+ All Categories
Home > Documents > Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

Date post: 22-Aug-2015
Category:
Upload: de-paor-consultancy
View: 35 times
Download: 1 times
Share this document with a friend
Popular Tags:
48
Forage and Nutrition Guide 2015 5
Transcript
Page 1: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

Forage andNutrition

Guide 2015€5

Page 2: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

Premier Molasses Co. Ltd. Harbour Road, Foynes, Co. Limerick. Deepwater Berth, Ringaskiddy, Co. Cork.

t: 069-65311f: 069-65537 e: [email protected]

Contact us or your local Co-op/merchant today:

www.premiermolasses.ie

Prevent Grass Tetanythis Spring with

Magnesium supplementation in ruminant diets has been recognised as having thegreatest influence in preventing both grass tetany and milk fever.

Premier Ultra-Mag, formulated from a diverse range of quality ingredients includinga highly bio-available form of magnesium is specifically designed for both dairy andbeef cows. Combining magnesium with an extremely palatable energy dense liquidis the perfect option to prevent grass tetany this spring.

Premier Ultra-Mag (2.5%)

Premier Molasses A4.indd 1 01/04/2015 09:20

Page 3: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

3

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Editor: Liam de Paor Managing Editor: Bernie Commins Design: Barry Sheehan Advertising Manager: Brian Murphy Advertising Executive: John SheehanChief Executive: Rebecca Markey Publisher: David MarkeyAccounts: Tricia Murtagh Administration & Subscriptions: Sue Nolan Publishers: IFP Media Printing: Anglo Printers Limited

Forage & Nutrition Guide 2015, 31 Deansgrange Road, Blackrock, Co Dublin. Tel: +353 1 289 3305 • Fax: +353 1 289 6406 e-mail: [email protected] • www.irishfarmersmonthly.com

Copyright IFP Media 2015. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any material form without the express written permission of the publishers.

CONTENTS4 Life after quotas – now the work begins

6 Multi-species grassland swards for silage

8 Fertilising the grass silage crop

11 Concentrate feeding and turnout date on weanling performance

14 Understanding the new Pasture Profit Index (PPI)

17 Grazing management with Automated Milking Systems (AMS)

19 Investigation into body condition at drying off

20 The answer lies in the soil

23 Yield benefits from film and film wrapping

24 How to achieve full financial benefit when investing

26 Moderate concentrate build-up

27 An impressive Claas of mowers

28 Profitable lamb production trials at UCD

30 Challenges of post-quota milk production

32 Managing the risks of farming

34 Managing dairy stock for improved health and performance

36 Breeding & feeding - how new technology can help

39 FRS - there when you need it most

40 Magnesium supplementation through molasses

42 Getting your soil to deliver its potential for grass growth

45 Saving time with clever technology

14

45

28

Premier Molasses Co. Ltd. Harbour Road, Foynes, Co. Limerick. Deepwater Berth, Ringaskiddy, Co. Cork.

t: 069-65311f: 069-65537 e: [email protected]

Contact us or your local Co-op/merchant today:

www.premiermolasses.ie

Prevent Grass Tetanythis Spring with

Magnesium supplementation in ruminant diets has been recognised as having thegreatest influence in preventing both grass tetany and milk fever.

Premier Ultra-Mag, formulated from a diverse range of quality ingredients includinga highly bio-available form of magnesium is specifically designed for both dairy andbeef cows. Combining magnesium with an extremely palatable energy dense liquidis the perfect option to prevent grass tetany this spring.

Premier Ultra-Mag (2.5%)

Premier Molasses A4.indd 1 01/04/2015 09:20

Page 4: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

4

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015 FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

The abolition of milk quotas after 2015 is focusing minds on future expansion. However, much lower milk prices and the threat of future price volatility is also focusing minds on how to improve production while also reducing costs. The new quota, as pointed out by Brian Reidy

(see page 30), will be on land and labour. So, dairy farmers will need to significantly improve herd performance if they are to make a decent profit from increased production.

There is a record number of dairy cows and cattle in the country. According to the CSO, in June 2014, the total number of cattle increased by 148,500 to 6,902,600 while the number of dairy cows increased by 63,200.

After April 2015, there is also likely to be a further increase in dairy cow numbers, with replacement heifers, and extra calves from dairy herds being reared on beef farms.

Dairy farmers need to optimise production from grass if they are to increase milk yields per hectare. Our most efficient farmers are growing and utilising in excess of 12 tonnes of dry matter (DM) per hectare, yet the national average is only 7.5 tonnes so there is significant scope for improvement.

Cattle farmers also need to improve live-weight gains during the grazing season. To improve farm incomes all producers need to minimise the purchase of expensive concentrates and have extra silage for winter feed.

The experience in recent years has shown us that there was insufficient forage to cater for a late spring or an early winter, so, we had to import hay from abroad and feed record levels of compound feed during the fodder crisis.

Even during a normal year many farmers complain about the cost of purchased compounds when they could easily minimise

these costs by reseeding about 15 per cent of their land each year. Yet, only about 25 per cent of landowners reseed on a regular basis.

According to Teagasc, dairy farmers are losing €300 per hectare as a result of old pastures and such fields are 25 per cent less responsive to fertilisers. Indeed, since 2000, fertiliser prices have increased by 81 per cent, so it is important to optimise their use in a cost-effective manner.

No matter what price calves, cattle, lambs or milk are making - poor health will impact on busy farmers, livestock performance and consequently on farm incomes. So, improving the health of your herd or flock will save time, money and, ultimately, improve livestock performance.

One sick animal takes as much time to look after as 40 healthy ones. This can be a nightmare in springtime, when more than 60 per cent of the herd may calve in six weeks. Any problems at calving or lambing may also have longer-term consequences. According to Dr Henk Hogeveen, a Dutch animal health expert: “The total economic damage caused by production diseases in livestock is larger than the damage caused by notifiable diseases such as foot and mouth.”

For example, the average cost of a single case of milk fever in a cow (from mild to severe) is over €300 when we factor in the effects on future milk production.

Many dairy farmers have cows that should be culled for reasons such as poor fertility, lameness, high somatic cell count (SCC), mastitis problems and low milk solids. Reducing cow numbers by 20 per cent and replacing them over the next three years, with better bred replacements, would solve a lot of problems. For a start, there would be more grass and silage available, therefore improving milk yields and reducing the cost of purchased feed.

TLife after quotas – now the work begins

Liam de Paor

Page 5: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015 FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Never approach or touch. Contact our emergency service immediately.

CALL 1850 372 999

FALLEN ELECTRICITYWIRES ARE LIVE AND DANGEROUS

Serving all electricity customers

www.esbnetworks.ie

Never approach or touch. Contact our emergency service immediately.

CALL 1850 372 999

FALLEN ELECTRICITYWIRES ARE LIVE AND DANGEROUS

Serving all electricity customers

www.esbnetworks.ie

Page 6: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

6

Perennial ryegrassPerennial ryegrass has been the preferred grass species for most grassland research undertaken to date in temperate climates. This reflects its suitability for grazing and for producing high yields of digestible and readily ensilable herbage with good, season-long production and persistence over many years.

In order to deliver on this potential and, therefore, justify the costs and risks associated with establishing a new sward, ryegrass swards usually require high soil fertility and the input of high rates of nitrogen (N).

The biology of both the individual ryegrass plant and the whole sward, and their responses to a range of management and environmental factors, have been extensively researched. It is evident that the potential exists to further increase herbage production across an extended growing season and to avoid declines in herbage digestibility at specific stages during the year.

Whereas newer management strategies can provide some of these increases, those dependent on grass breeding and evaluation programmes will take some time to develop. This raises the question of whether other grass sward types have potential to increase the productivity, or reduce the costs of livestock production systems, while also providing any simultaneous ecological or environmental benefits.

Ryegrass and cloverIntroducing legumes, such as white or red clover, into seed mixes with ryegrass can increase herbage yields under grazing or silage production conditions, respectively. This reflects the synergistic effects that occur when species of different growth habits are grown together (e.g. differing in root depth, nitrogen fixation, canopy structure).

In a grass-clover mixture, for example, clover has the ability to facilitate specialised unique bacteria, resident in nodules on their roots, to absorb nitrogen from air and convert it to a form that can be used to stimulate plant growth. This is similar to the effect of N in purchased inorganic fertiliser. Besides increasing herbage production, this can also facilitate reducing the input of fertiliser N and, thus, reduce the costs of providing feed for cattle.

The benefits from growing legumes with grass are further advanced by the very palatable and digestible nature of legumes, such as white clover for livestock. Despite these advantages, there can also be risks associated with legumes, including the challenge of getting good initial establishment or ensuring their long-term persistence in permanent grassland swards. The extent to which their annual growth pattern differs from grass, the greater challenge they can pose if preserving as silage, and the risks associated with ailments such as bloat.

Multi-species grassland swards for silage

Words: Padraig O’Kiely and Thomas Moloney, Teagasc, Grange, Co Meath

Grass trial plots at Teagasc, Grange

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Page 7: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

7

Multi-speciesProgressing the species mixture in a grassland sward beyond perennial ryegrass, plus white or red clover, offers the opportunity to provide further complementary competitive effects that can better optimise season-long production of quality herbage.

The identification of the larger number of appropriate species (and varieties) to include in such complex mixtures, requires considerable knowledge of their individual biology, and how they interact together.

Just as there are some combinations of species that are complementary to one another, there are others that will be neutral or even antagonistic to one another.Therefore, not all multi-species grassland sward mixtures will be attractive. The three main categories of forages considered for inclusion, if sowing a multi-species grassland sward, are: perennial grasses; legumes; and herbs. Criteria of importance when identifying the constituent species from each functional group include: their yield and nutritive value potential; ease of establishment and persistence; ability to fix atmospheric N; absence of anti-nutritional characteristics; rooting depth; foliage structure and habit; tolerance of drought; wetness; and cold etc.

European researchA large, Irish-led, multinational European research study, extended over a number of years, showed that annual herbage production was increased when species diversity within a sward was expanded by the inclusion of appropriately matched contrasting species. It also showed that yield variability between years was reduced with the multi-species swards. Thus, some multi-species swards appear to have potential that is worth investigating.

Irish researchThe Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine (DAFM) has funded a large collaborative study in Ireland between University College Dublin (UCD), Teagasc and the Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI), from Northern Ireland. This study involves comparisons of conventional perennial ryegrass and newer multi-species swards. The latter includes: grasses such as perennial ryegrass and timothy; legumes such as white and red clover and greater birdsfoot trefoil; and herbs such as chicory, ribwort plantain and yarrow. The overall research programme includes both grazing (sheep, at UCD Lyons Farm) and silage production management regimes (Teagasc, Grange), but also involves soil chemistry and biology assessments, and quantification of the biodiversity of plants and both soil and above-ground invertebrates. When all the findings are assembled there will then be a cost-benefit analysis undertaken of a livestock production system based on a perennial ryegrass monoculture or a multi-species sward. Further and updated information on this project can be found at http://smartgrass.ie/

The aims of the research ongoing at Teagasc, Grange, are to:

• Compare seasonal and annual herbage production for a number of monocultures, binary mixtures and multi-sward mixtures managed for silage production;

• Quantify the yield, botanical composition, nutritive value and ensilability responses of these swards;

• Quantify the impacts of the timing of the completion of spring grazing (i.e. number of sequential spring grazings) on sward yield and nutritive value when subsequently harvested for silage;

• Describe how the yield and composition (chemical, phenological and botanical) of the primary growth of the various swards change during May and June;

• Quantify any carry-over effects of these management options on subsequent silage harvests and on annual production; and

• Determine the effects of sward type and the other management factors on the efficiency of the ensilage process.

For further information on the research ongoing at Teagasc, Grange contact [email protected]

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Page 8: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

8

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015 FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

areful fertiliser management is required to ensure that maximum grass yields are achieved by the target harvest date. These target harvest dates are important, in order to achieve the desired silage quality required for the livestock production system. Where silage crops are

lighter than expected, there is often a temptation to allow the grass to grow and ‘bulk up’ for an additional couple of weeks. However, this can often have detrimental effects on silage quality. This article looks at planning and nutrient management required for a high-yielding grass silage sward.

AnalysisThe starting point is to check soil test reports to identify the fertility status of the silage fields. This will provide information on: soil pH; lime requirement; and the major plant nutrients phosphorous (P) and potassium (K). Soil test results are the basis for making the right slurry and fertiliser application decisions, in order to deliver the correct balance of nitrogen (N), P and K for yield. On average, silage fields tend to have lower levels of P and K for a number of reasons. Firstly, these fields are continuously cut for silage, thus, large quantities of P and K are removed each year, and secondly, these fields tend to be furthest from the farm yard and may not receive an annual application of organic manures due to the longer travel distances.

pH and lime The productivity of silage swards very much depends on keeping soil pH in the optimum range of pH 6.3 - 6.5. This is required for the survival of perennial ryegrass in the swards and is essential for the release of major soil nutrients (N, P and K). Where fields have lower than optimum soil pH, leading to a lime requirement, a strategy for liming must be put in place. As the date of closing silage areas is approaching fast, it may be best to delay lime applications on

these fields until after the first cut of silage. Ideally, leave at least a minimum of three months between lime application and closing for silage to reduce the risk of problems with ensiling grass in the pit.

NN is the key driver of yield but too much N in the grass at harvest will make it difficult to ferment properly, as it reduces the grass sugar levels and dry matter (DM) content. In contrast, too little N will reduce grass growth and overall yield and delay harvesting date. Grass swards with high levels of perennial ryegrass will use N more efficiently than older swards. Recently reseeded swards (0-3 years) will have 25 per cent higher N demand, especially when reseeded after a tillage rotation. First cut grass silage (5 to 6tonne/hectare of DM) will require 125 to 150kg N/hectare (100 - 120 units/acre). The grass silage crop will uptake, on average, 2.5kg/hectare/day of N (2 units/day). Therefore, it is necessary to apply the N fertiliser at least 50 days before harvesting to ensure full N utilisation.

Where fields received early N applications for grazing, assume 30 to 50 per cent of this N will be available and deduct from the above N total for the silage crop.

Reseeded swards will respond better to N than old, permanent swards.

P and K P and K are essential to maximise grass yields, therefore adequate supply of these nutrients in the soil is critical. Assess the most recent (< 5 years) soil test reports to determine the P and K requirements for silage fields. A crop of grass silage will remove approximately 4kg P and 25kg K/tonne of grass dry matter (DM). A 5tonne/hectare DM crop (fresh grass silage yield of ~10 tonnes/acre at 20 per cent DM) will remove 20kg P/hectare and 125kg K/hectare at harvest time. Where insufficient P and K are applied for silage swards, soil P and especially K levels will decline rapidly due to the high off-takes of these nutrients in the silage crop.

Fertilising the grass silage cropOver the coming days and weeks it will be time to consider closing up

silage fields, to ensure that enough grass silage is produced to meet winter feed requirements. Plan to maximise both grass silage yield and quality to

help reduce the costs associated harvesting and ensiling the grass

C

Words: Mark Plunkett & David Wall, Teagasc, Johnstown Castle, Wexford

Page 9: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

9

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015 FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

ManuresOrganic manures are an effective source of N, P and K and can provide a large proportion of crop P and K requirements at relatively low cost. Table 1. shows the available N, P and K content for a range of organic manures.

Table 1. Available N, P and K values for a range of organic manures

Manure type N P K

kg/m3

Cattle slurry (7% DM)1 0.7 0.6 3.3

Dilute cattle slurry (3.5% DM)1 0.6 0.3 1.65

Pig slurry (4% DM) 2.1 0.8 2.2

kg/tonne

Farmyard manure (FYM) 1.35 1.2 6

Spent mushroom compost (SMC) 1.6 1.5 8

1Actual N, P and K value for cattle slurry.To convert kg/m3 to units/1,000 multiply by nine. To convert kg/tonne to units/tonne multiply by two.

Cattle slurry is the most common manure applied to silage fields and good quality cattle slurry (7 per cent DM) has the correct ratio of P to K for to match silage crop requirements. Diluting cattle slurry with water is beneficial for ease of agitation and can help to improve the N availability in the slurry, However, it will also dilute the P and K content of the slurry.

Table 1. shows the typical available N, P and K values for a typical 7 per cent DM and dilute (3.5 per cent DM) cattle slurry. It is important to take account of slurry DM content when considering appropriate application rates to reduce the risk of under fertilising silage crops. The slurry hydrometer is a useful tool than can be used to measure the DM percentage of your slurry and to predict the nutrient content more accurately. Once you know how much N-P-K you are applying in slurry, you will be able to select a suitable fertiliser type to complement, or top up, these nutrients levels to the required levels to maximise grass yield (see Table 2.).

For example 3,000 gallons per acre of good quality cattle slurry (7

per cent DM) will supply (18 units N, 15 units P and 90 units K) a

large proportion of the crops’ P and K requirements. Cattle slurry

contains N which needs to be deducted from the total crops N

requirement. Table 2. shows the recommended rates of N, P and

K and suggested fertiliser programmes at different soil P and K

indexes (1 to 4) required to grow 5 tonne/hectare grass DM (10

tonnes fresh grass/acre).

• Apply slurry to very bare stubble or short grass.

• Where slurry cannot be applied for first cut, apply after silage

harvest.

• Application of cattle slurry with trailing shoe/band spreader will

increase N recovery by 0.4 kg/m³ (3 units/1,000 gal).

Page 10: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

10

Table 2. First cut grass silage N, P and K requirements (5 tonne/hectare DM) and suggested fertiliser programmes

Soil indexN kg/hectare

(units/ac)

P kg/hectare

(units/ac)

K kg/hectare

(units/ac)

Fertiliser options3,4

No slurry Cattle slurry 3,000gal/ac

11 125 (100) 40 (32) 175 (140) 3.5 bags/ac 0-7-304 bags/ac CAN

3 bags/ac27-2.5-5.0

21 125 (100) 30 (24) 155 (120) 3 bags/ac 0-7-304 bags/ac CAN

3 bags/ac27-2.5-5.0

3 125 (100) 20 (16) 125 (100) 5 bags/ac 15-3-201 bags/ac CAN 3 bags/ac CAN

43 125 (100) 0 0 4 bags/ac CAN 3 bags/ac CAN

1Index 1 and 2 soils apply P and K balance advice to build soil P and K levels to after grass for example apply as 24-2.5-10/0-7-30.2Index 4 soils omit P for 2/3 years & retest. Index 4 K omit for one year and revert to index 3 advice thereafter until next soil test.3Urea can replace CAN as main N source. Light rain (up to 10mm) before or after application will reduce N losses from urea.4For new/older swards with higher/lower yield potential reduce N, P, K by 25kg N, 4kgP & 25kg K per tonne of grass DM.

TimingApply crop N, P and K requirements when closing silage fields in late March or early-apply April. Where cattle slurry is applied, delay the top-up fertiliser applications for one week. In wetter soil conditions fertiliser N can be split 50:50 for example 50 per cent in late March/early April and the remainder, two weeks later to reduce the risk of N losses.

FutureWhere the soil P and K status of silage fields has been worn down over a number of years, put a plan in place to build these up and restore their high grass yield potential. Apply additional P and K (soil build-up rates) to index 1 and 2 soils after first cut silage, or later in summer. For example fertiliser products such as straight 16 per cent P or 50 per cent K, or compounds such as 0-7-30, 18-6-12 etc. are very suitable for building soil P and K levels to the target index 3. This strategy will generally take a number of years, however, this will be rewarded with higher grass yields of more consistent quality.

Sulphur (S)S deficiency is most likely on light, sandy and free-draining soils with low soil organic matter levels. Grass silage crops have a requirement of ~20kg S/hectare per cut. The application of S to soils where it is required will improve grass DM yields and quality as it helps to maintain an optimum N:S ratio which will improve the efficiency of N use by the grass. Apply S with the main N split as N +S (e.g. CAN +S / Urea +S).

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Page 11: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

11

rofitability of suckler beef systems is greater where the quantity of grazed grass in the annual feed budget is higher. The main reason for this is the lower cost of grazed grass compared to conserved feeds or concentrates. Consequently, a short indoor feeding period

in association with a long grazing season is desirable. However, under Irish conditions, grass is available for grazing only seven to eight months of the year.

Despite challenges relating to soil type and prevailing weather conditions, which limit grazing season length, improvements in grassland management and infrastructure can provide opportunities to increase the number of grazing days on beef cattle farms. Improved profitability could derive from turning cattle out to pasture early in spring, particularly if increased live-weight gain is sustained through to finish.

Finishing spring-born beef cattle at 24 to 26 months of age, following an indoor finishing period during their second winter, is commonly practiced. The relatively expensive indoor feeding period might be eliminated if weanlings are supplemented during the first winter to achieve higher live-weights at turnout, and consequently finished at grass at the end of the second grazing season. However, the benefit of supplementing weanlings during the first winter is lessened by the capacity of weanlings on lower feeding levels to exploit compensatory growth following turn out to pasture.

Teagasc experimentAn experiment was conducted at Teagasc, Grange, to determine the effects of turnout date to pasture and supplementary feeding during the first winter on live-weight gain, carcass traits and the financial performance of suckler calf-to-finish systems.

Concentrate feeding and turnout date on weanling

performanceManagement routines carried out by dairy farmers vary greatly

throughout the country, but there are some general tips that can help farmers run a healthy and efficient dairy enterprise

P

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Words: Paul Crosson and Mark McGee, Animal and Grassland Research and Innovation Centre, Teagasc, Grange, Co Meath

Page 12: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

12

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015 FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

ExperimentA total of 72 (28 male and 44 female) Charolais and Limousin suckler-bred calves were used. Male calves were castrated in August and all calves were weaned and housed indoors on October 20. Weanlings were housed in slatted floor sheds and offered good quality (dry matter digestibility [DMD] 72 per cent) grass silage to appetite. The silage was supplemented with either 0.5kg or 2kg concentrate per head daily. The concentrate offered comprised 43 per cent rolled barley, 43per cent molassed beet pulp, 8 per cent soyabean meal, 4.5 per cent molasses and 1.5 per cent mineral and vitamins. Concentrate was offered in one daily feed in the morning. At the end of the winter feeding period half the steers and heifers were turned out to pasture on March 22, whereas their comrades remained indoors for another three weeks and were turned out on April 12. The ‘early’ turnout date is appropriate for Grange where grass growth commences in mid-March. Near the end of the grazing season, heifers were finished indoors in a slatted floor shed and offered grass silage ad libitum and 3kg of a barley-based concentrate per head daily. At the end of the grazing season, steers were also housed in a slatted floor shed and received grass silage ad libitum, plus 4kg of a barley-based concentrate daily.

TraitsAt turnout to pasture, weanlings fed higher levels of concentrate were heavier due to higher growth rates (Table 1. and Figure 1.). An additional 1kg live-weight per 5.5kg of extra concentrate offered to the high concentrate groups was obtained. Similarly, weanlings turned out to pasture later were heavier, as they were three weeks older than their counterparts turned out early, and also due to a greater gut-fill. However, on April 20 (eight days after the late turnout date), the animals turned out earlier had surpassed the live weight of animals turned out later. This was because dietary differences in gut-fill no longer existed and that the animals turned out to pasture earlier were growing faster than those still indoors.

An important finding was that the live-weight of the weanlings, offered the high level of concentrate and turned out late, was not significantly different to their counterparts turned out early i.e. they exhibited compensatory growth. In contrast, weanlings fed the low level of concentrate and turned out late were lighter than all the other treatments at final housing, which did not differ.

This demonstrated that where feed restriction during the indoor winter period occurred over a longer period, animal live-weight gain at pasture is lower i.e. compensatory growth is not expressed.

Page 13: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

13

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015 FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Conversely, when the duration and/or severity of the restriction is not great, live weight gain is higher (i.e. compensation occurs).

Slaughter and carcass weight were similar for both concentrate levels. This shows that live-weight gain responses by continental crossbred weanlings, to additional supplementary concentrate offered during the indoor period, were subsequently largely lost due to compensatory growth at pasture. Slaughter and carcass weight were heavier for weanlings turned out earlier. There was no effect on kill-out proportion, carcass conformation and fat score between the treatments.

FinancialThere was no effect of concentrate feeding level during the first winter on net margin. The effect of turnout date to pasture for the second grazing season was modest with a slight increase in profitability where turnout date was advanced by three weeks. However, in a scenario (not presented here) where progeny were sold at the end of the indoor winter feeding period, a higher

level of meal feeding improved net margin, as this is captured in heavier sale live-weight and consequently, higher animal value.

Where sale was delayed until after a season at pasture, the effect of compensatory growth at pasture for progeny fed lower levels of concentrate during the first winter, eliminated most of the live-weight advantage gained by those fed higher levels of concentrate. Correspondingly, the net margin was greater for the low concentrate feeding regime. A notable aspect of the results was the sensitivity of the scenarios to beef carcass price, with the effect of concentrate price being much lower.

As initial turnout date to pasture in spring is largely dependent on interactions between many factors, including soil type, weather, grass growth, sward management and grazing conditions, the degree to which this practice can be easily exploited will vary substantially, especially according to geographical location, but also from year-to-year. Consequently, flexibility in grazing management is required. This may include using strategies such as ‘on-off’ grazing, whereby animals are given restricted access time to pasture daily.

Table 1. Effect of supplementary concentrate feeding level and turnout date to pasture on live-weight and carcass traits

Concentrate level Turnout date

Low High Early Late

Live weight (kg)

Weaning 317 319 318 318

Turnout 356 391 368 380

On 20 April 367 394 387 374

Housing 523 531 537 518

Slaughter 598 607 611 594

Carcass traits

Carcass weight (kg) 327 333 336 323

Kill-out proportion (g/kg) 546 545 547 545

Carcass conformation1 3.1 3.2 3.1 3.2

Carcass fat2 3.6 3.9 3.7 3.8

1 Scale 1 to 5 (best conformation); 2 Scale 1 to 5 (fattest)

Figure 1. Effect of winter concentrate feeding level and turnout date to pasture on live-weight gain of beef cattle

Table 2. Effect of supplementary concentrate feeding level and turnout date to pasture on net margin (€/hectare)

Sensitivity analysis

Concentrate feeding1 Turnout date2 Net margin

(€/hectare) Sale price3 Concentrate price4

0.5 kg/day 22 March 405 158 6.27

0.5 kg/day 12 April 396 152 6.91

2.0 kg/day 22 March 407 157 8.29

2.0 kg/day 12 April 389 156 9.361Concentrate feeding level during the first winter; 2Turnout date to pasture for the second grazing season; 3Impact of 10c/kg change in live animal or beef carcass price on net margin per hectare. 4Impact of €10/tonne change in concentrate price on net margin per hectare.

Effect of concentrate feeding and turnout date

700

650

600

550

500

Housing

Low conc. – Early turnout Low conc. – Late turnout

High conc. – Early turnout High conc. – Late turnout

Live w

eight

(kg)

EarlyLate

Steers

Heifers

450

400

350

300

Nov Jan

HOUSING

TURNOUT

Mar May Jul Sep Nov Jan Mar

Page 14: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

14

he Pasture Profit Index (PPI) has been developed by Teagasc in conjunction with the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine (DAFM). The purpose of the PPI is to assist farmers when selecting perennial ryegrass varieties for their farm. The PPI

quantifies the total economic merit (€/hectare/year) of individual perennial ryegrass varieties.

This spring, for the first time, the PPI has being officially released. It is published in the National Recommended List for grasses and is also available to download from the Teagasc website.

Sub-indicesThe PPI comprises of a number of sub-indices, with each variety receiving an economic value within each sub-indices. This indicates if a variety is above or below the average of all varieties for that particular trait. The sub-indices comprise the following:

• Seasonal dry matter (DM) yield;

• Spring DM yield;

• Mid-season DM yield;

• Autumn DM yield;

• Quality (across the months of April to July, inclusive);

• April;

• May;

• June;

• July;

• Persistency;

• Silage;

• First cut silage DM yield; and

• Second cut silage DM yield.

Economic valueIn order to calculate the total PPI value of a variety, the economic value of each individual trait was first calculated. The Moorepark Dairy Systems Model was used to determine the economic value of a unit change in each trait (€/hectare/year). The economic value

of each trait within the PPI is as follows:

Estimating valueA base level of performance was determined for each trait. The performance of an individual variety, relative to the base was then assessed to determine if a variety got a positive value (improved performance relative to the base) or negative value (reduced performance relative to the base) for that particular trait. The difference between the performance of a variety within a trait and the base performance for that trait is multiplied by the economic value for that trait to determine the economic merit of that trait for that cultivar (see example below for spring DM yield):

• Base level of performance for spring DM yield = 1,200kg DM/hectare (A);

• Performance of variety X for spring DM yield = 1,320kg DM/hectare (B);

• Difference between variety X and base for spring DM yield (B-A) = 120kg DM/hectare (C);

• Economic value for spring DM yield = €0.163 (D); and

• Economic merit of variety X for spring DM yield (C × D) = €19.56/hectare per year.

This example indicates that variety X should give an additional €19.56/hectare/year for spring DM yield relative to the base. The economic merit of all traits for a particular variety is summed to give the PPI (€/hectare/year) for the variety.

Understanding the new Pasture Profit Index

Dr Mary McEvoy explains the function of the new Pasture Profit Index (PPI) released for the first time this spring, and how it assists

farmers in selecting perennial ryegrass varieties for their farms

T

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Figure 1. The traits and their economic values which are used to calculate the PPI value of a variety

Pasture Profit Index€/hectare/year

Spring: €0.16Summer: €0.04Autumn: €0.11

Seasonal DM yield(per kg change

in DM yield)

April: -€0.001May: -€0.008June: -€0.010July: -€0.009

Quality(per unit change in DMD/kg DM)

1st cut: €0.042nd cut: €0.03

Silage(per kg change

in DM yield)

-€56 per ha per year

Persistency

Words: Dr Mary McEvoy, Germinal Seeds

Page 15: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

15

Late diploidsPasture Profit Index sub-indices (€/hectare/year)

DM production Quality Silage Persistency Total PPI €/hectare/year

Variety Ploidy1 Heading date Spring Summer AutumnAberChoice D 10-Jun 24 52 47 57 9 -5 184

Drumbo D 07-Jun 27 35 35 36 -4 -11 118

Glenroyal* D 05-Jun 25 41 46 -2 6 -11 105

Majestic* D 02-Jun 43 38 43 -23 0 0 101

Glenveagh* D 03-Jun 37 39 34 -22 7 0 96

Stefani* D 01-Jun 25 34 27 -9 9 0 86

Piccadilly* D 03-Jun 31 38 22 -30 16 0 77

Tyrella D 04-Jun 41 23 19 -1 0 -11 71

Mezquita D 06-Jun 22 30 18 -22 6 0 54

Clanrye D 06-Jun . . . . . . .

Late tetraploidsPasture Profit Index sub-indices (€/hectare/year)

DM production Quality Silage Persistency Total PPI €/hectare/year

Variety Ploidy1 Heading date Spring Summer AutumnAberGain T 05-Jun 42 50 43 58 26 -11 208

Kintyre T 08-Jun 29 40 58 25 14 0 166

Astonenergy T 02-Jun 10 41 43 54 12 0 160

AberPlentiful* T 08-Jun 15 44 48 30 15 0 152

Navan T 06-Jun 14 41 50 21 10 0 136

Aspect* T 05-Jun 26 45 29 30 10 -5 135

Delphin T 02-Jun 13 42 27 10 21 0 113

AberCraigs T 04-Jun 14 38 21 17 18 0 108

Twymax* T 07-Jun -11 48 20 27 17 -5 95

Solas T 10-Jun . . . . . . .

Intermediate diploidsPasture Profit Index sub-indices (€/hectare/year)

DM production Quality Silage Persistency Total PPI €/hectare/year

Variety Ploidy1 Heading date Spring Summer AutumnAberMagic D 30-May 47 53 78 21 13 -28 184

Rosetta* D 24-May 97 40 39 -2 19 -28 165

Solomon D 23-May 66 32 35 -30 22 0 125

Boyne* D 22-May 42 39 33 -56 41 0 99

Rodrigo D 27-May . . . . . . .

Intermediate tetraploidsPasture Profit Index sub-indices (€/hectare/year)

DM production Quality Silage Persistency Total PPI €/hectare/year

Variety Ploidy1 Heading date Spring Summer AutumnDunluce T 30-May 43 45 58 35 24 -11 194

Seagoe* T 29-May 30 45 43 13 38 -11 158

Magician T 22-May 59 37 42 -5 28 -11 150

Giant T 20-May 39 50 39 -2 22 0 148

Trend T 24-May 25 41 30 3 38 0 137

Carraig T 24-May 42 40 38 -19 31 0 132

1D=Diploid, T=Tetraploid; *Limited data based on one sowing year (two harvest years only) Germinal varieties are highlighted in yellow

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Using PPIFigure 1. presents the 2015 PPI for 2015 according to ploidy (the number of sets of chromosomes in a cell) and heading date. Information is presented for each variety on total PPI value and the sub-indices (performance across the individual traits). The sub-indices provide the farmer with a good indication as to the relative performance of each variety across all traits. A high value for spring, mid-season, autumn, silage and quality is desirable and indicates a variety that is performing well in each of these traits. A value of ‘0’ is desirable for persistency as it indicates a persistent variety. Negative values for persistency indicate varieties that may be less persistent.

PPI rankingsThe first thing to look at is the ploidy and heading date of each variety. To simplify this, the table below ranks varieties within the PPI according to their heading category (intermediate or late) and ploidy (diploid or tetraploid). For grazing mixtures you should select varieties with a heading date of June or late May. Grazing mixtures should contain approximately 40 per cent tetraploid, but use less tetraploid if you are reseeding a heavier soil.

AberChoice and Drumbo are the top ranked late diploids, both of these have excellent performance across spring, summer and autumn and also have exceptional quality. Majestic, Glenveagh and Tyrella also perform well in spring, but they have much poorer performance in the quality sub-indices, meaning they have a lower total PPI value.

Page 16: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

16

AberGain and Kintyre are the top two late tetraploids. Both varieties have exceptional seasonal DM yields, high quality and good performance in the silage sub-indices hence, they have a high total PPI value.

Abermagic is the highest performing intermediate diploid, with a heading date of 30th May, it is suited to both a grazing or silage system. It is the 4th highest ranked variety overall in the PPI.

Dunluce and Seagoe, top the intermediate tetraploids on the PPI list. Both varieties have high seasonal performance, excellent quality and also give more profit to a silage system. They are suited to either a one-cut and graze or an intensive silage system. Seagoe and Trend have the highest performance overall in the silage sub-indices.

If a variety is being selected for grazing, the farmer should place a lot of emphasis on the seasonal performance of that variety (spring, mid-season and autumn), quality and persistency, with less emphasis being placed on the silage sub-index. If on the other hand, a farmer is interested in reseeding a field specifically for silage, then the focus on silage will be prioritised, with quality and persistency also being important.

There are three varieties (Clanrye, Solas and Rodrigo) that do not have any values in the PPI list. These varieties have insufficient data in the DAFM simulated grazing protocol to generate a PPI value for them. Therefore, when selecting varieties you should also use the DAFM Recommended List as it presents some information on these varieties.

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Page 17: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

17

t is estimated that there are approximately 30,000 automated milking systems (AMS), also known as robotic milking machines, worldwide. The vast majority are located in Western and Northern Europe, the US and Canada. As witnessed across Europe, the uptake of AMS in Ireland is increasing at an accelerating rate, anecdotal evidence

suggests there are approximately 200 robots on the island of Ireland. In the south, the majority of robots are integrated with a spring-calving, grazing-based system of farming. Cows on these farms are full-time grazing outside which contrasts with the majority of AMS farms worldwide, where cows spend most of their time indoors, fed with a total mixed ration diet.

The robot removes the necessity for farmer involvement in the milking process and herding. The cow decides when to leave the field, volunteer for milking and the robot milks the cow. This decision is motivated by the trained knowledge that new grass is available every eight hours (an ABC system with three grass allocations) or 12 hours (an AB system with two grass allocations), which is accessible upon passing through the milking yard. The farmer can control cow movement from the field by precise grass allocation and management and in the milking yard with specific settings on the AMS, which calculate how often a cow has permission to milk each day.

Grass allocation Critical to the system is the attention to detail and the precision of grass allocation for the herd on a daily basis. It assists with cow movement to the milking yard and maintains good subsequent grass quality when low grass residuals are achieved. For example, if excess grass is allocated in field A by the farmer, either one of two things may occur, depending on the time of the year and how well the cows are trained to the system:

(1) High grass residuals are left behind in field A - cows exit the field. Once they have been trained, they anticipate the time of day they have access to new grass in field B, prior to consuming the quantity allocated to the herd;

(2) High grass residuals are left behind in the next grazing (field B) - cows may stay grazing too long in field A and don’t move to B in time to consume the quantity allocated to the herd.

On the Teagasc Dairygold Research farm we operate a three-way system of grazing, where the farm is divided into three sections (A, B and C - see above) with an eight-hour grass allocation in each section daily. Cows have access to section A from midnight to 8am, section B from 8am to 4pm and section C from 4pm to midnight. Grass allocations are carried out in sections B and C before 8am and at 12pm in section A.

Grazing management with AMS

Anecdotal evidence suggests there are approximately 200 automated milking systems (AMS) in Ireland. Precise grass allocation and management are essential in order for the

AMS system to be successful

I

Words: Dr Cathriona Foley, Teagasc, Moorepark

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Page 18: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

18

To carry out grass allocations there cannot be any cows present in the section, if cows are present they are herded from the field prior to grass allocation. Usually there aren’t cows in the field, however, it does occur from time to time and under this circumstance, herding cows to the milking yard is beneficial to maintaining subsequent herd grass consumption and movement through the system. With this system in place during 2014 we had an average post-grazing height of 5cm and cows entered pre-grazing covers of 1,509kg grass dry matter (DM) per hectare, on average. Grass walks were carried out once a week on the shoulders of the year and twice weekly during the main grass growing periods of the year. This assisted greatly for grass budgeting throughout the year and on average 13,287kg grass DM per hectare was grown during 2014.

MilkingA challenge arises when the number of cows milking on a single AMS unit is increased - 70 cows on the Teagasc Dairygold Research farm in 2014, for example. In this situation there is less free time in the AMS for cows to milk, which could potentially increase time spent waiting to be milked on hard surfaces, and reducing time spent grazing. However, farmers could reduce milking permission (MP), which would also reduce milking frequency, allowing cows out to grass more often. Cows are permitted to milk, based on time since last milking and expected milk yield. The number of times the cow voluntarily visits the AMS, and is permitted to be milked, is defined as the milking frequency (MF). For example, in a three-way system a cow voluntarily visits the milking yard three times daily. However, for one of the three visits, if not enough time has elapsed since her last visit she will be directed straight out to grass, resulting in a MF of two times per day.

Two separate experimental trials were carried out on the Teagasc Dairygold Research farm during 2014, assessing the effect of different MP levels on subsequent MF during mid- and late-lactation. During mid-lactation (April to August) cows with a MP of two times per day had a MF of 1.4 times per day and cows with a MP of three times per day had a MF of 1.8 times per day. Interestingly, there was no difference in milk yield per cow per day between cows with a MF of 1.4 versus 1.8 times/ per day.

A second study compared two levels of MP (3.2 vs 1.8 times per day) and two levels of concentrate supplementation (3 vs 0.84kg) in late-lactation (August to November). Cows with a MP of 3.2 times per day had a MF of 1.9 times per day and cows with an MP of 1.8 times per

day had an MF of 1.3 times per day. There was a milk yield per day difference of 5 per cent between the groups as cows with a MF of 1.8 times per day produced 15.7kg per day and cows with an MF of 1.3 times per day produced 15 kg per day. Interestingly, a lower milking permission resulted in less time spent waiting to be milked per day as cows with an MP of 3.2 waited 2.1 hours per day compared to cows with an MP of 1.8 waiting 1.6 hours per day. Cows receiving 3kg concentrated produced 16.3kg of milk per day compared to 14.5kg milk per day from cows receiving 0.84 kg concentrate per day. There was no difference between cows on high and low concentrate for time spent waiting to be milked.

Table 1. Effect of milking permission and concentrate supplementation on milk yield (MY kg) and milking frequency (MF) per day

Milking permission/day

1.8 3.2

Milk yield/day 15.0 15.7

Milking frequency/day 1.3 1.9

Concentrate (kg)

0.84 3

Milk yield/day 14.5 16.2

Milking frequency/day 1.6 1.7

ConclusionReducing milking frequency reduced time spent waiting to be milked. This may benefit lower ranking cows, providing them increased opportunities to access the AMS, and also reducing time spent standing on hard surfaces. This enhances cow welfare. This study demonstrated that, by implementing appropriate settings on an AMS it is possible to achieve a milk yield response to concentrate supplementation in the latter stages of lactation. This research suggests management strategies involving reduced milking frequency and increased concentration supplementation towards the latter stages of lactation in an effort to maintain milk yield and reduce pre-milking waiting time.

Acknowledgements

This research is funded by the FP7 EU funded project AUTOGRASSMILK which is coordinated by Dr Bernadette O’Brien from Teagasc Moorepark. Fullwood provided the use of their Merlin 225 automated milking system. This research was possible due to the work and dedication of PhD student John Shortall and technician James Daunt. The contribution of numerous work placement students and farm staff on the Teagasc Dairygold research farm has also been instrumental to this research.

Figure 1. Displays milking frequency differences between a group with a milking permission of three times per day (MP3) and a group with a milking permission of two times per day (MP2) over 12 weeks in mid lactation

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2.0

2.2

1 2 3 4 5

Week

Milking permissions 2 v 3 times/day

Milki

ng fr

eque

ncy c

ow/d

ay

6 7 8 9 10 11 12

MP2

MP3

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Page 19: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

19

his issue is now being investigated by the by Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI) in Hillsborough, thanks to co-funding from producers and the exchequer through AgriSearch and Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (DARD) through the

Research Challenge Fund (RCF).

The modern Holstein-Friesian dairy cow was bred to produce high milk yields throughout lactation. When these high-yielding cows do not consume enough energy to meet their requirements, they break down their own body-tissue reserves to provide energy for milk production.

This mobilisation of body tissue is particularly evident in early lactation when the energy requirements for milk production are at their greatest. Cows normally begin to regain this lost body condition from approximately day 100 of lactation onwards. However, if diet quality is poor or if grazing conditions are difficult cows may reach late lactation with less than ideal body condition scores.

Previous AgriSearch-funded research at AFBI Hillsborough demonstrated that cows gain relatively little body condition during an eight-week dry period. Thus, cows with below-target body condition scores at drying-off will generally be too thin at calving, with AFBI research showing that these cows are more likely to be culled during the subsequent lactation.

Consequently, it is generally recommended that cows are dried-off at the target body condition score for calving of 2.5 to 3.0. For this reason, strategies need to be developed to allow thin cows to gain body condition in late lactation.

The effects of three late-lactation and dry-period management strategies are being examined.

These strategies consist of:

(1) Offering cows 5kg of a standard ‘control’ concentrate (17 per cent protein) each day for five weeks prior to drying-off at eight weeks pre-calving;

(2) Offering cows 5kg of a ‘low-protein’ concentrate (13 per cent protein) each day for five weeks prior to drying-off at eight weeks pre-calving; and

(3) Giving cows an ‘extended dry period’ by drying-off at 13 weeks pre-calving.

This study will examine the effect of these management strategies on milk production and food intake in late lactation, body-condition-score change during the dry period, calving difficulties and calf live-weight, and cow performance during the subsequent lactation. All cows will remain on the study for 19 weeks after calving and full results of the study will be available later this year.

See www.agrisearch.org for details of this and other industry backed research aimed at making NI beef, lamb and milk production more competitive.

Investigation into body condition at drying off

Cows dried off below the target condition score for calving of 2.5 to 3.0 often cannot regain enough condition over the eight weeks they are dry

T

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Page 20: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

20

rass is the cheapest source of nutrients for ruminants, with an average production cost of only 6c/kg dry matter (DM). In comparison, bought-in concentrates cost 25-35c/kg DM.

And yet, down on the farm:

• Milk from forage is in long-term decline and dropped below 2,000l/cow for the first time in 2013. Efficient grassland farmers are achieving 4,000 l/cow from grass;

• Beef cattle average daily live-weight gain on grass is 0.80kg compared to the potential of 1.20-1.30kg;

• General dissatisfaction with grass growth from reseeded pastures is widely reported;

• Feeding value of grass silage has stalled over the past 10 years;

• Average grass utilisable dry matter (DM) per hectare per year is around seven tonnes, compared to the potential of 12 tonnes. This difference is worth over €50,000 to the average herd;

• Mineral trends for grass silage over the past 20 years has shown an approximate 50 per cent increase in potassium (K), a doubling in iron (Fe) and a 33 per cent increase in molybdenum (Mo). All three elements are implicated in cattle nutritional disease, as risk factors for hypocalcaemia, depressed immunity and infertility respectively; and

• At a time when livestock production should be becoming more forage-dependent, in reality the reverse is occurring. The answer to the decline in yield nutritive value and contribution of grass to milk and beef production lies in the soil.

Soil compaction

Soil compaction is the greatest threat to grassland production and can reduce yields by up to 40 per cent. Furthermore, a recent survey reported 70 per cent of grassland soils in England and Wales exhibit severe or moderate soil compaction.

Soil compaction has many causes including:

• Intense rainfall (1” water per acre - weight 101 tonnes);

• Cows poaching;

• Heavy machinery;

• Excess slurry applications; and

• Soil mineral imbalance (high magnesium (Mg) – low calcium (Ca) soils).

The consequences of compaction include:

• Grass growth reduced by up to 40 per cent;

• Fertiliser requirement increased – nitrogen (N) by X 2.5 to achieve the same yield;

• Root penetration reduced;

• Earthworm counts reduced by 95 per cent;

• Nutrient run-off increased;

• Soils take longer to warm up in spring;

• Soils are biologically dead; and

• Anaerobic soils resulting in residues degrading more slowly and an increase in the solubility and uptake of iron and molybdenum by grass.

The bottom line is that compaction squeezes air out of soils, and air is just as essential for life below the ground as it is for life above. As soil life declines, soil fertility - which is the ability of soils to supply nutrients to plants in a sustainable way - is reduced.

Soil lifeSoils comprise a myriad of dependent complex life forms from microscopic bacteria and fungi, through protozoa, nematodes and arthropods, to earthworms. But it is earthworms that are the most visual sign of soil life. Healthy soil is reckoned to have over three tonnes of earthworms per hectare, which is considerably more than the weight of livestock grazing on the surface.

They consume over 15 tonnes of soil during the course of a year which is essential for nutrient cycling, drainage and building a stable soil structure which is more resistent to soil compaction. Look for 15-20 worms in a typical spade-hole if the soil is in a healthy state. The other significant threat to soil life is excessive application of putrid, anaerobic, smelly slurry. Cattle and especially pig slurry contains a high level of ammonia, which is highly toxic to worms. The sight of gulls following the slurry spreader and picking up dead earthworms used to be all too common, but on many farms now the birds stay away because the worms have long gone.

The answer lies in the soilAs cost pressures continue to rise for livestock farmers, it is increasingly

important that they get maximum production from their pastures

Words: Dr David Atherton, Thomson & Joseph Ltd

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

G

Page 21: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

21

So, compaction reduces soil life, which is further compromised by slurry, resulting in up to 40 per cent less grass yield. In addition, the mineral balance of grass changes with higher levels of K, Fe and Mo increasing the risk of hypocalcaemia, infertility and poor cow health.

Dig a hole

To assess the extent of soil compaction, dig a hole. A spade’s depth and width will provide a wealth of information, not only on compaction but also soil health and fertility.

Look for the following criteria:

Good Poor

Compaction Not apparent Surface compaction

Texture Uniform Horizontal compressed bands

Smell Earthy Stale

Colour Brown Grey and mottled

Rooting depth Deep Shallow

Earthworms 15-20 <10

Drainage Effective Surface waterlogging

The photo (left) shows a typically surface-compacted soil, with a horizontal band of compressed soil at 10-15 cms deep, just below the grass line. Going below this compacted zone the soil is more crumbly and open. Rooting is shallow and no earthworms can be seen. This is definitely a soil with poor fertility that is not achieving its potential in growing grass.

Soil Improvement Plan

At a time when livestock farmers are being encouraged to grow more grass, and to produce more milk and meat from forage, soil compaction is the single biggest threat to achieving these aims. The key actions required to improve soil fertility are to get air into the soil, keep it there and support soil life. In 2013, in conjunction with Devenish Nutrition and Lakeland Dairies, a Soil Improvement Plan was developed based on:

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Page 22: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

22

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015 FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

1. Aeration – to disrupt surface compaction and get air into the soil. Most of the soil nutrients and biological activity is in the top 15-20cm. The McKenna Aerator was selected because of its design and workload. It can operate up to 15km/hour and has the capability to cut through the surface compacted layer to a depth of 7” allowing air penetration and improving drainage;

2. Improving soil structure – to keep air in the soil and make it more resistant to compaction. It has been recognised for many years that high magnesium soils are ‘sticky’ and more liable to clump and compact. High calcium soils are more ‘open’, but again are potentially unstable leading to collapse and compaction. Getting the calcium-magnesium balance right for a stable soil structure involves a soil analysis. Corrective actions can include liming, or the application of gypsum (calcium sulphate) or kieserite (magnesium sulphate); and

3. Composting slurry – converting slurry from a putrid, toxic waste into a valuable fertiliser nutrient source that supports soil life requires an aerobic digestion or composting process to occur.

Translating this principle to slurry can have the same positive effects. BioAg’s Digest-it liquid microbial composting culture has been proven to improve N levels by 33 per cent by converting ammonia into the more stable organic-N form. It also progressively composts slurry by moving the microbial balance

from anaerobic (putrid) to aerobic (composted). Slurry solids are digested producing a more uniform slurry which requires less energy to stir, pump and spread. Surface crusting is reduced and odour gradually dissipates. A cost-effective ratio of 2.5:1 in slurry fertiliser nutrient status has been shown from the composting action of Digest-it.

BenefitsBuilding and maintaining soil life and fertility using the Soil

Improvement Plan will have the following benefits:

• Increased grassland production;

• Higher feeding value of grass;

• Improved mineral balance and reduction in risk factors to cow health;

• Environmental benefits from reduction of potent anaerobic greenhouse gases such as Nitrous Oxide, Methane and Hydrogen Sulphide; and

• Increased livestock production from forage.

Monitor farmsLakeland Dairies has established monitor dairy farms to evaluate this Soil Improvement Plan over the next three years to measure its impact on both grassland productivity and cow health.

Page 23: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

23

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015 FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

hase two of a trial examining the Film&Film (F&F) bale wrapping system has concluded that the F&F system continued to offer better protection to baled silage during an extended bale storage period of 13 months.

The use of the F&F wrapping system resulted in an increased average forage yield of 5.7kg dry matter (DM) per F&F bale. When quantified in terms of ME (metabolisable energy) this additional 5.7kg of DM per bale, offers dairy farmers an additional 11.6l of milk production or beef farmers an additional 1.5kg of beef production. Whilst it is generally accepted that a longer storage period increases the opportunity for losses to occur, this second phase of the trial demonstrated that these F&F wrapped bales, that had been stored for over a year, had 54 per cent fewer losses on average, compared to the traditionally wrapped net and bale wrap bales, also produced in this trial.

The superior performance of the F&F wrapping system over a longer storage period, follows an even better performance during phase one of the trial, which demonstrated that the F&F wrapping system delivered an additional 7.35kg DM per F&F bale following a more standard six month storage period. When quantified in terms of ME, this earlier batch of F&F bales offered dairy farmers an additional 15l of milk production or beef farmers an additional 1.9kg of beef production. Together, both phases of this commercial farm trial have shown that the F&F wrapping system can be beneficial to farmers.

Key findingsWhereas the phase one bales were opened and assessed 206 days after ensiling, the phase two bales were stored for a further 200 days taking their total ensiling period to 406 days. The keys findings of the on-farm assessment and the chemical analysis of both the F&F and net & balewrap treatments were:

• The F&F wrapping system offered better protection and preservation to silage bales stored for extended periods;

• Whilst the total storage losses for both wrapping systems increased with a longer storage period, the losses incurred on the net & balewrap bales (24.5kg) were more than double those of the F&F bales (11.4kg);

• The average mould losses for the net and bale wrap bales of 16.8 kg DM were significantly higher than the average mould losses of 6.59 kg DM recorded for the F&F bales;

• At 13 months, the F&F bales showed a similar level of storage losses as the net & balewrap bales had displayed at six months;

While the longer storage period saw the sugar levels drop in both wrapping systems, the sugar level measured in the F&F bales (48.8 g/kg DM) was 21 per cent higher than the sugar level in net and bale wrap bales (38.4 g/KG);

More forageAs with phase one of the trial, the reduced losses that resulted through the use of the F&F wrapping system meant that the farmer gained more forage to feed to his herd. For the beef farmer involved in this trial the additional forage meant:

• The farmer gained an average of 5.7kg DM per F&F bale;

• As 1kg DM = 11.8 MJ (mega joule) ME this means that the farmer gained 67.26 MJ ME per F&F bale;

• In order to produce 1kg of beef you need approximately 45 MJ ME;

Therefore the 67.26 MJ ME averagely gained for each F&F bale could give an additional 1.5kg of beef production.

Although an additional 1.5kg of beef production per bale may sound like a small gain, one should consider that, when multiplied across the total F&F bales that a herd could consume annually, it could make a difference.

For example, a farm using 300 F&F bales during the winter months could potentially add 450kg of additional beef production.

In the case of a dairy farmer, the additional forage would also have facilitated an increase in production as follows:

• A dairy farmer would gain an average of 5.7kg DM per F&F bale;

• As 1kg of DM = 11.8 MJ ME, this means that the farmer gained 67.26 MJ ME per F&F bale (5.7kg DM x 11.8 MJ ME);

• In order to produce one litre of milk you need: ± 5.8MJ/litre MJ ME.

Therefore the 67.26 MJ ME averagely gained for each of the F&F bales could give an additional 11.6l of milk production (67.26 / 5.8 = 11.5l).

Commenting on the findings of phase two, Seán O’Connor, general manager, Silotite Ireland said: “The extra 15l of milk production made possible through the use of the F&F system in phase one has been further enhanced by an additional 11.6l of milk for each F&F bale opened in phase two. Collectively, the F&F system could provide an overall 387.5l of extra milk or and additional 49.3kg of beef production across the 27 bales made using the F&F system during this trial.”

“Increases of this magnitude can make a significant difference to the profitability and success of farming operations. Switching to the F&F system for greater bale numbers could provide tangible and ongoing financial benefits,” he said.

Commenting on the outcomes of phase two of the F&F wrapping comparison trial, Dr Dave Davies of Silage Solutions Ltd (the independent consultant who conducted the trial) said: “The results for the ‘on-farm’ assessment of the bales after 406 days of ensiling are in broad agreement with those from the 206 days assessment, with the F&F bales being better than the net & balewrap treatment.”

“The better film seal, the lower storage losses and the lower mould losses combined to give a lower total loss per bale which can be quantified into real milk or beef production gains for the farmer.”

Yield benefits from film and film wrappingTrial results examining the Film&Film bale wrapping system show that it offers better

protection during an extended bale storage period

P

Words: Dr Dave Davies, Silage Solutions Ltd

Page 24: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

24

ignificant investment continues to be evident in the agri sector, primarily, but not exclusively, driven by dairy farmers due to abolition of milk quotas. The nature of farming, like any business, is that farmers are continually investing in their farms, whether it is for buildings and machinery, or

measures to improve productivity or to expand from their current position. Farm investment activity is likely to remain buoyant with the anticipated announcement of further grant-aided schemes.

Volatility, across all farm systems, has been a feature of the agri sector in recent years, impacting incomes and making farm planning and cash flow management much more difficult. It is important to account for this volatility in investment plans and ensure that the farm business is able to weather periods of reduced income, while taking advantage of the good years.

VolatilityIt is widely accepted that not every year will be a great year in farming, or indeed a great year for all farm sectors. Farmers have always contended with a level of income cyclicality that has heightened significantly in the past decade. At AIB we now consider volatility to be the norm that we must factor in when lending to the sector on day one. All of our research indicates that farmers now see income volatility and weather as the key challenges in the years ahead. In lending to the agri sector, we lend on the basis of a through-the-cycle view of prices, factoring in periods of low and high prices. We recognise that, in reality, some years the farm will generate a cash surplus and some years a cash deficit that must be managed. This is not a simple challenge.

It is useful to look at a farming sector that has been dealing with volatility for many years.

How to achieve full financial benefit when investingJohn Farrell, agri sector specialist AIB, examines some of the key considerations for farmers planning farm investment, to ensure they achieve the full financial benefit

S

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Page 25: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

25

AIB has much experience of banking the pig sector, which has long been exposed to the vagaries of the world market, receives no market support and experiences a high level of income volatility exacerbated in recent years by feed price fluctuations. Pig farmers have responded to this volatility by improving production efficiencies on an ongoing basis, managing their cost base (in particular feed cost), undertaking strong financial management, including cash flow budgeting, and building a buffer cash fund in good years to support the business through lean years.

Better before biggerUndoubtedly, the greatest opportunity to mitigate against volatility lies inside the farm gate. As price takers for both inputs and outputs, improving the efficiency and cost base of the farm is central to remaining profitable, particularly at times of low income. While lower cost producers are not immune to the effects of income volatility, over the long term,. they are more resilient to income swings as they are more profitable at lower output prices and are better able to withstand tough periods over time. A vital part of planning for the future involves looking at the present and establishing the existing levels of efficiency. The Teagasc Profit Monitor shows that there is considerable scope within the farm gate to improve efficiency and profitability among farms, across all farm sectors. The priority should be to improve and maximise existing efficiencies before considering further investment or expansion.

While a significant level of farm investment has taken place over the past few years, our research shows that one-in-three farmers are planning to make an investment in their farms in the next three years. This figures rises to one-in-two in the dairy sector, as farmers plan to avail of the opportunity presented by the removal of milk quotas, with two-thirds of dairy farmers planning to increase milk output.

Our core message to farmers considering farm investment or expansion is ‘better before bigger’. Seek to improve your efficiency and cost base before embarking on any further investment or expansion, otherwise the result will be a multiplication of inefficiencies resulting in, either no, or low increased profits. Farm profitability is as dependent on cost control and technical management as it is on scale.

StructureWhen undertaking farm investment, it is important to structure finance correctly to ensure you get the full benefit of the investment. Borrowings should be structured over the useful life of the asset; 15 years for farm buildings and five to seven for machinery or breeding stock. This will help ensure that you don’t put undue pressure on farm cash flow by trying to repay a loan in an unrealistic time frame. This is particularly true in an expansion scenario as there may be a lag period before there is a positive impact on farm cash flow.

A well-structured investment on day one should enable you to see the full financial benefit of the investment at an early stage. In good income years, it can be tempting to undertake capital investment from cash flow. If investment is undertaken from cash flow it is essential to cost the investment properly, seeking quotations from suppliers. Starting an investment from cash flow and running out of money, because the investment was not accurately costed, may lead to delays and add further to costs.

Even in cases where investment is not funded from cash flow, it is important to understand the effect, if any, the investment may have on the farm’s cash flow. For example, if you are building a new shed to accommodate increased stock numbers, the cost of retaining additional stock and the opportunity cost of not selling them needs to be factored into plans, and this can be easily overlooked.

ManagementAll indications are that the level of volatility we have experienced is likely to continue into the future. As a result, all farmers, like pig farmers, should consider how they can ‘buffer’ their business from the effects of volatility. It is worth considering putting some cash aside in good years to support the business through the lean years. Forward purchasing of inputs can help manage cash flow going into a challenging income period. For example, some farmers bought fertiliser forward at the back end of 2014 when they had cash available and in anticipation of the possibility of rising fertiliser prices in 2015.

For all farmers considering investment it is important to take the necessary time to plan the investment, ensuring it fundamentally serves to enhance and strengthen the existing operation. If you are contemplating farm investment or seeking additional working capital, contact AIB to see how best we can support your individual needs.

Allied Irish Banks, p.l.c. is regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland.

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Page 26: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

26

lmost 200 dairy farmers attended this AgriSearch farm event, where the merits of taking a moderate build-up approach to feeding concentrates at the start of lactation, were examined.

Drew and Valerie McConnell, along with four other farm businesses, were involved in on-farm research, co-funded by AgriSearch and the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (DARD) Research Challenge Fund, which has sought to test a novel approach to early lactation feeding.

Opening the on-farm debate Dr Andrew Dale of Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute (AFBI), Hillsborough, said that most health problems occur immediately pre-calving, or within two to four weeks post-calving, due to physical, social, dietary and metabolic stress. One possible way to reduce metabolic stress levels is to delay concentrate build-up and reduce dietary protein levels. Two studies carried out at AFBI showed that delayed build-up strategies led to higher forage intakes, which in turn, improved rumen health. Over the whole lactation period there was no effect on milk yield or composition and no effect on fertility.

ProteinThe concept was then examined on five local dairy farms, including Drew and Valerie’s, in a study involving 385 cows, calved from October to April. One treatment involved an immediate build-up of concentrates with normal protein levels and the other treatment used a delayed build-up strategy with lower protein levels.

This trial showed that there is some loss of milk with the delayed build-up, but this is compensated for, by feeding less concentrates. In addition, conception to first service was significantly improved with the delayed build-up strategy, although overall conception rate was not affected.

The delayed build-up strategy could have a role on farms with high rumen health issues. However, farms wishing to embark on this strategy must have high quality silage available.

Taking the combined results of the Hillsborough and on-farm studies, Dr Dale recommended that a moderate build-up approach should be adopted, with concentrates increased over the first 21 days of lactation.

See www.agrisearch.org for details of these and other projects selected for support by AgriSearch, and the NI Agricultural R&D Council.

Moderate concentrate build-up

Farmers Drew and Valerie McConnell, from Omagh, played host to a successful AgriSearch farm walk recently, which attracted

producers from Donegal, Leitrim and Northern Ireland

A

Ian McCluggage, Valerie McConnell, Mary McAvoy, and David Little pictured at the AgriSearch farm walk.

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Page 27: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

27

he simpler Trend mower units from Claas are operated using the tractor spool valves without any electric control terminal, but if required, can be incorporated into the tractor’s headland management. The optional individual lifting function is operated using a hydraulic isolator

valve, which makes it possible to pre-select the mowing units.

Contour series mowers are, again, operated using the tractor’s spool valves, but the pre-selection is made using the new Operator control panel or an ISOBUS control terminal.

Business and Duo mower units utilise load-sensing hydraulics and are controlled using either the new Operator terminal or the ISOBUS-compatible Communicator II terminal, which allows the various mower functions to be assigned to the function buttons on the tractor’s multi-function control lever. The AutoSwather model series is also controlled using the ISOBUS Communicator II control terminal.

The company’s new high output triple mowers are equally impressive. A total of seven new high output Disco triple mower and mower conditioners are now available, ranging from the 9.10m wide Disco 9400 C Duo to the Disco 8500 Trend, which has a working width of 8.10m. This is a new entry-level model that has a low power requirement and is simple to operate, targeted at medium-sized farms. The range also includes two Contour specification models, the Disco 8500 (8.10m) and the Disco 9200 (8.90m), which are also new additions.

On Business, AutoSwather and reverse drive Duo ranges, the load sensing hydraulic system enables active control of the ground pressure directly via the ISOBUS control terminal. They also have a hydraulic non-stop, break-back system as standard, which enables the mower unit to swing back automatically without reversing.

A total of nine new mounted or trailed Contour straight mower, or

mower conditioner versions are available, ranging from the Disco 2800, which has a working width of 2.80m up to the 3.80m-wide Disco 4000, providing a wide range of models for small and medium-sized farms.

New features, such as the optional hydraulic transport lock, make these models easy to operate. There is also a new unhitching option, which allows the mower to be unhitched in the transport position safely, and in a way which saves space. In the trailed mower range two new models are available, the Disco 3200 TC and the TC AS which has a conveyor system for swath grouping, both of which have working widths of 3m.

All the new Contour models retain the hydro-pneumatic active float suspension, which enables the ground pressure on the mower unit to be changed from the driver’s seat when mowing and adjusted to the conditions in the field. They are also protected by a mechanical break-back system which moves the mower unit backwards and up, so that it is raised above the obstacle. To continue driving, the machine must be reversed slightly until the mechanical break-back system is locked again.

Completing the Disco mower line-up are two front mowers, the Disco 3200F and the Disco 3200FC mower conditioner, both of which have a 3.00m cutting width. To ensure optimum ground contour following, the mower units are fitted with the existing ‘Profil’ kinematics. On the principle that it should be the ground that guides the mower, and not the tractor, the mower is suspended and pulled using a trailing linkage around a pivot point close to the ground.

This allows the mower bed to swing both longitudinally and laterally, so accurately following the ground contours independent of the tractor front axle. There is a choice of spring-based suspension or the hydro-pneumatic active float suspension to allow the suspension to be adjusted to the current conditions at any time from the cab.

An impressive Claas of mowers

Claas has introduced some very impressive upgrades to its mower

ranges. Editor of Irish Farmers Monthly, Matt O’Keeffe, gives an

overview of the offering

Words: Matt O’Keeffe, Editor Irish Farmers Monthly

T

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Page 28: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

28

Profitable lamb production trials at UCDDr Tommy Boland discusses UCD researchers’ sheep grazing trials, and their

findings, in the exploration of profitable lamb production

ver the last three to four years, the national sheep flock has stabilised and began to increase, indicating a degree of confidence in the industry. This is coupled with increased lamb prices over the last number of years, but seasonal variability remains. Perhaps this was

most stark in 2014 when lamb prices dropped by €20 per head in the space of a couple of weeks. The real negative impact of this was on farmers who were feeding high levels of concentrates to ensure lambs finished for the higher priced early market, but failed to quite make it. To a large degree the price farmers receive for the lamb is dictated by outside influences and only partially under the control of the farmer. The same can be said of input prices, but the farmer can exercise more control over the volume of inputs utilised. Sheep profit monitor figures for 2013 (the most recent available) show that feed and fertiliser are the two main variable costs on lowland sheep farming, accounting for a combined total of 57 per cent of total variable costs incurred.

SupplementationResearch work at Lyons Research Farm, University College Dublin (UCD), is looking at ways to reduce these costs. Frank Campion is engaged in a PhD looking at the nutritional management of the ewe throughout the production cycle. His work in 2014 focused on concentrate supplementation of twin suckling ewes during the first seven weeks of lactation.

Milk yield in a twin suckling ewe will peak at three to four weeks after lambing. The lamb will begin to consume solid feed at around seven weeks of age, although this can happen significantly sooner depending on the system.

Concentrate supplementation during this early lactation window is quite common on Irish sheep farms. But, the question remains as to whether or not we see an improvement in performance, and most importantly, a financial return on the investment.

Three treatmentsFrank’s study consisted of three treatments, with ewes all offered grass to appetite. In addition, one group received 500g of concentrates per day for the first three weeks of the lactation, the second group received 500g of concentrates per day for the first seven weeks of lactation and the final group received no concentrate supplementation.

In this study, grass was zero grazed and fed to the ewes indoors. We needed to do this to accurately measure intakes. Grass offered was of high quality throughout the study with an average pre-grazing herbage mass of 1,100kg dry matter (DM) per hectare. The findings indicated that when concentrates were offered, intakes of grass declined and offering concentrates had no beneficial effects in terms of increasing total daily (DM) intake.

Ewes offered concentrates throughout the feeding period did regain more body weight and body condition prior to weaning and they tended to produce more milk than their un-supplemented counterparts. It also appears that ewes, supplemented with concentrates, tend to have a more persistent lactation curve than the un-supplemented ewes.

These differences in milk yield were not transferred to improvements in lamb growth rates. This may be partially explained by the fact that milk yield differences were not observed until week six of lactation and the supplement was removed in week seven of lactation.

O

Words: Dr Tommy Boland, UCD

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Page 29: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

29

The findingsThese findings would indicate that where adequate supplies of good quality grass are available in springtime for twin suckling ewes, performance benefits from concentrate supplementation are minimal. It is important to state that these ewes were fed indoors and repeating this work outdoors is required before final conclusions can be drawn.

An additional, and perhaps even more important finding from this study, is the impact grass moisture content has on the intake of grass, and more accurately grass DM. On wet days and days when grass DM was low, intake was significantly reduced. For the range of grass DM recorded in this study, as grass DM increased, we witnessed an intake increase of 20 per cent. This suggests that even where good quality grass is available, intake can be greatly restricted in wet conditions. As this study was conducted indoors, one could reasonably expect that the impact would be even greater in outdoor grazing conditions, where the wet weather conditions will alter the animals’ grazing behaviour.

Alternative mixturesThe second area of study we are engaged in is examining the role of alternative grazing mixtures in the grazing rotation for sheep. This work is being carried out by Connie Grace, in conjunction with doctors

Bridget Lynch and Helen Sheridan. This year we have four farmlets established at Lyons’s farm, containing pastures consisting of one of the following mixtures: perennial ryegrass only; perennial ryegrass plus white clover; a six species mix (two grasses; perennial ryegrass and timothy, two legumes; white clover and red clover, two herbs; plantain and chicory); and a nine species mix (three grasses; perennial ryegrass, timothy and cocksfoot, three legumes; white clover, red clover and birdsfoot trefoil, three herbs; plantain, chicory and yarrow).

The focus of our part of the study is to examine the level of animal performance which can be supported by these multi-species swards that are known to give benefits form an ecological and biodiversity point of view. Our early results, from plot based studies, clearly show that these types of mixtures have very good DM production potential with yields of up to 19 tonnes of DM achieved with some mixtures. Questions remain about the quality of DM, particularly in terms of digestibility. Other questions revolve around the seasonality of production and the persistency of the various components of the sward under sheep grazing management.

The next two years will hopefully answer some of these questions and can potentially point to new sward mixtures for sheep grazing.

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Page 30: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

30

his new era of quota-less production provides a fantastic opportunity for Irish milk producers. It is worth stating however, that it is about producing more milk, as an industry, and not a race to have as many cows as possible. All of the talk is about controlling feed and variable costs, but fixed costs

can easily spiral out of control if extra cows are put on a farm where further infrastructure is required.

There is a new quota on the way in the form of land and labour. Very high figures are quoted for rented land at present in an effort to get more grass for all the extra cows. Skilled labour for the expanding dairy enterprises will also prove difficult to source.

Exploiting potentialFor all milk producers, exploiting the optimum potential of grazed grass should form the basis of their management systems. It is still by far the cheapest feed on a dry matter (DM) basis. But before it can be utilised effectively, it is necessary to ensure that it is managed correctly. Many of the grazing problems that occur are associated with the mismanagement of grass in early season, up to first cut silage.

Grass managementI often have to remind dairy farmers that it is their responsibility - and not their cows’ - to manage their grass! Under-utilisation, by either delaying turnout or by applying insufficient grazing pressure, will waste grass and result in poorer quality swards in later season.

Over-stocking of grazing ground in poor conditions can result in poaching which may do permanent damage to the grass quality. Ultimately, in order to optimise your cows’ genetic potential you must feed and manage them properly. Be sure to complement grass when they can’t eat enough of it, or don’t have access to enough of it.

It is worth remembering that if cows respond to feeding with extra production, and there is a positive economic response, then it is correct to keep feeding them. However, if cows don’t respond to extra feeding then stop feeding them. Too often we are told that cows need nothing other than grazed grass. This is not an accurate reflection of the quality of cows on most Irish dairy farms. Now that quotas are gone, many will discover that with good nutrition management, their cows are much better than they have given them credit for.

ReseedingProviding a good diet for dairy production is vital to maximise on-farm profit. Reseeding grassland is an important way to ensure quality forage. The benefits can be seen in a number of ways. New grass swards will provide higher yields of quality grass at lower costs, with a 25 per cent (and upwards) increase in DM yields, an increase in digestibility, and therefore, improved animal performance. Reseeded swards also respond much better to nitrogen (N) application. Key signs that reseeding is needed include: a noticeable decrease in silage quality; patchiness in the sward; a decrease in milk production in a particular field; and a high proportion of weed grasses compared to perennial ryegrasses.

Challenges of post-quota milk production

For the first time in 31 years, milk production is free from quotas, but it is important not to lose focus on what matters most, and that is

overall farm profit and return on investment

T

Words: Brian Reidy, Premier Farm Nutrition

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Page 31: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

31

ProductionThe above factors not only affect grazed grass quality but also the quality of grass silage, which may be conserved off these swards. Livestock are the best judges of the feeds which we provide them with. As with grazing, the starting point for good quality silage is the sward. Old permanent pastures are likely to be more difficult to ensile and will have a lower feed value than ryegrass swards which have high sugar contents and are ideal for ensiling. The heading date of varieties has a large impact on cutting date and subsequent feed value as the feed value will fall rapidly as seed heads are produced.

Grassland deteriorates with age and unbelievably only 50 per cent of the sown species remain in most swards after five years! The presence of a high proportion of weeds in a sward results in later growth, lower digestibility of grass, lower digestibility of silage, lower palatability, lower yields, slower growth and a poorer response to N. All this means that inferior quality food is being provided for the high producing animals on the farm.

Poor quality forage sources result in an increased dependency on more expensive concentrates. When ensiling grass it is vital to try to maximise the DM and metabolisable energy (ME) values of the silage. Good intake characteristics and energy will result in better productivity from the forage and as a result a reduction in milk production costs. Remember also that poor quality silage will have a detrimental effect on replacement heifer growth and performance. Small heifers never mature into good cows that last in your herd.

The basics On most dairy farms in Ireland, grass silage is not of desired quality. That statement may not please farmers but it is a reality. Silage quality has not improved in Ireland over the last 25 years, despite all the technology and information now available.

What do we need to do better?:

• Soil science needs to be used to establish the appropriate nutrients required to grow a successful crop of silage;

• N application for silage really should be split in two to feed the crop when it needs it rather than spreading it all in the one day and hoping it all gets used;

• First cut silage should be cut in the first two to three weeks of May, if good quality is to be achieved;

• There should be good field practice with regard to mowing and rake usage. Leave the clay in the field;

• The decision to use an additive should be based on the desire to ensile a good quality grass, ensuring you get to feed a good quality silage;

• Compact the silage very well in the pit and cover it properly eliminating air; and

• When feeding out silage the pit face must be managed to prevent waste - a shear grab really should be used.

Changing practicesOver the last few years silage production practices have changed and many have had a negative effect on silage quality. I often see that mowers are cutting too tight, resulting in clay entering the silage pit, causing contamination and moulds. Perhaps we should go back to rolling silage fields in the spring! Also of concern is the use of rakes on silage which are set too tight to the ground, raking in further clay. The above issues have seen moulds and toxins in a significant number of silage pits in the last few years. High ash readings in analysis are confirming this problem. There is also a tendency to over wilt silage. Grass really should not spend longer than 24 hrs on the ground before getting to the pit. Over-dry silage is difficult to ensile and does not feed well.

Better nutritionMore and more producers will look at getting extra milk from each cow in their herd. This will be driven by a scarcity of available grazing ground, a requirement to spend more on facilities and a lack of labour. Firstly, if cows can milk more over their lactation they need to consume more food and utilise it well. Higher yielders are associated with fertility problems, however that is too easy an excuse to give for cows not going in calf. The main reason that dairy cows do not go back in calf on Irish farms is a lack of energy during the critical periods post calving right through to the breeding season.

Alternatives With land limitations due to availability and rental costs, many have looked at outsourcing feed and forages for milk production. Rather than producing all of the silage required on the grazing platform many are now buying maize silage and whole-crop cereals for their cows. Growing or purchasing maize silage or whole-crop cereals are actually cheaper per tonne of DM than home produced grass silage and far cheaper than producing silage on rented ground. Apart from being cheaper these alternative forages also provide a more reliable source of quality forage for efficient milk production. In a year when silage quality is not good due to conditions outside your control it must still be fed and either you accept underperformance or you spend a lot of extra money to maintain performance, either way you are out of pocket. Apart from providing a more reliable forage source these alternative forages are an ideal complement to grazed grass. As buffer feeds where cows cannot meet their energy requirements from grazed grass, these forages are ideal as they are low in protein and high in energy in the form of starch. This means that they are a good complement to grazed grass and have a very low grass replacement relative to concentrates.

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Page 32: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

32

arm deaths comprised 55 per cent of all workplace deaths in 2014, even though just 6 per cent of the workforce is employed in the sector. This sad fact must motivate us all to cut the level of tragedy, pain and suffering associated with farming.

Farm accidents occur for a wide range of reasons, Figure 1. indicates that farm vehicles and machines, livestock, collapsing objects and slurry incidents account for 89 per cent of accidental deaths.

Prevention strategies use the following approaches: firstly they remove hazards from the farm environment and then influence human behaviour to adopt safe procedures. These strategies are urgently needed for Irish farming.

ProfileThe risk of being struck or crushed by a moving vehicle has increased substantially and is now the predominant cause of farm deaths. In 2014, 16 (60 per cent) deaths were associated with farm vehicles or

machines and the majority involve crushes or blows.

Over time, the size of the average Irish tractor has increased, and as a consequence, good visibility in all directions may not always be achievable when operating such a vehicle. It is vital to ensure that people, particularly older farmers and children, are not in the vicinity of moving vehicles in the farmyard.

There have been a number crush deaths associated with tractors rolling away in farmyards. These are silent killers! Farmers, preoccupied with the task at hand, do not see or hear the vehicle coming until it is too late.

There have been several deaths associated with baled silage also. Farmers have been crushed either by a falling bale, or while removing the bale wrapping with the load raised.

SafetyAttention is needed when parking vehicles to prevent ‘run-away’ which can occur on slopes, and can result in crushing. The principal precautions are as follows:

Managing the risks of farming

Following a tragic 2014 when 30 people died in farm accidents, farm safety must be given top

priority by all in the sector

F

Words: John McNamara, Teagasc farm safety specialist

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Farm vehicles, machinery and collapsing objects are among the causes of 89 per cent of accidental deaths on farms.

Page 33: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

33

• Stop the engine, leave the fuel-control in the shut-off position and remove the key;

• Apply the handbrake securely;

• Park on level ground where possible. Leave the vehicle in gear. If on a slope, use the reverse gear if facing downhill and low forward gear if facing uphill;

• Use wheel stops if necessary to prevent a vehicle rolling from its parked position; and

• As vehicles vary in operating procedures, always follow the handbook instructions.

The majority of accidents with power take-off (PTO) occur when using stationary-operated machines, particularly slurry tankers, slurry agitators or grain rollers, so particular care is needed in these situations. Ensure complete covering of the power-shaft and adopt a work procedure where you do not operate near the rotating shaft. Also, particular care is needed when adjacent to operating stationary-powered machines, such as diet feeders. Getting caught in the moving parts can be fatal.

Tyre inflationTyre-pumping practices should be reviewed following two tragic tyre-related farm accidents in 2014. The Health and Safety Executive in Britain has issued a guidance leaflet on safety during tyre inflation in motor vehicle repair, including agricultural-type tyres. This is available http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg433.pdf and should be read in its entirety.

This leaflet advocates using a clip-on chuck to connect the air line with a quick-release coupling at the operator’s end. Use an air line hose long enough to allow the operator to stay outside the likely explosion trajectory during inflation.

Use enough bead lubricant when seating the tyre and remove the air line after use to prevent air seepage and possible over inflation. Don’t use a valve connector that requires the operator to hold it in place, and don’t exceed the recommended tyre pressure. Do not use unrestricted air lines or allow the control valve to be jammed open.

Load collapsesLoads collapsing or falling, particularly from heights, and untidy farmyards are associated with a significant number of deaths. Farms are dynamic places and this aspect of managing the farm needs to be kept under constant review. Particular attention needs to be given to positioning sharp objects in a safe manner and securing weights, for example, unattached heavy gates can pose a particular threat to children. Always consider the safest way to access heights and use a safe platform with edge protection.

Freshly calvedA recent trend in livestock accidents is an increase in the number of fatal accidents involving freshly calved cows. The number is

now almost as high as bull fatalities. Farmers should use a range of protective measures when handling these cows, including using facilities to minimise contact with them, culling animals that show aggression, and breeding for docility. Vigilance is always required in the presence of cows and calves.

Risk assessment Completing and updating a risk assessment document is a legal requirement under the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act (2005). In this document, key questions regarding safety and health are asked and information on causes of accidents, along with pictures of key controls, are provided. Safety and health actions needing attention should be listed and acted upon.

The document should be kept on the farm and a HSA inspector can examine the document during an inspection. The HSA recently announced that it plans to use a direct prosecution approach in the following situations: children under-seven carried as passengers on tractors; and uncovered power-shafts and slurry tanks.

Safety trainingTeagasc provides half-day training courses to farmers on completion of the risk assessment document. The feed-back from half-day training courses is very positive. Ninety nine percent of farmers agreed that it would be worthwhile to offer the course to all farmers, 97 per cent of farmers agreed that the course motivated them to implement health and safety measures while 100 per cent stated that they planned to make health and safety improvements on their farms.

Discussion groupsTeagasc will be highlighting farm health and safety issues in its publications, at events and particularly at discussion groups during 2015. Discussion groups are particularly valuable due to their interactive nature. Sometimes it may be hard to spot hazards on your own farm. Why not ask a friend or neighbour to take a look around and suggest ways to improve safety.

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Machinery, 36, 19%Livestock, 26, 13%Drowning/Gas, 22, 11%Falls from height, 17, 9%Falling objects/Collapses, 14, 7%

Timber related, 13, 7%Electrocution, 3, 2%Others, 4, 2%Tractors/Farm vehicles, 58, 30%

Figure 1.

Page 34: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

34

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015 FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

he main areas to focus on at turnout are: parasite control at grass; trace element supplementation; lameness; monitoring and maximising performance at grass; and the general health of your stock. After turnout, carry out a full power hosing with an appropriate disinfectant to get

rid of all dirt and bacteria. Xtremeklene will help to speed up cleaning and give a better clean. Always use a Department-approved disinfectant (e.g. Osmodex).

Hoof healthThe first area to look at is the general health and well-being of your herd and facilities, including roadways, paddocks and drinkers. Lameness after housing needs to be addressed with hoof paring as required. Cows should be routinely walked through a footbath on leaving the parlour after milking, using King-On-Blue solution. This will clean and harden hooves after winter. It is good practice to power-wash hooves as cows leave the parlour to prevent dirt entering the footbath.

The length of time this should be continued will depend on the state of your cows’ feet. Products with zinc sulphate help harden their feet for walking to and from the milking parlour for the grazing season. Roadways and gateways to the paddocks should be in good order to minimise lameness issues. Paddocks should also be fenced and arranged in an efficient manner for rotational grazing, with the most efficient access to your parlour. Cows don’t make money walking on roads!

Drinkers in paddocks should be cleaned to reduce any risk of contamination, and should have sufficient volumes of water and

flow rates to cater for your herd. Tetany is also a major issue for the dairy herd in the spring. Cal Mag in the ration, dusting of paddocks, mineral lick buckets and magnesium in the water drinkers are the main options of supplementation to prevent tetany. Remember, the cow can only store magnesium for 10-12 hours so ensure they have regular access to magnesium during the

at-risk period.

Trace elements In general grass supplies 80 per cent of an animal’s trace element requirements. This depends on: grass quality and quantity; part of the country; antagonistic factors (e.g. high molybdenum areas, regions high in sulphur or iron etc.); animal performance; and the weather. Many trace elements cannot be stored in the body, so a daily supply is beneficial to performance. Excess trace elements tend to get wasted so the best approach is a little and often. Trace elements that are essential for the dairy cow are copper (Cu), iodine (I), zinc (Zn), selenium (Se), cobalt (Co) and manganese (Mn). Deficiencies of these will cause infertility issues including silent heats, ovarian cysts and anoestrus. This will also lead to retained placentas, reduced immunity and poor milk output, and may contribute to elevation of somatic cell counts (SCCs). All farms and soil types have different trace element profiles. In this regard Osmonds have range of long-acting trace element boli available to cater for the different scenarios at farm level. These boli are: High Fertility, Copper Plus and Super Grazing. These boli have a unique advanced release system that gives a balanced and controlled daily supply of trace elements. This means there is no waste. Where calves have a problem on the farm you can supplement from eight weeks old (over 100kg) with a Trace Calfmin bolus to supply the required trace elements over

Managing dairy stock for improved health and performance

Management routines carried out by dairy farmers vary greatly throughout the country, but there are some general tips that can

help farmers run a healthy and efficient enterprise

T

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Words: Michael O’Grady, operations and marketing manager, Osmonds Animal Health

Page 35: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

35

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015 FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

the first four months at grass. This will help muscle and bone development, overall health, energy and calf vitality and overall performance.

Parasite control at grass Fail to prepare, prepare to fail! Now is the time to prepare a dosing strategy to control worm and fluke populations on your farm throughout the grazing season. Their populations will vary from region to region and from herd to herd. There is an array of products available for the treatment and control of endoparasites including ostertagii (roundworms), hoose, liver and rumen fluke, with various timing and intervals for dosing. It is now well-known that to avoid the development of resistant worms on your farm it is necessary to rotate the ‘active’ ingredient in the wormers that you use annually. The repeated use of the same or similar active ingredient may lead to a build-up of resistance and a reduction of the efficacy of the dose used.

There are now useful tools and methods available to help target specific problems at farm level, to help monitor the efficacy of the product and the control programme in place.

Bulk milk tank and faecal analysis can now be used to identify and monitor specific parasite problems. Bulk milk tank samples can be analysed for antibody levels, indicating whether ostertagia, lungworm or liver fluke are problems. Interpret the milk results in the context of your dosing programme and when products were last administered. Faecal analysis can be used to detect the presence of roundworms, liver and rumen fluke. Analysing pooled faecal samples is the most cost efficient way of identifying the parasitic status of your herd. Eight weeks after turnout is a good time to check bulk faecal samples for emerging parasitic problems. If coughing cows are causing concern during the grazing season, you need to get a Baermann analysis carried out to check for the presence of dictiocaulus or lungworm. Hoose has re-emerged as a parasite of concern in the last few years in both dairy and young grazing stock.

Effects of parasites on performance

Parasite Effect on performance Reduced output

Stomach worms

Scour, reduced intakes, poor feed conversion efficiency, longer calving to conception interval and later development to puberty.

Reduce live-weight gain (LWG) by 10-20kg. In severe situations up to 2l less milk per day. Untreated animals can graze for up to an hour less per day.

Lung worms

Coughing, difficult breathing, reduced peformance, susceptible to other respiratory problems.

Reduced performance and in severe situations, even death.

Liver fluke

Ill-thrift, reduced performance, condemned livers and reduced health status.

Feed intake can be reduced by up to 11%, versus treated stock. Reduced daily LWG by 0.6-1.2kg per week.

Rumen fluke

Watery scour, dehydration, poor intakes, weight loss and reduced performance.

Up to 10% reduction in performance with severe situations.

Lice Irritated and shedding of coat. 2-5% reduction in performance.

Monitoring Another very effective way of initially detecting parasitic and other problems in your calves and young heifers, is by routine weighing of your stock. This will highlight any under-performance within your herd and signal that corrective action needs to be taken. It is essential that you have an appropriate cattle weighing scales in your yard to cater for your stock and that it is properly calibrated to accurately record their weight on a consistent basis. Below is a table of the target body weights as a percentage of mature weights at various stages over the first two years of life.

Target percent of mature body weight Age

30% 6 months old

50% 15 months old

90% 22 months old

New Zealand data suggests that for every 1 per cent behind target weight, the cow produces 2 per cent less milk solids in their first lactation. Also, as body condition scores improve, both submission and conception rates improve. With the Targeted Agricultural Modernisation Scheme (TAMS) grant farmers now have an ideal time to invest in a cattle weighing scales to improve decision making on their farm.

For further information contact 01-4667988 or visit www.osmonds.ie

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Page 36: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

36

pril 2015 and the breeding season is upon us. By now the majority of Irish herds have calved and we are towards the end of our voluntary waiting period (VWP) with most cows in peak lactation. Now is your last chance to make decisions concerning breeding and which

cows to breed. With just a 40-day breeding interval after 280 days of pregnancy and the 45-day waiting period, there is only a short time-frame to work with in order to stay within the 365-day calving interval.

Each year a new calf is considered the most efficient and profitable way of producing milk, especially on a grass-based system where production depends on grass growth and seasonal changes. The start of the dry period on Irish farms is more dependent on date than on decreased production. When the average calving interval takes longer, farmers are losing out on valuable milk. For example, the average calving interval in Ireland is currently 396 days. This is 31 days less production than the ideal situation.

Teagasc estimates a loss of €2.07 for every day after the 365-day calving interval. This means that for a 100-cow herd, almost €6,500 is missed due to production losses alone each year. On top of production losses farmers are also feeding extra. To reduce calving intervals farmers need to have optimal heat detection and health monitoring. With the changes in the industry, farmers are looking at becoming more efficient as well as expanding herd size. Improving fertility is a very important tool to achieve this.

The award-winning MooMonitor+ can help you with this by monitoring the cow’s daily behaviour and alerting you when it detects an animal off-form. It also helps you with accurate heat detection on your farm. The American Journal of Dairy Science recently published a study showing 88.6 per cent accuracy in detection rates with Dairymaster’s MooMonitor technology.

A 40-day breeding season means farmers have less than three heat cycles to get cows in calf. This means that all of the herd should be in top condition and have a normal cycle pattern before the end of the VWP. Of course, in reality there are always animals that are

Breeding & feeding - how new technology can help

With over 85 per cent of milk in Ireland currently being produced off-grass, and a decline in the fertility of the typical Irish cow in

recent years, the challenge of matching milk production to grass growth will become more difficult for the Irish farmer

A

Words: Conor Beirne and Jiska Roessen (veterinarians), Dairymaster, Causeway, Co Kerry

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

The Dairymaster Swiftflo Swing Parlour

Page 37: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

37

not up to scratch around this time and these animals should be submitted for a vet-check, even before the end of the VWP. Your veterinarian can tell you if the animal is suffering from any abnormalities in the reproductive tract and what the quality is of the cow’s CL (corpus luteum), the uterine wall and the overall condition of the cow. And in a lot of cases he/she can do something to help.

Cows that should be seen by a vet are ones that are at risk of reproductive failure. This comprises all animals with difficulties during or after the calving event including: cows that had a difficult calving; cows with twins; cows with a discharge; lame animals; cows that suffered from milk fever, mastitis, metritis, or any other sickness all belong to this ‘at risk’ group. Also, extremely thin or fat animals that are in negative energy balance, or that have ketosis, should be checked, because this all influences a cow’s reproductive performance. Finally, all cows that have irregular cycles or have not come in heat by the end of the VWP need to be submitted.

To know exactly which of your animals are at risk requires optimal performance monitoring together with excellent data recording. This makes it easier for both you and the vet to select the right animals for scanning. Data recording, heat detection, as well as health and welfare monitoring all done by one device, will facilitate these processes even more.

Dairymaster has over eight years’ experience detecting heats accurately with their

MooMonitor collars. This makes it a very reliable system for detecting heats with ease. High detection rates both on grass, as well as indoors, will help you to decrease your calving interval. Accurate identification of the onset of heat assists in predicting the optimal time to submit a cow for insemination. The new MooMonitor+ is upgraded with health and welfare monitoring. Health alerts are given when a change in the cow’s daily behavioural patterns are detected and can aid in detecting health events sooner. Once events have been entered, easy-to-use software helps you to monitor your farm with one look at the app or on screen and will give you all the information you need when you need it.

Milk qualityNow that quotas have been abolished, land availability is a major limiting factor to expansion of Irish dairy farms. As we are competing on a global market, Irish farmers must differentiate themselves from other milk producers internationally by putting greater emphasis on milk quality. Therefore, they need to produce milk with low somatic cell counts (SCCs) and lower bacterial counts.

Somatic cells are white blood cells (WBC) that are part of the cow’s natural defence against infection. These WBCs migrate from the blood to the mammary tissue in response to invasion of the mammary gland with bacteria. The only way for bacteria to enter the mammary gland is through the teat end. Therefore it is imperative that cows have healthy, functioning teat ends to fight off infection. When teat ends are damaged through constant vacuum or when the cow’s immunity becomes compromised, barriers for infection are lowered. Also, entry into the udder tissue is a lot more likely when bacterial numbers are high. In response to these foreign invaders an inflammatory reaction occurs and this can be seen in the milk as elevated SCCs.

The Dairymaster milking system uses 4x0 pulsation to milk cows in the most natural way possible similar to the way in which a calf suckles a cow. By milking all four teats at the same time and resting all four teats at the same time – as opposed to milking two teats and resting the other two simultaneously – Dairymaster has improved the interaction between the teat and liner. This has been achieved through years of research and development, resulting in the manufacture of high performance liners and

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Page 38: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

38

clusters that interact with the cow in a synergistic manner.

The vacuum level at the teat end is reduced when the liner collapses. This allows blood circulation and improves the massaging effects on teat ends. Teats milked in this manner are not exposed to the effects of constant vacuum that can be a requirement of 2x2 pulsation in order to keep the clusters from slipping. There are a number of benefits of milking a cow with the Dairymaster

system. They include better udder health and teat end condition, lower liner slippage, more complete milk-out and reduced milking time. Animals are happier and more comfortable during milking, resulting in a better quality end product i.e. milk.

As cows’ yields increase, so too does the risk of metabolic disorders such as negative energy balance and sub-acute ruminal acidosis. These diseases can result in conditions such as ketosis or altered milk fat and/or protein percentages of

individual cows or the herd itself. Proper transition cow management and ensuring cows calve at the correct body condition score (BCS) can help to reduce such issues. Cows need to be fed the correct amount and type of energy during lactation to compensate for the demands of high milk production. This is all possible using Dairymaster’s in-parlour feeding technology and farm management software.

By feeding to yield, body weight or stage of lactation, cows receive the energy they need (without getting too much or too little). This ensures that milk solids remain high and the cow’s health is optimised. Another interesting feature of the automated feed system is appetiser feeding. It dispenses feed to the cow to encourage her to enter the parlour and release oxytocin. The rest of the feed is dispensed upon attachment of the cluster. All this improves cow flow. It makes cows happier, more content and more productive. While the cows are in the parlour the golden rule is ‘put clean clusters on clean cows’. This means good preparation. Using ClusterCleanse technology that sanitises each cluster after milking, the threat from contagious bacteria such as Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus agalactiae can be even further reduced. This minimises transmission of infectious organisms during milking itself.

When all is said and done, lower SCCs mean more milk production and better herd health, all contributing to farm profitability giving excellent return on investment for the farmer.

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Page 39: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

39

hen farmers and farming families are at their most vulnerable, Farm Relief Services (FRS) Membership Benefit Scheme is there to help out.

Tim Doody farms a dairy herd of 140 near Bruff, Co Limerick. He is married to

Paula and they have a baby daughter, Emma, aged just a few months.

In 2014, Tim sustained two hand injuries when he broke both of his thumbs, just eight months apart. His injuries meant that he was incapacitated for approximately six months. However, the support Tim received from FRS during those difficult periods was invaluable at the time. As a member of the FRS Membership Benefit Scheme, Tim’s local farm relief office manager, Liam O’Rourke, came to the rescue and ensured that the farm work was covered. Tim received full assistance milking the cows, while his thumbs recovered.

Tim’s storyTim’s first accident occurred in March 2014 as a cow was calving. His right thumb got crushed in the gate of the cattle-crush and although he felt he could continue his work, he soon realised how serious the injury was. He contacted Liam to send an operator to him.

“By Sunday I couldn’t lift a bucket and my FRS operator was at the farm on Monday to take over the work. For the next 12 weeks FRS took care of the farm while I concentrated on getting my hand back into action.

“To be honest, it is not 100 per cent yet. It was a silly mistake, but thankfully I had a fall-back in place,” says Tim.

Injury strikes twiceUnfortunately for Tim, he broke the thumb on his other hand in November 2014. This time it was as a result of a cow kicking back while he was drying her off in the milking parlour.

“I knew this time what the story was and called Liam again. He couldn’t believe it had happened again, and neither could I,” says Tim.

“I had a student, Louise Crowley, from Pallaskenry College in Limerick, with me at the time who was very efficient. Liam assessed her and registered her as an FRS operator and she kept the farm on track for me until she needed to return to college.

“Then, another FRS operator, Paul Murphy, took over. Again, I was out of action for 12 weeks, but didn’t have to worry about the farm as I knew we were in reliable hands. I have to say that I have highly

recommended the membership support to farmers.”

FRS Sickness & Accident Support is a unique benefit and entitles members to receive the services of an experienced FRS operator for up to *12 weeks at only 25 per cent of the regular cost (75 per cent off). Maximum benefit is €500 (including VAT) per week (*first week is excluded and must be paid by the member). Tim saved himself more than €8,500 during his two claims, but more importantly he had the safety net in place and got reliable help at his most vulnerable time and he could concentrate on the recovery of his hands.

Feedback from farmers who have claimed under the sickness and accident support reinforced to FRS the importance of offering this benefit to the industry. The savings that these farmers made on their labour needs were just one side of it, with the more significant side being that they could concentrate on recovering as they were confident that their farms were in safe hands. Having a trained reliable operator ready to step in when required is what the farmer needs and is what FRS is all about. The membership also gives better value farm services rates with top priority given to members. A death and capital benefit of up to €20,000 is also given. Membership costs €295 annually - that is peace of mind for only 81 cent per day.

Visit www.frsfarmrelief.ie/membership or phone 1890 790 890 or text ‘FRS mbs’ and your name to 51444 for a call back, or contact your local FRS office.

FRS - there when you

need it mostFarming is one of the most dangerous professions in Ireland today.

Death and injury can cause great upheaval on farms as families try to pick up the pieces in the wake of a tragedy, or simply try to manage

the day-to-day farming operation after an accident

W

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Words: Jane Marks, FRS Networks

Tim Doody

Page 40: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

40

ontinuing supervision of both calved cows and lambed ewes is vitally important during this time to prevent the onset of any metabolic disorders in early spring.

Hypomagnesaemia, more commonly known as grass tetany or grass staggers, is one such

metabolic disorder. It is the result of low magnesium levels in the blood of ruminants, and, if untreated, can be fatal for the affected animal. Death often occurs from seizures or, in some instances, the animal may become comatose before death.

Due to the complexity of the disorder, it is often difficult to identify its onset. In acute cases, typical signs include fine muscular twitching in the face and ears, nervousness, an uncoordinated walk and a stiff gait. Symptoms can occur quite rapidly, and it is not uncommon for the farmer not to notice these indicators until death of the animal has occurred. Dead animals are often found with the ground routed and disturbed in the immediate area around them due to muscular convulsions. Adequate supervision of animals is very important as animals that have succumbed to hypomagnesaemia will have shown some additional symptoms

Magnesium supplementation through molasses

With this year’s spring calving and lambing seasons reaching their final stages on the majority of farms around the country, life can get back to some form of normality. By now, animals should be returning to pasture

after the long winter period - but the hard work isn’t over just yet

C

Words: Robert Flynn, product manager, Premier Molasses

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Page 41: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

41

in the days prior to their deaths. These include a drop in milk yield, changes in temperament and a loss in body condition score.

Magnesium (Mg) is one of the most important minerals within ruminants, and so, needs to be supplemented in the animal’s diet. Absorption of Mg occurs throughout the digestive tract of the animal but primarily in the rumen and reticulum, provided that the mineral is readily soluble. As a mineral, magnesium plays many important roles, including the regulation of protein and energy metabolism within the animal. Unfortunately, it is not readily stored in the body of ruminants but does exist in the animal’s bones; however, absorption from these reserves is limited.

Moreover, as the age of the animal increases, the ability to retrieve magnesium from these stores decreases. Due to the high amounts of Mg excreted in milk, grass tetany is most commonly found in more mature lactating cows and ewes grazing on rapidly growing lush pastures in the spring and autumn periods. Animal requirements for Mg during these periods can vary from 15g/day to 50g/day, depending on weather conditions and the animal’s stress levels.

Supplementation of Mg is best done in a preventative, rather than remedial form. Providing a Mg supplement with a high biological availability is the most effective strategy for preventing grass tetany. Premier Molasses’s Ultra-

Mag provides this by using magnesium chloride (MgCl2), which has a higher bioavailability than the more commonly used magnesium oxide. Introducing Premier Ultra-Mag to the cow’s diet at a rate of 1kg/head/day will provide 25g of Mg which will supply most cows with their daily magnesium requirements. Moreover adding Premier Ultra-Mag Sheep to a ewe’s diet at a rate of 0.4 – 0.75kg/head/day will also be sufficient for supplying the animal’s Mg requirements in the

high-risk period. Additionally the availability of a readily fermentable carbohydrate source such as molasses also improves adsorption of Mg by increasing volatile fatty acid production resulting in more blood flow to the rumen.

For more information on Premier Ultra-Mag contact your local co-op/merchant or Premier Molasses directly on (069) 65311 or [email protected].

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Page 42: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

42

his is reflected at farm level by the consistent and convincing message that the more feed (i.e. forage in the form of grass) that can be grown and utilised within the farm-gate, the more profitable and sustainable the farming system.

Grassland systems in Ireland have enormous potential to deliver high levels of output in a profitable way. On-farm studies being conducted by Teagasc are showing that annual grass growth rates of above 18 tonne/hectare/year of grass dry matter (DM) are being achieved on some farms. By comparison though, the national average grass growth and utilisation on farms is less than half of this potential. There is incredible scope for productivity improvements on farms.

Soil fertilityTeagasc soil analysis data show that only 10 per cent of fields being tested have results showing optimum soil fertility. That means 90 per cent of fields are missing something. Soil management is a key factor that will determine the farm’s potential to grow grass. In any year, weather is obviously critical. There will be good years and bad years when grass production on all farms will vary upwards or downwards. However, what will be consistent year-on-year is that well managed fields with fertile soils will perform best. Farmers are at the mercy of the weather, but do have control over the management and fertility of their soils.

Soil samplingSoil sampling is a cost to farmers. The cost of soil analysis varies between suppliers and samplers, but typically costs approximately €25 per sample, including sampling charges. Standard advice is to sample grassland every three to five years, while sampling every four years is required on farms with a Nitrates Derogation. A regime of sampling in four hectare (10 acre) blocks every four years would correspond to a cost of only €1.56 hectare per year. To put this in perspective, the typical annual spend per hectare on fertiliser on an intensive dairy farm will range from approximately €300 per hectare, for a straight Nitrogen (N) programme, up to approximately €500 per hectare where fertility is low and high rates of phosphorous (P) and potassium (K) are required for build-up. Good information from accurate soil sampling is therefore a very low-cost investment compared with the potential impact on the annual fertiliser spend on the farm.

P & K adviceThe nutrient advice for maintenance of P and K at index 3 for grazing and silage are shown in Tables 1 and 2. Additional P and K required for build-up are also shown in Table 3. Note that the application rates shown include P and K from both chemical fertiliser and slurry sources. The P advice rates should also be adjusted to account for the P coming onto the farm in concentrate feeds. To convert from kg/ha to units/acre, simply multiply rates shown by 0.8.

Getting your soil to deliver its potential

for grass growth

Ireland has an enormous competitive advantage on global markets for dairy, beef and sheep products due to our potential to grow large quantities of highly

nutritious grass

T

Words: Dr Stan Lalor, Grassland AGRO

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Page 43: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

43

Table 1. P and K advice (kg/ha) for grazing (maintenance rates at index 3)

Stocking rate (LU/ha) < 1.5 1.5-2.0 2.0-2.5 2.5-3.0

Dairy (kg/ha) 10 P/25 K 14 P/30 K 19 P/35 K 23 P/40 K

Beef/Sheep (kg/ha) 7 P/10 K 10 P/15 K 13 P/20 K 16 P/25 K

Table 2. P and K advice (kg/ha) for silage (maintenance rates at index 3)

Cut First Second

kg/ha 20 P/125 K 12 P/75 K

Table 3. Additional P and K required (kg/ha) for build-up on low index soils

Build-up Index 2 Index 1

kg/ha +10 P/30 K +20 P/60 K

Cattle slurrySlurry is a valuable source of P and K. On many farms, chemical P fertiliser is not permitted within the nitrates regulations, resulting in slurry being the only source of P available to the farmer for distribution. Cattle slurry (undiluted) typically contains approximately five and 32 units of P and K per 1,000 gallons. The P and K fertiliser values of slurry can be highly variable, usually due to dilution with water. Where slurry is diluted with soiled water (or rainwater in the case of unroofed tanks), it is important to consider the level of dilution when allocating slurry to fields. The distribution of slurry around the farm should be based on soil testing and P and K requirements. Target fields that have a requirement for both P and K, and adjust the slurry application rates depending on the requirements of individual fields.

Separating P & KThe application of K fertiliser has declined in line with P usage in recent years. This is because P and K are normally applied together as compound fertiliser products. The requirements for K fertiliser should still be considered even where no P fertiliser is required or permitted. On fields with no P requirement, the use of either straight K fertiliser or N:K fertiliser compounds should be considered where there is a requirement for K. The requirements for K are particularly crucial on silage crops. As a rule of thumb, an application of 8m3/hectare (700 gallons per acre) of undiluted slurry (c. 7 per cent DM content) will be sufficient to replace the P and K removed per tonne of silage DM harvested. Remember to consider P and K removed from paddocks taken out for bales for slurry or P and K application as well as the areas harvested for main silage crops.

The P and K balance in slurry usually makes it a more efficient fertiliser for silage swards than for grazing. There is evidence that the typical K content in slurry has been declining in recent years. Silage harvested off low P and K fields is likely to contain lower P and K contents. Therefore, ignoring low P and K fertility on silage fields and expecting slurry to do all the work of replacing P and

K is likely to result in a vicious circle of declining P and K fertility over time. Additional chemical P and K fertiliser is required to complement slurry in situations where P and K fertility is run down. This problem can be particularly acute in blocks of ground used for silage but where slurry is not returned.

Setting targetsManaging soil fertility is important so that the production potential of soil is optimised with economically sustainable fertiliser inputs. Implementing the following five simple steps will go a long way to ensuring that the production potential of the farm is realised, and that fertiliser inputs are utilised as efficiently as possible:

1) Soil samples Have soil samples taken for the whole farm. Unless you know

what is in the soil, it is impossible to know how much fertiliser it needs. Therefore, by taking soil analysis and putting the results into practice, the fertiliser programme can be tailored to the needs of the soil and the crop. Repeating soil analysis over time is also critical to monitor the effectiveness of the fertiliser strategy.

2) Soil pH & lime Apply lime as required to increase soil pH up to target pH for

the crop. Soil pH should be the first thing to get right if soil test results indicate that lime is required. Lime should be applied to neutralise acidity and raise the pH. For mineral soils, a pH of 6.3 is recommended for grassland. Acid soils will result in reduced nutrient release from soil, and poorer response to fertilisers. Apply lime as a priority in line with the lime advice.

3) Target index 3 for P & K Aim to have optimum soil P and K fertility levels in all fields. At

optimum fertility levels, nutrients being removed in products need to be replaced. High-fertility soils are a resource and should be exploited. Low-fertility soils need to be nurtured and improved.

4) Slurry While slurry can be more difficult to manage than chemical

fertiliser, it can be a very cost-effective way to increase fertility levels. Use slurry on the farm as efficiently as possible, and top up with fertiliser as required.

5) Balanced nutrient supply If one nutrient is deficient, no amount of another nutrient will

overcome this. For example, if a field is deficient in K, then excess N application will not be fully utilised. Make sure the fertiliser compound is supplying nutrients in the correct balance for the crop, the soil, and to complement other fertilisers being applied.

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Page 44: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

44

Assess the programmeDoing the same thing with the same fertiliser products year-on-year just because it is what you have always done won’t improve the grass production potential of the farm if those products are not right for your situation. Approximately 20 per cent of the total variable costs on most farms are spent on fertilisers. Make sure this money is spent on the right products to suit your soils and your farm.

Allow the soil to work for youFertiliser on its own won’t grow all the grass you’ll need. In many cases more than half of the total nutrients used by grass come from the soil rather than from direct uptake of applied fertiliser. Soils contain large total amounts of nutrients. However, soils with low pH, poor biological activity and/or structure and drainage problems will release less of these nutrients to plants for uptake. In these

soils, more nutrients just get either locked up or lost completely to water or air. You are losing grass growth potential when this happens. The response to fertiliser being applied will also be reduced.

Management optionsGrassland AGRO offers a range of fertilisers that have enhanced capability over and above standard NPK fertilisers. The range includes a number fertiliser products that combine individual, or combinations of, technologies that improve soil fertility and nutrient supply to grass and crops. The products are not a substitute for focusing on the basic fundamental principles of soil pH, soil index levels and slurry management. However, in many cases, specific issues arise on farms where standard fertiliser and lime programmes may not be sufficient to deliver the best result possible. An enhanced fertiliser option may work well in this case.

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Page 45: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

45

his farming app can save farmers up to four hours a week on paperwork such as calf registrations, remedies recording and animal movements. Dairy and suckler farmers around the country have saved thousands of hours by registering calves with this new

technology, which is making compliance easier and faster.

Volume and efficiencyFarm Relief Services (FRS) predicts that during the spring calving season up to 20,000 calves will be registered in this new and efficient way, saving farmers over 3,000 hours doing farm paperwork.

According to an article in Today’s Farm magazine, by Pat Clarke, Teagasc Animal & Grassland Research and Innovation Programme, Herdwatch is bridging the gap between the hours of work that farmers are happy with - 59 hours - and the reality, which is closer to 64 hours per week. Farmers are reporting that Herdwatch is saving them up to four hours of work each week.

“For every 60 calves, Herdwatch customers can save over 10 hours on calf registrations alone, with no pen or paper involved.” said Fabien Peyaud, Herdwatch co-founder.

“This doesn’t even take into account cost savings, such as up to €40 in stamps, or time saved by reducing errors and time searching for handwritten notes.”

Saving time with clever technology

Clever technology is the best way for busy farmers to save time. A perfect example of such technology is Herdwatch, an

award-winning farming app launched last year

T

Words: Peter Byrne, FRS Network

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Patricia Hearne pictured using the Herdwatch app on her farm in Co Waterford.

Page 46: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

46

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015 FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

Many benefitsEasy calf registration is only one of many time-saving benefits of going mobile with Herdwatch. Farmers can save even more time by applying for movement certs, notifying cattle movements straight from the app and recording remedies on the go. It gives the farmer peace of mind by being on top of compliance at all times.

Herdwatch is the only farming app that allows herd-keepers to download their herd from Department of Agriculture systems, from their smartphone, in seconds and create updates at a click of a button.

“We built the app to deliver an easy-to-use, cost-effective and mobile solution for busy farmers. We are very proud of how far Herdwatch has come, with almost 1,000 farmers already embracing this new, faster way of doing things,” said Mr Peyaud.

Key features of Herdwatch:

• Register calves directly with the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine (DAFM);

• Record remedies for full compliance;

• Record breeding events and weight;

• Record animal movements;

• Download herd profile directly from Agfood;

• Approved by DAFM and Irish Cattle Breeders Federation (ICBF);

• Create to-do lists – no more back-of-hand reminders;

• App can be used anytime, anywhere directly on your smartphone, tablet, laptop and PC;

• Easy to use – if you can text, you can use it;

• Automated backups;

• Works even with no internet access; and

• Free regular updates and support For more information visit www.herdwatch.ie or text ‘frs 40’ and your name to 51444

to request a call back from the Herdwatch team.

What do the farmers say?

Andrew Darmody, Co Tipperary“I often wonder how I managed before, it saves

me around four hours a week. It’s great not having to sit in front of the computer or the blue book after a long day on the farm. I can be in the

middle of a field or shed with no mobile coverage, look up a cow and dose her or find out when she

was dosed, or when she is due to calve. ”

Pat Feehily, Athlone, Co Westmeath

“Herdwatch is so handy. I am into buying and selling so it is great to have all the information

in my pocket and at the touch of a button at any time. It is so convenient and saves me a lot of

time and it is good value for money.”

Patricia Hearne, Co Waterford

“Herdwatch is a godsend. I never had an easier inspection in my life. The

fear factor was gone.”

Page 47: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015 FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015

� e best grassland farmers in the country are!

Are you producing 15 tonnes of Grass DM per hectare?

€1,500

€1,550

€1,600

€1,650

€1,700

€1,750

€1,800

€1,850

€1,900

€1,950

€2,000

> 90% 80 - 90% 70 - 80% <70%

€1,861

€1,810

€1,739

€1,689

80 - 90%80 - 90%

€1,861

€1,810€1,810

<70%

€1,689

70 - 80%

€1,739

80 - 90% 70 - 80%

€1,810

€1,739€1,739

€1,689

8.8T GrassDM/ha

812 kgMS/ha

837 kgMS/ha

891 kgMS/ha

971 kgMS/ha

� e most pro� table livestock farms are those that maximise grass growth and grass utilisation.

� e Teagasc ePro� t monitor results for spring milk production in 2014 show that ‘Grass Rich’ farms generated a higher net pro� t compared to ‘Grass Poor’ farms.

8.1T GrassDM/ha

7.6T GrassDM/ha

6.7T GrassDM/ha

Measure and Manage your Grass with Teagasc’s range of tools.

is a comprehensive database of all grassland measurements across thecountry and is available to help you quantify grass growth and Dry Matter production.

Avail of the Spring Grazing Rotation Planner, Summer Grass Wedge and the Autumn Grazing Planner by visiting www.teagasc.ie

@PastureBase

‘Grass Rich’ Systems ‘Grass Poor’ Systems

Forage Guide.indd 1 31/03/2015 16:24:46

� e best grassland farmers in the country are!

Are you producing 15 tonnes of Grass DM per hectare?

€1,500

€1,550

€1,600

€1,650

€1,700

€1,750

€1,800

€1,850

€1,900

€1,950

€2,000

> 90% 80 - 90% 70 - 80% <70%

€1,861

€1,810

€1,739

€1,689

80 - 90%80 - 90%

€1,861

€1,810€1,810

<70%

€1,689

70 - 80%

€1,739

80 - 90% 70 - 80%

€1,810

€1,739€1,739

€1,689

8.8T GrassDM/ha

812 kgMS/ha

837 kgMS/ha

891 kgMS/ha

971 kgMS/ha

� e most pro� table livestock farms are those that maximise grass growth and grass utilisation.

� e Teagasc ePro� t monitor results for spring milk production in 2014 show that ‘Grass Rich’ farms generated a higher net pro� t compared to ‘Grass Poor’ farms.

8.1T GrassDM/ha

7.6T GrassDM/ha

6.7T GrassDM/ha

Measure and Manage your Grass with Teagasc’s range of tools.

is a comprehensive database of all grassland measurements across thecountry and is available to help you quantify grass growth and Dry Matter production.

Avail of the Spring Grazing Rotation Planner, Summer Grass Wedge and the Autumn Grazing Planner by visiting www.teagasc.ie

@PastureBase

‘Grass Rich’ Systems ‘Grass Poor’ Systems

Forage Guide.indd 1 31/03/2015 16:24:46

� e best grassland farmers in the country are!

Are you producing 15 tonnes of Grass DM per hectare?

€1,500

€1,550

€1,600

€1,650

€1,700

€1,750

€1,800

€1,850

€1,900

€1,950

€2,000

> 90% 80 - 90% 70 - 80% <70%

€1,861

€1,810

€1,739

€1,689

80 - 90%80 - 90%

€1,861

€1,810€1,810

<70%

€1,689

70 - 80%

€1,739

80 - 90% 70 - 80%

€1,810

€1,739€1,739

€1,689

8.8T GrassDM/ha

812 kgMS/ha

837 kgMS/ha

891 kgMS/ha

971 kgMS/ha

� e most pro� table livestock farms are those that maximise grass growth and grass utilisation.

� e Teagasc ePro� t monitor results for spring milk production in 2014 show that ‘Grass Rich’ farms generated a higher net pro� t compared to ‘Grass Poor’ farms.

8.1T GrassDM/ha

7.6T GrassDM/ha

6.7T GrassDM/ha

Measure and Manage your Grass with Teagasc’s range of tools.

is a comprehensive database of all grassland measurements across thecountry and is available to help you quantify grass growth and Dry Matter production.

Avail of the Spring Grazing Rotation Planner, Summer Grass Wedge and the Autumn Grazing Planner by visiting www.teagasc.ie

@PastureBase

‘Grass Rich’ Systems ‘Grass Poor’ Systems

Forage Guide.indd 1 31/03/2015 16:24:46

Page 48: Forage_Guide_2015-LOWRES

BOVIPAST RSP The ONLY vaccine to protect your weanlings against

Pasteurella* & Viral Pneumonia

BOVIPAST RSPvaccine range

IE/B

BR/1

114/

0006

Pasteurella*

Why vaccinate with Bovilis Bovipast RSP?• Reduces the use of antibiotics• Increases productivity and in turn, the profi tability of your farm

• Protects against Pasteurella* & Viral Pneumonia (RSV and PI3) - among themost common causes of pneumonia in young stock§ (<12 months old)

Prevent pneumonia fromstriking down your calves this spring

RSV

PI3

Licensed for concurrent use with Bovilis® IBR Marker Live. Bovilis Bovipast RSP contains inact. BRS strain EV908, PI-3 strain SF-4 Reisinger and Mannheimia haemolytica A1 strain M4/1Bovilis IBR Marker Live contains live, attenuated IBR marker vaccine BHV-1 strain GK/D (gE_ ). For the active immunisation against infectious bovine rhinotracheitis virus.Withdrawal periods: zero days. Legal Categories: ROI POM(E) NI POM-V .For further information see SPC, contact prescriber or MSD Animal Health,Red Oak North, South County Business Park, Leopardstown, Dublin 18, Ireland.Tel: +353(0)1 2970220. E-Mail: [email protected] Web: www.msd-animal-health.ie

* Mannheimia haemolytica# GFK sales data September 2014§ Anon 2012. AFBI/DAFM All-Island Animal Disease Surveillance Report 2012

09621-Bovipast RSP-Veterinary Journal Ireland.indd 1 23/01/2015 12:42


Recommended