From the March-April 2011 Dairy Route Newsletter
“Dairying under the influence”
of $ 6.50 corn (and $13.00 soybeans, etc…)
Let us face facts.
It will take a higher milk price than we currently receive to make milk
profitably at the volume of corn for which we currently balance rations. Nor was the 1990s answer “get bigger or
get out of the way” proof against the current and future reality of higher corn
prices, thus more farmers competing for
available farmland. (Nor is it safe to
expect milk prices will go so high as to allow us to avoid making any
structural changes—all those emptied “expansion barns” might just fill back up
with surplus cows and put us right back where we were in 2009.)
Under the “old math”, most feed
conversion experts said you could put $2.50 (then $3.00) corn through a dairy
cow and at $20.00 per hundredweight, be getting $4.50 for your corn. So we all got convinced to focus on corn as
our key milk making crop—even though the cow’s basic nature as a ruminant
always implied she was better off (and more efficient) eating cellulosic
forages. DHIA helped to reinforce this
by giving all the trophies to those who fed the most corn (ie, produced the
most milk volume) rather than those who produced more valuable (more nutrient
dense forage-derived) milk or more per-cow profit.
But feeding $6.50 corn tomorrow to
produce $4.50 worth of milk will never make sense. Thus today’s strategy must be getting
more digestible fiber energy from higher quality forages, thus needing less
corn to “balance” rations to cows’ total nutrient requirements.
There always was an alternative way
Europe has always been a major player in dairy, exporting
cheese worldwide, and Oceana grew quickly on an emphasis as a low cost producer
of milk proteins and butterfat products.
Neither of these regions of the world became dependent on corn—they
stuck with the breeding and propogation of higher energy grass forages. 95% of the cows in New Zealand milk, breed
back, and stay healthy on “no corn” grass based rations. In seeking higher performing genetics from
North America, they often found Canadian genetics of the 1970s-80s (slightly
less milk but higher component %s, fed more hay and less corn) more applicable
to their needs and more adaptable to their environments. The lessons in this were lost on us in the
USA; we had cheap fuel and grew cheap corn and didn’t care what went on
anywhere else, always able to coax the US Congress into a bigger subsidy as the
costs of this strategy began to increase.
It is time to create some alternatives of our own
Remember barley? Bushel for bushel it more than replaces
corn (same energy, 50% more protein and useful minerals). It is simple to grow, handles cold weather
better than corn, and you get some added straw. Some spring barley varieties can hit 100
bushel/acre at one third the input cost of growing corn.
It can be overseeded for a following
forage crop of summer annuals or grass hays in the same season.
Remember grass? ( “grass is not a weed” except when in a row crop )
Grass is nature’s answer to covering
any erodable earth surface. Ruminants
(like cows, sheep, goats, alpacas, llamas, water buffalos, bison) evolved to eat that grass as their total
diet. Grandpa’s hay had grass in it and
his cows liked it. Today we often
observe that when a sick cow won’t eat anything else, she will still eat nice
soft grass hay. But after WWII, Dad
was told to kill the grass, pure alfalfa was a better (higher volume yield)
forage that could combine with corn to make a new way to get more milk.
It was simple—starch energy (but not
much protein) from corn, high ammonia protein (but not much energy) from
alfalfa. Scratch factor from some
baled hay (the less the better, given how fast wilting alfalfa loses nutrients). If short protein, add soybean meal; if short
energy, add molasses. Get 18-25 tons
of corn silage and 4-6 tons of alfalfa hay per acre, roughly equal in value
given protein always cost three-four times what energy cost per volume. Spread manure on the corn ground and it
uses it up.
But today’s facts no longer support
this as the “ideal” ration. We have
too much blood urea nitrogen on pure alfalfa diets, we lose too much butterfat%
and protein% on high corn diets.
Metabolic disease rates are too high; lameness is too frequent;
reproductive rates are too low. Cows
wear out too fast.
Modern grass genetics produce a forage superior to pure alfalfa
Think about it. Your nutritionist is always trying to
create a ration with 16.5% protein at 78 or more megacals of energy to
stimulate high milk production. Good
grass harvested at its optimum stage is nearly a perfect balance—16% to 18%
protein and 76 to 80 megacals energy. Your
only trick is to get her to eat enough to hit your production target: it is
already by nature a “balanced” ruminant feed.
Compare that to the typical GMO corn
silage—7% to 8% protein and 78 to 83 megacals energy, maybe 20% of its volume
actually undigestible lignins.
Compare that to the typical top alfalfa—18% to 24% protein and 72 to 76
megacals energy. Neither is a “complete” feed, each adds an
element of waste (excess non protein nitrogen in the alfalfa; too much
nondigestible stalk and cob fiber in the silage).
Various tests from Wisconsin and
elsewhere show that the “milk per acre” possible from an acre of the Barenbrug
grasses— perennial Dutch ryegrass, perennial hybrid tall fescue, annual
Italian ryegrass – equal or exceed the “milk per acre” from even the best GMO
corn silages—at much lower per acre cost.
It is this lower cost per acre at the
same milk value per acre that will make you more money—not being on the
unending treadmill to get higher yields from crops lacking the same nutrient
density and level of rumen digestibility.
Modern grass genetics are compatible with alfalfa for maximum yields per
acre
The new sales pitch for “Round Up
Ready alfalfa” is just the opposite of the strategy a dairy farmer needs to
follow. Interseed high energy grass
into existing alfalfa—you will gain both yield and feed value. This has been repeatedly proven in the
latest Wisconsin forage trials. More
feed and a lower per acre cost of seed over the field establishment
lifetime—again, a cost benefit as well as higher yields.
Modern grass genetics helps
lower your purchased nitrogen costs. Italian
ryegrass as plowdown is worth 250 units of nitrogen. Grass will increase its yield and nutrient
density just from 3-4 pounds of clover seed added per acre in the seeding. Grass root structures will trap more rainfall
than row crops.
Converting to grass based rations (corn
silage, mixed hay, grasslage) can significantly lower grain cost.
Forage based animal genetic selection
Today’s sire rankings are based more on “corn
consumption” than “feed efficiency”.
This bold statement by a Holstein
breeder I know who is very successful as a grazing dairyman, is a sentence
worth pondering.
He selects his service sires on
type—but specifically with an eye toward the wider, deeper, more open ribbed
cow. He likes big cows, because he
expects them to get 80% of their dry matter intake from forages, only 20% from
grains. He likes vigorous cows,
because he sends them outside in the green grass season to harvest their own
feed (and spread their own manure).
Example sires who fit this alternative paradigm
76HO 590 Wabash Way Thunder ET (aAa 5 3 4 1 6 2) Genomic young sire (list $16)
$12
What is the chief complaint of the modern Holstein? No width, no “guts”, no herdlife. Her physique was designed to suck finely
ground grain through a straw. She is
incapable of handling more than six pounds of hay in a day—she can’t chew it,
her muzzle is so narrow; she can’t digest it, her body is both shallow and slabby
ribbed, too inflexible for the rumen to “roll” when full of fiber.
“Thunder” is that rare
bull—a widely sprung, open ribbed, deep physique from a high performance sire
and cow line. His dam is Gaige
Outside Tootsie an “EX 94” Outside that is as wide as a bale of hay and at
4 yrs in 357 days made 34070m 4.9% 1674bf 3.3% 1127pr actual in
Ohio. Next dam is Gaige Highlite
Tamara an “EX97 4E” Highlite who at 4 yrs in 365d had 33740m 3.9%
1229bf 3.0% 1007pr and now at 15 years
of age has exceeded 300,000 pounds actual lifetime to date while also
shown to All American status in the 125,000+ lifetime cow class.
Characteristics of sires who will fit high forage ration programs
They are more likely to be plus than minus for butterfat
% and protein %. You
want cattle exhibiting healthy rumen function. Low bf% indicates a lack of cud chewing to
buffer the rumen and capture the added energy from digestible fiber, low pr%
indicates negative energy deficit inhibiting body condition.
They are more likely to be above average for fertility
(DPR = daughter pregnancy rate) suggesting more of a “flat” than “peaked”
lactation curve. Strong natural
fertility suggests more balanced genes when it is necessary for a cow to
‘ration” her feed energy intake vs. competing uses for milk, health and repro.
They are more likely to be below
average (below 3.00) for somatic cell score (SCC) suggesting a
more effective immune system. SCC is
not just about mastitis—it is about any body infection, which means heel warts
as well. Lower SCCs are a general
indication of a healthy animal that will continue to milk well at mature size
and ages. (Higher SCC sires generally
sire shorter herdlife cows. The
exceptions will be sires with extraordinarily high levels of butterfat% and
mineral excretion.)
They will have “aAa” mating physiques
that can add some dimension of capacity relative to size
and scale. Thus when mated
to the typical tall/narrow/fine-boned commercial short life cow, their heifers
will exhibit more in either chest depth/bone capacity OR chest width/rib
capacity.
(Look at 54HO489 No Fla Legend (aAa 156324) and 76HO466
Ridgedale Escalate (aAa 345126)
The kind of cows you will like are the kind of cows who add profit
Like the looks of this cow?
We can make you this kind.
We know the bloodlines.
We know what sires do.
We understand matings.
She is the profitable kind.
Able to milk on forages.
Requiring less grain to milk.
Still able to breed on time.
Strong enough to live awhile.
Mostly takes care of herself.
