancements include: 1) doubling of global milk production in past thirty years; 2) North American dairy cows now produce three times as much milk as they did seventy years ago; 3) the genetic ability of dairy cows for production and conformation are 20% higher than they were twenty years ago; and 4) each US farmer now feeds 200 people where seventy years ago it was 16 people fed per farmer.

Dairy farming and the dairy cattle improvement industry have made significant progress in the past decade. Butterfat is now a positive. Yet milk production exceeds demand in many countries. Resulting is depressed farm gate prices. 

Opportunity Themes for Dairying

The Bullvine offers six Opportunity Themes for dairy farmers, their advisors and service providers to use in planning and execution in the future. The pace of change will be fast. Based on what is currently being published and talked about on how healthy food will regain in importance to consumers. And knowing that dairy farmers’ history of turning on and producing more milk there will continue be tight on-farm margins in the coming years. The following six opportunities will need to be applied to all areas on-farm and in the entire industry. Of course, opportunities always require investment to yield a positive outcome.

1. Revenue Generation – Income is the major driver of all businesses and for dairy’s future it will be closely associated with marketing and consumer needs, demands and preferences. Just think of the opportunities for dairy of setting and achieving the goal of 10% increased sales of enhanced fluid milks (to children, athletes, seniors, …) and 10% increased sales of milk solids products (which may well include alignment with other food producers and processors). In the end only with increased revenue will all dairy industry stakeholders be viable.
2. Efficiencies – An efficient operation is the second biggest factor that determines success. On a total operation basis, it includes improving efficiencies in both variable and fixed costs on farm, in processing and in wholesale-retail. Without continually improving efficiency there is not sustainability.
3. Value-Added – If any device, decision, service or approach does not enhance the bottom line, lifestyle or the overall operation success then it is a negative not a positive.
4. Virtual– COVID 19 has shown that the world is now virtual. All sectors of the dairy industry must adopt and adapt. Perhaps not exclusively but the WWW provides an excellent means for communication, information sourcing, education and training, banking, marketing, ordering supplies, shopping, … etc.
5. Business Relationships – Farmers working collectively has been a significant factor in the past success of dairy farming. That will continue in the future, but close mutually beneficial relationships must be expanded to include the milk processors and retailers as well as input suppliers.
6. Practices – In order to guarantee food quality, safety and traceability, the practices and protocols on-farm, in transport, in processing and in delivery to retailers will be required to be documented and available to both other stakeholders and consumers. Accepting accountability for how milk is produced, handled, processed and delivered is the way forward.

Be Ready for More Industry Changes

Dairying must be ready for even more changes in the 2020’s.  The pace of change will be accelerated. Those who hold back or oppose will be left behind. Some changes could include:

• Sire Selection – With already 70+% of dairy sires used being genomically evaluated and with perhaps 40%-60% bred beef, the use of daughter proven sires (dairy or beef) is likely to be discontinued. When, not if, the reliabilities for genomic indexes reaches 85% for production and 75% for health traits, turning generations will be much more important the accuracy of indexes. Breeding companies’ programs would be significantly changed.
• Animals with the Best Genes Regardless of Breed– Dairy farmers have favored one of about six breeds of cattle. Down the road there will be a need for a super breed that is a combination of the best genes available. CDCB now produces crossbred genetic indexes. Will those crossbreds be the new breed? Or will the super breed come about because of science and invention? It is not an if or a why but a how and a when.
• Data Services – With added technology on-farm comes new data for even more accurate decision making. Past practices of third-party eyes, official designation and international approved devices and practices will become less important and less used when dairy farmers are running their businesses based on daily, even second by second, data capture. Who ‘owns’ the data will not be nearly as important as having integrated data systems that yield the most accurate information. The organizations, public or private, providing information or advice to dairy farms will change to an integrated data approach or they will exit the industry.
• Eliminating Services – Could the day come when it is more cost, performance and herd improvement effective to individually genomically test all replacement heifer calves at birth, cull the low indexers, allocate animals to groups according to their indexes and only monitor groups of animals for performance? Thereby reducing the costs associated with some of the current improvement services that are based on data being captured on every animal.
• Milk Leaving the Farm – The importance of fat and protein content of milk due to genetics, nutrition and management will be increased. Both lactose (fed back to animals) and water will be removed at the farm level for revenue generation, cost savings and business alignment reasons.
• Vertical Integration – Other livestock industries have systems whereby there are alignments from the farm all the way to the sale of product. Dairy could well be the next where 100,000 cow groupings align from the inputs all the way to the sale at the grocery store.
• Meetings – All decisions beyond the farm will be made without leaving the farm office. On farm decisions and instructions will be virtual.
• One Health – with over 70% of diseases in humans originating from animals, dairy farming can expect to see animal health linked more closely with human health. Expect more regulation.
• Food Security – Citizens and governments are quickly becoming more concerned about their ability to domestically source their food and to insure viable domestic agriculture. Countries and agricultural industries that produce more than their domestic needs will need to find ways to prices product for domestic use separate from product that is exported.

Of course, these nine are just a start to the long list of changes that the dairy industry may address and implement. The take-home message is be ready for challenges, opportunities and changes.

The Bullvine Bottom Line

Looking to the future always involves the unknown, opportunities and changes. The changes will challenge history, norms and beliefs but the end result must be viable and sustainable if dairy businesses are to survive.

COVID 19 put the world on pause. During this pause everyone associated with the dairy industry has a responsibility to take the time to find the Opportunities to Create the Future.

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

For far too long the dairy industry has neglected to capture and transmit to a central data base calf and heifer data. It is time to do a full-scope analysis of what is needed for the genetic improvement of calves and heifers. The result will be dairy farmers with calves and heifers that will positively contribute to long-lived productive trouble-free cows and profitable dairy herds.

Setting the Scene – The Cost

Herd replacement costs range from 15-20% of total herd costs. Every dairy worker knows that a sick calf can take an exorbitant amount of time. Is that calf sick because of genetics, nutrition or environment? Calves and heifers are important when it comes to herd profitability. And currently, we know only a limited amount genetically when it comes to the best calves and heifers.

Even More Perspective – Time is Money

Currently, the average number of lactations per cow in the North American herds is about 2.8 lactations. This means that the time prior to first calving equates to 45% of a female’s lifetime. When and if the average was 4.0 lactations for an average milking cow’s productive life it would be 32% of time spent pre first calving. If knowing more about heifer genetic merit for additional traits would add even half a lactation to a cow’s lifetime – that would be significant.

Heifers – A Cost or An Investment?

Most often when reporting on calves and heifers, the number provided is the cost to first calving. Currently the cost is estimated to be $2,200 (US) to $2,400 (US).

Yet costs are only a part of the financial equation. Important, but seldom mentioned, is that calves and heifers are an investment. Maximizing heifer ROI in today’s dairy economy is a must do.

The question becomes what can be done in next 2-5 of years in capturing and analyzing heifer data to maximize their ROI?

Current Heifer Genetic Indexes Are A Good Start

For some time now breeders have had genetic indexes on some traits that affect calves and heifers including: (sire) calving ease; daughter calving ease; sire stillbirths; daughter stillbirths; and genetic defects/haploids. These have been developed due to the need to primarily to avoid the death of calves are the time of birth. Recently CDCB has added a trait called EFC (early first calving). Yet these do not address the heifer rearing challenges associated with growth rate, feed conversion efficiency, health, immunity and morbidity.

Although the heritability for these traits is quite low, considerable progress has been made from when the majority of Holsteins could be a problem calving for the first time.  Results included the possibility of a dead calf or a calf that was a ‘poor doer’ that did not reach its genetic potential. Sire calving ease (CE & CA) has received the primary attention. Even though daughter calving ease (DCE & DCA) has been reported it is unfortunate that it has not been given more attention in sire selection. Hard first calvings can severely hold back first calvers from achieving peak production and in quick breeding back.

Breeders have available to them sire rankings for calf related health indexes calculated and published by Zoetis. Table 1 reports the top proven Holstein sires for: overall calf health (CW$); calf respiratory problems (C RESP); calf scour problems (C SCOURS) and calf livability (C LIV). There are many genomically evaluated sires that have even higher indexes for CW$.

Table 1 – Highest Ranked US Proven Holsteins Sires for CW* (Dec ’19)

Notes: * Date Source – www.holstein.com; ** 100 is the average rating for sires.

The Immunity Plus program (Semex) reports that the sires, designated as Immunity+, show 4-8% superiority for many heifer and cow performance limiting health related diseases.

Other Young Stock Genetic Indexes

The Angus Breed has an extensive program that capture data and produces genetic indexes for growth (birth, weaning and yearling), feed conversion, fertility, carcass, functional conformation, health, and temperament. It has been a key factor in Angus having an excellent branding program.

As early as the 1960’s, Norway was performance testing all dairy bulls, entering its young sire sampling programs, for growth, fertility, health and hoof growth.  The young sires were initially selected based on the parents’ milk production ability but only the top half of the sires based on their own performance had semen collected and were sampled to determine their daughters’ performance.  This screening continues in the present day in Viking Genetics cattle improvement programs.

A recent study in New Zealand reported on the benefits of high fertility male and female lines compared to low fertility lines. High fertility lines reached heifer puberty 21 days earlier and 55 lbs. lighter than low fertility lines. High fertility line females in first and second lactations had 30% more pregnancies six weeks after first breeding than low fertility lines. This research supports the moves by many A.I. not to return to proven service low fertility sires even though their total merit indexes may be high.

New Traits for Calves and Heifers

The potential list is long. Every dairy farmer will have 1 to 3 performance traits they wish to improve in their calves and heifers. Which traits would add to the profitability of your herd? Calves that resist disease? Calves that grow faster? Calves with more functional feet? Heifers that have their first heat at a younger age?

It would be beneficial if young A.I. sires could also be evaluated before semen is sold for their own ability to grow and resist disease. Genomic indexing will be important when adding new heifer traits. Almost every A.I. company is working on some trait to genetically improve calves and heifers.

New Technology Will Provide Usable data

Currently there are automated calf feeding devices that have considerable information for calves from birth to weaning. We can expect to have many new monitoring devices, cameras and management softwares in use on-farm in the near future. There will be data that will have significant benefit for management at the farm level and improvement in the industry. The data for new traits will need to be uniformly defined and it needs to get to the central data system.

Organizations Must Act

The way forward will require data captured on-farm, the data transmitted to the national data bases and then analyzed and reported for benchmarking and genetic advancement purposes. If this process is not part of the national system, then the calf and heifer data systems will be taken on by breeding companies in order to support their services and products.

Animal improvement organizations are procrastinating in moving this matter forward. Why is that? This inaction should not continue.

The Bullvine Bottom Line

The dairy cattle improvement industry must expand the focus from primarily the milking herd to all animals covering from birth to removal from the herd. And as the dairy herd expands to be a larger portion of the meat production industry, the data needs to be more than just milk production focused.

Breeders, milk producers and industry organizations need to insist that the matter of monitoring and sharing of calf and heifer data be given a much higher priority in research and development.

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

Recently I overheard two milk producers discussing a proven sire’s daughters in their herds. One producer praised the sire for his ability to raise fat yield while the other producer put down the sire because of the extra time it took his staff to treat sick calves, the need to pull the calves from the sire’s first calf heifers and that it took 3-4 services to get the sire’s daughter pregnant.

That conversation got me thinking – “Do we put enough emphasis in sire selection on the amount of staff time that a sire’s daughters may require?”

Attitude to Labor Required

In the past breeders were pleased to obtain superior production and/or conformation from a sire’s daughters and were prepared to overlook the extra labor required for a sire’s daughters.

With the increased cost for labor and the often lack of availability of skilled herdspersons to treat sick, underperforming, infertile or special needs animals, labor utilization is often front and center on a herd manager’s work agenda.

Genetics and Labor Meet

The Bullvine asks – “Is it time to address how the genetic merit of our dairy animals affects the cost of labor on the farms of tomorrow?”

Farm financial analysis shows that labor is between 14-20% of total farm costs. Reducing labor costs by 15-20% by having animals of all ages and stages that require less staff and management time could significantly impact net income, while freeing up staff time to implement enhanced procedures.

Traits the Affect Labor Required

The thirty-five traits with genetic indexes that can affect labor costs is significant and apply from birth to herd removal follow:

Direct Affect:

1. Animal Health: All animal health issues on dairy farms require the attention and time of staff.

Genetic indexes include: C Scours; C Resp; C Liv; CW$; Immunity+; SCS/MAS/MR; LIV; WT$; …

2. Reproduction: For some time now, dairy breeders have selected for improved reproductive performance, but it remains a high priority as it requires considerable staff time.

Genetic indexes include: DPR/FI/DF; HCC; CCR; MET; …

3. Calving Time: Calving time issues can be stressful and can require an excessive amount of staff time. It continues to be a priority item for improvement on dairy farms.

Genetic indexes include: CE/CA; MCE/DCA; SSB; DSB; RP/RPL; GL; …

4. Milking Time: Regardless of the degree of on-farm automations the milking process requires staff time at every milking. Factors that slow down milking time of individual or groups of cows is a staff cost.

Genetic indexes include: MSP(Milking Speed); MT(Milking Temperament); RTP(Holsteins); UD(Udder Depth); …

5. Animal Locomotion: An animal’s ability to move without problems is an absolute necessity. Dealing with locomotion problems requires extra labor. Any genetic indexes currently available are at best an indirect measure of animal locomotion.

Genetic indexes include: HH(Hoof Health); FA(Foot Angle); HD(Heel Depth); LAME; …

6. Metabolic Disease: When a metabolic disease occurs, extra staff is required to detect and treat.

Genetic indexes include: DA(Displace Abomasum); KET(Ketosis); MVF; MD(Metabolic Disease Composite – 3x); …

Indirect Affect

Some genetic related traits may have an indirect affect on the cost for labor. These include: PL/HL (reduced labor for replacements); PP (no dehorning); AFC (Age at First Calving – reduce labor for replacements); Sexed Semen (easier calving); Cross Breeding (correction of breed limiting traits).

Necessary to Apply Selection Pressure

Dairy cattle breeders know that to improve the genetic level of their herds, they must use superior sires. To improve quickly the sires must be significantly superior.  Significantly superior sires are the ones that are in the top 5% of the breed. In statistical terms those sires are two standard deviations above average.

The traits mentioned above, the contributors to saving on labor costs are lowly heritable, not easily measured and often only identified later in an animal’s life. All of which contribute to the need for stringent sire selection in order to make herd improvement.

In Canada, CDN/Lactanet expresses traits on a scale of 100 being average, one standard deviation is 5 so two standard deviations (top 5%) is 110.

In the USA, at CDCB and with many company’s proprietary labor-saving traits, there is not a standardized method of trait expression, average is not always zero (0.0) and the standard deviation value is not published. It is difficult, if not impossible, for a milk producer to quickly know the superiority or inferiority of a sire’s rating for those traits.

No matter the source of the information, milk producers planning to improve a labor-saving trait must make sure that only truly superior sires are used.

Some Top Sires for Saving on Labor

To assist Bullvine readers to start the process of finding labor saving sires the following sires are offered:

• AltaTopShot (11HO11779) – SCS 2.67/MR 107; PL 7.4/HL 108; DPR 1.6 / DF 106; SCE 5.9% / DCA 109; DSB 3.7%; HH 108; MD 107; LIV 2.7; UD 0.0; MSP 97; #10 CW$, #50 WT$(#1 DWP$; #1NM$; #2 TPI; A2A2)
• Exactly (7HO12721) – MR 111/ SCS 2.50; DF 111/ DPR 2.9; HL 109 / PL 4.5; DCA 107 / DCE 5.2%; MD 105; HH 105; DSB 4.5%; LIV -0.9; MT 103; MSP 101; UD 3.41 (GLPI 3399; Pro$ 2097; TPI 2438; NM$ 563, A2A2)
• VJ Tir (JEDNK303616) – SCS 2.68/MR 109; DPR 4.6/DF 111; PL 6.1/HL 115; MSP 104; UD 1S (#3CM$; A2A2)
• Vivaldi (200JE07756) – DF 106 / DPR -1.9; MD 104; MR 103 / SCS 3.00; MSP 103; HL 101 / PL 2.0; CA 108; DCA 100; MT 117; UD 2D/+1.30                                                   (#1 Pro$; #1 LPI; JPI 143; CM$ 547; A2A2)

Very noteworthy is the fact that, with 70% of A.I. services to genomic sires, milk producers can choose from many many genomic sires that have high indexes for labor-saving traits. 

Facts that the Bullvine Observed

In developing this article on genetics and labor-saving traits the author observed:

• North American total merit indexes (NM$, Pro$, CM$, TPU, LPI, …) are frequently not labor-saving trait friendly. This could be because these indexes are developed from historic breeding objectives rather than for the future reality.
• Locomotion and functional feet are not well defined in genetic terms. More research is needed.
• The methods of expressing traits with respect to breed averages and levels of superiority are not easily understood or known to milk producers.
• Work needs to continue on trait definitions as more and more labor-saving traits will be captured by electronic on-farm systems. Common trait interpretation is need when data is combined when conducting genetic evaluations or when benchmarking herd performance.

Bonuses from Improving Labor Saving Traits

The bonus for dairy farmers for improving labor-saving traits will be in time saved primarily by eliminating doing the unnecessary. More time will be available to attend to other important on-farm herd functions – fresh cow temperature checking; extra health checks of calves; increased heat checking; more time for report analysis; more time for staff training; …

The Bullvine Bottom Line

With more animals per employee and the focus moving to on-farm efficiency, it is imperative that milk producers choose and use sires that are significant breed improvers for labor-saving traits.

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

Have you ever wondered why some sires’ daughters perform better in some herds or environments than they do in others?  I have.  The current sire indexing system may rank two sires as being of equal genetic merit, yet their daughters may perform differently in the individual tie stall barns of cold Minnesota compared to the 400+ cow groupings in the heat and humidity of a Florida cow shed.  The system assumes that there are not performance expression differences due to environment.

Geneticists do not know enough about what happens on farm

It is a known fact that our geneticists do not have enough details about the animals’ health events, ability to perform in large groups, differing nutritional programs within a herd, calf-heifer disease and many other matters when processing the genetic evaluations to produce genetic indexes. Without the details, geneticists can only assume all animals in a herd are treated equally. We all know that this not the case.

Other Livestock have similar Challenges

Recently I read an interesting presentation (EPDs only one part of the genetic selection formula, 2018 Canadian Beef Breeds Council’s Technical Forum) by P J Budler of Modern Ova Trends on beef cattle genetic indexing. He cautioned about using EPDs (Estimated Predicted Differences aka genetic indexes) without also considering nutrition, herd management, animal health, forage program, animal marketing program, record keeping, human capital and farm finances.  His article also made mention about breed performance differences that depend on environment. His example was fertile Black Angus cows that are great at raising calves in the sometimes harsh cold of the Upper Plains of the United States and Western Canadian Provinces but put them in a hot semi-tropical environment and they do not graze, stand in ponds and they do not breed back.  My summation of Budler’s presentation is – a) environment, management and nutrition play a role in an animal’s expression of its genetic make-up and b) sires need to be proven in the environment in which their future daughters will perform.

Plant scientists in genetically evaluating varieties of corn, need to know the length of the growing season, heat units, soil type, tillage program, nutrient program, plant population, spray program and more in order to make accurate predictions on a variety’s ability to perform. The extent of the data captured from corn test plots is huge.

Likewise, it is a fact that livestock genetics do not work independent of nutrition, animal health, animal care, animal management and the environment.

Assuming can lead to Errors

Budler’s presentation got me thinking. Does the dairy cattle breeding industry make too many assumptions about animal treatment equality, when we do our genetic evaluations?

We have super super computers and very advanced methods to statistically analyze data, but we have not expanded the data forwarded to genetic evaluation labs.

Every Bullvine reader can think of a long list of factors beyond genetics that can affect an animal’s performance and for which geneticists do not have data available for inclusion when they do their analysis.  This list includes all the things that happen from birth to removal from the herd. Some things like calf morbidity, calf growth, hoof trimming, disease occurrence and animal grouping are not known. And yes, each one on its own may be minor in its affect but in total they lead to errors being made, when it comes to genetically ranking animals in the population. 

More Data Can Help

I often hear dairy people say – but that trait has a low heritability so we should not pay much attention to an index until the reliability of prediction is over 90%.

We need to ask – if we could have more data for the animals could the prediction accuracies be increased?

Feet, as currently scored by classifiers, has a low heritability.  Could the heritability for feet be increased if the geneticists knew details about calf hoof growth, housing environment of calves, heifers and cows, how recent was the last hoof trimming, have the feet ever been trimmed and has the animal ever been lame?

For more and more milking cows we electronically have observations from every milking (90 data points per month), the nearest weather station can provide the weather for the each day, in-barn monitors capture extensive information, … yet, the dairy cattle improvement industry (breeders and organizations) persist in using one milking or one day’s observations per month to calculate milk yields and ignore data from in-barn monitoring systems. In addition, animal performance beyond milk cows is non-existent in our central data bases.

There are never too many known facts when it comes to making accurate genetic index predictions and information available for managing a dairy herd.

The Goal in Genetic Evaluations

The goal in genetic evaluations is to accurately predict an animal’s ability to transmit a trait relative to other animals in the population.  Of course, ability can be both positive and negative.

Every breeder’s goal is to have the perfect animal for a trait and for that animal to transmit that perfection to the next generation. Perfection is not achieved by making decisions based on averages.

More Data Points affect all Aspects of a Dairy Herd

1. As mentioned above having more animal, herd and farm data will enhance herd nutrition and management. In fact, those two disciplines will determine 75% of herd profit.
2. Bullvine readers continuously learn about new on-farm monitoring devices. The data they supply should be included in the national data base if it can assist in improving herd profit.
3. Dairy farmers will experience even tighter financial margins in the future. Data points that contribute to increased profit are a “must have” in the national data base.
4. With more and more cloud or on-farm animal / herd management softwares in use, some farmers are talking about discontinuing to use DHI and breed services. If that is done it stops data from being available for benchmarking and for enhancing improvement services.
5. It is highly unlikely that sires will ever be sampled and proven randomly across all herd environments scenarios. So, having more data points will assist in genetic index accuracy, especially for low heritability traits.
6. More data especially feed efficiency, animal health, animal fertility, calves and heifers will assist in increasing the reliabilities of genomic indexes. Even to 90+% REL within the next decade.

Something to think about

Determining an animal’s lifetime profit is a marathon that starts at birth and ends when the animal leaves the herd. The performance and events focus in the past has been the lactations of the milking cows, thereby the industry has been missing the data from significant parts of each animal’s life.

The Bullvine Bottom Line

It is time for breeders and their representatives on committees and boards to think to the future and the need to use more on-farm data.

The accuracy and number of traits included in genetic evaluations and on-farm performance reporting can be significantly increased by having more on-farm data reach the central national data bases. Use it, not waste it!

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

As the saying goes … ‘Nothing is as constant as change’.  Today in the dairy farming industry, the world over, owners and managers face a change in the data services they use, which data pieces are important to them and who has access to their data. This article will focus on factors milk production focused farms need to assess when it comes to the use of dairy cattle improvement programs and services.

Herds of The Future

Currently, the average US dairy herd size is 250+ milking cows (in 37,000 herds) and 90+ in Canada (in 10,500 herds). Those averages have been increasing and will increase faster as labor availability diminishes, technology is applied, and margins per cow remain narrow.

Recent USDA analysis has shown that in the US 2000+ cow herds have a 20% lower daily cost per cow as compared to herds with 100-200 cows – “on a per hundredweight basis, large farms face 12% lower feed costs, 20% lower operating costs, and 45% lower allocated overhead than smaller operations” (Ben Laine, dairy analyst for Rabobank). Twenty per cent savings is huge – so we can expect to see larger herds. Presently 55% of US milking cows are in herds of 1000+ cows.

Double the current average herd size may not be the answer. The USDA study also shows only 4-5% savings in daily cow cost for 500 cow herds compared to 100-200 cow herds.

Canadian herds are currently considering how they address the loss of market share to foreign milk products, the payback on purchasing technology and the size of quota holding for their operation.

Milk producers in both the US and Canada need data on which to base their planning and management.

It’s a Changed Business Model

Only milk with unique content (A2A2, BB … etc.) will demand a significantly higher future farm gate price.

For most farms, the market for surplus heifers and cows no longer exists.  A profit centre, often 10% but up to 50% of farm revenue, has disappeared.

With sexed semen, only the top 60% of females need to be bred dairy to produce herd replacements. The remaining animals including low fertility animals can be breed to beef sires.

Dairy farms will sell both milk and meat. The meat revenue will be from beef-dairy cross animals born on the farm.

Dairy farm managers will need to focus on ways to increase revenue while keeping costs under control.

In short, generalization is gone, and specialization and focus must be practiced – in order to have a positive bottom line.

Future On-Farm Focus

These three areas of dairy farming will be added to milk producer planning in the future:

• Producing to consumer demands/needs.
• Efficiencies will supplant production, type, cattle shows and high records.
• A total business approach must be considered – from the soil to the consumers’ tables.

Improvement Services for Milk Producers to Invest In

The following are areas for milk producers to consider when enrolling or investing in improvement services in the future:

• Virtual Management Service will be Very Important

All farms, no matter the size or country, will need an animal, herd and farm information to plan, manage, feed and breed their operations. Progressive farms will not stop animal and herd recording. They need the data. They may, however, discontinue traditional DHI and herdbook recording and go to global cloud-based data systems that are linked to their on-farm electronic data capture systems.

• Genotyping Service will be Very Important

Herd replacements females need to be genotyped. To identify: 1. Accurate parentage; 2. Animals that can be culled and not raised based on production, longevity, functionality; reproductive fitness and resistance to disease genetic results; 3. Desired protein (beta and kappa caseins) genotypes, as well as other ingredients in milk; and 4. For optimal mating decisions.

• Private vs Cooperative Service will not matter

Traditional animal and herd recording systems have been provided by cooperative type organizations. However, that is changing. Private organisations are now providing parentage verification, data capture, new trait evaluations plus indexing and testing for a host of other things with more services promised.  So, where once it was the domain of cooperatives to provided trusted information, it now comes down to the trust that producers put in the information provided by whomever.

• Animal Traceability Service will, in time, be Important

Being able to guarantee product by having an effective and accurate animal traceability system in place exists in many countries. It will come to North America. There are three components to animal traceability: premise identification; electronic identification; and tracking of animal movement. In most areas, North America has the first two, however not the third one. All livestock owners will require a service whereby an animal’s location and movement can be known. Farm biosecurity, including records, will also be a necessity.

• Animal Purity will not be necessary

Animal purity in milk production herds will not add revenue for the milk shipped or reduce on-farm costs. Milk producers need to breed for the gene make-up in their animals, not purity.

• Third-Party Verification will not be necessary

Milk producers need to be focused on their farm and its profitability but do not require third-party verification of the data on their farms.

The Future for Improvement Services

Milk production focused farms will decide on a cost: benefit basis which improvement services or programs they will use. Not all the current services will survive either entirely or in their current format.

The Bullvine Bottom Line

Herds will be fewer and larger. Consumers, efficiencies and a total farm approach will need to be added to what is important in animal, herd and farm improvement services.

The future scope, options and services in improvement programs offered to milk producers will need to be different from the past or present services. Milk producers will participate according to their plans and needs.

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

Every dairy farmer is also a beef producer – even more, today than in the past. How so? Today there is considerably less demand for springing bred or newly calved heifers. Also, we must factor in sexed semen, and more effective on-farm cattle management and dairy farms are being advised to breed from 30% to 50% of their lower producing or lower profit cows and heifers to beef sires. The Bullvine wishes to share with you how one innovative dairyman, Ian Crosbie owner of Benbie Holsteins from Saskatchewan Canada, approached this profit opportunity. 

The Usual Approaches to Dairy-Beef         

New born male calves are quite variable in price going from no value, even a negative value when sold at sales barns, to over $150 depending on breed, time of year and number of calves on the market. With less demand in North America for milk-fed veal calves, even choice new born Holstein calves are not bringing the returns they once did.

Some farms have always bred a portion of their animals to beef sires to garner higher dropped calf prices. But that has not been a widespread practice.

Today with the extensive use of sexed semen on the top females in a herd and the surplus of fresh first calvers, dairy farms are looking to find a way to generate revenue from the lower end of their herds by producing animals that will enter the meat trade. Therefore they use beef sires on a portion of their herd. In some cases, they are even breeding all females beef and buying all their replacement milkers on the depressed price market for newly calved females.

Dairy-Beef Not All Roses

Dairy farms that retain all their half beef animals and grow them out for meat find no problem with growing them. They have the feed and the facilities, but when it comes time to send them to market, they face packer buyer price discrimination against part dairy animals in the live animal auction ring.  Breaking even or no profit on raising these animals for the meat market was not what the dairy farms had as their objective.

If selling their half beef dropped calves at the farm or at auction, dairy farms can obtain from 2x to 3x the price for a dairy calf, so most farms take that route for marketing their dairy-beef calves.

Setting the Benbie Scene

Benbie Holsteins, a high genetic high performance 160 milking cow Holstein family farm, has for a few years been breeding a portion of their lower end females to Angus sires.

Ian explains his decisions to investigate in using more beef sires as follows: “There are multiple reasons that breeding the dairy herd to beef semen made sense for us at Benbie Holsteins. The main reason for beginning breeding a portion of our herd to beef semen was to try to control how many replacement two-year-olds we were calving in. And from which genetics we were getting our replacements. It’s no secret that over a ten-year period extra replacements are typically sold for less than the cost of raising them. Sexed semen has added to the problem of surplus dairy heifers, and we did not want to overstock or further invest in our heifer facilities for replacements that were undervalued.”

Ian continued in his explanation: “We focus heavily on our top end genetics in the Holstein herd and through genomic testing, performance testing, ET, IVF and sexed semen we can genetically optimize our next generation of replacement females. Being located in Saskatchewan, we have good demand from beef producers for cross-bred Angus/Holstein calves, especially during calving season where those calves can bring up to $500 as drop calves.”

Ian Did His Homework

“After researching and learning about the Wagyu breed, mainly through YouTube, I became very interested in producing Wagyu/Holstein cross beef.  This has led to the launch of Saskatchewan Snow Beef in 2018.”

When asked ‘Why Wagyu?’ Ian’s response was: “Wagyu beef is the best money can buy, plain and simple. The breed is world renowned for its ability to deposit fat (marbling) throughout the muscling of the animal — the intense marbling results in a juicy, tender steak.  The ‘Canadian Prime’ grade for beef is the highest standard. Approximately 1-2% of all Canadian beef is graded Prime. The Wagyu breed will reach at least Prime over 80% of the time due to their superior marbling ability.  Wagyu crosses well with Holsteins. Calving ability is second to none; we have yet to assist a calving. And coming from two intensely bred parent lines the cross offspring have hybrid vigour. We have found the resulting calves to be extremely aggressive and healthy.”

Ian Received Great Advice

Ian himself is a great contributor in the dairy cattle industry; however, in this endeavour, he sought out and got valuable advice from Wagyu industry people. He credits Ken Kurosawatsu and Kevin Hayden of Wagyu Sekai, Puslinch Ontario for helping him get started and selling him full-blood Wagyu semen.  Ian found that a specialized diet is needed to finish the animals before slaughter and for that advice, he gives credit to Dr Jimmy Horner from Texas. Ian’s comments on his advisors include “seek out experts and follow their advice; it has been a key to our success”.

Benbie’s Production Routine

For the first 18 months of life, Benbie’s Wagyu/Holstein crosses are raised with their dairy animals. After that, they are separated and feed the specialized diet until they are finished at 28 months of age. There are approximately a dozen animals in the finishing pen at any given time. Although that number is not large, it must be remembered that Snow Beef has been in operation for just over a year and it easily fits into Benbie Holsteins without requiring extra labour and facilities. Benbie Holsteins now breeds 35% of its females to beef – 50% to Wagyu and 50% to Angus – so, Snow Beef will grow in size. Ian added: “Working with a good butcher is necessary. Shane Oram of Westbridgeford Meats has worked with us to get the cutting and wrapping done in a way to get the most value out of each carcass.”

Marketing Does Make A Difference

Coming from the milk production industry where producers seldom get involved in selling milk, Ian reports that he did considerable work on detailing his Wagyu meat’s attributes and finding customers for his product. Ian reports: “There is a lot of education that is needed to convince the general public to purchase beef at a premium price.  Selling directly to high-end restaurants in my province was always my business plan. And although those restaurants appreciate the quality and taste, margins are very tight in that industry so convincing them to pay a premium for the meat has been challenging.” Snow Beef is working with two high-end restaurants in Regina.

To support his marketing Ian is now participating in ‘Verified Beef Plus’, a program to document that the meat Snow Beef sells meets high standards for animal health and welfare.

It’s Results that Count

Ian shared with The Bullvine some of the dollars and cents side for Snow Beef so far. “Expenses for feeding to 28 months of age are definitely higher than that for springing heifers, but there are none of the heat detection, breeding and calving expenses that go with dairy heifers. All expenses in the per animal costs are about $4,500 to get the meat in the deep freezer.”

“Raising to 28 months results in extra marbling and high levels of Oleic Acid in the meat. That has a direct positive impact on the beef’s palatability and has shown to decrease levels of LDL cholesterol.”

“When finished properly the best cuts of Snow Beef (8-10% of hanging carcass) retails for $45/lbs. Margins per animal to date for Snow Beef far exceed margins for raising surplus dairy heifers, which for most dairy farmers is now a negative number.” Snow Beef only sells Prime grading meat under its label. And since it is early on in this initiative, Snow Beef is not stating exact extra profit numbers. But be assured there is considerable extra profit.

Every New Venture will have Pros and Cons

In researching for this article, The Bullvine was reminded of some facts:

• Starting a dairy beef enterprise will not be a fit for all dairy farms.
• A realistic business plan, including specialized marketing, can be a key to realizing a profit.
• Tomorrow’s consumers will pay more for organic and grass-fed and for a product with total traceability and documentation.
• Hair colour will not change meat quality, but coat colour is a factor for live animal buyers.
• Feed costs may be saved for the growing but not finishing phase by utilizing lower quality feed or refused feedstuffs left over from the milking herd.
• Feed and labour are the key expenses, but as with every enterprise, exact records are a necessity.

The Bullvine Bottom Line

The effort and energy expended most often determines the degree of success. Thank you to Ian Crosbie for sharing his approach to creating an additional profit centre on their farm. As with all new ventures adding dairy-beef to a farm requires both a production plan and a marketing plan.

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

Frequently dairy producers are being encouraged to implement ways and means to improve the efficiency with which their cows and herds convert their feed into milk. For herd feeding and management, some solutions already exist yet for accurate genetic indexing the answers are yet to be found. The Bullvine has written about feed efficiency in the past (read more: Should You Breed for Feed Efficiency?, A Guide to Understanding How to Breed For Feed Efficiency and Fertility  and Feed Efficiency: The Money Saver), however, let’s further consider both the facts and the challenges.

The Growing Power of Small Wins

In the past 25 years, the matter of feed efficiency has gone from giving cows a “least cost” balanced diet and accepting the resulting milk production to monitoring both feed intake and milk production to arrive at maximum net profit per day.  Why? This is in a major part because the cost of production now, 50-60% of which is feed costs, is much higher relative to farm gate milk price than 25 years ago. Yes, the margins on dairy farms, the world over, are much narrower and the cost of feed is therefore under scrutiny. So even a slight gain of $0.25 to $0.50 on Income Over Feed Costs (IOFC) per cow per day can make the difference between a farm staying in business or exiting the industry. With most other items in the cost of producing milk increasing every year, it leaves feed cost as the target for change.

The challenge of cost savings is not the only matter producers face when it comes to feed.  Consumers want access to certifiable information on how the cows were fed to make the milk. Organic. Were human edible feedstuffs used? What ingredients were added? The list is expanding. Where producers once ignored customers questions on feedstuffs, there will need to be accurate records of feeds and feeding methods.

Past Progress Not a Stop Sign

Before we continue, it must be noted that US dairy farmers have put in place many improvements over the past seventy-five years. Comparing 1944 to today, cows produce much more milk per year (443%). As well as modern milk production requires 23% of the feed, 35% of the water and 10% of the land to produce a gallon of milk than was required in 1944. All impressive numbers.

The reality is, that like in many businesses, dairy farming will need to continue to operate on tight margins, all the time with more monitoring and the need to a guaranteed product.

Establishing Milestones to Feed Efficiency Improvement

There are two aspect to monitor feed efficiency – the herd and the cow.

• Herd Analysis Through Data Collection
  Working with their nutritionist, dairy farmers can now monitor and specifically manage their herds, strings and pens for feed costs by recording feed inputs and milk output. There are programs that also consider the effects of a feeding program on udder health, fertility, animal health and more. For pasture-based herds, it is only the concentrates feed that can be closely monitored. My experience in working with dairy herd improvement clubs, producers can increase their income over feed costs anywhere from $0.50 to $2.00 per cow per day by fine-tuning both the nutrition program and the management program. $150 to $600 more net per cow per year – that’s well worth the extra work and effort.
• Animal Analysis Through Genetic Ranking
  On the genetic side of the improvement equation, it is not possible to currently sort or rank animals for feed efficiency. It is costly to capture individual cow feed intake. The Bullvine article, “The Genetics of Feed Efficiency in Dairy – Where are we at?”, published in May 2018, covers in detail the current global studies to establish genetic ranks for sires and the approximations for Feed Efficiency sire rankings that A.I. organizations are currently producing.  As well, most national total merit indexes, including NM$, TPI, LPI and ProS, include in their formulae a discounting factor for cow maintenance. This is an attempt to, for equal production performance, reward smaller to moderate-sized cows relative to larger cows. It is noteworthy that LPI considers Dairy Strength, an approximation of size, as a positive in its formula not a negative. Within, especially the Holstein breed, there is a   trend around the world to favouring moderate stature and medium-sized cows.
  Achieving national sire genetic rankings, for all proven sires based on 100+ daughters for Feed Efficiency, are years away due to the cost of data capture and the variation in data capture systems. At the present time, some breeding companies (A.I.) and an increasing number of precision dairy companies are extensively studying the capture of individual cow feed intakes and matching that with production performance and genomic information. They will be producing genomic indexes for feed efficiency. Within a few years, breeders can expect to see company genomic indexes for feed efficiency in the 55-70% reliability range.
  USDA (Beltsville) researchers have studied heifer and milking cow feed efficiency and found that on a genetic basis for equivalent performance $0.21/day can be saved in heifer feeding costs and $0.23/day can be saved in cow feeding costs. The number of animals in the study are limited but it does give hope to having genetic indexes for animals in their ability to convert feed to meat or milk. The USDA numbers are in the same range as feed cost savings published in literature explaining STgen’s EcoFeed® sire ratings. In time dairy managers will be able to choose between sires of equal genetic merit for production where one sires whose daughters cost $0.20 more or less in feed costs per day.

Start by Improving Selection Criteria  

At the herd, string and pen level dairy managers need to work with their nutritional staff or advisors to routinely record feed inputs and milk production. Then calculate the Income Over Feed Costs. Always keep in mind that the Income Over feed Costs number is not the total answer as animal health and fertility are very important for a dairy farm to be successful.

At the sire selection level, dairy managers should consider the feed efficiency values that are published by A.I. As mentioned above, many national total merit indexes already factor in the cost associated with cow maintenance. As yet, the reliabilities for feed efficiency genetic ratings are only in the 45-55% range but they are a good start. Expect within a few years to see genomic sire and heifer indexes for feed efficiency. Our best advice, at this time, is to use the published feed efficiency numbers for animals as a supplementary piece of information. Total merit, production, health and fertility genetic indexes should remain the primary sire selection criteria.

The Bullvine Bottom Line

Feed conversion efficiency is important now. It will be even more important in the future.  Dairymen need to record feed intake and using it for herd feeding and management purposes.  As sire genetic indexes for daughter feed efficiency become available to eliminate the use of sires that do not rank in the top 25% for feed efficiency.

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

Often a story begins with looking back-back to the good old days. Have you recently heard a dairy cattle breeder speak or write about how cows used to last until they were ten years old and that today cows are one lactation wonders? Should Bullvine readers accept this perception as fact? Especially knowing that breeding dairy cattle is about creating a superior cow for the future? Let’s think this one through.

Unique Comparison to 1960

Holsteins with the genetic merit of the 1960s have been maintained for study and comparison purposes at a University of Minnesota research station.  The photo below shows the physical appearance of cows from back then.

This cow from the U of M Morris Research Dairy is a living representation of genetics from the 1960s.

Compared to present day US Holsteins the cows from the 1960s were shorter, beefier, had udders that deepened quickly with age and they produced half as much milk (35 pounds per day from first calving to herd removal). Heifers calved for the first time at 27-28 months of age and a significant percentage of first calvers were culled after difficult calving or for low production or physical problems including undesirable udders. Also, twice as many calves died before weaning as happens today. By comparison to today, there were fewer genetic indexes and they were less accurate. The theory of comparisons that utilized BLUP had yet to be developed by Dr Charlie Henderson at Cornell.

The fact is those good old days of the 1960s were not actually that great. Breeders lamenting for those years are selectively remembering that only the top 10-20% of first lactation Holsteins excelled and those breeders are not remembering that 20-30% of cows one month into their first lactation had health issues, low milk, low-fat test, deep udders or weak median suspensory ligaments.  Over half the first lactation cows classified Good or lower in Canada in 1965.  Breeders thought in terms of their best animals and not what their herd average was.

Globalization of Single Purpose Dairy Cows Has Occurred

It is not just in North America where the dairy cow has changed.  Dual purpose cows have gone by the way and single purpose dairy cows have become the desired milk cows in “dairy” countries.

The picture below of the President of the German Holstein Association holding two cow models shows how fifty years of selective breeding has changed German Holsteins.

The next two pictures are pictures I took of a prize winner and a class line-up at the 1976 World Holstein-Friesian Conference Show held at Stoneleigh England. ‘Holsteinization’ of the Black and Whites were just underway in 1976 in the UK and the judge at that show was still looking for the dual-purpose cow.

Other breeds have also experienced significant changes in the ideal conformation of their cows.

The Present-Day Mature Cow

Below is a barn shot of a ten-year-old Holstein cow that checks many boxes for today’s dairy cattle breeders.

  Riverdown Baxter Marina,  VG-2yr/5E,   7 lactations  97,512 kgs 4.3%F 3.4%P
                    (Sire Stack – Baxter x Goldwyn x Lee x Lindy x Prelude x Inspiration)

Marina first calved at 2-02 and in the next eight and a half years (3060 days) of her life, she averaged 70 lbs. of milk per day. That’s 70 lbs. for every day – milking days plus dry days. It is interesting to note that Marina was just slightly above the average milk yield to her herdmates throughout her productive life while excelling in fat % and protein %.

As a young cow Marina ranked top 10% for her genetic indexes, however, today she falls to the top 50% level, due mainly to the very rapid genetic improvement that the Holstein breed has made in the past decade. As ever, time marches on.

In today’s purebred dairy breeder circles, much discussion can be heard on whether the ideal cow is the great old cow, like Marina, or the productive, low maintenance first to third lactation cow. However, it is A.I. studs and their commercial dairy breeder customers that are now driving the overall genetic progress and for which traits. But that is in 2019 terms. What about the ideal dairy cow for the future?

Tomorrow’s Cow

In a recent Milk House post about the cow of the future, which was commented on by almost sixty group members, there was equal support for wanting cows to remain much as they currently are and for wanting cows to be more – more functional, fertile, healthy, efficient converters and to be evaluated on a daily net profit basis. So, that would appear to say in breeders’ mind that the jury is still out on future selection criteria for both sires and cows. However, as dairy farming continues to evolve into a finer and finer tuned business with average herds size, in the US, moving towards 500 milking cows we can expect significant changes in the traits breeders include in their animal selection programs.

The first question that traditional breeders will ask about the cow of the future is – ‘What will the cow of the future look like?” The Bullvine sees that body form will not be as important as it has been in the past for purebred breeders. Breeders have enhanced the body form of dairy cattle as much as is possible using visual evaluation. In the future, it will be body part functions that will determine the body form for commercial cows. So, breed ideal or true type models will not be used by over 95% of future herd owners, as each owner will have their own ideal.  Final score and body parts genetic indexes will not be used. And descriptive scoring will be the primary conformation indexes (udder depth, teat placement, legs rear view, thurl width and hoof form) used in sire selection and mating programs. It is entirely possible that the conformation data will be captured using photo imaging. (Read more: Are You Breeding for the Correct Conformation to Produce the Greatest Lifetime Profit?, Does The Current Conformation Evaluation System Work for Commercial Breeders? and She Ain’t Pretty – She Just Milks That Way!)

Dr Jack Britt, Professor Emeritus, North Carolina State University along with a group of associate researchers and ag extension specialists have done extensive work on predicting what the dairy industry, globally but primarily in the US, will be like 50 years from now. Dr Britt has presented the group’s predictions many times over the past two years, including at the 2018 World Dairy Expo in Madison Wisconsin. They are predicting that in twenty years US cows will average over 40,000 lbs. milk per year and in fifty years over 55,000 lbs.  One slide from his presentation is shown below for traits and processes that will be commonplace.

– Future Dairy Cow Selection Criteria and Processes as seen by Dr Jack H Britt

Dr Britt has other slides that show: 1) that seven countries (US, India, China, Brazil, Germany, Russia and France) produce 50% of the global milk and twenty countries produce 75%; 2) that with global warming dairy cows will change from an animal that functions best in temperate climates to be heat tolerant; 3) that increased technology and epigenetics will be commonplace; and 4) that there will be enhanced ways of feeding the rumen microbes.

The fact is that dairy farming, including the genetic side, will undergo major changes in the next ten, twenty and fifty years

The Bullvine Bottom Line

For sure yesterday’s cows got us here… Definitely, tomorrow’s cows will be different.

In the future cows will function trouble free for many years in large groups on automated farms. They will live in a multitude of environments and will need to be able to produce a high volume of milk solids. They will efficiently covert non-human food to milk. And genetic selection will turn on net returns over a lifetime and how body parts function most effectively.

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

How often have you heard that the post-weaning heifers are the most ignored, yes even neglected, animals on a dairy farm? From birth and until weaning, calves are fed and observed two or more times per day by humans and now increasingly by specialized machines …  so, there can be on-farm records maintained either in hard copy or electronically. However, no matter how extensive the on-farm heifer records, much of the health, growth, sexual maturity, mobility and vaccination records never make it to the central national database. 

We have Created the Impasse

Somewhere back in time, the dairy farming industry decided that cows and their information was important but that heifers were not important. Of course, that is not the case on all farms, but as an industry, we have not monitored and analyzed the performance of pre-producing animals in the way it occurs in the swine and poultry industries and partially in the beef, sheep and fish industries.

Why? Perhaps there is not a right answer to that question. Likely it has something to do with milk production being over 90% of the revenue from dairy herds. However, the more important question is how much is the dairy cattle industry missing out on increased on-farm profits by not performance recording and genetic indexing for heifer traits?

Times are Changing. Why Aren’t We?

It used to be that 52% of births were females and on average 90+% of heifers survived to first calving. In the past, it took $500 to feed and $800 total to raise a heifer to calving and fresh heifers sold for $1,500 to $2,500. So, raising all heifers meant that concern about heifer rearing costs and age at first calving did not significantly affect a farm’s bottom line.

Those days are history.

Today, with sexed (female) semen, 90+% of births are heifers and, as well, 95+% of heifers get to their first calving. It now costs $2,000+ to rear a heifer to calve at 24 months of age, and fresh heifers sell from $800 to $2000 depending on demand, pedigree and genetic merit. Where it was once a profit centre, rearing all heifers is now a losing proposition.

However, the important consideration is what will the best future program be for producing and rearing heifers as herd replacements? Dairy producers can avail themselves to heifer software management programs but, without a central producer owned database system, there will not be publicly available research, development, benchmarking and genetic analysis for heifer traits.

Think of the Possibilities

What would you like to know about your calves and heifers in the future for management, nutrition and genetic purposes? Some, but by no means all, items could be:

• Temperature, rumination, respiration, …
• Growth, …
• Immunity (including colostrum transfer and vaccination effectiveness), …
• Feed intake, feed efficiency, visits for feeding, magnet effectiveness, …
• Mobility, gate, stance, hoof care, …
• First heat, stage of estrus cycle, pregnancy, …
• Data to support guaranteed food safety, …

Some of these may be possible now; others will require new technology or devices. Most likely we will only get the heifer details if the data is captured electronically. Of course, the additional data points will be added to what is already known for animals on pedigree, DNA profile, …etc.

What is Currently Available? Is it enough?

Calf and heifer software management systems and devices are currently available, but some are stand-alone or not linked to an on-farm system.

A.I. and private companies have seen the need for more facts on calves and heifers and are producing private proprietary indexes for sires on immunity, disease resistance, feed conversion efficiency, wellness and other non-traditional traits. However, those indexes are just scratching the surface on what needs to be known.

Do We Have the Will to Change?

Ideally, all facts and figures must be in one data system on a farm that can be transferred to the national dairy data system that already stores the milk cow data. Until we have this calf and heifer data stored in the national dairy databases, it will not be possible to know their effect on and relationship with performance, economics and genetics.

A supplementary thought could be that if we knew more facts about young bulls destined for A.I. would we be able to more accurately know if they should enter A.I. or not?

The need is there. Yet … 1) will dairymen see that need and capture and transmit the data? and 2) will data centres do the analysis and provide the services in the areas of farm management and genetic evaluation?

The Bullvine Bottom Line

The dairy improvement industry must move beyond thinking that dairy cattle monitoring and improvement is only about milk cows. Extensive data for all heifer traits and characteristics are needed from conception all the way to herd removal. The average female spends sixty months in a herd. Twenty months or 33% of an animal’s lifetime, is being ignored.

 The extent of this untapped opportunity to take the dairy cattle industry forward in viability and sustainability is significant. Is extensive calf and heifer data needed in the central data system? The answer to that question is – YES!

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

Dairy farmers, like all business owners, must continually be addressing financial viability and sustainability in both the immediate and longer term.  Revenue generation is an extremely important aspect of finances.   On dairy enterprises over 90+% of revenue comes down to the milk shipped. Today The Bullvine would like readers to think about the proportions of components in the milk they will ship off-farm in five years’ time.

Setting the Scene

A considerable number of factors come into play when planning the composition of milk and milk revenue. Some factors relate to genetics, some to feeding and some to management. Here are some with a bearing on both future genetics and revenue.

• Fat is Becoming King – Reports from almost all dairy countries are showing high demand by consumers for butterfat. This demand is now reflected in the increased value of fat on farmer’s milk checks in some countries. This increasing trend for full-fat milk products for healthy living is predicted to continue and even to increase.
• Excess Powder – Yes protein level is important in cheese production but the move of the last almost half-century of increasing protein per cent and narrowing the percentage gap between fat and protein in cow’s milk has no doubt contributed to it taking more volume of milk to get the needed fat and thereby leaving more remaining solids to produce powder products.
• Eating vs Drinking Milk – The proportional use of milk in the US is now 75% solid and 25% fluid. In developing countries, especially in Asia and Africa where the future population growth will occur, the per cent of milk that is consumed in the solid form will be even higher. High per cent butterfat milk will be in demand everywhere.
• Feeding the Rumen – Ruminant diets are being fine-tuned for ingredients and feed preparation so that forages will form a very high per cent of the total. Feeding strategies to achieve high butterfat per cent will be common.
• Cost of Moving, Storing and Removing Water – High-fat content milk will save considerable energy and cost per unit of solids as it relates to cooling on-farm, transportation to processing, storing at processing and removal of water and disposal of whey liquids by processors. Costs saved can positively impact farm gate price.
• Savings on Farm – High-fat cows provide the opportunity to save some on the stress of high-volume yields in the areas of cow health and reproduction. Although the genetic relationship of functional traits with % fat may not be high, every little bit will help to increase cow profit per lifetime.

These and other factors will contribute to what the composition of milk needs to be in the future.

The Ideal Milk of the Future

Currently, in North America, the average component per cent for milk leaving farms is 3.9% fat and 3.3% total protein. It should be noted that the current move to measure true protein will reduce the total protein per cent by 0.19% to 3.1% true protein. There has been a slow but gradual annual genetic increase of 0.02% fat and 0.01% total protein in the past decade. So, in five years if selection pressure on % fat and % protein remain unchanged, we can expect milk coming off the farm to be 4% fat and 3.15% true protein.

Based on the demand for butterfat and future milk uses and products, experts have estimated that in the future milk shipped from farm needs to 4.5% fat and 3.2% true protein by 2025. So, a revised strategy on sire selection will be needed higher % fat, hold % protein and continued improvement in production, functionality, feed conversion and animal health.

What About Switching Up Breeds?

In recent years the Jersey breed has seen a resurgence doubling to about 10% in the US and 5% in Canada. So, is it simply increasing Jerseys to 40% of the national herds to achieve a higher % fat? A complicating factor would be that Jerseys have in recent years been selecting for increased volume of milk at the expense of % fat. The fact is that there would need to be a movement to selecting for higher % fat in all breeds.

A scenario to reach 4.5 % fat for all milk shipped could be: 73% Holsteins at 4.25% fat; 23% Jerseys at 5.3% fat; 3.5% crossbreds at 4.5% fat; and 0.5% other breeds at 4.5% fat.  If breed percentages were to be 78% Holstein, 20% Jersey and 2% others, then Holsteins would need to average 4.30% fat.

Some will question Holsteins at 4.25% fat. It is a fact that the famous Montvic Holstein herd, dispersed over 76 years ago, had a herd over 4.1% fat and today there are many Holstein herds averaging at or over 4.0 % fat. The genes for higher % fat are there! The detour in the 1970s – 1980s to selecting against % fat and for % protein in Holsteins, in hindsight, was an error.

Not Simply Higher % Fat

There needs to be a higher % fat but not higher % protein. Since the correlation between selecting for % fat and % protein is 60-70%, using higher % fat sires will also get high % protein. Carrying on selecting for increases in both % fat and % protein would leave added surplus powder. No producer wants a future of what currently exists: low global farm gate prices – prices below the cost of production.

Which Sire Ranking Index Would Be Best?           

The following tables compare the results of analyzing the top US and Canadian proven sires for four selection programs with the overall objective to increase % fat, hold % protein and increase total genetic merit. The proven sires studied were the top twenty marketed Holsteins and top ten marketed Jerseys for the sire ranking indexes of % fat, fat yield, breed selection index and net merit ($).

Table 1 – Average Sire Proof* for US Proven Sires for Four Selection Programs

* US Sire Proofs are expressed in Estimated Transmitting Ability. Proofs from August 2018.

Table 2 – Average Sire Proof* For Canadian Proven Sires for Four Selection Programs

* Canadian Sire Proofs are expressed in Estimated Breeding Values (= 2 x ETA’s). Proofs from August 2018.

The fact is that selecting sires based on the four programs summarized in Tables 1 and 2 will not get the needed result of high %F, increased fat yield and a hold on %P. In all cases, the %P is too high or too high compared to the %F and would result in expanding the volume of protein/powder not holding it. Therefore, if following a program does not do it, then breeders will need to do it by their individual sire selections. Of course, there is the possibility that the formulae for national selection indexes could be revised to select for a widening gap between %F and %P, but that would take research and resources and, in the meantime, breeders are not preparing for what will be needed in 2025.

Bulls That Would ‘Ring the Bell’

Forward-looking breeders will need to use sires that give high % fat improvement, minimal % protein improvement and continued improvement in other important traits. There will be a very limited number of such sires available. Most sires will not widen the gap between % fat and % protein.

From a search of current top proven sires, here are five sires that give the high % fat, high-fat yield, hold % protein and that are breed average or above for other major traits.

                Brewmaster (CA EBV’s)      +0.78 %F,            +132 kgs Fat                       +0.11 %P

                Megatron (CA EBV’s)           +0.75 %F              +122 kgs Fat                       +0.17 %P

                Mookie (US ETA’s)                +0.39 %F              +106 lbs Fat                        +0.09 %P

                Mackenzie (US ETA’s)          +0.32 %F              + 96 lbs Fat                         +0.13 %P

                Rubicon (US ETA’s)               +0.26 %F              +120 lbs Fat                        +0.06 %P

The Bullvine Bottom Line

The decision on the need to widen the gap from 0.8% to 1.3% between % fat and % protein needs discussion in all markets – local and global. The sooner there an industry-wide position on what is needed in the future for milk component percentages, the sooner breeders will be able to get on with making the necessary changes in their genetic selections.

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