Feeding management, production and performance of 13 pasture-based dairy farms in a Mediterranean environment

Physical performance data from 13 dairy farms in Western Australia, six feeding all concentrate in the milking parlour and seven feeding a portion of concentrate in a partial mixed ration (PMR) with forage, were collected between March 2012 and June 2013. Each farm was visited 13 times at intervals of 4–6 weeks, and feed intake and milk production was recorded on each visit. Four farms had access to fresh pasture all year round via irrigation. Milk yield (MY) and composition data was calculated daily from milk processor records. Pasture dry matter intake (DMI) was estimated based on metabolisable energy supply and requirements according to published feeding standards. All milk and feed-related measures were significantly affected by visit date (P < 0.01). Mean annual concentrate intake and MY was 2082 ± 344 kg/cow and 7679 ± 684 kg/cow, respectively. Daily concentrate DMI was greatest in May 2012 (8.9 ± 2.2 kg/cow), near the end of the non-grazing season, and lowest in August 2012 (5.1 ± 1.5 kg/cow). On an average annual basis, PMR farms provided 22 ± 15% of total concentrate fed as part of a PMR, and 28 ± 11% of total concentrates and by-products fed as part of a PMR. Daily grazed pasture DMI was highest on all farms in September 2012 (12.9 ± 2.4 kg/cow), and averaged 6.6 kg/cow on the four irrigated farms between January and May. Daily yield of energy-corrected milk was highest in September 2012 (26.9 kg/cow) and lowest in January 2013 (21.9 kg/cow). Milk fat content was highest in summer and lowest in winter; the reverse was true of milk protein. Feed conversion efficiency was significantly affected by visit date, but mean feed conversion efficiency was the same (1.37) for in-parlour and PMR farms. Overall there was some evidence that PMR feeding systems on Western Australian dairy farms are not optimised to their full potential, but a high degree of variability in performance between all farms was also apparent.

Potential impacts of negative associative effects between concentrate supplements, pasture and conserved forage for milk production and dairy farm profit

A case study and whole-farm modelling approach was used to examine the potential impacts of negative associative effects on milk production and economic performance of two dairy farms in northern Victoria. The two case studies differed in herd and farm size, calving pattern, forages grown and use of labour, but both had production systems based on grazed pasture, grain fed in the dairy at milking and conserved hay fed out in the paddock. The feeding system of each farm was altered by implementing a partial mixed ration (PMR), where cows grazed once a day and received supplements in a well formulated mix once a day. Negative associative effects between feeds were included in the biophysical modelling by deriving a relationship from published studies between declining neutral detergent fibre digestibility and increasing grain intake. Before applying a PMR system, both farms were profitable and earning competitive rates of return after tax, with mean real internal rate of return higher than 5%, and positive mean annual operating profit and mean net present value, at a discount rate of 5%. Feeding a PMR enabled both farms to increase profitability and internal rate of return, particularly if milk production was increased as well, but only when associative effects were less than those in the feeding system based on grain fed in the dairy and hay in the paddock. Increased profitability was also associated with higher standard deviation in annual operating profit, internal rate of return and net present value, in other words risk increased under the PMR feeding system, as the businesses would be more vulnerable to fluctuating supplementary feed prices.

Forage-based dairying in a water-limited future: use of models to investigate farming system adaptation in southern Australia

The irrigated dairy industry in southern Australia has experienced significant restrictions in irrigation water allocations since 2005, consistent with climate change impact predictions for the region. Simulation models of pasture growth (DairyMod), crop yield (Agricultural Production Systems Simulator, APSIM), and dairy system management and production (UDDER) were used in combination to investigate a range of forage options that may be capable of sustaining dairy business profitability under restricted water-allocation scenarios in northern Victoria, Australia. A total of 23 scenarios were simulated and compared with a base farm system (100% of historical water allocations, grazed perennial ryegrass pasture with supplements; estimated operating surplus $A2,615/ha at a milk price of $A4.14/kg of milk solids). Nine simulations explored the response of the base farm to changes in stocking rate or the implementation of a double cropping rotation on 30% of farm area, or both. Five simulations explored the extreme scenario of dairying without any irrigation water. Two general responses to water restrictions were investigated in a further 9 simulations. Annual ryegrass grazed pasture, complemented by a double cropping rotation (maize grown in summer for silage, followed by either brassica forage crop and annual ryegrass for silage in winter and spring) on 30% of farm area, led to an estimated operating surplus of $A1746/ha at the same stocking rate as the base farm when calving was moved to autumn (instead of late winter, as in the base system). Estimated total irrigation water use was 2.7ML/ha compared with 5.4ML/ha for the base system. Summer-dormant perennial grass plus double cropping (30% of farm area) lifted operating surplus by a further $A100/ha if associated with autumn calving (estimated total irrigation water use 3.1ML/ha). Large shifts in the forage base of dairy farms could sustain profitability in the face of lower, and fluctuating, water allocations. However, changes in other strategic management policies, notably calving date and stocking rate, would be required, and these systems would be more complex to manage. The adaptation scenarios that resulted in the highest estimated operating surplus were those where at least 10 t of pasture or crop DM was grazed directly by cows per hectare per year, resulting in grazed pasture intake of at least 2 t of DM/cow, and at least 60% of all homegrown feed that was consumed was grazed directly.

Feeding management and feeds on dairy farms in New South Wales and Victoria

Feeding practices in Australian dairy herds were recorded in 100 dairy herds in five districts of two states. A questionnaire about the feeding practices was completed and pasture samples were also collected, where applicable, for analysis. Data and pasture samples were collected once from each farm with visits to regions occurring at different times of the year. Diets were evaluated for nutritional adequacy using the CPM Dairy program. Average milk yield on the day of sampling was 22.8 L/day. The combination of grazed pasture with grain fed during milking was the most prevalent feeding system (54%) in all areas. This was followed by combination of pelleted grain/by-products combined with pasture grazing (25%). Only one herd in the study was not feeding any form of concentrates at the time of sampling. The estimated percentage of concentrate in the diet ranged from 25% ± 11.6 to 44% ± 12.0. Wheat, which was fed at up to 9.8 kg/cow.day DM was the most prevalent grain in all areas, except for Gippsland. The predominant sources of protein in all areas were canola meal, cottonseed meal and lupins. By-products were prevalent, with brewers grain and wheat millrun the most commonly used, fed at 2.8 and 1.6 kg/cow.day DM, respectively. Most farms (81/100) incorporated at least one type of ‘buffer’ in the ration, and limestone (67%) was the most prevalent mineral additive. Monensin and virginiamycin were fed in all areas, with a varying prevalence. Feeding or dose rates used for minerals and rumen modifiers were not always appropriate to those recommended for mineral needs or control of rumen function. This paper demonstrated that a wide variety of feeding systems are used in Australian dairy herds and provides information on nutritive characteristics of pastures.

Calculating dry matter consumption of dairy herds in Australia: the need to fully account for energy requirements and issues with estimating energy supply

Feed costs are the major component of the variable costs and a significant component of the total costs of milk production on Australian dairy farms. To improve farm productivity, farmers need to understand how much feed is being consumed and the nutritive characteristics of the diet. This paper reviews an existing simple approach, the ‘Target 10’ approach, which is commonly used by the dairy industry in Victoria to estimate annual forage consumption. An alternative approach – the ‘Feeding Systems’ approach – is then introduced. The ‘Feeding Systems’ approach is compared with estimated forage consumption measured under experimental conditions. An analysis of the sensitivity of both approaches to incremental changes in key variables is presented. The ‘Feeding Standards’ approach was concordant with estimated forage consumption measured under experimental conditions. Sensitivity analysis has highlighted key variables which may have considerable influence over simulated forage consumption using this approach. Given that none of the key variables tested in this analysis can be varied in the ‘Target 10’ approach, we feel confident that the ‘Feeding Standards’ approach provides an improved method of back-calculating annual on-farm forage consumption. Using a robust approach to calculate forage consumption which fully accounts for metabolisable energy requirements is important where farmers are using home-grown forage consumption as an indicator of farm feeding system performance. It is also important to understand the assumptions involved in estimating metabolisable energy supply from either supplements or forage.