Pasteurized whole milk is one of many strategies used to supply the liquid diet of growing calves. This whole milk can be sourced from several different areas of any given dairy operation, including saleable bulk tank milk, transition milk, mastitic milk and other non-saleable antibiotic-containing milk. While feeding saleable bulk tank milk to calves usually results in an economic loss to the producer, pasteurizing and feeding non-saleable milk — essentially waste milk — can be an effective, cost-efficient method for utilizing an otherwise unusable product, provided it can be managed properly.

How pasteurization works

A primary concern when feeding waste milk to calves is the bacterial load that may be present in the milk. Pasteurizing waste milk has been recommended in order to reduce bacterial contamination and limit the spread of diseases that can be transmitted through milk. Pasteurization is a method of exposing this waste milk to specific temperatures for specific amounts of time in order to reduce the pathogen load. Table 1.0 lists the temperature and time guidelines set forth for adequate pasteurization.

 

It is important to note that pasteurization is not a sterilization technique. Recent research has demonstrated that any remaining bacteria in pasteurized milk has the ability to proliferate to dangerous levels if holding temperature and/or feeding time is mismanaged. Additionally, pasteurizing highly contaminated milk may allow certain varieties of viable pathogenic bacteria to survive the pasteurization process.

Types of pasteurizers
Batch pasteurization uses a vat or tank with a heating element that heats the milk. Agitators are used with batch pasteurization to eliminate cold spots within the tank. This system typically heats the milk for longer periods of time at lower temperatures, as compared to high-temperature short-time units. Thereafter, milk is cooled and can be fed to calves. 

Advantage:

• Low-cost

Disadvantages:

• Large batches may take several hours to pasteurize
• Manual cleaning process

Continuous flow pasteurization circulates milk through a network of heated coils for a rapid increase in temperature. This high-temperature, short-time system can be equipped to rapidly cool the milk to feeding temperature once pasteurization is achieved. 

Advantages:

• Rapid pasteurization
• Cleaning process may be automated, using a system similar to that used in milking systems

Disadvantages:

• Expense
• Requires an adequate supply of hot water

Colostrum pasteurization is typically done in a batch pasteurizer held at 145 degrees Fahrenheit for 60 minutes to effectively kill bacteria while also preserving high-quality colostrum components. Both time and temperature parameters for colostrum pasteurization should be carefully followed. When compared to raw milk, colostrum is extremely high in both protein and fat content. High-temperature, short-time pasteurizers can denature important proteins — such as immunoglobulins — and can thicken colostrum, making cleaning and maintenance of the system very difficult. 

The benefits of feeding pasteurized waste milk
Reduced disease transmission: Heating milk to 162 degrees Fahrenheit for 15 seconds is effective at eliminating Staphylococcus, Streptococcus, Salmonella, E. Coli, Listeria, Mycobacterium paratuberculosis (the organism responsible for Johnes disease) and Mycoplasma bacterium. Reducing bacterial exposure to calves can lower morbidity and mortality rates while also reducing the opportunity for pathogens to spread throughout a calf barn.

Utilization of waste milk: Unless fed to calves, waste milk is seen as a loss to dairy producers. Utilizing waste milk to feed and raise calves allows for producers to avoid potential economic losses, disposal challenges and environmental concerns that may arise during the discarding process. The profitability of a pasteurization system is dependent upon many factors, including labor, equipment, installation, maintenance, energy costs, number of calves, amount of waste milk available and other variable costs.

Opportunity for improved calf health and performance: Pasteurized waste milk tends to contain more protein and fat on a dry matter basis as compared to a traditional milk replacer, making it more energy-dense. Research has shown that pasteurized-milk-fed calves typically outperform milk-replacer-fed calves, due to the increased nutrient composition and non-specific immune components (e.g. hormones, growth factors, etc.) found in waste milk.

The drawbacks of feeding pasteurized waste milk
Intensive management: Compared to a milk replacer feeding program, feeding pasteurized milk to calves requires thorough research on what type of pasteurization system is most suited for the farm prior to purchase. Infrastructure needs to be considered in order to properly harvest, store and transport both pre- and post-pasteurized milk, to avoid contamination and reduce pathogen load. Strict pasteurization, sanitation, maintenance and monitoring protocols need to be set up and strictly followed. 

Failure of pasteurization: Routine monitoring of the system is vital to ensure that failure of pasteurization is avoided. Pasteurization failure can occur due to a number of causes, including human error, malfunctioning and/or contaminated equipment, heating and cooling inadequacies or unusually high bacteria counts in the pre-pasteurized milk. If fed to calves, improperly pasteurized milk can quickly lead to calf morbidity and mortality. 

Inadequate waste milk supply: Due to the inconsistent and sometimes unpredictable number of cows producing waste milk and the number of calves feeding on milk at any one time, there may be times when the supply of waste milk available for all calves is inadequate. As such, it is imperative to have a strategy in place in the case that waste milk supply may be limited. Options available to surpassing milk shortages include utilizing a milk replacer, using a milk extender or pasteurizing saleable milk. Older calves are more tolerant of diet changes than young calves. A common suggestion is to switch the diet of older calves during waste milk shortages, with the goal of limiting diet changes as much as possible in order to avoid digestive upset.

 

Inconsistent nutrient composition:

Unlike milk replacer, the nutrient composition of waste milk is variable. This inconsistency has the ability to cause digestive upset in calves, especially in young calves. The suggested quality goals of pasteurized waste milk are found in Table 2.0. Milk replacer, fat supplements, whey proteins or milk balancer can be used to increase components. Pasteurized milk with high bacterial counts should never be fed to calves in the event of inadequate waste milk quality. 

There is no ‘one-size-fits-all’ option when it comes to selecting a liquid feeding program for growing calves. Major factors to consider when establishing a program should include targets for nutrient intake in relation to growth goals, ease of managing the program, economics and potential disease risks.

 

Sources:
Elizondo-Salazar, J. A., C. M. Jones, and A. J. Heinrichs. 2010. Evaluation of calf milk pasteurization systems on 6 Pennsylvania dairy farms. J. Dairy Sci. 93:5509-5513.

Jorgensen, M., and P. Hoffman. 2015. On-farm pasteurization of milk for calves. University of Wisconsin Dairy Update. https://fyi.uwex.edu/heifermgmt/files/2015/02/pasteurization.pdf.

US Department of Agriculture, Bovine Alliance on Management and Nutrition. 2008. Managing a pasteurizer system for feeding milk to calves. AFIA Publications, Arlington, VA.

US Department of Agriculture, Bovine Alliance on Management and Nutrition. 2008. Feeding pasteurized milk to dairy calves. AFIA Publications, Arlington, VA.

Source: IFA

Having trouble with employees following protocols consistently? Maybe you have a common problem called “helpful employees”.

One of the most common issues that I see in dairy parlors in Michigan is what I call helpful employees. “But that is exactly what we want,” you might say, and while we do want helpful employees, we want them to be helpful in performing their task within our predetermined protocols.

This problem really jumped out at me when the Michigan State University Extension Dairy Team was conducting a field study in Michigan this past summer.  The project looked at milking efficiency in parlors, focusing on ensuring the best possible milking experience for cows.  As I was observing employees at work performing the farms protocols, I noted that often, helpful employees would enter the parlor and negatively impact the routine.

In some cases, the helpful employee was an individual that was fetching cows, but in other cases it was just someone who was looking for a task to do.  In either case, the employee would enter the parlor and jump into the routine, without first determining where they could be most helpful and still maintain the proper protocol. 

When milking cows the protocol is important for several reasons. First, there needs to be sufficient time for the teat dip (sanitizer) to effectively kill bacteria on the outside of the cow’s teat. Second, there needs to be adequate stimulation of the cow’s teat in order to engage her natural milk letdown response. Third, there needs to be adequate lag time (time between start of stimulation and milker unit attachment) to allow the cow’s milk letdown response to occur.

What we are trying to accomplish with each of these is to be efficient with time, but make sure that time goals for cows are still met:

1. 10-15 seconds per cow of stimulation (in the first pass)
2. 30 seconds of dip contact time
3. Apply unit 60-120 seconds after stimulation

However, if we just give these goals without the reasons, employees are less likely to follow them because they do not understand the importance of these goals.

Of course, this is not just a Michigan problem, I also observed helpful employees on a recent visit to some Texas dairies with our MSU Extension Dairy Team, and I have seen this problem on dairy farms in other states as well.  So, what can we do about this issue and are there broader applications for other types of farms and businesses?  I think the answer is yes to both of these questions and there are couple of ideas to consider:

1. A protocol solution for dairy farms: I am now advising dairy farms to consider adding to their milking protocol, “Someone has to step out, before you can step in”. Having only one person working with a group of 5-8 cows at any one time, keeps the protocol intact.  If someone comes into that 5-8 cow space to help, the first person needs to step out and do something else. Two or more people are not allowed to perform the milking protocol in that space, at the same time.
2. A training solution that has broader application: Employees need to know the reasons for our farm or business protocols. Practically, this means that they need to understand the goals for their area of the business and how their actions (the protocol) affects these goals. Employees with this level of understanding are more likely to feel competent in their job, have a higher level of engagement and perform to the standards that you expect. They will be the helpful employees that you really want on your farm.

If employees know the goals and how their actions affects those goals, and still choose not to follow the protocols, we have moved into the area of employee performance feedback and discipline, and another Ag Forum article.

Encourage helpful employees and do not break that great attitude by merely telling them, “follow the protocols,” or, “just do what I say,” rather, help them understand how to be the most helpful, while also meeting the goals of your farm.

Source: canr.msu.edu

“It’s a logical step to produce fresh food on the water.”

Floating farm project leader Mink van Wingerden beside the floating dairy farm plaform being built at Merwehaven in the Dutch city of Rotterdam.

You’ve heard of offshore drilling platforms and offshore wind farms. Now a Dutch company is developing what’s being called the world’s first offshore dairy farm. Plans call for the high-tech, multilevel facility to open this fall in Rotterdam, a port city about 50 miles southwest of Amsterdam.

The floating farm will produce milk and yogurt near Rotterdam’s center, taking advantage of unused space while helping curb the expense and pollution associated with transporting food products from distant farms to local grocery stores.

“Seventy percent of the face of the Earth is water, while the world population is growing and arable land is limited so we have to look in other ways to produce fresh food next to the citizens, to reduce transport,” said Minke van Wingerden, a partner in the Rotterdam-based property development firm Beladon and the leader of the project. “It’s a logical step to produce fresh food on the water. Most big cities are situated in [river] deltas, and it’s easy to use the deltas for food production.”

She said the floating farm concept could be adopted by other port cities, with farms producing poultry and fruit as well as dairy products.

The first of up to 40 Meuse-Rhine-Issel cows, which are known for long lives and robust health, will come on board in November, van Wingerden said. By December, the farm — built on a floating concrete platform near the mouth of the New Meuse River — should be producing more than 200 gallons of milk and yogurt a day. The animals’ manure will be collected by poop-scooping robots and sold as fertilizer.

The cows will be kept on the farm’s second level, a garden-like enclosure where the animals will be milked by robots. One level up, greenhouses will grow grass, clover and other crops that will used to feed the cows. The farm’s bottom level will house the machinery needed to process and package the milk and yogurt.

The cattle, which will also feed on used grain from local breweries, will be able to descend a gangway to graze on nearby land. But dairy experts working on the project think the cows will prefer the shelter of the floating habitat and spend most of their time on the waves.

The farm will be anchored to the bottom of the harbor and should be stable even in bad weather, according to van Wingerden. “We asked vets in Utrecht if the cows would get seasick [on the floating platform], and they said no,” she said. “So the cows will [be] very comfortable.”

Source: NBC News

As farms and other agricultural businesses around Wisconsin struggle to find and retain employees, many turn to seasonal worker programs to hire workers from outside the United States to fill empty positions. Performing jobs that often otherwise go unfilled, these seasonal workers play key roles in local economies, including in western Wisconsin.

The federal H2A (for agricultural workers) and H2B (for low-skill, non-agricultural workers) visa programs allow employers to hire workers from abroad during their busy seasons if they can fulfill two conditions. One, employers must be able to prove that there are not enough willing, qualified and available American workers to employ and, two, that employing seasonal workers would not affect the wages and working conditions of similarly employed Americans.

Without these visa programs, many Wisconsin farms would not be able to operate at their current capacity, said Simon Jette Nantel, farm management specialist at the University of Wisconsin Center for Dairy Profitability and an assistant professor in the UW-River Falls Department of Agricultural Economics.

“I believe it has a positive impact on the local economies, because without those foreign workers, pretty much all the farmers wouldn’t be able to operate at the scale that they operate on,” Jette Nantel said. “And they wouldn’t be able to offer produce that is competitive at such a cost. In the end, they allow for those farms to produce at a higher scale.”

Many H2B workers have jobs in the landscaping, food service or other industries, while H2A workers are employed at various types of farms nationwide. Largely from Mexico and Central America, they essentially fulfill roles that U.S. citizens do not.

“Many farmers have tried putting ads in the paper, recruiting from high schools or talking to neighbors, but they can’t rely on those workers, or they’re just not interested,” said Jennifer Blazek, director of the Farm & Industry Short Course at the UW-Madison College of Agricultural & Life Sciences. “People are interested in working on a farm, until they actually work on a farm.”

Regardless of the nature of the work, both visa programs have attracted thousands of immigrant workers in recent decades, according to the Council on Foreign Relations, a public policy think tank that researches and communicates on foreign policy issues facing the United States and other nations. In 2016, the U.S. Department of Labor issued over 130,000 visas for the H2A program, which has no limit. This number is steadily increasing.

The H2B program, which does have a limit set annually by Congress, reaches it year after year, and oftentimes leaves many employers with fewer workers than they requested. The 2018 cap was originally set at 66,000 visas, but was later increased to 81,000.

Seasonal worker program numbers in Wisconsin

In Wisconsin, 1,235 visas (575 H2A and 660 H2B) were certified between Oct. 1, 2017 and June 30, 2018. Of this total, 342 visas (106 H2A and 236 H2B) were for employers located in seven counties in western Wisconsin fronting the Mississippi River: Pepin, Buffalo, Trempealeau, Vernon, Crawford and Grant. This region is home to 4.6 percent of the Wisconsin’s population; however, it accounted for 27.7 percent of the state’s H2A and H2B temporary visas during this time period.

While the reasons for this difference are not entirely clear, Trisha Wagner, an outreach program manager for the UW-Extension Farm Management Program, pointed to a decline in rural populations and challenges in retaining younger generations who might perform these jobs in rural areas like much of western Wisconsin.

Like employers nationwide, many in Wisconsin rely heavily on foreign workers, especially during busy seasons. In the seven-county region in western Wisconsin, these employees are typically employed under a variety of titles, including “forest and conservation workers, landscaping and groundskeeping workers, food preparation workers and farmworkers,” according to the U.S. Department of Labor.

Richard de Wilde of Harmony Valley Farm in Viroqua said that his 40 seasonal workers are “the dream team.” He described them as “absolutely everything you’d hope for in employees. They are dependable, capable, smart, very productive, inventive, and all around pleasant to work with.”

sparkle-motion (CC BY-NC 2.0)

Harmony Valley Farm, an organic produce and beef operation in Viroqua, employs seasonal workers on temporary visas.

Scott Kee, the vice-president of operations at Sacia Orchards in Galesville, echoed this praise for the program. He said hiring seasonal workers is “the only way we can get the crops off the trees.”

“It’s not political for us, it’s pragmatic,” Kee also said.

Although not required by law, many employers provide H2A or H2B employees with housing for their duration in the U.S. At Sacia Orchards, Kee said that they’ve built two on-site dorms for the 32 H2A workers.

“We’re asking them to handle precious cargo and to be safe. So, they need to have a nice bed and a nice place to sleep, understandably, since it’s hard work,” Kee said.

The non-seasonal (and non-eligible) dairy industry

While many farms and other businesses utilize the H2A visa program, there is one major Wisconsin industry is almost entirely left out of the equation: dairy.

Due to the year-round nature of the dairy industry, dairy farms do not qualify for the seasonal worker programs, even though they struggle with finding and retaining good labor.

“Many dairy farmers would like to have access to a program that would allow them to bring in workers for a few years, but that doesn’t exist,” said Simon Jette Nantel of the UW Center for Dairy Profitability. “Therefore, a majority of the farm labor is migrant workers – and to what extent they’re documented or undocumented, we’re not able to get statistics.”

Some dairy farms hire full-time immigrant workers, many of whom are undocumented. In 2008, 40 percent of Wisconsin’s dairy workforce were immigrants – up from just 5 percent in 1998, reported the Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism. Their numbers have been even higher at larger dairy operations.

Under the Trump administration, dairy farmers and their immigrant employees say they are facing increased hostility and fear crackdowns that could jeopardize their livelihoods. Meanwhile, there have been legislative efforts to expand guest worker programs to include the dairy industry as it grapples with a growing reliance on undocumented immigrants for its workforce.

An immigrant worker at a Wisconsin dairy feeds calves. Photo taken in 2009.

Robert Gutsche Jr./Wisconsin Center for Investigative Journalism

“The labor market is tight everywhere, and dairy farmers are also struggling for labor,” Jette Nantel added.

In May 2018, the seven-county region in western Wisconsin had a 2.5 percent unemployment rate, consistent with the statewide rate of 2.6 percent.

One program that dairy farmers have utilized as an attempt to rectify their labor shortage is the H1B visa program, which allows employers to temporarily hire specialized, educated workers in certain fields.

Jennifer Blazek of the UW-Madison ag school said that oftentimes dairy farms hire veterinarian students from other nations under the H1B program; however, they are still temporary, and leave those businesses with the same shortages they faced prior to their arrival.

“It would seem logical for dairy farmers to participate in these programs,” added UW-Extension’s Trisha Wagner. “We have these visa options for other agricultural industries, but not dairy. And a lot of farmers are feeling the labor issue right now. Unemployment is low, so it’s hard to find help.”

While lower unemployment rates are generally positive for job-seekers and the broader economy, they illustrate a labor shortage problem in the, dairy and broader agriculture industries.

“If we couldn’t bring these seasonal workers over, we would have less horticultural production here,” said Jette Nantel. “And, we’d be buying products from other places and would have no say on the labor or environmental conditions there.”

Source: WisContext

The importance of proper care and management of dairy cows during the final 60 to 45 days of their pregnancy cannot be overstated. The nutrition, health care, and environment provided during this period have a tremendous influence on their health and performance well into the next lactation.

To keep stress at a minimum the dairy shelter “basics” which include providing excellent ventilation, a dry comfortable resting area, good access to feed and water, and a confident footing are the same for all dairy animals. Some minor adjustments to the feeding space and resting area stall and/or pack space are necessary to accommodate the cow’s slightly larger size, reduce stress, and improve cleanliness – especially for those cows close-to, during, and after calving. Avoiding group overcrowding – especially in the close-up and maternity areas – is extremely important in keeping stress to a minimum.

Reproductive performance peaks and valleys caused by such factors as heat stress, environmental stress, and new animals entering the herd create fluctuations in dry cow population. These fluctuations present a design and management challenge trying to match the space available to the number cows occupying it.

Typical grouping for cows from dry-off to post-fresh include:

Far-off – from dry-off until ~3 weeks pre-freshening

• Freestalls: 4 inches wider than those used for lactating cows (52 inches typical)
• Bedded pack: 80 to 100 square feet of bedded area per cow
• Provide 27 to 30 inches of feeding space per cow
• Provide restraint facilities for vaccines & observation (headlocks or chute)

Close-up – cows ~3 weeks (heifers 4 weeks) pre-fresh to a few days (hours) pre-calving

• Freestalls: 4 inches wider than those used for lactating cows (52 inches typical)
• Bedded pack: 100 to 120 square feet of bedded area per cow
• Provide 27 to 30 inches of feeding space per cow
• Provide restraint facilities (headlocks or chute)

Maternity – a few days (or hours) before to a few hours after calving

• Box stalls: 16 feet by 16 feet (12 feet x 12 feet minimum)
  Area for fresh feed & water if kept more than 1 to 2 hours
  Restraint facilities for calving assistance
• Freshening pack: 150 to 200 square feet of bedded area per cow
  Provide 27 to 30 inches of feeding space per cow
  Restraint facilities for calving assistance

Post-Fresh – 1 to 3 days post-calving

• Shelter recommendations similar to far-off group

Many designers assume ‘uniform’ calving year-round, with a 12-month calving interval, first calving at 24 months, and a 30% culling rate. In practice these guidelines fail almost immediately since ‘uniform calving’ is difficult to achieve – especially in expanding herds where large numbers of cows are purchased to fill the stalls available.

A study in 2000 of 160 New York dairy herds tracked the number of calvings over 365 days. Approximately 26% of the herds freshened at least 5% more than the total number of cows. The study also examined the monthly distribution of calving to see if herds exceeded the uniform calving rate by 25, 35, and 50%. Only 10% of the herds surveyed had no months when the pre-fresh and maternity areas were not overcrowded. Where pre-fresh and maternity areas were sized according to a uniform calving model, 65% of the herds were 25% overcrowded for at least 2 months of the year, while 40% were overcrowded by 35% for at least 2 months. For at least one month, over 40% were overcrowded by 50%. Therefore, it seems that facilities for pre-fresh and maternity cows should be sized perhaps 30% larger than the uniform model to reduce overcrowding of these areas. Table 1 illustrates the difference between the ‘uniform model’ and ‘real world’ study for a total herd size of 100 cows.

Table 1. Estimated group sizes for different calving scenarios (adapted from Stone, 2000)

Of course, increasing facility size increases initial investment as well. The exact cost of overcrowding pre-fresh and maternity areas is difficult to determine. Overcrowding can lead to increased stress that may increase the incidence of freshening health disorders such as retained placentas (RP) and left displaced abomasums (LDA). Some estimates indicate that each RP and LDA cost a dairy over $200 and $300, respectively. Relatively minimal decreases in each of these disorders can justify the additional costs to provide more space and reduce stress (Stone, 2000).

Keeping stress at a minimum throughout the dry and freshening cycle increases the chance of cows calving without health problems and entering the lactation cycle productive and in good condition. Meeting the environmental and space needs of these special cows is a key element in a successful overall pre-fresh, maternity, and post-fresh management program. Do the numbers add up for your pre-fresh, maternity, and post-fresh needs?

Source: extension.psu.edu

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Foreign Agricultural Service predicts that Brazilian fluid milk production is set to increase by 1.8% in 2018, with volumes potentially growing to 23,980 MMT compared to 23,550 MMT in 2017*. This is good news for dairy farmers, especially the ones who have invested in automation in order to boost productivity. Automated milking systems help to eliminate rigid schedules associated with dairy milking activities and improves milking consistency. While robotic milking has benefitted the industry, it is not without its challenges.

While the robot performs the repetitive task of milking, the system’s tubing does the rest of work from collection to deposits into containers that will transport the product to its final location. Poor equipment sanitation can have serious effects in raw milk applications, impacting everything from product quality to production efficiency. Tubing plays a vital role in maintaining/upholding product safety, hygiene and quality.

Choosing the right raw milk collection transfer tubing with benefits that include kink resistance, tear resistance, milk fat absorption resistance and cold flexibility can also help to safeguard milk processing equipment. Further, while the principle of the milking machine is the same regardless of the location of the farm, the environmental conditions the milk tubing is exposed to differs from northern to southern climates and so tubing attributes such as cold flexibility are important. Another important factor to take into consideration is to choose tubing that complies with global regulations.

Tygon® II silicone milk tubing offers ultra-high purity characteristics with extremely low extract- ables and leachables. This tubing does not contain plasticizers or other additives and by-products that can leach into the milk during raw milk collection and cause toxicological issues. Tygon® S3 M-34-R milk tubing, which was designed specifically for the dairy industry, is entirely clear allowing for immediate visual inspection and verification of cleanliness. Its smooth, non-porous inner surface reduces the occurrence of buildup from butterfat, milkstones and milksoil and can help to eliminate the possibility of bacteria growth within the milk transport line.

As for vacuum tubing, Tygon® S3 A24-C, which is suited for supply air transport, has a smooth inner surface that is less susceptible to particle entrapment which can impact air flow. Tygon S3 A-24-C is designed to work with Tygon S3 M-34-R to provide both easy flow and vacuum within the milking process.

Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics services the Brazilian market through our plant in São Caetano do Sul, SP, which can help Brazilian and other South American dairy farmers to find the best tubing to ensure that the integrity of their milk products is protected. Product performance lead-ership combined with global consistency and regulatory compliance give customers peace of mind and protect their brands.

By the end of the century heat stress in cows could see average sized dairy farms losing thousands each year if farmers fail to act on environmental changes

The unusually hot summer of 2018 has proved challenging for farmers across the UK. Among other things, the scorching weather and lack of rain has damaged crops, and the grass used to feed farm animals too.

Unfortunately the unusual may become more usual as the effects of climate change are felt more frequently across the world. The high ambient temperatures and humidity seen this year, as well as extreme weather conditions such as flooding, are a significant challenge to the future of farming.

Pasture-based systems of dairy production, which are very common in the UK, are particularly sensitive to environmental factors. In fact, dairy cows are more likely to be vulnerable to the effects of climate change than cows that are housed, because housing provides shelter and technological options to mitigate the extremes of weather.

For our recent study, our team looked at how climate change might impact UK milk production, given what we already knew about how it affects dairy cows. In particular, we wanted to quantify the effects of heat stress on milk production.

Heat stress in cows occurs when ambient temperature and humidity go above animal specific thresholds. These thresholds are estimated by the temperature humidity index (THI). At present, the current British temperature and humidity is considered moderate on this scale, but is expected to get worse. It is open to debate, and depends on the cattle themselves, but generally a THI of more than 70 is regarded to be the point when heat stress becomes a problem and less milk is produced.

Using 11 different climate projection models, and 18 different milk production models, we estimated potential milk loss from UK dairy cows as climate conditions change during the 21st century. Given this information, our final climate projection analysis suggests that average ambient temperatures in the UK will increase by up to about 3.5C by the end of the century. This means that THIs during the summer, in some parts of the country, will lead to significant heat stress for cows if nothing is done to alleviate the hot weather’s effects.

Lactating cows initially respond to mild heat stress by sweating, panting, drinking more, and seeking shade when possible. At higher temperatures cows eat less feed, which leads to a fall in milk production. In southeast England – the region with the highest incidence of heat stress – the average annual milk loss is projected to exceed 170kg/cow. Cows in the UK currently produce an average of about 7,500kg of milk each year so these future losses would be about 2.4 per cent of their production.

However, climate change projections also suggest the UK would experience more heatwaves, and these would lead to even greater losses of milk. For example, the hottest area (southeast England) in the hottest year in the 2090s is predicted to result in an annual milk loss exceeding 1,300kg/cow, which is about 18.6 per cent of annual milk yield.

In economic terms, southwest England is expected to be the region most vulnerable to climate change because it is characterised by a high dairy herd density, and so potentially, a high level of heat stress-related milk loss. In the absence of mitigation measures, the estimated heat stress-related annual income loss for this region by the end of this century may reach £13.4m in average years, and £33.8m in extreme years.

However, by the end of the century we predict dairy cattle in large portions of Scotland and Northern Ireland could experience the same level of heat stress as cattle in southern England today.

Mitigation now

These predictions assume that nothing is done to mitigate the problems of heat stress. But there are many parts of the world that are already much hotter than the UK where milk is produced, and much is known about what can be done to protect the welfare of the animals and minimise economic losses from heat stress. These range from simple adaptations, such as the providing shade, to installing fans and water misting systems.

Cattle breeding for increased heat tolerance is another potential, which could be beneficial for maintaining pasture-based systems. In addition, changing the location of farming operations is another practice used to address economic challenges worldwide. Even though there is little indication that movement of dairy farming operations is a feasible strategy to decrease the risks of environmental challenges in the UK, regions with little or no prediction of conditions leading to heat stress (for example some parts of Scotland) may become increasingly important for UK dairy farms that depend on the availability of pasture.

In any case, we estimate that by 2100, heat stress-related annual income losses of average size dairy farms in the most affected regions may vary between £2,000-£6,000 and £6,000-£14,000 (in today’s value), in average and extreme years respectively. Armed with these figures, farmers need to begin planning for a hotter UK using cheaper, longer-term options such as planting trees or installing shaded areas.

Source: independent.co.uk

When building a dairy parlour, there are a variety of different materials you can use for walls.

Humidity is a big factor due to water use in a dairy parlour. Good options for water resistance would be using concrete, tile, FRP, or Duramax PVC. Each material has its pros and cons, but they all aim to provide a stress-free and hygienic environment for the cows. In this article we will discuss the water resistance, installation, and maintenance of each material.

Maintenance and Hygiene
Bacteria and dirt can be a big issue to a dairy parlour. There has been a correlation with the cleanliness of the dairy facility, cleanliness of the cow, and levels of mastitis. Mastitis, or inflammation to the udders, can be spread through handlers, clothing, and equipment. It is important that the walls and floors are easy to maintain and clean. A smooth, cleanable, light colored surface is optimal for easy maintenance and hygiene.

Concrete: has a smooth surface and can withstand high pressure water hoses, however it is porous and can stain with dirt and bacteria.
Tile: has a smooth surface but gaps between each tile filled with grout.
FRP (Fiber Reinforced Plastic): panels are commonly used in kitchens, restrooms, and offices, the sheet of FRP has a rough textured surface and rivets which may be susceptible to bacteria hiding between crevices.
Duramax PVC (Polyvinyl Chloride): is light reflective and has a seamless surface that is easy to clean.

Installation
Installation and labor time can make a huge difference in overhead cost. The amount of work required depends on what material is used and if any time is needed for drying/layering. Each material has a different process that may require additional time or material.

Concrete blocks do not have any footing so the height is a maximum of 4 feet. A long period of time is needed until the concrete hardens into full strength.
Concrete slabs can be used by screwing or nailing to the stud walls. The panels would need a paint or tile finish which is an additional few days.
Tile requires a concrete slab backing due to the wet environment. Adhesive is required on the slabs before placing each tile with spaces between. After 1-2 days the adhesive should dry and then grout is placed between each tile spacing. The grout should dry after 1 day and then grout sealant application.
FRP Panels requires a backer and adhesive as well. After installing a non-wood backer, apply adhesive and FRP panels with spaces between each panel. Rivets should fasten the panels to the backer and apply trim on the spacing between each panel.
Duramax PVC require screws to attached onto the wall studs. After applying the first panel, the second panel interlocks using the fasteners. Requires a silicone sealant between each panel to be extremely waterproof.

Water Resistance
Water resistance is a crucial part of keeping a dairy facility clean and mold-free. Water-use, humidity, and an animal habitat are big factors in the environment of a farm. Some materials require sealant or non-wood backings to become completely water resistant.

Concrete won’t allow water through but since it is porous, water vapor will penetrate. This shouldn’t be a problem as long as there is no wood behind the concrete.
Tile completely waterproof if sealant is used on grout. However, if tile is cracked, water that enters grout cannot escape.
Fiber Reinforced Plastic is very water resistant, as long as there is no wood backing, there should not be a problem.
Duramax PVC is completely waterproof, water vapor cannot penetrate if a silicone sealant is used between panels.

Overall, there are many options for building materials used in a Dairy Parlour. Depending on the size, budget, and overall look, each material has its benefits. Pricing can be a big factor in deciding but don’t forget about practicality and maintenance. The building environment can affect the daily cleaning, cleanliness of cows, and overall milk production.

The concept of limit-feeding or precision feeding dairy heifers has been studied for the last decade primarily at Penn state and the University of Wisconsin.  The goal of this research was to decrease costs while providing for adequate growth and performance after the heifer calves.

A few concepts regarding limit feeding and raising heifers are:

1. Heifers are either the first or second largest cost on the dairy.
2. Feed is the largest cost in raising heifers.
3. Labor would be the second greatest cost in heifer raising.

An idea taken from the beef and other meat industries is the concept of feed efficiency.  In other words, how much feed per unit gain.  But differing from the meat industry is that we target growth at 1.8 to 2 pounds of gain per day over the post-weaned phase.   Precision feeding allows the farmer to precisely balance the heifer’s diet with little wasted feed and a reduction in cost.  There are no novel or different feed ingredients needed to make this work.  However, there are some hard and fast methods that must be adhered to, to make this work on your farm.

How do you do this?

Birth to weaning- no changes from what is presently done on the farm.

Penn State recommends the following regarding nutrition and management.

Nutrition

General: No free choice forages or concentrates are fed.  The diet must be followed specifically (Precision Feeding)

Dry matter intake (on a dry matter basis):

• Pre-puberty 2.15% body weight/day
• Post-puberty 1.65% body weight/ day

Crude protein:

• Pre-puberty 14-15%
• Post-puberty 13-14%

No RUP sources are needed here, this can be done with conventional ingredients.

Energy

The requirements are based on heifer size, growth rate, and environment the heifer is raised in.

Limit-feeding diets have a fixed energy requirement that meets an average daily gain of 1.75 to 2.0 pounds per day.  This is equivalent to 130 kcal of metabolizable energy per pound of metabolic body weight (BW0.75).  Work with your nutritionist or contact a UNH dairy specialist to help you with this if needed.

Fiber

Based on the fact that the heifers are limit fed, using poor quality forage (heifer hay) probably will not work here.  Data suggests that NDF values as low as 19% can work in this situation, but typical NDF values range from 23 to 31% over the growth period.

Vitamins and minerals  

There are no data indicating any changes required while limit feeding heifers

Concentrate sources

In this diet, a higher portion of the diet will be made of concentrate allowing the producer more flexibility in meeting nutrient requirements.  It is important to meet the minimum NDF values, most of this will be from forage and help prevent any laminitis from happening.  It is also suggested to limit the amount of alfalfa hay as this combination of a higher grain and alfalfa can result in frothy bloat.

Management

1. Heifers must be weighed often to ensure that heifers are gaining within the target gains of 1.75 to 2.0 pounds/day.  For ease of weighing, anytime a heifer is handled, she should be weighed either via electronic scale or taped.  Recent data indicates that dairy heifer weigh tapes are accurate.  It is recommended that heifers be weighed monthly at the same time of day.  These results will allow you to adjust the diets as the heifers grow. 
2.   Make sure all heifers can eat at the same time, no overcrowding because heifers will consume all their feed within an hour, headlocks work best to allow the heifers to eat without competing with a boss heifer.  ALL heifers have to eat at one time.
3. Feed only once a day at the same time.
4. Grouping heifers should have a range of body weights less than 200 pounds within a pen after 4 months of age (2-4 month age variation at the most within a pen).  
5. No straw or shavings as bedding- they will eat it.
6. Expect a lot of vocalization at the start, they will settle down eventually.
7. When heifers are approaching freshening (two months prior to calving), you can add them to the high forage dry cow pen.  Their rumens will adjust.

Experience at UNH

We have been limit feeding post-weaned heifers for a few years now.  What we see is adequate growth, no feed wastage, and no negative effects on performance or breeding.  Routinely, our age at first calving is 22 months.  If you are interested in limit feeding don’t hesitate to contact me or work with your nutritionist.  You should see adequate growth, lower feed costs and lower labor costs.

Source: extension.unh.edu

Prevention of mastitis requires reducing exposure to mastitis pathogens and enhancing the ability of the heifers’ immune system to respond.

The ultimate goal for any heifer management program is to develop a healthy adult cow that produces high quality milk. This success depends on how heifers are managed from birth to first calving. Mastitis is considered one of the most significant and costly diseases in dairy cows and results in decreased production and profitability.

Mastitis in heifers is rarely detected before calving, but few farms actively look for an infection before the animal calves. Subclinical mastitis can be difficult to detect because the milk appears to be normal but a high somatic cell count is present. It is recommended that all producers use the California Mastitis Test (CMT) on fresh cows to detect mastitis in each quarter. The CMT provides an inexpensive option for detecting mastitis early and provides the most accurate results 5 days post fresh. Producers also have other options available to them to detect mastitis. Microbiological exam of milk samples may be obtained from suspect quarters to determine the type of bacteria with which each quarter is infected. This exam can be more time consuming than CMT but also provides more in depth evaluation. With increased technologies, culturing on farms has become more popular in Pennsylvania and costs to do so have greatly decreased.

The highest risk factor in the development of heifer mastitis can be linked to exposure to mastitis causing organisms. The environment that heifers are housed in year round can play a large role in the exposure. Heifers should be housed in a clean, dry environment with sufficient amounts of bedding. Animals that have manure cover on the legs and udder area will experience an increased incidence of mastitis at freshening. All heifers should be treated to the same clean environment as the milking herd. These animals are the future of the farm and will soon be relied upon to provide high production levels to keep dairy farms profitable.

A second risk factor that contributes to heifer mastitis is feeding of waste milk to calves. This practice should be discouraged unless milk can be pasteurized prior to feeding. The exact mechanism that the organism is transferred to the udder is unknown but it is likely related to colonization of the teat skin and inner thighs with mastitis causing organisms. Studies have shown that milking herds with a high incidence of mastitis also have a high incidence of heifer mastitis.

Prevention of mastitis is based upon reducing exposure to mastitis pathogens and enhancing the ability of the heifers’ immune system to respond. Prevention of mastitis in heifers includes the following strategies:

1. Controlling mastitis in the existing adult herd; contagious mastitis is more likely to spread if there is a high incidence of mastitis on the farm.
2. Use of individual hutches for pre-weaned calves to prevent suckling.
3. Feed milk replacer or pasteurized milk rather than waste milk.
4. Control flies, this is especially important in the upcoming months.
5. Milk fresh heifers first using clean milking equipment.
6. House heifers in well bedded areas that are clean and dry.
7. Consider implementing a heifer mastitis vaccination program.

Remember, heifers are the future of your dairy farm. Introducing healthy, viable heifers into the milking herd will help to increase productivity and profitability in the future.

Source: extension.psu.edu

The unusually hot summer of 2018 has proved challenging for farmers across the UK. Among other things, the scorching weather and lack of rain has damaged crops, and the grass used to feed farm animals too.

Unfortunately the unusual may become more usual as the effects of climate change are felt more frequently across the world. The high ambient temperatures and humidity seen this year, as well as extreme weather conditions such as flooding, are a significant challenge to the future of farming.

Pasture-based systems of dairy production, which are very common in the UK, are particularly sensitive to environmental factors. In fact, dairy cows are more likely to be vulnerable to the effects of climate change than cows that are housed, because housing provides shelter and technological options to mitigate the extremes of weather.

Heat stress in cows

For our recent study, our team looked at how climate change might impact UK milk production, given what we already knew about how it affects dairy cows. In particular, we wanted to quantify the effects of heat stress on milk production.

Heat stress in cows occurs when ambient temperature and humidity go above animal specific thresholds. These thresholds are estimated by the temperature humidity index (THI). At present, the current British temperature and humidity is considered moderate on this scale, but is expected to get worse. It is open to debate, and depends on the cattle themselves, but generally a THI of more than 70 is regarded to be the point when heat stress becomes a problem and less milk is produced.

Using 11 different climate projection models, and 18 different milk production models, we estimated potential milk loss from UK dairy cows as climate conditions change during the 21st century. Given this information, our final climate projection analysis suggests that average ambient temperatures in the UK will increase by up to about 3.5℃ by the end of the century. This means that THIs during the summer, in some parts of the country, will lead to significant heat stress for cows if nothing is done to alleviate the hot weather’s effects.

Lactating cows initially respond to mild heat stress by sweating, panting, drinking more, and seeking shade when possible. At higher temperatures cows eat less feed, which leads to a fall in milk production. In south-east England – the region with the highest incidence of heat stress – the average annual milk losses due to heat stress is projected to exceed 170kg/cow. Cows in the UK currently produce an average of about 7,500kg of milk each year so these future losses would be about 2.4% of their production.

However, climate change projections also suggest the UK would experience more heatwaves, and these would lead to even greater losses of milk. For example, the hottest area (south-east England) in the hottest year in the 2090s is predicted to result in an annual milk loss exceeding 1,300kg/cow, which is about 18.6% of annual milk yield.

In economic terms, south-west England is expected to be the region most vulnerable to climate change because it is characterised by a high dairy herd density, and so potentially a high level of heat stress-related milk loss. In the absence of mitigation measures, the estimated heat stress-related annual income loss for this region by the end of this century may reach £13.4m in average years, and £33.8m in extreme years.

However, by the end of the century we predict dairy cattle in large portions of Scotland and Northern Ireland could experience the same level of heat stress as cattle in southern England today.

Mitigation now

These predictions assume that nothing is done to mitigate the problems of heat stress. But there are many parts of the world that are already much hotter than the UK where milk is produced, and much is known about what can be done to protect the welfare of the animals and minimise economic losses from heat stress. These range from simple adaptations, such as the providing shade, to installing fans and water misting systems.

Cattle breeding for increased heat tolerance is another potential, which could be beneficial for maintaining pasture-based systems. In addition, changing the location of farming operations is another practice used to address economic challenges worldwide. Even though there is little indication that movement of dairy farming operations is a feasible strategy to decrease the risks of environmental challenges in the UK, regions with little or no prediction of conditions leading to heat stress (for example some parts of Scotland) may become increasingly important for UK dairy farms that depend on the availability of pasture.

In any case, we estimate that by 2100, heat stress-related annual income losses of average size dairy farms in the most affected regions may vary between £2,000-£6,000 and £6,000-£14,000 (in today’s value), in average and extreme years respectively. Armed with these figures, farmers need to begin planning for a hotter UK using cheaper, longer-term options such as planting trees or installing shaded areas.

Source: Phys.org

A new rapid farmside test developed in New Zealand is able to detect the presence of mastitis bacteria in just 10 minutes.

The method developed by Koru Diagnostics is almost 24 hours faster than its nearest rival, and three to five days faster than traditional methods.

Koru Diagnostics CEO Rhys McKinlay says the technology doesn’t rely on culturing or detecting the bacteria itself.

“It quickly and accurately detects specific biomarkers in fresh milk samples that are indicative of an infection,” he says.

The Palmerston North-based start-up has raised over $900,000 in its first round of investor funding, which will give them commercialisation runway until late 2019.

“These funds will be directed towards product development and commercial scale-up, protecting our IP and securing new commercial partnerships,” Mr McKinlay says.

Mastitis is a common infection of the udder tissue in dairy cattle and represents $300 million in treatment costs and production losses in New Zealand alone.

Source: Newshub.

Mental health can be defined as “a state of well-being in which the individual realizes his or her own abilities, can cope with the normal stresses of life, can work productively and fruitfully, and is able to contribute to his or her community.” In contrast, a mental health disorder is a diagnosable illness that affects a person’s thinking, emotional state, and behavior and disrupts the person’s ability to work, carry out other daily activities, and engage in satisfying personal relationships. All of us exist somewhere on a spectrum ranging from good mental health to having a mental health disorder. Stress at work, financial problems, health issues, excessive drinking, and social or family problems can move someone from the healthy to unhealthy end of the spectrum.

Approximately 18% of adults in the US will experience a mental health disorder in any given year. The most common mental health disorders are anxiety and depression, but also include substance use disorders, eating disorders, bipolar disorders, and schizophrenia. Often an individual will experience more than one of these conditions at the same time. Only about 40% percent of people with a mental health disorder in any given year will seek professional help for it.

For those suffering at the extreme end of the mental health disorder spectrum, suicide is sometimes seen as an option for ending suffering. Suicide is the tenth most common cause of death in the US, with 45,000 suicides in the US each year. White males between the ages of 45 and 65 are the most common group to die because of suicide. Farmers have one of the highest suicide rates of any profession.

Signs and Symptoms of Mental Health Disorders

While there are many different mental health disorders, common signs and symptoms include but are not limited to:

• An unusually sad mood. Feeling anger or rage. Irritability. Change in mood.
• Loss of enjoyment and interest in activities that used to be enjoyable. Withdrawing from friends.
• Lack of energy and tiredness.
• Feeling worthless. No sense of purpose.
• Thinking about death and wishing to be dead. Threatening to kill or injure oneself.
• Difficulty concentrating or making decisions.
• Being agitated.
• Change in eating behavior. Loss of interest in food or eating too much.
• Change in sleeping patterns. Not sleeping or sleeping too much.
• Acting reckless.
• Increasing alcohol or drug use.
• Rapid heartbeat or breathing.
• Dizziness, headache.
• Unrealistic and/or excessive fear or worry.
• Statements, such as: “I’m a failure.”, “Nobody cares.”, “Everyone would be better off without me.”

What to Do If You or Someone You Know is Suffering from a Mental Health Disorder

If a barn is lost in a fire or natural disaster or someone suffers a physical injury neighbors, friends, and family will often respond to help the farm or individual recover. In the case of an individual suffering from a mental health disorder this response is often lacking. The lack of response may be related to our uncertainty about what to do or it may be related to our inability to see the condition. The inability to see someone is suffering from a mental disorder may cause the person to be labeled as lazy, uncooperative, or not really ill.

If you suspect someone is suffering from a mental health disorder, sometimes the best thing you can do is simply ask, “How are you doing?”. Try to get them to open up without pressuring them and then just listen without judging, interrupting, or offering advice. If someone is an immediate danger to themselves or others, call 911 or a suicide prevention hotline. After listening to the person, you may want to recommend they seek professional help (primary care physician, mental health professional, or certified peer specialist) and suggest some self-help options (talk with family, friends, or church members, participate in a peer support group, read a book, change diet, exercise, etc.).

If you or a friend or family member are suffering from a mental health disorder, a variety of mental health resources can be found on the:

• Iowa Concern Hotline, 1-800-447-1985, offers assistance to address stress and mental health concerns. They are focused on farming and the rural area, but will assist anyone who calls. Their services are available nationwide.
• Center for Dairy Excellence web site offers links to additional resources, including a list of local crisis intervention contact numbers for each county in Pennsylvania.
• National Suicide Prevention Lifeline: 1-800-273-8255.

Portions of this article were adopted from:

• Mental Health First Aid (First Edition). 2015. National Council for Behavioral Health and the Missouri Department of Mental Health.
• C. Gardner. 2018. Communicating with Farmers Overwhelmed by Stress. Center for Dairy Excellence.

Source: extension.psu.edu

Hitting the outlined targets for harvesting corn intended for silage can offer dividends through exceptional feed over the next year.

Midwestern corn intended for silage appears to be popping tassels at a fast and furious pace in 2018. Thanks to early and steady rain throughout the growing season, great sunshine, and heat, growing degree days have been prevalent and have lit a ‘planning for harvest’ fire under many growers. This preparedness always includes dry matter assessment in an effort to determine the chopping timeline.

“There are two reasons we are interested in dry matter (or moisture) of freshly chopped whole-plant corn intended for silage,” explains Dr. John Goeser, animal nutrition, research and innovation director for Rock River Laboratory. “Fermentation characteristics and crop maturity; assuming that dry matter correlates to kernel maturity.” Goeser recommends reviewing university guidelines for ideal dry matter levels, dependent on storage type for you or your customer’s farms but offers a general guideline of 35% dry matter (65% moisture). “Realizing that chopping can take some time, it’s best to begin the harvest just before you reach the dry-matter target. Continue chopping beyond the target and realize an average dry matter that is right around the ideal level.”

The word ‘Immune’ has become a buzz word in the dairy industry over the past few years. You can feed this, or inject that, or breed for improved immunity…it can be very confusing to even know where to start! Let’s take a quick look at the very basic and critical role that omega fatty acids play in improving immune health.

Lyden Rasmussen, owner of Koro Dairy, hosted a successful grazing and pasture management field day on July 26, 2018, to teach other farmers about the benefits of Managed (Rotational) Grazing. Koro Dairy showcased their successful transition to a managed rotational grazing operation. Through the Natural Resources Conservation Service’s (NRCS) Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP), the dairy was able to obtain a managed grazing plan, and a design and installation guideline for structural practices such as fences and watering facilities. EQIP provides financial assistance for a variety of practices intended to help farmers to achieve environmental goals on their land. With the Prescribed Grazing Practice, farmers receive a flat rate payment to implement a grazing system and commit their land to permanent pasture for 5 years. “This practice includes developing a prescribed grazing plan that considers the resources on the farm, such as soil productivity, landscape, livestock type, environmentally sensitive areas and water sources to determine carry capacity and stocking rates for pastures, paddock layout and hay harvesting schedules,” said Brian Pillsbury, State Grazing Specialist for NRCS in Madison. Other EQIP cost-shared practices that facilitate this practice are fencing, animal trails/walkways, forage planting, pipeline and watering facilities.

In addition to utilizing grazing to lower the cost of production for his milking herd, Lyden is also planning on utilizing rotational grazing with his dairy heifers. Raising dairy heifers on the farm is the second highest expense on most operations. In fact, over 50% of those costs are for feed, from birth to freshening. Managed grazing can help curb those feed costs, help herd health, and more.

On hand was Cutler Fence, demonstrating equipment and fencing materials to set up an actual rotational grazing system on the farm. New technologies make fences easier to install and maintain. They are affordable and time-saving. “NRCS can help cost share a grazing setup; contact your local USDA service center to get started with a conservation plan,” said Adam Abel, NRCS Resource Conservationist. “NRCS has relationships with many local contractors who know NRCS practice requirements and standards for managed grazing; we’re looking to get landowners a fence that will last for 20 years with very little maintenance,” added Abel.

Pasture raised heifer benefits include increased milk production in the first lactation, higher fertility rates, greater herd longevity and herd health. To learn more about heifer replacement comparison costs and cost savings, read the Improving Dairy Profitability, Incorporating Managed Grazing factsheet. “If set up properly, Managed Grazing can lessen the amount of time a farmer spends growing and harvesting feed, feeding and watering cattle, and hauling manure. The cattle are doing that themselves now,” said Merrie Schamberger, NRCS District Conservationist in Oshkosh.

Field day participants were also able to walk on a new lane installed on the farm. With cattle having more access to pastures, trails can get worn down. Installing a lane with EQIP financial assistance that meets NRCS standards enables livestock easy, reliable access to pastures. “Lanes are designed to be elevated and pitched in the center so water goes off both sides,” explained Mike Haase, Winnebago Land and Water Conservation Department (LWCD). He adds, “This lane is designed to meet NRCS standards and last for years; Lyden can do small amounts of maintenance after rainfall events to keep the lane functional for his livestock.”

Next, Abel presented a rainfall simulator demonstration. The rainfall simulator demonstrated that samples with long time no-till, cover crops and actively managed pasture had higher rates of infiltration than conventional field samples. Conventional samples had much more runoff and less infiltration. “Pasture that is well managed is by far the best filter we can put on the land to protect from runoff,” said Abel. “The great thing about rotational grazing, if it’s done right, you can get as much yield out there as you could if you were taking your tractor out there and cutting it; you can reduce your labor and your cost to harvest feed for at least 6 months out of the year. A whole farm filter to keep water and soil in place; that’s why NRCS is here to help farmers with managed grazing,” added Abel.

Participants walked through Koro Dairy’s rotationally grazed pastures, seeing first-hand how easy it was to move livestock from one paddock to the next with NRCS cost-shared fencing. Field day presenters encouraged participants to consider managed grazing as an option whether you are a dairy, beef stocker, cow/calf, sheep, or other type of livestock producer. You can reduce your costs in seed, fertilizer, fuel, machinery and time. You can also improve overall herd health and reduce your veterinarian bills, while extending the production life of your animals. With grazing, fewer inputs and active management leads to farm profits and happy, healthy livestock.

The field day was planned in partnership with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, NRCS; Winnebago LWCD; University of Wisconsin—Extension and Cutler Fence. For more information about incorporating managed grazing on your farm, contact your local USDA‒NRCS Service Center.

One of the most difficult things for farm managers/owners to master is coaching employees for optimal performance. Just like becoming an 85% free throw shooter on the basketball court, it takes practice. Once mastered you will see employees who understand goals and expectations more clearly, are more motivated, have ownership of their work, show greater responsibility, while maximizing their potential and problem solving ability. What you as an employer get is more productivity and lower turnover along with being freed of the day-to-day micromanagement of employees.

For this to happen it often requires a mindset change on the part of the employer via letting go of short-term control and constant micromanagement of employees. Coaching is not creating an anarchy but instead empowering employees to think and act on their own, making decisions as the need arises through knowledge gained by teaching and leadership. It does require effort, patience, and insight into learning what makes your employees tick.

We also need to remember how humans are different than machinery, plants and animals. Quoting Dr. Bob Milligan, Professor Emeritus Dyson School of Applied Economics and Management, Cornell University (2014), “1. People can think, so they can make decisions. 2. People can speak, so they can ask questions, provide feedback and provide new ideas. 3. People have feelings, so our actions impact their motivation, attitudes and performance.” As an employer or manager/supervisor you are the team’s leader and you need to remember how your coaching of the team will help achieve the desired outcome.

Coaching is different than the evaluation process, which often is only done once a year. Coaching focuses on guidance and development of the employee by being proactive and positive and providing feedback. The employer must take the time to understand and determine the following:

• Each employee’s unique strengths and weaknesses.
• What it will take to help the employee overcome any barriers to their success.
• Finding out what motivates each individual employee and tailoring incentives toward them.
• Communicating direction towards achieving company goals.
• Helping employees understand the big picture.
• Helping employees understand their individual role in the company’s success.

When getting employees to improve their performance through coaching there are six critical steps involved.

1. Describe the problem in a professional non-confrontational manner.
   This discussion needs to be positive and done in a non-threating manner. This is not the place to blame but instead uncover causes of the problem to work towards solutions.
2. Ask the employee(s) help in solving the problem.
   In doing so you will get the employee(s) commitment via asking them to decide what to do to solve the problem. In return you are boosting the employee(s) self-esteem because you value their opinion and ideas.
3. Discuss the causes of the problem.
   You need to remember this is a discussion about a performance problem, not about the employee’s attitude or personality. You need to remain friendly and relaxed throughout the conversation. Information should be gathered using open-ended questions which often start with words like “How”, “What”, “Who”, and “When” and cannot simply be answered yes or no.
4. Identify and write down possible solutions.
   By writing down the solutions you have a reference point to follow what must be done, and if one does not work you can go to the next proposal. In doing so, involve the employee(s) in choosing the best solution and identify their role in the solution.
5. Decide on a specific action to be taken by everyone.
   By identifying specific actions and responsibilities for the solutions and writing it down it will emphasize that the responsibility for improvement rests with the employee(s).
6. Agree on a specific follow up date.
   By setting a date it sends a message to the employee(s) that solving the performance problem is important and it also tells the employee(s) that you want to know how well the actions agreed upon are being handled. It also allows for further follow up or tweaking to the problem if needed. As always end the discussion on a friendly note.

As you will see, how each employee meets the goals established is left up to the employee(s) and it gives personal ownership towards the goal or desired outcome.

In the end you have helped the employee(s) understand the “Why is it done this way? or Why a certain behavior is it needed?”. Along with enabling them to become a part of the solution or desired outcome. We need to remember that in a T.E.A.M. nobody goes it alone and that T-together, E-everyone, A-achieves, M-more. Using appropriate coaching methods with employees will help you as a manager to achieve the desired employee(s) performance you are looking for in your operation.

Source: dairy.unl.edu

The effects of heat stress can continue long after cooler weather has arrived — even for cows not in milk. In fact, research has shown that proper cooling in the dry period improved subsequent lactation by up to 16 pounds more milk per day and 20 pounds more 3.5-percent fat-corrected milk (FCM) per day.1

“Most producers pay careful attention to the heat stress on their lactating cows, but dry cows need the same attention,” says H. Nielsen, DVM, Technical Services – Ruminant, Lallemand Animal Nutrition. “Heat stress takes a toll on every member of the herd, and the effects don’t simply dissipate when the stressor is over.”

Stress of any kind can cause animals to divert energy from performance, and their bodies do not quickly shift back into production-mode when the period is over. In research on heat-stressed herds, the period of lowest milk production occurred two months after the highest ambient temperature,2 Dr. Nielsen notes.

University of Florida research showed heat stress can even affect the growth and future milk production of calves in-utero. These calves were born earlier with decreased weight at birth and decreased reproductive performance as heifers. Their productivity struggled even after entering the lactating herd, where they experienced reductions in milk production nearing 11 pounds per day during peak lactation.3

In addition to persistent productivity losses, herds also can experience lowered immune function after a stressful event.

“It’s common for producers to see increased incidence of diseases after a stressful event,” Dr. Nielsen says. “Not just heat stress, but any time where the animal experiences changes in her environment like pen movements or even ration changes. It’s critical to maintain feed intake and keep up a robust immune system that’s primed to fight off health challenges.”

Probiotics are an easy, cost-effective way to support the immune system of cattle against everyday natural challenges. The right probiotic can initiate an active process of stimulating microflora — the dynamic and robust bacterial communities in the lower intestinal tract — to enhance lower gut health. The lower gut signals to the rest of the body, which stimulates the innate immune system, Dr. Nielsen explains.

One probiotic, Saccharomyces cerevisiae boulardii CNCM I-1079 — found in the brand ProTernative® — has been proven to positively modulate the immune system of cattle during times of stress. In a study, S. c. boulardii CNCM I-1079 supported higher peak milk and resulted in fewer health events for transition cows.4

He advises that producers still must lay the foundation for reduced stress by providing clean, readily available water; using adequate heat abatement techniques like providing shade, fans and/or sprinklers; and ensuring cattle are fed during the cooler times of the day to keep intake up.

“We’re only beginning to see the long-term effects of heat stress in our herds. Probiotics are a relatively new tool in helping fight against these negative effects,” Dr. Nielsen says. “It’s going to take all of our tools to protect cattle and keep performance up during — and long after — stressful periods end.”

Lallemand Animal Nutrition is committed to optimizing animal performance and well-being with specific natural microbial product and service solutions. Using sound science, proven results and knowledge, Lallemand Animal Nutrition develops, produces and markets high value yeast and bacteria products ─ including probiotics, silage inoculants and yeast derivatives. Lallemand offers a higher level of expertise, leadership and industry commitment with long-term and profitable solutions to move our partners Forward. Lallemand Animal Nutrition is Specific for your success. For more information, please visit Lallemand Animal Nutrition. 

When dairy cattle consume aflatoxin-contaminated feed, they are lethargic, their appetite wanes, they produce less milk, and their immune system goes awry. Some of those symptoms relate to oxidative stress, in which dangerous free-radicals bounce around, damaging cells. In a new study, researchers at the University of Illinois investigated the potential of injectable trace minerals to reduce the damage and keep dairy cows healthier.

“If we’re providing enough trace minerals to manufacture more detoxifying enzymes, the liver has a better chance of fighting the aflatoxin,” explains Russell Pate, doctoral student in the Department of Animal Sciences at U of I and lead author on the study.

Phil Cardoso, assistant professor in the department and co-author on the paper, adds that an injectable product could be helpful during aflatoxin challenge, when a cow’s appetite is suppressed. “Our idea for injecting is that it might help during a time when intake is impacted. If something is causing her to eat less, she’ll consume less of any diet-based mineral too.”

The researchers injected lactating Holsteins with Multimin®90, a commercially available injectable trace mineral formulation, twice, approximately a month apart. Another set of animals received a saline injection only, but both sets received the recommended amount of trace minerals in their diet. About a month after the second injection, the researchers used a balling gun to introduce aflatoxin-contaminated feed to half of the animals.

Cows receiving aflatoxin and saline had greater liver inflammation and lower feed efficiencies than cows that weren’t exposed to aflatoxin. But introducing Multimin®90 to aflatoxin-challenged cows increased liver concentrations of selenium and iron. It also bumped up the activity of serum glutathione peroxidase, whose job is to protect cells from oxidative damage by neutralizing free-radicals.

“As we had hypothesized, supplying cows with trace minerals via injection, independent of minerals ingested in the feed, resulted in an improved immune response and reduced oxidative stress when cows were challenged with aflatoxin,” Pate says. Trace minerals are co-factors of enzymes responsible for alleviating the oxidative stress in animals.

Aflatoxin M1 was present in all milk samples for cows that received the contaminated feed. In other words, injectable trace minerals didn’t prevent transfer of the toxin into the milk. The researchers were not surprised by the result, though.

“We knew it would not help with transference to the milk. If the cow is exposed, she needs to excrete that toxin through milk, urine, feces; anywhere to get rid of it,” Cardoso explains. “To stop transference to the milk, you have to first identify the source of the aflatoxin and avoid feeding it. But sometimes you just can’t. In those cases, we are showing for the first time that an injectable trace mineral will provide a benefit.”

Source: ACES

Modern dairy shelters provide the five freedoms of animal welfare that are essential to cow comfort and animal husbandry.

Instead of looking for what we do wrong in the dairy industry maybe we should look at what we do right. The “Five Freedoms of Animal Welfare” are as follows:

1. Freedom from hunger or thirst by ready access to fresh water and a diet to maintain full health and vigor.
2. Freedom from discomfort by providing an appropriate environment including shelter and a comfortable resting area.
3. Freedom from pain, injury or disease by prevention or rapid diagnosis and treatment.
4. Freedom to express (most) normal behavior by providing sufficient space, proper facilities and company of the animal’s own kind.
5. Freedom from fear and distress by ensuring conditions and treatment which avoid mental suffering.

To me these are the basics of good animal husbandry. I can’t think of a dairy producer, nutritionist, veterinarian, ag builder, or anyone involved in the industry as a whole that does not want to provide these freedoms to their animals. The health and welfare of the animals is a known barometer of the health and welfare of the dairy business. Simply said, healthy cows are more productive.

As I look through the above list, all of the design standards for modern dairy shelters can be reflexed. Freedom from hunger and thirst means providing 3+ inches per cow of waterer space, feed space of 30 inches for prefresh cows, 20+ hours per day of access to feed and water, and minimizing total milking time per day to less than 3 hours.

Freedom from discomfort means good stall design, making neck rail modifications, making stalls longer in older barns, using more bedding, sand bedding, proper grooving/texturing of concrete, maximizing lying time, and minimizing standing time. It means providing proper ventilation for the season and heat abatement in the summer months.

Freedom from pain, injury, or disease is the design and use of treatment systems/pens, installation of rubber or resilient flooring, and development of vaccination and treatment protocols with the oversight of the veterinarian. It includes proper design and construction of alleyways, floors, and stalls.

Freedom to express normal behavior just means freestall design with adequate lunge room, feed bunks that present feed at 4 to 6 inches above the animal’s front feet, 4 to 6 inches of water in the water trough, and providing adequate floor space for animals to move throughout the shelter and around animals at the feed bunk or waterers.

Freedom from fear and distress may be the hardest to measure and really know if we are doing our best. I think as an industry we are moving in the right direction with management tools like pain medication at dehorning, stockmanship training for employees, and protocols for downed cows.

I don’t think we should live in fear of the animal welfare topics that seem to lurk on the horizon. Rather, I think we should be proud of the comfort and care we provide day in and day out to the animals of the US dairy industry.

To learn more about Animal Welfare in Dairy System Design take a look at Penn State Extension’s recent Technology Tuesday Webinar.

Source: extension.psu.edu

Follow these tips for your automated alley scraper system

About GEA

GEA is one of the largest suppliers of process technology for the food industry and a wide range of other industries. The international technology group focuses on process technology and components for sophisticated production processes in various end-user markets.

In 2017, GEA generated consolidated revenues of about EUR 4.6 billion. The food and beverages sector, which is a long-term growth industry, accounted for around 70 percent. The company employs almost 18,000 people worldwide. GEA is a market and technology leader in its business areas. The company is listed on the German MDAX stock index (G1A, WKN 660 200) and included in the STOXX® Europe 600 Index. In addition, the company is listed in selected MSCI Global Sustainability Indexes. Further information is available at gea.com.

We often don’t focus as much on heat stress in young dairy calves and tend to focus more on cold stress. However, it is just as important and producers or calf raisers should have a plan in place to help mitigate heat stress in these animals also. Why is it important? When calves are hot they eat less under stress which affects weight gains and overall performance and health. A study by Heinrichs et al. 2005, made the association between heat stress and subsequent first lactation cows finding that the calves that underwent heat stress early in life had a higher average age at first lactation. This obviously, affects the total cost of raising a heifer and a producers’ profitability.

The thermoneutral zone is a range of temperature in which animals perform best by maintaining a constant body temperature while not expending extra energy to do so. The temperature in this zone is not affected solely by the outside temperature but can be influenced by relative humidity, air movement, moisture, hair coat, sunlight (direct vs indirect), bedding, and rumination in older calves. It is important to remember that calves can often deal with heat better than cows simply because of their larger surface area in comparison to their weight and the fact that they are producing less heat due to minimal rumination occurring. Minimal research regarding the THI (temperature humidity index) for dairy calves has been done. The Temperature Humidity Index (THI) is a measurement that accounts for the combined effects of environmental temperature and relative humidity. When we look at the THI levels for lactating cows mild heat stress starts occurring between 68-71 THI index and a lactating cow will experience mild to moderate stress with a 72-79 THI index. This information can be found in the Dairy Heat Stress Management and Energy Use Planning Guide.

Thus, we need to be cognizant of the observable symptoms of heat stress in young dairy animals which are the following:

• A calf’s body temperature will increase above 103 ˚F
• There will be an increased respiration rate
• There will be a loss of appetite
• A decrease in activity
• If dehydration in occurring due to heat stress there will be less urine output and manure will become firmer
• There will be increased water consumption

Producers need to start mitigating heat stress even before the calf is born by looking to the dry cows. Keeping them cool is essential to helping maintain colostrum quality which often goes down in the summer. Thus, extra effort needs to be given to monitoring colostrum quality and possibly utilizing a colostrum replacer if necessary.

Maternity pen areas will need to be cleaned more often or if bed packs are used, fresh clean bedding added more often. With increased heat and moisture these become ideal pathogen breeding grounds.

If a calf is born and is extremely hot, they may need to be cooled down in high THI conditions. Utilizing fans will help this situation.

Do not forget to pay attention to how the animals are being transported and arriving at the calf raising facility. Does your trailer have enough ventilation to keep the calves cool? Are calves being checked for heat stress and given proper fluids upon arrival?

Are you adjusting the times at which you process calves (vaccinations and dehorning) and doing it in the cooler periods of the day? This will also decrease heat stress on the calves as well as humans.

Nutritionally, we need to remember a few key things with unweaned calves and heat stress. Calf starter intakes often decrease, while their energy requirements for maintenance will increase 20-30% when enduring heat stress. Thus, you will want to evaluate your milk replacer program along with considering increasing the amount times calves are fed milk or milk replacer daily from 2X/day to 3x/day. Additionally, offering smaller amounts of fresh calf starter more often will decrease spoilage and help intakes. A lot of FRESH, CLEAN, COOL WATER is an absolute must several times throughout the day if needed. Healthy calves will drink between 6 to 12 quarts of water daily and sick calves experiencing heat stress can drink up to 20 quarts of water. For more information on dehydration refer to the article, Recognizing Signs of Calf Dehydration. Additionally, you may have to extend weaning times by a week or more depending upon starter consumption during heat stress.

As we look to housing and ventilation keeping shade, airflow and cleanliness as priorities is a necessity.

Calves that are raised in hutches should have the opening to the north with all vents open during the summer months. Place them 4 feet apart and 10 feet between rows in the summer. A cement block can be placed under the back of the hutch to allow for a 6-8 inch opening to help create an upward draft forcing hot air out. Utilizing a shade cloth 4 feet above hutches will also help decrease the temperature in the hutches 3-4 ˚F if plastic hutches are utilized.

Calves raised in naturally ventilated barns will need increased air flow either by adding more fans or by using a positive pressure tube ventilation system. If curtain barns are utilized all curtain sidewalls should be completely open if the THI reaches 72.

Keeping calf housing clean is always essential and in the heat of the summer calf raisers need to be even more vigilant due to the ideal growth environment for pathogens. You may want to consider switching to inorganic bedding in the summer to help calves stay cooler, as sand absorbs more body heat rather than retaining it. Saw dust is also a consideration and does not retain as much heat as straw. The priority is keeping it clean, regardless of bedding used. Cleaning and disinfecting hutches or pens, bottles, nipples, pails and feeding equipment on a regular basis, while allowing for adequate drying time will help decrease bacteria, parasite and other micro-organism growth.

Making fly control a priority is also essential to helping mitigate additional stress placed on the animal through irritation caused by biting and disease transfer. Horn fly populations will peak in the hottest months and have a life cycle of 10-20 days which decreases with warmer temperatures. Face flies spread the pink eye bacteria by feeding on the protein found in eye mucus. Thus, keeping eye irritations such as blowing dust and debris to a minimum will help minimize pink eye infections.

Summary

Making heat stress management a priority in young dairy animals will pay off in years to come by improving the overall performance and health of the animal, while also impacting your profitability.

Source: igrow.org

When dairy cattle consume aflatoxin-contaminated feed, they are lethargic, their appetite wanes, they produce less milk, and their immune system goes awry. Some of those symptoms relate to oxidative stress, in which dangerous free-radicals bounce around, damaging cells. In a new study, researchers at the University of Illinois investigated the potential of injectable trace minerals to reduce the damage and keep dairy cows healthier.

“If we’re providing enough trace minerals to manufacture more detoxifying enzymes, the liver has a better chance of fighting the aflatoxin,” explains Russell Pate, doctoral student in the Department of Animal Sciences at U of I and lead author on the study.

Phil Cardoso, assistant professor in the department and co-author on the paper, adds that an injectable product could be helpful during aflatoxin challenge, when a cow’s appetite is suppressed. “Our idea for injecting is that it might help during a time when intake is impacted. If something is causing her to eat less, she’ll consume less of any diet-based mineral too.”

The researchers injected lactating Holsteins with Multimin®90, a commercially available injectable trace mineral formulation, twice, approximately a month apart. Another set of animals received a saline injection only, but both sets received the recommended amount of trace minerals in their diet. About a month after the second injection, the researchers used a balling gun to introduce aflatoxin-contaminated feed to half of the animals.

Cows receiving aflatoxin and saline had greater liver inflammation and lower feed efficiencies than cows that weren’t exposed to aflatoxin. But introducing Multimin®90 to aflatoxin-challenged cows increased liver concentrations of selenium and iron. It also bumped up the activity of serum glutathione peroxidase, whose job is to protect cells from oxidative damage by neutralizing free-radicals.

“As we had hypothesized, supplying cows with trace minerals via injection, independent of minerals ingested in the feed, resulted in an improved immune response and reduced oxidative stress when cows were challenged with aflatoxin,” Pate says. Trace minerals are co-factors of enzymes responsible for alleviating the oxidative stress in animals.

Aflatoxin M1 was present in all milk samples for cows that received the contaminated feed. In other words, injectable trace minerals didn’t prevent transfer of the toxin into the milk. The researchers were not surprised by the result, though.

“We knew it would not help with transference to the milk. If the cow is exposed, she needs to excrete that toxin through milk, urine, feces; anywhere to get rid of it,” Cardoso explains. “To stop transference to the milk, you have to first identify the source of the aflatoxin and avoid feeding it. But sometimes you just can’t. In those cases, we are showing for the first time that an injectable trace mineral will provide a benefit.”

Source: aces.illinois.edu

Dr. Charlie Staples Presents New Research on Calf Immunity and Health

During the recent ADSA Annual Meeting, Dr. Charlie Staples, University of Florida, presented new research* on choline’s impact on calf immunity and performance. Click on the video above to watch the full presentation and see how calves from cows that received ReaShure®Rumen Protected Choline during transition had greater DMI and higher body weight than calves from cows that did not receive ReaShure. 

Opening up new silage is commonly associated with a dip in milk production, but the transition can be smoother — and less costly for producers — with a few easy fixes.

“In the fall, producers often tell us they see a drop in milk production,” says Renato Schmidt, Ph.D., Technical Services – Forage, Lallemand Animal Nutrition. “This is usually due to an abrupt change from old corn silage to recently fermented corn silage. It takes a little planning to ease this transition, but it’s worth it to maintain peak milk production.”

Producers can make adjustments at harvest, during ensiling and after the new silage is opened.

During harvest, Dr. Schmidt recommends adding a proven silage inoculant containing enzymes, like Biotal® Buchneri 500. Inoculants with high activity enzymes can help break down plant fiber, which improves fiber digestibility. The product label should clearly indicate guaranteed levels validated by independent research studies.

Lactic acid bacteria (LAB) — like Lactobacillus buchneri NCIMB 40788 and Pediococcus pentosaceus 12455 — in silage inoculants also help initiate a fast, efficient fermentation immediately after ensiling, which works to help prevent milk production drops by maintaining feed quality.

After ensiling, Dr. Schmidt recommends waiting until the starch is more digestible to open. Ideally, producers should wait at least four months before feeding. This is particularly important for forage harvested above 35 percent dry matter (DM) and/or flint corn varieties.

When producers are ready to open the new silage, make the transition gradual and adjust the ration to balance changes in dry matter (DM) and nutrient content. Switch silages over a 10- to 14-day period. New silage can be introduced as 25 percent of the silage portion of the ration in the first three days, then 50 percent of the ration the next three days, and so on until the transition is complete.

“It’s important to have the new silage analyzed during the transition,” Dr. Schmidt recommends. “The analysis undertaken covers fermentation profile, NDF digestibility and starch digestibility, plus the associated rate values. Forage can range in composition among silage structures and between years. What you harvested last year can have a different nutrient value than the new forage. Part of the fall slump is cattle reacting to those changes in the feedstuff composition. Testing and adjusting the ration can help minimize fluctuations.”

During the transition from old to new silage, herds are particularly vulnerable to Sub Acute Ruminal Acidosis (SARA) due to high levels of fermentable sugars in the silage. SARA is a sustained period of time with lowered pH levels in the rumen. When rumen pH dips below 6, cellulolytic bacterial activity is decreased and fiber digestion are impaired.1 As a result, milk production and feed efficiency can suffer.2,3

Supplementing feed with an active dry yeast (ADY) probiotic helps increase pH and improve fiber digestibility in the rumen. Results from multiple trials show cows fed a specific strain of ADY, Saccharomycescerevisiae CNCM I-1077, had an increase of 2.1 pounds of 3.5 percent fat-corrected milk (FCM) and were more efficient than controls.4

“When SARA occurs, it’s difficult for cows to make the best use of any ration — no matter how expertly analyzed or carefully introduced,” Dr. Schmidt says. “There’s no substitute for making a smooth transition from old to new silage, but a proven probiotic can help optimize the rumen environment and maintain peak performance even during changes to the ration.”

David Martin, a 1992 graduate of the University of Missouri College of Agriculture, Food and Natural Resources, checks out the milking parlor where cows are milked three times daily at Martin Prairie Farms.

Martin Prairie Farms near Humansville treats dairy cows like guests.

The family-owned dairy farm north of Humansville in Hickory County dedicates itself to top-of-the-line herd nutrition and care, says University of Missouri Extension dairy specialist Reagan Bluel.

Freddie and Mary Martin, son David, and David’s spouse, Alana, own and operate the nearly 3,000-acre farm. Almost 700 cows produce an average of more than 24,300 pounds of milk yearly, or 8 gallons per day per cow. The Martins milk cows three times daily-7 a.m., 3 p.m. and 11 p.m.

Cow comfort is key. “Experienced dairymen tell us that cows that aren’t comfortable and cool produce less milk,” says Bluel. “It is not rare for the vulnerable herds to experience a 10- to 20-percent decline in milk production during the hottest of times.”

Recent research from the University of Florida found that not only do heat-stressed cows produce less milk than cows given access to shade, sprinklers and fans, they also give birth to calves that grow up to produce less milk, says Bluel.

The Martins house cows in three free-stall barns, which give the cows room to roam in a comfortable environment shielded from precipitation and extreme temperatures. They flush and clean barns six times daily.

They are expanding their operation to include a compost-bedded pack barn for the cows nearing calving. The 125-foot-long “close-up cow” barn offers good ventilation and protection from the elements.

“The key is to not overcrowd,” David says. A 16-foot feed alley allows easy access for equipment. Tilling the bedding daily aids composting action to reduce odor and disease. The compost can be applied as nutrient-rich fertilizer to fields. Calf hutches line the inside of the pack barn, away from the cows. This ensures individualized care for each heifer for the first two weeks.

Nutrition is another key ingredient of the Martins’ healthy herd. They add expired fruits and vegetables from local grocers to their total mixed ration (TMR). David formulates the TMR with the assistance Dennis Turner of Turner’s Special Supply in Hartsville.

Most of the feed products come from the farm. Corn silage and wheat are the homegrown stored forages. They devote most of the acreage to mixed grass pasture for grazing or hay, and they purchase dry alfalfa off-farm.

The Martins share workloads. Freddie oversees the dairy and takes charge of calves up to 4 months of age. David is in charge of rations, crops, cares for calves after they are 4 months old and markets the springer heifer crop. David’s wife supervises nutrient management and is responsible for human resources. There is a herd manager and a team of employees, including six who milk the cows.

Unlike many modern-day dairy farms, the Martins believe in checking on their cows by foot instead of by ATVs. “We think it helps to develop relationships with the cows,” David says.

This is the third generation of Martins to raise dairy cattle on the farm. Freddie’s father moved to the farm in 1950, when Freddie was 10. He bought 120 acres and hand-milked Guernsey dairy cows. The original parlor still stands in the shadow of the new pack barn facility.

David graduated in 1992 with a degree in agricultural economics from the MU College of Agriculture, Food and Natural Resources. He credits MU’s “Returning to the Farm” seminar with a smooth transition back to the farm.

For more information and resources related to dairy cattle heat stress, visit dairy.missouri.edu/stress or contact your local MU Extension dairy specialist.

Wisconsin’s soil types and weather patterns, which support the growth of a variety of forages, are ideal for raising cattle. We have two seasons (cold winter and hot summer) that do not support cattle very well, but in general, even those times are limited in the length of time during which cattle may struggle, with humid summer days having more of an impact on their well-being than January’s wind-chilled days.

Cattle prefer ambient temperatures of 55-60 °F, and they do not handle humidity very well. Their normal internal temperature is 101 °F. Their lung capacity is small in relation to their body size; so while panting helps, it may not be enough to cool them during hot, humid summer days. Their well-being especially suffers during humid days followed by evenings that do not drop below 70°F, as under those conditions, cattle will not have a chance to recover before the next hot, humid day begins.

Heat and humidity make transporting cattle especially stressful. Pay attention to weekly and daily weather forecasts and plan all hauling events accordingly, doing your best to avoid transporting cattle whenever possible during these times. If you must transport cattle, even for short trips between farm locations, keep hot weather transporting tips in mind.

Bear in mind the animals’ space requirements. Loading density charts, like the one included in this article, are available from BQA.org. (Click on image to make it larger.) Increase space per head during hot weather conditions to maximize air movement between them. Loading fewer cattle and making more trips is an economically superior outcome than having cattle suffer heat stroke during the trip.

Source: BQA-Transportation, https://www.bqa.org/programs/bqa-transportation

When transporting on hot days, open all the trailer vents so there is plenty of air movement, and while driving the speed limit, make the trip as direct and efficient as possible. Make sure all animals are standing after being loaded and before starting out. It is best practice on long hauls to check animals after two hours on the road, and every four hours after that. If cattle must be hauled at times of hot temperature and humidity, avoid stopping and only stop if it is an absolute necessity. If possible, stop during the cooler parts of the day or park in the shade when stopped, and keep stops with cattle on the trailer as short as possible. Do not park near other vehicles as doing so prevents ventilation; try to allow cross breezes to pass through the trailer in hot weather.

Avoid hauling cattle when the heat index (HI) is in the extreme range, greater than 100 (orange areas on the HI chart included with this article) (Click on image to make it larger). Avoid hauling between 11 am and 4 pm. Early morning is the coolest time to haul, assuming it followed a cool evening. There really is not a good time to haul during stretches of hot, humid days and nights; if possible, postpone transport until the weather breaks.

Source: BQA-Transportation, https://www.bqa.org/programs/bqa-transportation

Cattle find transportation stressful, and in response, their internal temperature naturally increases a few degrees. Physiologically, it takes them three to four hours to lower their temperature from its peak. So think about what ‘early morning hauling’ really means. During some hot, humid Wisconsin days, the extreme HI may begin by 11 am. Plan transport so that cattle’s internal stress response temperature is not peaking or coinciding when the HI is extreme. Ideally, they should be out of the trailer, relaxing in shade around full water troughs, naturally bringing their internal temperature down hours before the HI reaches extreme levels.

Source: fyi.uwex.edu

Hot summer temperatures, currently climbing near the triple digits, combined with high dew points can cause significant heat stress to cattle. Heat stress is magnified when high temperatures continue into the night. The combination of high day and nighttime temperatures prevents cattle from properly cooling.

Tips to Keep Your Cattle Cool

Here are some simple tips from Michigan State University Extension to make sure your cattle stay comfortable:

• Avoid handling, transporting, moving, or processing cattle. If cattle must be handled, work them in the early morning hours using low-stress handling techniques.

• Provide additional water. For cattle on pasture, provide additional water supply, especially if they only have access to one tank in the pastures. Provide additional tank capacity as water intake increases. Check to make sure that water sources are clean and free of contaminants, defecation in a small portable watering tank will prevent cattle from drinking. Cattle prefer water between 40 -65 degrees F, water intake decreases when water temperature exceeds 80 degrees F. Producers can help keep the water cooler by ensuring that the water lines are covered by grass in the fence rows.

• Observe cattle for abnormal behavior. Problems often occur during stressful events. Watch cattle movement, location and behavior for indications of problems. Have a backup plan ready if power or water systems fail. 

• Provide shade. During heat stress days, shade is critical especially for dark-haired, fleshy, young and older cattle. Shade can easily be provided by allowing access to pasture with trees or providing access to open buildings. If shaded pasture acres are limited these pastures must not be grazed during the days with normal temps so that pasture forage will be there when heat stress temperatures arrive.

• Provide adequate ventilation. If cattle are being fed and housed in an enclosed barn or building, use fans to move air out or through the building or open sides of the barn or provide access to an outside pen or pasture with shade. Using sprinklers in this situation will potentially intensify the problem and create more humidity without proper air movement to remove it from the building. 

There are several stages of heat stress with the following indicators. When first signs of heat stress are observed, minimize the stress immediately with the tips above. Early intervention is the key to survival, especially providing intervention in the evening when cattle are trying to dissipate heat from the day. 

Signs of Heat Stress

The following are signs of heat stress, per the USDA’s Agricultural Research Service:

• Stage 1: elevated breathing rate, restless, spend increased time standing
• Stage 2: elevated breathing rate, slight drooling, most animals are standing and restless
• Stage 3: elevated breathing rate, excessive drooling or foaming, most animals are standing and restless, animals may group together
• Stage 4: elevated breathing rate, open mouth breathing, possible drooling, most animals standing, animals may group together
• Stage 5: elevated breathing with pushing from the flanks, open mouth breathing with tongue protruding, possible drooling, most animals standing and restless
• Stage 6: open mouth breathing with tongue protruding, breathing is labored, and respiration rate may decrease, cattle push from flanks while breathing, head down, not necessarily drooling, individual animals may be isolated from the herd.

Stress Categories

The chart below illustrates stress categories as defined by predicted breathing rate.

Beef producers also need to be aware that heat could have implications which may not be seen immediately. If you are in breeding season with your cow herd, heat stress could result in early embryonic death loss of the new fetus in the first few weeks after conception. For bulls preparing for breeding season, high temperatures could impact semen quality for several weeks, resulting in lower conception rates a month after the heat stress event. Reduced conception risk is a possible outcome and key reason producers should keep cow herds cool during times of high heat index weather. 

Source: msue.anr.msu.edu

Lyn Webster has too much to do to think about four-day weeks.

OPINION: It’s said there is no gap between town and country in New Zealand, but I reckon there is. Watching 7 Sharp the other night, I saw a segment on the four-day working week that made me think the rural-urban divide gapes wider than the Grand Canyon – well, Skippers Canyon, anyway.

What I saw on TV was an office full of townie insurance clerks lined up in rows all gazing at computer screens and their boss was enthusing about how condensing their five-day working week down to four days was increasing their productivity because no-one was having any extra coffee breaks or whiling away work time on Facebook.

And I had to laugh – out loud. The 7 Sharp presenters were getting a bit excited visualising their four-day working week and the insurance boss was saying all businesses should definitely give it a try.

As a self-employed dairy farmer, I am in the midst of calving and working seven days a week. I am not complaining, mind. It’s my choice, my job. I could employ someone to lighten the load and have some time off, but it’s unaffordable and not practical at this crucial time of year. 

If I take my eye off the calving ball for one minute, I guarantee something will go wrong and wrong in my job usually means something gets sick or dies and a whole lot of time and effort is for naught. Such are the joys of farming.

Source: Stuff

As the saying goes, a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Is it possible there are “weak links” in your fresh cow treatment protocols that could set your dairy up for vulnerabilities, either for antibiotic residues or lack of efficacy?

You can decrease your risk of residues and cost of treatment by improving your fresh cow program in three key areas: identifying and treating sick cows, implementing treatment protocols, and drug use, storage and handling.

Here are some questions to help identify and strengthen potential weak links in your fresh cow treatment program.

Identifying and treating sick cows

• Who on the dairy is responsible for symptom identification?

• How are employees trained to identify symptoms?

• When was the last time these employees received training?

Implementing treatment protocols

• How often are protocols reviewed and revised with your veterinarian? When was the last time you reviewed treatment protocols with your fresh pen team?

• How are employees trained on treatment protocols? When was the last time employees received training?

• How do you make sure antibiotic doses are administered according to the label for the animal’s actual weight?

Drug use, storage and handling

• When was the last time you reviewed on-farm health records with your veterinarian to determine the success level of each treatment?

• If you asked your employees right now, would they know the label withdrawals for milk and meat?

• How often do you review your drug inventory and compare it with the known disease challenges on your dairy?

A single residue violation can erode consumer confidence. Work with your veterinarian to evaluate the antibiotics and treatment protocols used on your dairy.

Evaluate antibiotics based on:

• Food and Drug Administration approval for on-label treatment of fresh cow diseases, like metritis

• Low residue profile

• Demonstrated efficacy

Source: Farm Forum

A good dry cow program can result in an additional 1,000 to 2,000 pounds of milk in the next lactation alone.¹ Plus, producers that successfully navigate the period three weeks before and after calving can reduce treatment costs and downtime due to illness and metabolic disorders.²

Transition cows frequently experience stress from moving to a new pen or herd environment; ration changes; or environmental challenges like heat stress,” says H. Nielsen, DVM, Technical Services – Ruminant, Lallemand Animal Nutrition. “These stressors can take a toll and make cows more likely to develop mastitis, ketosis or metritis — which are some of the costliest diseases of dairy cattle today.”²

A good transition cow program minimizes post-calving disorders and maximizes dry matter intake (DMI). To do this, producers should target the optimal dry period length, which is between 50 and 70 days.¹

During transition, the ration should account for a lowered DMI, especially around calving. Adequate nutrition is fundamental to bolstering the immune system.

“Because this is such a critical period, I recommend adding a probiotic to close-up and fresh cow diets, which can help prime the immune system to better respond to stressors,” Dr. Nielsen notes. “The right probiotic can help stimulate microflora — the dynamic and robust bacterial communities in the lower intestinal tract — to enhance lower gut health.  In turn, the lower gut signals to the rest of the body, which positively stimulates the cow’s innate immune system.”

Not all probiotics have the same effect. One probiotic, ProTernative®, includes the active dry yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae boulardii CNCM I-1079, and has been proven to positively support the immune system of cattle during times of stress. In a study, S. c. boulardii CNCM I-1079 supported higher peak milk and resulted in fewer health events for transition cows. Cows receiving the probiotic produced 4.87 pounds more peak milk each when compared to controls.³

Over the entire lactation, cows fed S. c. boulardiiCNCM I-1079 would produce 1,193 pounds more milk compared to controls. On top of that, the probiotic saved $2,609 in treatment costs and milk lost due to transition problems.³

“Producers can never recover the production losses that arise when an animal must divert its energy to fight off illness — rather than on performance,” he says. “Proactively supporting animal health improves overall well-being and ensures cows are better prepared to fight off inevitable challenges. When illness does strike, robust animal health minimizes disease risks, gets cows back into production and helps them reach a high level of peak milk production.”

Lallemand Animal Nutrition is committed to optimizing animal performance and well-being with specific natural microbial product and service solutions. Using sound science, proven results and knowledge, Lallemand Animal Nutrition develops, produces and markets high value yeast and bacteria products ─ including probiotics, silage inoculants and yeast derivatives. Lallemand offers a higher level of expertise, leadership and industry commitment with long-term and profitable solutions to move our partners Forward. Lallemand Animal Nutrition is Specific for your success. For more information, please visit www.lallemandanimalnutrition.com.

1 Chase LE. Management of the Transition Cow. Feeding and Managing the Transition Cow. Proceedings Penn Conference 1996. Accessed Feb. 23, 2017. Available at: https://research.vet.upenn.edu/DairyPoultrySwine/DairyCattle/PennConf1996/tabid/1602/Default.aspx

2 Borchers M and Bewley J. The Effects of Stress on Transition Cow and Calf Health. University of Kentucky Department of Animal and Food Sciences. Accessed Feb. 23, 2017. Available at: https://afs.ca.uky.edu/dairy/effects-stress-transition-cow-and-calf-health.

3 Nielsen H, Health and production of Holstein cows fed ProTernative during the transition period and early lactation. Lallemand Animal Nutrition Internal Report.

“There’s a lot that can go wrong during the transition phase,” said Dr. Mark van der List, senior professional services veterinarian with Boehringer Ingelheim. “Their body undergoes many metabolic changes. It’s a high-risk period for dairy cows.” Diligent management techniques, proper nutrition and monitoring can help mitigate potential problems. Cows that undergo a successful transition may experience higher milk production, a reduction in post-calving disorders and improved reproductive performance.

Consider including the following protocols on your operation for a successful transition period:

Three Weeks Prior to Calving

The close-up dry cow diet should be well-formulated and include quality feed ingredients. “Dry cows need a sufficient amount of protein, vitamins and minerals in their diet to meet energy requirements without increasing their body condition score,” Dr. van der List stated. “Over-conditioned cows are more likely to develop metabolic problems.”

“We also want to supplement dry cows with anionic salts, creating a negative dietary cation-anion difference (DCAD) diet,” he added. “This can help maintain blood calcium levels after freshening, which are tied to a cow’s future milk production and post-calving health.” Producers can ensure their DCAD diet is balanced correctly by monitoring urine pH. “It’s important to make sure the DCAD diet is still palatable for cows,” Dr. van der List continued. “We don’t want to be losing body condition, either.”

Close-up dry cows need plenty of space to rest. “Monitoring stocking density in the dry cow area is essential,” emphasized Dr. van der List. “Overcrowding puts additional stress on the already vulnerable cow.” Other ways to avoid stress include minimizing pen movements and keeping cows cool with fans and sprinklers in warmer temperatures.

At Calving

“We want the calving area to be clean with good facilities if intervention is required,” said Dr. van der List. “The goal is to have calm, injury-free calving.” The person in charge of the calving pen should be well-trained, able to recognize the signs of calving, and know when to intervene.

Three Weeks Post Calving

“The first few days after calving are really about calcium control,” remarked Dr. van der List. “We want to make sure these animals aren’t dealing with subclinical hypocalcemia [SCH]. I’d recommend supplementing all second- and greater-lactation cows with an oral calcium supplement, in which they get one bolus at calving and one bolus the day after calving. If we can control calcium levels, we can head off a lot of other problems.”

Dr. van der List recommends consulting with your veterinarian to get a better idea of SCH prevalence in your herd. “A veterinarian can help retrieve blood samples of recently fresh cows to determine blood calcium concentrations,” he noted. These test results can be used to build and execute an economically viable control strategy for SCH.

A fresh cow diet should encourage dry-matter intake by offering high-quality forage and making feed accessible at all times. This will help ease the negative energy balance the fresh cow is facing.

If possible, put fresh cows in a separate pen. Stocking rate is important, as you do not want cows competing for bunk access. “Mixing already at-risk fresh cows in a sick pen isn’t ideal, either,” said Dr. van der List. “A fresh cow’s immune system might already be compromised, making them more susceptible to the diseases found in the sick pen.”

A separate pen also allows for closer monitoring. “Producers should be checking fresh cows at least twice a day, observing the front and back ends of the cow,” he said. When looking at the front of the cow, observe the ears, eyes, nasal discharge and attitude. When looking at the hind end of the cow, check for uterine discharge, udder and rumen fill, manure consistency, and hoof and leg health.

“Record any instances of treatment,” Dr. van der List concluded. “This will help producers track performance and identify areas that may need improvement.”

Dr. van der List encourages working with a veterinarian to develop and implement a comprehensive transition cow program suited for your operation.

Source: Bovine Veterinarian

Assessing a farm’s sustainability in today’s challenging markets requires evaluation of both production and financial metrics. Consultants have become so specialized that finding someone knowledgeable in both areas can be difficult. Smart decisions are made when both aspects are reviewed and the producer can examine the ripple effect of how a change in one area can impact another. One area that can create problems for even a well-managed dairy is taking out an owner draw that exceeds what the milk income can cover. A simple calculation method can be used to determine what the operation is able to cover for family living expenses.

A common metric that producers and consultants use in evaluating a herd’s performance is average milk production per cow per day. However, this number alone does not tell the complete story on how an operation is performing financially. Ultimately it comes down to the total annual pounds of milk shipped along with the current milk price to generate the income to cover all expenses. Table 1 illustrates an example of a 2018 cash flow plan examining the dairy enterprise only. This producer wants to keep owner draw at $90,000, similar to the previous year. This operation has done a good job of keeping direct, overhead, and feed expenses close to the budgeted amount. Loan payments are fixed throughout the year. The current gross milk price for 2018 is averaging $16.16/cwt. In order to keep owner draw at $90,000 the herd will need to average 79 pounds/cow/day for the year, assuming the milk price stays around $16.00/cwt. This herd has never shipped 5.7 million pounds on 200 cows, so trying to maintain this owner draw in 2018 will create a hardship for this operation. If the herd continues to maintain a 74 pound average, family living expenses would need to be reduced to $30,000. It is unlikely the family can live on that amount. The other option would be to milk more cows. Considering the added expenses that come with that scenario, it would be possible to keep owner draw around $70,000. The one bottleneck to the added cows and additional milk shipped is if the farm exceeds their base, which is very likely. The other options to consider are other sources of farm income or off-farm income.

There are some common themes that surface when working on cash flow plans. The first is actually budgeting for family living expenses. Many times this is an ambiguous number and just a guesstimate. Producers who develop and follow cash flow plans year after year usually are keeping good records and are accurately accounting for their owner draw and farm expenses. When accurately reported, family living expenses are often much higher than what was first budgeted.

The calculation method requires producers to examine what the expenses are and how much milk must be shipped to cover those expenses. Very rarely is this approach taken and that’s the reason so many operations are struggling with negative net income. The big question is how long will other off-farm income or other farm income subsidize the dairy enterprise? With less than stellar milk markets, very few dairy operations would still be in business if it were not for other income. The dairy enterprise alone should show a profit and provide the necessary income for a family to maintain a decent standard of living. There are still too many operations that do not know their numbers and are not operating as a business. The future of the family dairy operation depends on managing both the production and financial metrics.

Table 1. Determining the family living expenses to cash flow the dairy enterprise in 2018.

Action plan for evaluating the income needed to cover expenses including family living expenses.

Goal – Develop a cash flow plan for 2018 budgeting in family living expenses.

• Step 1: Using the Penn State Excel worksheet, determine all expenses for 2018 including direct, overheads, feed costs, loan payments, and the desired owner draw needed for the family.
• Step 2: Take the outflow minus all non-milk income divided by the expected milk price to determine the pounds of milk needed to be shipped for the year. Divide the amount by the number of cows milking to determine the average production per cow.
• Step 3: Evaluate if the pounds of milk shipped is realistic for the herd and make adjustments as needed.
• Step 4: Monitor pounds of milk shipped monthly to make sure the herd is on track. Check expense lines to ensure everything is staying close to the budget planned.

Economic perspective:

Monitoring must include an economic component to determine if a management strategy is working or not. For the lactating cows income over feed costs is a good way to check that feed costs are in line for the level of milk production. Starting with July 2014’s milk price, income over feed costs was calculated using average intake and production for the last six years from the Penn State dairy herd. The ration contained 63% forage consisting of corn silage, haylage, and hay. The concentrate portion included corn grain, candy meal, sugar, canola meal, roasted soybeans, Optigen and a mineral vitamin mix. All market prices were used.

Also included are the feed costs for dry cows, springing heifers, pregnant heifers and growing heifers. The rations reflect what has been fed to these animal groups at the Penn State dairy herd. All market prices were used.

Income over feed cost using standardized rations and production data from the Penn State dairy herd.

Note: Penn State’s May milk price: $17.08/cwt; feed cost/cow: $5.22; average milk production: 84.0 lbs.

Feed cost/non-lactating animal/day.

June 2018

Source: extension.psu.edu

As we look at reproductive management and its impact on overall success of a dairy operation, it is clearly a critical component. But the full impact of management successes or failures often won’t be seen in the short-term. Managing for reproductive efficiency requires patience and a long-term mindset.

To get into this long-term mindset for reproductive management, let’s look at three important considerations: 1) genetic progress, 2) future production, and 3) efficiency. And let’s keep in mind that reproductive management overlaps with many other management areas. There are close relationships with heifer management, milk production, feed management, and herd health.

Genetic Progress

Why would you not want to make genetic progress in your herd? The specific improvements you’re aiming for may be up for debate, but it only makes sense to aim high. Whether through intentional selection of good sires, or using more advanced technologies with embryos and/or genomic testing, there is plenty of opportunity to make progress.

Natural service is still used to some extent for breeding purposes on many dairy operations around the country. Though there are a number of risks to having breeding bulls around, a dairy owner has the right to decide whether or not to use them. But with a long-term mindset, how much might you be selling yourself short? Where is that bull from and what steps have been taken to make sure he is actually going to benefit the operation? Are the benefits truly outweighing the risks? It might be worth examining current versus potential genetic progress in the herd, including factors such as inbreeding. There may be reasonable justifications for using a particular natural service bull in the herd, but it’s worth making a concerted effort to avoid the “duds” and any complications they might bring to the operation.

Future Production

Achieving timely conception certainly has an impact on milk production. It also impacts the rate of calves being born to use as replacements or to merchandise for additional income. But this doesn’t just pertain to lactating cows. A significant segment of the herd that often receives less attention is the young stock, both pre- and post-breeding. These heifers are the future of the dairy herd!

General recommendations from Penn State are to breed Holstein heifers when they are 13 to 15 months of age, weigh 750 to 800 pounds (or 55% of mature body weight), and measure 48 to 50 inches at the withers. Accomplishing that, they should be nearing 1300 pounds (or 85% of mature body weight) by 23 to 24 months of age and have already delivered a calf. If heifers are calving later than 23 months of age, there no benefit on milk production–just the added costs of caring for them longer. In today’s economy, it is not often profitable to have average age at first calving of 25+ months.

Efficiency

There are many different strategies that can be used to achieve timely first insemination postpartum. A strategy can be chosen that works well within the operation’s unique conditions, taking into account factors such as labor, equipment, and drug costs. But what about those cows that fail to conceive after the first service? There needs to be a strategy for pregnancy diagnosis and subsequent insemination that minimizes the length of time cows are open. Even in herds where really good conception rates are being achieved, having a good rebreeding strategy is important. It might be the difference between having an average days open of 125 days (good) or 160 days (not so good).

There are several options available for diagnosing pregnancy around 28 days. Having this early information helps manage for rebreeding, but there is a frustrating factor to realize. On average, 10 to 15% of pregnancies are lost between day 17 and 42 in dairy cows. This means that a small but significant percentage of cows diagnosed as pregnant on day 28 will later turn up open. Diagnosing pregnancy at a later stage of pregnancy will avoid the frustration of noticing lost pregnancies after early diagnosis but might hinder the goal of reducing the time window between inseminations.

Regardless of the approach to rebreeding, heat detection can be helpful. There is no need to wait until a synchronization protocol has been completed before rebreeding a cow. If she is exhibiting standing behavior and seems to be cycling normally, she can be bred. If workers on a dairy, regardless of their official role, are on the watch for cows in estrus, these small efforts can go a long way.

There are many benefits to implementing proven strategies for reproductive management. Just remember to be patient and think about the long-term picture. You’re in a position today to make decisions that can benefit you well into the future, even though you might not see all of the benefits immediately.

Source: extension.psu.edu

For decades, dairy producers have designated reasons why cows leave the milking herds through Dairy Herd Improvement Association (DHIA) recordings. Information given when cows complete lactations or are removed from the herds place the animals into 4 destination codes (DC): remained in herd, sold for dairy, sold for slaughter, or died. Those removed from the herd are given more descriptive codes called termination codes (TC). The TC system has added codes across time and in addition choices offered to producers vary slightly between dairy records processing centers (DRPC). All DRPCs include TCs on each lactation record before forwarding to the national cooperators’ dairy database. The frequencies of the codes are provided annually to describe reasons for voluntary and involuntary culling as they have considerable economic impact on producers. Rate and reason for culling also provide beneficial information for economic studies on dairy management.

Currently there are 2 TC codes for cows that remain in the herd when their lactation ends, and 9 choices (TC codes) for cows that leave the herd. For cows that stayed in the herd, the TC indicates whether their lactations ended normally (TC=0) or ended unexpectedly as a result of an abortion (TC=8). For those cows “sold for slaughter”, 7 TC choices provide detailed information about why they left the herd.

Historical studies of survival of U.S. dairy cattle have been reported by Nieuwhof et al. (1989) and Hare et al. (2006). Those studies grouped cows by calving year and tracked them until they left the herd. That method provided comprehensive information, but unfortunately any results using this approach are quite dated due to having to wait until all animals in the original group leave the herd. An alternative approach (used here) provided more current information by summarizing reasons cows left the herds last year. This report is based on lactations with completion dates between January 1 and December 31, 2017. Results using this method are impacted considerably by annual fluctuations in milk and feed prices.

Selected summaries are provided by parity and breed (including crossbreds). The number of crossbreds has increased over the last decade. Crossbreds were categorized into 2 groups depending on the extent of heterosis: those with heterosis of >90% (CB90) and those with heterosis of 50 to 90% (CB50). The CB90 group was primarily first-generation crosses between 2 breeds (F1s) or offspring of a third-breed sire and an F1-crossbred dam of 2 other breeds; the CB50 group was predominately backcross offspring from an F1 dam and a sire from 1 of the F1 parent breeds.

Table 1 shows the frequency of codes by breed disregarding parity. The percentage of cows that stayed in the herd after completing their lactations averaged 64.5% across all groups. Purebreds ranged from 61.3 to 67.0%; Jerseys and Milking Shorthorn were highest, Holsteins were at 63.9%. Crossbreds were higher than purebreds with 68.8% of CB50s and 69.1% of CB90s remaining in the herds for an additional lactation. All purebred and crossbred groups had 0.2 to 0.3% of their lactations ended by an abortion.

TABLE 1. Percentages of cows (ALL BREEDS and CROSSBREDS) completing lactations by reason for termination and breed (2017).

¹Breed is designated on individual cow records, and cow’s breed is used to determine herd counts. For example, a Holstein herd with a few Jersey cows would be included in the herd count for both Holsteins and Jerseys. Thus, the total number of herds across all breeds is much higher than the actual number of herds in Dairy Herd Improvement programs.

Because of breed differences in the percentage of cows remaining in the herd, percentage sold for various other reasons was often inversely related. Across all groups, the cows coded as sold for dairy was 4.4%; percentage of Holsteins and Milking Shorthorns were the extremes for purebreds at 4.2% and 6.9%, respectively. Percentages of crossbreds sold for dairy was 3.6 and 4.6%. Across all groups, unspecified reasons, low production, reproduction problems, and mastitis/high somatic cell score (SCS) accounted for 9.4, 6.1, 4.6, and 4.3%. Crossbreds were intermediate to Holsteins and Jerseys in percentage reported culled for reproduction and for locomotion. Percentages of crossbreds sold for low production was higher than the average percentage of all purebreds. The percentage of Holsteins and Jerseys that died was the same (5.4%). The lowest percentage of animals coded died was for Milking Shorthorn (3.7%).

Table 2 shows the percentages derived from only animals that left the herd excluding those sold for dairy purposes. This gives a clearer picture of the relative importance of the various reasons for exiting. Unfortunately, for 30.2% of all cows leaving the herd, the reason was unspecified (24.8 to 36.4%), the highest in every group. Low production was the next most frequent code assigned for Holstein, Jersey, and crossbred cows exiting the herd (19.2 to 24.5%). Reproduction problems was the second most frequent code assigned for the remaining breeds except Guernseys (19.1 to 23.0%). Death was a frequent code for all groups (13.9 to 21.8%). Mastitis/high SCS was also an important cause for departures (7.7 to 16.6%).

TABLE 2. Percentages of cows (ALL BREEDS and CROSSBREDS) leaving the herd except for dairy purposes by reason for termination and breed (2017).

¹Breed is designated on individual cow records, and cow’s breed is used to determine herd counts. For example, a Holstein herd with a few Jersey cows would be included in the herd count for both Holsteins and Jerseys. Thus, the total number of herds across all breeds is much higher than the actual number of herds in Dairy Herd Improvement programs.

More detailed information by parity is in Table 3 for Holsteins, Table 4 for Jerseys, Table 5 for other purebreds, and Table 6 for crossbreds. Purebreds other than Holsteins and Jerseys were combined because of small numbers, especially in later parities. The 2 crossbred groups were also combined. Clear differences across parity are evident for all groupings as each were less likely to complete the lactations as they aged. Although 73.7% of Holsteins remained in the herd when lactation 1 ended, those percentages dropped to 67.2, 58.1, 50.0, 43.7, and 37.2 as lactations 2 through ≥6 ended. Likewise, Jerseys remaining was 72.3, 71.5, 65.9, 58.1, 51.8, and 44.2%. Other purebreds and crossbreds declined as well across lactations, from 72.1 to 46.6% and from 76.6 to 45.1%, respectively.

The probability that lactations were terminated by abortion was low (0.1 to 0.4%) for all lactation and breed groups. The frequency of recorded abortions has declined from 0.7% in 2007 and 2008 (Norman et al., 2009) to 0.2% in 2017. Percentage sold for dairy purposes averaged across groups declined from 6.2% in lactation 1 to 3.3% during lactations ≥6 as younger cows are preferred due to their longer expected life.

Because of the declining percentage staying in the herd and sold for dairy across parities, one would expect those leaving the herd for other reasons to increase. The trends across parity are clear and consistent for Holsteins. Holstein cows sold for mastitis/high SCS increased from 1.9 to 10.1%, for locomotion issues from 0.7 to 3.8%, for low production from 4.9 to 9.1%, and for reproductive problems from 3.7 to 6.4%. The largest increase was for those sold with reason unspecified, from 6.3 to 18.5%. The percentage of Holstein that died increased from 3.0% during lactation 1 to 11.6% during lactations ≥6. The percentage of cows of the other breeds that left for these five reasons increased across parities as well.

TABLE 3. Percentages of HOLSTEIN cows completing lactations by reason for termination and parity (2017).

TABLE 4. Percentages of JERSEY cows completing lactations by reason for termination and parity (2017).

TABLE 5. Percentages of other purebred cows (AYRSHIRE, BROWN SWISS, GUERNSEY, MILKING SHORTHORN, and RED & WHITE) completing lactations by reason for termination and parity (2017).

TABLE 6. Percentages of CROSSBRED cows completing lactations by reason for termination and parity (2017).

Tables 7-10 show the percentages of Holstein, Jersey, other purebred, and crossbred cows, respectively, assigned to the various termination codes by lactation number for all animals that left the herd except for those sold for dairy purposes. Within all 4 breed and 6 parity groups, “sold for unspecified reasons” accounted for the highest percentage of exiting (26.0 to 35.8%). This could represent all reasons not designated, or simply indicate no reason was given; most likely more of the latter. One would hope that a large percentage of the cows given the termination code “sold for unspecified reasons” would be coded with a more descriptive reason in the future as it would improve the accuracy of the new trait Cow Livability. Sold for low production (12.9 to 30.8%) and died (14.4 to 22.6%) were the next most common code assigned in the 4 breed groups, followed by sold for reproduction (8.2 to 18.7%), and mastitis/high SCS (9.3 to 18.6%). A code added to the TC list recently, sold for locomotion, had considerable variation across breed and parity groups (0.9 to 7.2%). Sold for locomotion averaged across groups dropped from 3.2% in first lactations to 6.0% in lactations ≥6. Jerseys had fewer locomotion departures than the other breeds. Dairy producers should be encouraged to furnish more complete and accurate recording of termination codes as they are used to improve evaluation accuracy in their own herd and across the entire industry. Reducing the number of cows with termination code “unspecified reasons” would produce significant genetic gain in the U.S. dairy cattle population.

TABLE 7. Percentages of HOLSTEIN cows leaving the herd except for dairy purposes by reason for termination and parity (2017).

TABLE 8. Percentages of JERSEY cows leaving the herd except for dairy purposes by reason for termination and parity (2017).

TABLE 9. Percentages of other purebred cows (AYRSHIRE, BROWN SWISS, GUERNSEY, MILKING SHORTHORN, and RED & WHITE) leaving the herd except for dairy purposes by reason for termination and parity (2017).

TABLE 10. Percentages of CROSSBRED cows leaving the herd except for dairy purposes by reason for termination and parity (2017).

References

Hare, E, H.D. Norman, and J.R. Wright. 2006. Survival rates and productive life of dairy cattle in the United States. Journal of Dairy Science 89:3713–3720.

Nieuwhof, G.J., H.D. Norman, and F.N. Dickinson. 1989. Phenotypic trends in herdlife of dairy cows in the United States. Journal of Dairy Science 72:726–736.

Norman, H.D., J.R. Wright, and J.E. Lombard. 2009. Reasons that cows in Dairy Herd Improvement Programs exit the herd. AIPL Research Report CULL1 (9-09).

We wish to acknowledge the contribution of the dairy producers who supplied data for this report through their participation in the Dairy Herd Improvement (DHI) program and the dairy records processing centers (DRPC) that processed and relayed the information on to the Council on Dairy Cattle Breeding (CDCB).

Source: queries.uscdcb.com