Date post: | 01-Apr-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | cierra-bavis |
View: | 220 times |
Download: | 5 times |
Wisconsin Herd Expansion-1999 Wisconsin Dairy Modernization Survey
Wisconsin Herd Expansion-1999 Wisconsin Dairy Modernization Survey
Roger W. Palmer and Jeffrey BewleyRoger W. Palmer and Jeffrey Bewley
UW-Madison Dairy Science DepartmentUW-Madison Dairy Science Department
UW-Extension Dairy TeamUW-Extension Dairy Team
Roger W. Palmer, UW-Madison Dairy Science Department
Dairy Modernization Objectives
Dairy Modernization Objectives
Operate with lower investment per animalOperate with lower investment per animal Improve labor efficiencyImprove labor efficiency Improve profitabilityImprove profitability Improve the “quality of life” for dairy farm Improve the “quality of life” for dairy farm
owners and workersowners and workers
Roger W. Palmer, UW-Madison Dairy Science Department
Dairy Systems Options
Dairy Systems Options
Roger W. Palmer, UW-Madison Dairy Science Department
Modernization – the process of changing management systemsModernization – the process of changing management systems
Modernization/Modernization/Expansion is Expansion is not newnot new
Optimum herd Optimum herd size is size is defined by defined by the the technology technology chosenchosen
Roger W. Palmer, UW-Madison Dairy Science Department
Thoughts about ModernizationThoughts about Modernization Direction is more important than speedDirection is more important than speed UnderstandUnderstand
where the industry is goingwhere the industry is going your family’s goalsyour family’s goals
Develop a list of possible strategiesDevelop a list of possible strategies Get opinions from other peopleGet opinions from other people
Evaluate each strategyEvaluate each strategy Keep an open mindKeep an open mind
Make the best decision for ‘your farm’Make the best decision for ‘your farm’
Roger W. Palmer, UW-Madison Dairy Science Department
Objective of This StudyObjective of This Study
To survey producers, who recently To survey producers, who recently expanded, to determine:expanded, to determine: what they didwhat they did how happy they are with their choiceshow happy they are with their choices
To provide information to others thinking To provide information to others thinking about:about: expanding their operationexpanding their operation changing their operationchanging their operation
Roger W. Palmer, UW-Madison Dairy Science Department
Survey Background InformationSelection Criteria
Survey Background InformationSelection Criteria
Producers who expanded herd size 1994-98Producers who expanded herd size 1994-98 >50% increase if 60-100 cow herd size>50% increase if 60-100 cow herd size >40% increase if >100 cow herd size >40% increase if >100 cow herd size
694 Mailed, 336 Returned, 302 Used (44%)694 Mailed, 336 Returned, 302 Used (44%) Production related information from DHIProduction related information from DHI Facilities types, management and Facilities types, management and
satisfaction values from survey responsessatisfaction values from survey responses
Roger W. Palmer, UW-Madison Dairy Science Department
Average Herd SizeAverage Herd Size
1994 103 Cows
Before Most RecentExpansion
136 Cows
Now 252 Cows
Long-Term Goal 453 Cows
Roger W. Palmer, UW-Madison Dairy Science Department
Summary Averages (252 herds)Summary Averages (252 herds)Herd Performance Measures 1998 1994 Change Rolling Herd Average-Milk 21,956 20,103 +1853 Average ME Milk 23,698 21,741 +1957 Average Peak Milk 89 84 +5 Average Linear Score 2.9 ---- ---- Days Dry 61 63 -2 Calving Interval (DHIA) 13.8 13.2 +0.6 Culling Rate (DHIA) 33% ---- ---- Days Open 140 126 +14 Age at First Calving 26.1 ---- ----
Roger W. Palmer, UW-Madison Dairy Science Department
Operation Performance and Satisfaction by “Type of Expansion”
Operation Performance and Satisfaction by “Type of Expansion”
Comparison Factor
No new facilities
Some new facilities
All new facilities
All herds
Number Herds 31 218 53 302 Number Cows 1998 109 216 483 252 Change since 1994 +49 +119 +339 +150 Rolling Herd Average 1998 20,530 21,920 23,218 21,927 Change since 1994 +2519 +1620 +2321 +1824 Average Days Open 1998 143 136 142 138 Change since 1994 +4 +11 +7 +10 Average Linear Score 1998 3.07 2.89 2.82 2.91 Cows per Full Time Equivalent 30 38 52 40 Net farm income * 3.26 3.59 4.04 3.63 Personal satisfaction with my role* 4.00 4.03 4.25 4.07 Disposable household income * 3.32 3.59 4.08 3.65 Time away from the farm * 2.71 3.29 3.79 3.32 *Average satisfaction from 1 (very dissatisfied) to 5 (very satisfied).
Roger W. Palmer, UW-Madison Dairy Science Department
Operation Performance and Satisfaction by “Herd Size”Operation Performance and Satisfaction by “Herd Size”
Comparison Factor
60- 105
106-145
146- 220
221-360
> 360
All
Number Herds 61 62 59 60 60 302 Number Cows 1998 86 126 183 272 597 252 Change since 1994 +39 +55 +93 +165 +400 +150 Rolling Herd Average 1998 19,766 21,642 22,370 22,737 24,113 21,927 Change since 1994 +1631 +1999 +1680 +1842 +2115 +1824 Average Days Open 1998 130 136 143 136 143 138 Change since 1994 -2 +10 +18 +10 +10 +10 Average Linear Score 1998 3.04 2.96 2.83 2.85 2.80 2.91 Cows per Full Time Equivalent 27 34 40 49 51 40 Net farm income * 3.26 3.33 3.77 3.73 4.10 3.63 Personal sat. with my role* 3.98 3.92 4.03 4.10 4.30 4.07 Disposable household inc. * 3.33 3.39 3.55 3.87 4.12 3.65 Time away from the farm * 2.85 3.02 3.22 3.63 3.88 3.32 * Average satisfaction reported on a scale from 1 (very dissatisfied) to 5 (very satisfied).
Roger W. Palmer, UW-Madison Dairy Science Department
Labor Efficiency by Herd SizeLabor Efficiency by Herd SizeLabor Related Factors
60-105
106-145
146-220
221-360
> 360
All
Number Herds 61 62 59 60 60 302 Total Hours per Person per week
52
48
46
46
48
48
Yearly Hours per Cow
111
84
72
60
56
77
Cows per Full Time Equivalent
27
34
40
49
51
40
Acres per cow
3.38
3.37
2.64
2.61
2.31
2.87
Roger W. Palmer, UW-Madison Dairy Science Department
Determine Differences
4-RowVs
6-Row
Determine Differences
4-RowVs
6-Row
Roger W. Palmer, UW-Madison Dairy Science Department
Factors to Consider 4-Row vs 6-Row Freestall Barns
Factors to Consider 4-Row vs 6-Row Freestall Barns
CostCost Cost per cow vs cost per stall (overstocking rate)Cost per cow vs cost per stall (overstocking rate) Cost of self-locks vs sort gates and treatment areaCost of self-locks vs sort gates and treatment area
Cow ComfortCow Comfort Feed space (24” vs 18” inches/cow)Feed space (24” vs 18” inches/cow) Alley congestion (24 vs 18 sq ft/cow)Alley congestion (24 vs 18 sq ft/cow) Air quality (92 vs 79 cu ft/cow)Air quality (92 vs 79 cu ft/cow) Ventilation (barn width)Ventilation (barn width)
Convenience of Animal Handling Convenience of Animal Handling Use of self locking manger stalls versus separation of Use of self locking manger stalls versus separation of animals for health and reproduction treatmentsanimals for health and reproduction treatments Labor cost of herdsman and/or vetLabor cost of herdsman and/or vet Animal stressAnimal stress
Roger W. Palmer, UW-Madison Dairy Science Department
Overstocking Effect on Initial Cost of 4-Row and 6-Row Barns
Overstocking Effect on Initial Cost of 4-Row and 6-Row Barns
4-Row4-Row 6-Row6-Row DifferenceDifference
No. CowsNo. Cows 144144 144144
Stocking RateStocking Rate 12.5%12.5% 0%0%
No. StallsNo. Stalls 128128 144144
Cost/StallCost/Stall $1200$1200 $1000$1000 + 20%+ 20%
Total CostTotal Cost $153,000$153,000 $144,000$144,000
Cost/CowCost/Cow $1067$1067 $1000$1000 + 6.5%+ 6.5%
Roger W. Palmer, UW-Madison Dairy Science Department
New Freestall Barns with Drive-Thru Feeding
New Freestall Barns with Drive-Thru Feeding
Number HerdsNumber Herds
4-Row4-Row
5353
6-Row6-Row
4242
DiffDiff
1998 Median Herd Size1998 Median Herd Size 245245 247247
1998 RHA Milk1998 RHA Milk 23,64423,644aa 21,73321,733bb +1,911+1,911
RHA Change (’94-’98)RHA Change (’94-’98) 1,9741,974 1,3821,382 +592+592
Stocking Rate (%)Stocking Rate (%) 112112aa 103103bb +9%+9%
Average Linear ScoreAverage Linear Score 2.732.73bb 2.962.96aa -.23-.23
Cost Per StallCost Per Stall $1235$1235 $1212$1212 +$23+$23
Roger W. Palmer, UW-Madison Dairy Science Department
Sand vs Mattresses Production Differences
Sand vs Mattresses Production Differences
MattressesMattresses SandSand
Number HerdsNumber Herds 6969 145145
1998 Median Herd Size1998 Median Herd Size 265265 195195
1998 DHI RHA Milk(lb)1998 DHI RHA Milk(lb) 22,51922,519 22,53922,539
Linear SCSLinear SCS 2.882.88 2.802.80
Cows/FTECows/FTE 4545 4040
Culling Rate (%)Culling Rate (%) 3434 3232
Roger W. Palmer, UW-Madison Dairy Science Department
Sand vs Mattresses Satisfaction Differences
Sand vs Mattresses Satisfaction Differences
MattressesMattresses SandSand
Number HerdsNumber Herds 6969 145145
1998 Median Herd Size1998 Median Herd Size 265265 195195
Cow Cleanliness*Cow Cleanliness* 4.124.12bb 4.474.47aa
Hock Damage*Hock Damage* 4.224.22bb 4.724.72aa
Bedding Usage and Cost*Bedding Usage and Cost* 4.254.25aa 3.953.95bb
Manure Management*Manure Management* 4.324.32aa 3.433.43bb
*Average satisfaction reported, 1-Very Dissatisfied to 5-Very Satisfied
Roger W. Palmer, UW-Madison Dairy Science Department
Cow Preference for Different Types of Stall Base – Wagner/Palmer ‘02
Cow Preference for Different Types of Stall Base – Wagner/Palmer ‘02
Stall Base TypeStall Base Type % Occupied% Occupied % Lying% Lying
SandSand 79%79%cc 69%69%aa
Mattress 1Mattress 1 88%88%aa 65%65%bb
Mattress 2Mattress 2 84%84%bb 57%57%cc
WaterbedWaterbed 62%62%ee 45%45%dd
Soft Rubber MatSoft Rubber Mat 65%65%dd 33%33%ee
ConcreteConcrete 39%39%ff 23%23%ff
Roger W. Palmer, UW-Madison Dairy Science Department
Milking Facility PerformanceMilking Facility Performance
Milking Facility Type
Cows per Worker Hour
Turns per Hour
Avg. Number Stalls
Avg. Number Units
No. Herds
Stall barn with pipeline 21 6.6 62 7 65 Flat parlor in old building 27 6.1 12 9 52 Pit parlor in old building 34 4.6 16 14 74 Pit parlor in new building 43 4.3 20 19 107
Roger W. Palmer, UW-Madison Dairy Science Department
Parlor SatisfactionParlor SatisfactionSatisfaction Factor
Stall barn with pipeline
Flat parlor in old barn
Pit parlor in old barn
Pit parlor in new building
Number herds
65
52
73
107
Physical comfort of milker *
2.45
3.83
4.10
4.32
Milk quality *
3.28
3.75
3.66
3.70
Safety of operator *
3.31
3.40
4.01
4.38
* Average satisfaction reported on a scale from 1 (very dissatisfied) to 5 (very satisfied).
Roger W. Palmer, UW-Madison Dairy Science Department
Parlor Utilization Costs Capital Cost AssumptionsParlor Utilization Costs
Capital Cost Assumptions $18,000 per milking stall $18,000 per milking stall
Building and EquipmentBuilding and Equipment Milk 30 cows/stall 3X Milk 30 cows/stall 3X
6.5 hr/shift @ 4.6 turns/hour6.5 hr/shift @ 4.6 turns/hour $600 investment/cow$600 investment/cow
$18,000 per stall / 30 cows per stall$18,000 per stall / 30 cows per stall
Roger W. Palmer, UW-Madison Dairy Science Department
Parlor Utilization Costs Operating Cost Assumptions
Parlor Utilization Costs Operating Cost Assumptions
7 year loan repayment at 9%7 year loan repayment at 9% D-12, 2 people @$10/hr eachD-12, 2 people @$10/hr each 1 hour/milking to clean-up and set-up1 hour/milking to clean-up and set-up 20,000 lb shipped per cow per year20,000 lb shipped per cow per year
Roger W. Palmer, UW-Madison Dairy Science Department
Milk Harvesting Cost ($/cwt) with Different Parlor Utilization LevelsMilk Harvesting Cost ($/cwt) with Different Parlor Utilization Levels
UtilizationUtilization
LevelLevelCapital Capital
CostCostLabor Labor
CostCostTotal CostTotal Cost
FullFull $0.58$0.58 $1.09$1.09 $1.67$1.67
HalfHalf $1.16$1.16 $1.17$1.17 $2.33$2.33+$.66/cwt+$.66/cwt
QuarterQuarter $2.32$2.32 $1.32$1.32 $3.63$3.63+$1.96/cwt+$1.96/cwt
Roger W. Palmer, UW-Madison Dairy Science Department
Mean Production (1998) by Milking Frequency and bST Use
Mean Production (1998) by Milking Frequency and bST Use
RHA Milk 2x 3x Diff.
No bST
19,830
22,672
+2842 +14.3%
bST
22,078
24,607
+2529 +12.8%
Difference
+2248 +11.3%
+1935+9.8%
+4777 +24.1%
68% of respondents reported using bST
Roger W. Palmer, UW-Madison Dairy Science Department
Custom Heifer Raising by Herd Size
Custom Heifer Raising by Herd Size
Herd Size
% of Herds having “Most” or “All” heifers custom raised
60-105
7%
106-145
22%
146-220
28%
221- 360
28%
>360
29%
Roger W. Palmer, UW-Madison Dairy Science Department
Reasons for ExpansionReasons for Expansion
Why did you decide to expand your herd? *NumberHerds %
To increase our farm's profitability 265 89%
To improve labor efficiency 217 73%
To improve physical working conditions for operators 207 69%
To get time away from the farm (by using more hired help) 181 61%
To allow a family member to join the operation 103 34%
Other 52 17%*Percentages do not add up to 100% because multiple answers could be selected
Roger W. Palmer, UW-Madison Dairy Science Department
Satisfaction With Expansion Choice
Satisfaction With Expansion Choice
If another dairy producer asked you about your expansion project, "Knowing what you do now, would you do it again?," How would you respond? Answer Number Herds % of Herds Yes, the same way 148 51% Yes, only quicker 84 29% Yes, only bigger 66 23% Yes, but slower 17 6% No 16 6%
Roger W. Palmer, UW-Madison Dairy Science Department
Expansion AdviceExpansion AdviceBased on what you learned what advice would you give others considering expansion? Comment Herds Plan, Plan., Plan. Consider future needs,. Research, do homework 53 Visit Farms 35 Use consultants 29 Importance of cash flow/loan availability/financial planning 27 Take time/don’t hurry/ go slow 25 Take advice from farmers/consultants 23 Know yourself, your family, your goals 20
Roger W. Palmer, UW-Madison Dairy Science Department
Respondents Feelings about Expansion “Best Choice”
Respondents Feelings about Expansion “Best Choice”
Comment given by respondent NumberHerds
Switching to parlor/change to new parlor/efficiency of parlor 80Switching to freestalls/building new freestall barn 68Sand 36TMR/feeding convenience 27Employee relations/labor efficiency/working conditions 24Economics/profitability/cash flow/loans 21Family time and time off 19
Roger W. Palmer, UW-Madison Dairy Science Department
Respondents Feelings about Expansion “Worst Choice”
Respondents Feelings about Expansion “Worst Choice”
Comment given by respondent Number Herds
Manure handling
41
Not hiring contractor/contractor performance
17
Loans/cost overruns
13
Disease introduction
10
Facility design-curtains, sidewall, ventilation, size, etc.
10
Planning/timing problems
8
Building without future in mind
8
Roger W. Palmer, UW-Madison Dairy Science Department
Summary Respondents indicated:
Summary Respondents indicated:
Their willingness to share experiencesTheir willingness to share experiences Most were happy they expandedMost were happy they expanded That after expansion theyThat after expansion they
had a better life stylehad a better life style their labor efficiency increasedtheir labor efficiency increased their operation was more profitabletheir operation was more profitable
They would do it again, but bigger & fasterThey would do it again, but bigger & faster They plan to double herd size againThey plan to double herd size again
Wisconsin Dairy Modernization Summary
Wisconsin Dairy Modernization Summary
A complete summary of the results A complete summary of the results can be found on the University of can be found on the University of
Wisconsin-Dairy Science web page Wisconsin-Dairy Science web page (http://www.wisc.edu/dysci/), under (http://www.wisc.edu/dysci/), under
Management Publications Management Publications