Getting Stocking Rates Right & Integrating the Outside Block Brendan Horan & Donal Patton Animal & Grassland Research and Innovation Centre Teagasc, Moorepark, Fermoy, Co Cork. Phone: 025 42 222 web: www.teagasc.ie/dairy Email: moorepark_dairy@teagasc.ie Follow us: Moorepark2019
Strategy for Resilient Dairying A farm system which provides a vehicle for enjoyable & sustainable farm business growth within a turbulent production environment Simple & labour efficient with minimal decision making interventions Comparatively insulated from milk price & climate instability Consistently meeting profitability expectations (profit/ha & costs/kg MS) Producing high quality product in an environmentally friendly manner
SR & Cow Numbers on Irish Dairy Farms Year Average herd size (No. cows) No. cows in herds with > 100 cows Stocking rate (LU/ha) 2005 48 144,620 1.7 2010 58 302,060 1.7 2016 76 659,149 1.9 Trends in National Milk Solids Production & Dairy Cow Numbers (1980-2017) 1800 1600 550 1400 500 1200 450 1000 400 800 600 350 400 300 Milk Solids (kg) 200 Dairy Cow Numbers 0 250 2016 2014 2012 2010 2008 2006 2004 2002 2000 1998 1996 1994 1992 1990 1988 1986 1984 1982 1980 Year No. Dairy Cows Milk solids ('000 ton/year) 600 Cow numbers at 1988 levels Industry output +62% Milk solids/cow +20% in 10 years
Grazing 1.0: Realising the Optimum Stocking Rate: Surplus + Rate of pasture growth (kg DM/ha/yr) Control factors: climatic variables soil fertility & drainage plant species management Deficit - Rate of pasture consumption (kg DM/ha/yr) Control factors: level of pasture allocated (kg DM/cow) Supplementation (kg DM/cow) Stocking rate (cows/ha) Calving date and pattern
Animal management for grass-based systems kg DM / Hectare daily Daily pasture growth rate Daily herd feed requirement 100 Alignment of Grass Supply & Animal Requirements 80 60 40 20 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec % of cows in the herd 100 Spring 80 CALVE Compact calving, high fertility status dairy herd 60 Summer 285+ DIM Winter DRIED-OFF CONCEIVE 40 20 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication Leonardo da Vinci.
Linking Stocking Rate to Average Grass Growth Why is this so difficult to adhere to in practice.?? 130 120 Outside/fragmented land blocks Average' G ro w th (k g D M /h a /d a y ) 110 100 Cheap feed options 90 80 Eliminating expensive silage conservation 70 60 Creating labour/infrastructure utilisation efficiencies 50 40 Building equity by growing stock numbers 30 20 10 0 Date 2018
Appropriate Stocking Rate (SR) SR is the main driver of productivity from grazing systems due to its effect on herbage utilisation (McMeekan and Walshe, 1963; Macdonald et al., 2008; McCarthy et al., 2011) Milk yield (kg/ha) A 1 cow per hectare increase in SR - 9% in MS/cow +11% increase in MS/ha - 42 day reduction in lactation length Stocking rate (cows/ha) The ideal SR is a medium/balance of the dual objectives of generous feeding to achieve high production/animal and restriction to achieve high pasture utilisation (Penno, 1999) But traditionally negative environmental effects at farm level(treacy et al., 2008) Increased fertilizer and concentrate supplementation N loss to ground water
Relationship between SR and Farm Profitability 2017 Net Farm Profit ( /ha Dairy Enterprise) 6,000 R² = 0.4438 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 Whole Farm Stocking Rate (LU/ha) (G. Ramsbottom, 2018)
A Balanced Stocking Rate: Efficiency & Profitability 1.00 85 90 kg Lwt/ t DM Efficiency 0.90 0.80 0.70 0.60 0.50 Effect of comparative stocking rate (kg of BW/t of DM) on Op. profit ($/ha) 0.40 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 Com p arativ e Stoc king Ra te (k glw T/tDM)
Appropriate Stocking Rate (SR) lowest SR that maximises utilisation (CSR = 80-90 kg LW/T DM; Macdonald et al. 2008) t supplement DM/cow 10 Pasture grown, t 12 14 0.00 1.5 2.0 2.3 2.6 0.25 1.7 2.1 2.4 2.8 0.50 1.8 2.2 2.5 3.0 0.75 1.9 2.3 2.7 3.1 1.00 2.0 2.4 2.8 3.2 requires clarity & disciplined management Pasture cover at calving Rotation lengths Grazing intensity & residuals Use of supplements 16
The Future - Grazing Intensification in Context Soussana & Lemaire (2014)
Effect of SR on Nutrient Losses No significant effect of SR on N loss based on increased grazed pasture utilisation
Increased SR with Supplements 120 7 100 Nitrate leached, kg/ha 8 Stocking rate 6 5 4 3 2 1 y = 19x - 23 R² = 0.96 P < 0.01 80 60 40 20 0 0 Feed Intensification 0 5 10 Stocking rate, cows/ha Increasing stocking rate through purchased feeds increases NO3 leaching by 15-20 kg/ha per extra cow
Increasing stocking rate is compatible with improved environmental performance based on an integrated systems approach to increase reliance on natural resources M. Huebsch et al. / Agriculture, Ecosystems and Environment 179 (2013) 187 199 16.0 Fat plus protein Groundwater NO3-N 14.0 1.3 12.0 1.2 10.0 8.0 1.1 6.0 1 NO3-N concentration in groundwater (mg/l) Fat plus protein production (t/ha) 1.4 4.0 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Stocking rate (cows/ha) Concentrate (kg/cow) 2.4 741 2.4 716 2.4 645 2.6 2.6 2.7 636 1202 590 2.9 617 2.9 288 2.9 450 2.9 430 N imported in fertilizer (kg/ha) 294 289 296 331 244 248 252 249 Year 259 313 September, 10, 2014
Increasing SR beyond the Farms Grass Growth Potential Based on research undertaken at Ballyhaise D. Patton1, K. Pierce2 & B. Horan1 1Animal and Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Teagasc Moorepark 2University College Dublin
Feed Systems (2008-2011) HG system SR 3.14 cow/ha. 500kg concentrate/cow. Fully enclosed system. HI system SR 4.35 cows/ha. 1200kg concentrate/cow. Winter forage imported.
Systems Comparison Supplements required 100 90 80 Kg Dm/day 70 60 Additional Grass SR 4.5 cows/ha 50 40 30 Grazed grass SR 3.1 cows/ha 20 10 0 l l r r t t r r r eb Ma Ma Ma Ap Ap May May Jun Jun -Ju -Ju ug ug Sep Sep Sep Oc Oc ov F A A N 7 1 0 2 04 18 01 15 29 13 27 10 17 03 17 31 14 28 12 26 09 23 Q1. How much additional feed is required to sustain a higher stocking rate? Q2. Is it profitable to do so? (Feed costs vs additional revenues)
Grass Production Growth rate (kg DM/ha per day) 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 Week of year FS had no impact on annual grass production Climatic conditions similar to 10 year average Average pasture production of 13.2 tonnes (11.6 15.5) 40 43 46 49 52
2008 2011 High Stocking Rate Study Feed System1 HG HI Silage fed (kg DM/cow) 326 659 Concentrate fed (kg DM/cow) 542 864 MS yield (kg/cow) 377 391 MS yield (kg/ha) 1,144 1,786 Grass growth (t DM/ha) 13.6 12.9 Grass utilised (t DM/ha) 10.2 9.8 Silage produced (kg DM/cow) Growth required (t DM/ha) 704 15.0 145 19.0 Feed system1 HG = Low input pasture system, HI = High output per hectare system
Key herd output parameters for the evaluation of alternative grazing platform feed system1 Feed system Total Milking Platform, ha Milking Platform Owned, ha HG 40.0 40.0 HI 40.0 40.0 Herd size, no. cows Stocking rate, no. cows/ ha 124 3.1 180 4.5 563,182 45,794 854,415 69,016 1.47 2.14 Milk sales, kg Fat plus protein sales, kg Labour units required, no.
The effect of base milk price on farm system profitability for alternative grazing platform feed system1 Feed System Net profit at 29 c/l milk price per farm, / farm per cow, / cow per kg milk fat plus protein, / kg per ha, / ha HG HI 29,075 234 0.63 727 14,443 80 0.21 361 Net profit at 24 c/l milk price per farm, / farm per cow, / cow per kg milk fat plus protein, / kg per ha, / ha -3,800-30 -0.08-95 -34,837-194 -0.50-871 Net profit at 34 c/l milk price per farm, / farm per cow, / cow per kg milk fat plus protein, / kg per ha, / ha 62,019 500 1.35 1,550 63,825 355 0.92 1,596
Conclusions Match SR to long term grass growth rates of the farm for long term profitability The strategic use of supplements combined with increased further increases in SR result in increased output per ha more frequent buffer feeding throughout lactation reduced farm profits at average and below average milk prices Increases nutrient losses
We need to implement our systems better. Performance gap between current average and best practice grazing systems underline necessity for improved system implementation NFS Ave. Top 10% Target Herd EBI ( ) 70 105 200 Calving Interval (days) 394 370 365 Six week calving rate (%) 58 84 90 Grass growth (t DM/ha) Stocking rate (LU/ha) Grass utilised (t DM/ha) 9.0 2.0 8.0 13.0 2.3 10.0 + 15.0 2.9 13.0 Milk solids (kg/cow) Milk solids (kg/ha) 405 825 440 1,025 475 1,400 Net profit at 28 c/l ( /ha) 250 1,032 2,500 C footprint (kg CO2/kg milk) 1.05 0.85 0.80
Conclusions The sustainable intensification of grass-based systems is possible based on a systemic approach to improve implementation including Appropriate stocking rates and grazing practices High EBI animals Highly productive grazed ryegrass white clover pastures rigorous feed & nutrient budgeting and rapid adaptability appropriate chemical and organic fertilizer application minimum cultivation of N rich soils
We wish to acknowledge Irish dairy farmer funding of this research http://www.agresearch.teagasc.ie/moorepark brendan.horan@teagasc.ie