Fall 2010 Dairy - AAG Shur-Gain Ontario

Fall2010
2010
Fall
Freecopy
copy
Free
H
U
X
W
D
H
)
O
D
L
F
H
S
6
V
U
H
I
L
+H
Reports
Heather Holme Holsteins
Veracity Holsteins
S hur-Gain’s New Heifer Program
to Be Introduced in 2011
$/DXQFK<RX
'RQ¶W:DQWWR0LVV
Andrew Hunt
Ruminant Business Manager
Shur-Gain Central Region
H
F
Q
D
P
U
R
I
3HU
H
U
X
W
X
)
U
R
KH:D\I
UH
D
&
U
H
I
L
H
+
U
H
S
R
U
3
ZLWK
3DYLQJW
:K\DVSHFLDOIHDWXUHRQKHLIHUV"
and
Because we firmly believe in the importance of giving calves and heifers the care
they
when
optimum
their
to
perform
to
up
them
set
and
healthy
be
to
nutrition they need
feeding
start milking. This edition of At A Glance focuses on management, nutrition and
strategies. Your heifers are the building blocks of your operation and future success.
6KXU*DLQKHDYLO\LQYHVWVLQUHVHDUFKRQFDOYHVDQGKHLIHUV
1.
We believe strongly in the concept of life time profitability and that starts at day
and
calves
of
needs
the
on
research
e
extensiv
This is why Shur-Gain is conducting
heifers at its research facilities in Burford, Ontario, Canada’s largest private research
farm. This research extends past the latest in nutrition to also include eating behavior
and ultimately performance.
1HZKHLIHUSURJUDPWREHODXQFKHGLQ
Based on the very latest discoveries made by Shur-Gain and aimed at fostering
continuous improvement, the new feed program for calves and heifers will include
All
recommendations for improved management as well as feed intake and growth.
lity!
profitabi
lifetime
improve
and
this, to let you further optimize your results
IN THIS ISSUE
Your comments
are always welcome!
2
Send them to Andrew Hunt
By mail:
600 James Street South
St. Marys (Ontario) N4X 1C7
By e-mail: [email protected]
By fax:
519 349-2675
2
3
6
9
Editorial
How Many Heifers
Do You Need?
Are We Feeding
Our Heifers Too Well?
Managing the Pre-Weaned Calf
12 Benefits of Acidified Milk
For Calves
14 Young Farmers
16 Heather Holme Holsteins
18 Veracity Holsteins
20 Passion
Daniel Fournier, agr.
Technical Services-Polygastrics Director
Eastern Region
How many heifers
do you need?
How many heifers do you need is an intriguing question? The answer depends on what your goal is for your herd
replacement program. Are you planning on expanding and growing your herd or are you going to sell extra heifers
for supplemental income or are they needed simply to maintain your herd size? Depending on your answer, this
will help you determine how many heifers you will need. In addition, regardless of your goal you want to optimize
your herd’s potential and your return on investment. Today, the cost of raising a heifer from birth to calving is a
sizable investment, so you want to make sure that every animal you raise has the best chance of being profitable.
RAISING COST
HOW MUCH DOES IT COST?
When thinking about the costs of your replacement program you need
to remember that the investment starts at birth. Calf and heifer mortality, morbidity and the animal’s rate of growth will impact the overall
raising costs. Many management decisions will be made between birth
and calving of this heifer and they will affect the monetary value she
will generate. From a global standpoint, the two most important factors
that determine the economic value of a heifer are:
A very simple question isn’t it? But a lot of variables influence the answer.
The average total cost to raise a heifer to 26 months is $3,000. This
includes depreciation, cost of the heifer and actual raising cost, while the
variable costs are approximately $1,800 +/- $100 depending on the area.
Are you surprised? I am. As I stated earlier, raising heifers is a sizable
investment, so you must take advantage of every opportunity to lower
your costs or get the heifer into production as soon as possible.
1st Age at first calving
(this means age where she will start producing milk)
Since age at first calving influences future milk production (see next
graphic), it would be logical to aim for a 22-24 month goal.
2nd Weight and height she will be at calving
3
Table 1 shows that a heifer that freshens at 24 or 25 months of age
will produce more milk than a heifer at 26 months or older. Approximately
150 kg less milk when heifers calve at 26 months compared to 24 months.
Plus you had to raise her for 30 extra days, increasing your replacement
cost. For every month retracted on calving age, you will save $100/month
per heifer.
7,800
7,600
7,400
7,200
7,000
6,800
6,600
6,400
6,200
With the cost of raising a heifer cited earlier, it is important to know
the time necessary to recoup money invested. How much milk
does it take to amortize the expense of raising a heifer? It takes
approximately a complete lactation to cover the cost of raising
each animal. In addition, all heifers raised do not make it to calving
and all those that freshen do not complete a full lactation. This is
why we generally consider that one lactation is needed to cover
the costs of raising a heifer to calving (see table 3).
In table 3, you can see the return on investment line is crossed
when the animal reaches 37 months of age. According to Valacta,
income over feed costs varies from one farm to another, ranging
between less than $3,000 to more than $5,000.
24
25
26
27
28
29
Age at first calving (months)
30+
Table 3: Monthly expense rate on income over
productive life of cow
Table 2 shows a heifer weighing 625 kg will produce 500 more liters
of milk than one that calves at 575 kg.
Production (kg/head)
Table 2: Effect of weight at calving
on milk production (Valacta)
4
8,500
8,000
7,500
7,000
6,500
6,000
5,500
5,000
$/month
Age at first calving is not the only factor that influences milk production.
Weight at calving also influences future milk production. A minimum
of 630 kg at 24 months of age is important if you want to optimize
yield and reduce potential health risks.
250
5,000
200
4,000
150
3,000
100
2,000
50
1,000
0
0
-50
-100
-150
-1,000
0
10
20
30
40
Age of cow
Daily
<550
550-575 575-600 600-625 625-650
Weight at first calving (kg)
>650
Cumulative
50
60
-2,000
70
Total cost
Production (kg/head)
Table 1: Impact of age at first calving on annual milk
production (Valacta)
TIME NEEDED TO MAKE THIS PROFITABLE
NUMBER OF HEIFERS NEEDED
How many heifers does your farm need? It really depends on your
culling rate, breeding program (calving interval) and age at first
calving. The table below illustrates their impact.
By bringing back the calving interval to 13 months or a little less,
it would be possible for our herds to have surplus animals available
for sale to other breeders or decide to raise less animals. This would
reduce the costs of raising animals. This same principle applies to
the reduction of the age at first calving. “A cow should be replaced only
by an animal that will be more profitable.”
Table 4: Number of heifers available as replacements
in a 100-cow dairy herd, assuming a sex ratio
of 50% and 10% mortality
The cost of raising animals is a very important expense on all dairy
farms. Actual knowledge provides us the ability to improve the financial
picture of the dairy with better management of raising heifers.
Age at first calving (months)
CI**
24
25
26
27
28
CONCLUSION
29
30
Number of heifers in the replacement herd at any time
12.0
90
94
98
101
105
109
113
13.0
83
87
90
93
97
100
104
14.0
77
80
84
87
90
93
96
15.0
72
75
78
81
84
87
90
16.0
68
70
73
76
79
82
84
Number of first-calf heifers available for replacement per year
(Maximum possible cow culling rate to maintain herd size to 100)
12.0
45
43
42
40
39
37
36
13.0
42
40
38
37
33
34
33
14.0
39
37
36
34
31
32
31
15.0
36
35
33
32
29
30
29
16.0
34
32
31
30
27
28
27
With a calving interval at 14 months and age at first calving at 26-27
months (National average), table 4 shows that a herd cannot support
more than a 34% to 36% culling rate. A herd can not exceed this culling
rate if they want to maintain herd size. If your cull rate exceeds 36%,
you will either need to buy animals, lower your age at first calving
(AFC), to 24 months or lower your CI to 13 months to maintain your
current herd size. If you achieve all three the cull rate could be 42%
and still maintain herd size.
The decisions to make regarding these expenses are in your hands.
These decisions will have a financial impact on your business. It is
thus important to remember certain goals:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Calve at 22-24 months;
Calve at 630 kg of body weight;
Calving interval of 13 months or less;
Culling rate less than 30%;
Do not raise all heifers, except if you can sell them for a profit;
Replace a cow only if necessary.
Discuss these options with people around you, your dairy nutrition
advisor, veterinarian, business consultant, etc., and set achievable
goals for the year. Understanding the economic conditions can be
difficult, but these points will help you make the most profit from
your herd replacement program.
“A cow should be replaced only by
an animal that will be more profitable.”
Certain herds have culling rates close to 50%. These herds generally
need to buy heifers to maintain their current herd size, while other
herds have culling rates in the 25% range. The herds with lower cull
rates have much more latitude to improve their herd and/or reduce
the cost of raising animals.
5
Bill Woodley
Ruminant Technical Services Manager
Shur-Gain Central Region
Are We Feeding
Our Heifers
$+HLIHU¤V3RLQWRI9LHZ
¡,W ZDV D FRRO 2FWREHU PRUQLQJ DV WKH \RXQJ
+ROVWHLQKHLIHUVWDUWHGWRURXVHIURPKHUVWUDZ
SDFN LQ WKH ROG SROH EDUQ 6KH H[LWHG WKH EDUQ
WR JHW VRPH GU\ KD\ WKDW KDG EHHQ SODFHG LQ
WKH IHHGHU \HVWHUGD\ 6KH ZDV PHW ZLWK D VKDUS
ELWLQJZLQGDVVKHPDGHKHUZD\WRWKHIHHGHUŸZDV
WKDWVQRZLQWKHDLU"+HUKDLUFRDWZDVJHWWLQJ
ORQJHU EXW WKH ZLQG VWLOO VHHPHG WR EORZ ULJKW
WKURXJK KHU 7KHUH ZDV D ELW RI URXJK KD\ OHIW
LQ WKH IHHGHU WKDW VKH ZDV DEOH WR GUDJ WKURXJK
WKHRSHQLQJ
¶V
WKH ZDON WR WKH FUHHN DOORZHG WKH \RXQJ KHLIHU DQG
KHUKHUGPDWHVWRJUD]HPRVWRIWKHGD\$IWHUHDWLQJ
KHU ILOO RI WKH GU\ FRDUVH KD\ WKH KHLIHU ZDQGHUHG
WRWKHIDUHQGRIWKHSURSHUW\WRILQGZDWHU
+RSHIXOO\ WKHUH ZRXOG EH VRPH PL[HG JUDLQ LQ
WKH IHHGHU ZKHQ VKH UHWXUQHG DV WKH IDUPHU KDG
VWDUWHG WR IHHG VRPH JUDLQ RYHU WKH ODVW WZR
PRQWKV 7ZR SDLOV RI PL[HG JUDLQ ZLWK D VPDOO
DPRXQW RI PLQHUDO QHYHU VHHPHG WR EH TXLWH
HQRXJKIRUWKLV\RXQJKHLIHUDQGKHUKHUGPDWHV
%XW VKH ZDV JURZLQJ DQG VKH ORRNHG JRRG Ÿ ELJ
7KHZDWHUWURXJKKDGEHHQVKXWRIIRYHUWKHVSULQJ DQGIUDPH\ZLWKDQLFHGHSWKWRKHUULEV¢
DQG VXPPHU DV WKH FUHHN ZDVQ¤W WRR IDU DZD\ DQG
2010
Evidence from both research and field studies would indicate
that a high proportion of today’s dairy heifers are overweight.
This can be monitored as a shift in BCS (body condition score)
or as an increase in expected body weight measured at different
stages of the growth cycle.
Research results from four Elanco field studies demonstrated that
1st lactation animals were gaining body condition over the years
between the different studies. Each original study was set up to
examine parameters that were not necessarily related to the 1st
lactation heifers. But as the data was “teased” apart the information
specific to the heifers was surprising!
Elanco compared the results from the four studies from 1995 to 1999,
examining a number of parameters including BCS (body condition
6
score) between the studies and between parity groups. The comparison showed an increase in “fat” heifers (BCS>4) precalving and a
corresponding increase in “thin” sophomore (2nd lactation) heifers.
The study also measured the incidence of metabolic disorders such
as LDA, metritis, dystocia and ketosis. The metabolic disorder rates
were compared between studies and between parity and precalving
BCS. The results demonstrated that there was an increase in LDA cases
for heifers from the first study in 1995 to the last study in 1999.
BCS >4
Study 1
Study 2
Study 3
Study 4
10%
35%
31%
32%
BCS <3
14%
4%
3%
22%
LDA
2.8%
3.4%
5.0%
5.2%
Too Well?
The data (below) also indicated that “fat” heifers (BCS >4) are at higher
risk for LDA’s, dystocia and metritis.
Improvement in forage quality
Thin
Good
Fat
Ketosis
4.9%
1.9%
3.5%
The practice of cutting alfalfa and grass earlier, will lead to improved
plant digestibility and increased energy content. High-cut corn
silage, high grain corn silage and BMR corn silage will all have a
higher plant digestibility and higher energy content. An improvement
in plant digestibility will also lead to a potential increase in DMI.
LDA
3.7%
3.8%
8.8%
Feeding of “leftover” lactating TMR
Metritis
3.7%
1.9%
9.7%
The “leftover” lactating TMR is often not weighed or analyzed. If the
TMR is similar to the consistency of the original TMR (i.e. not sorted)
then it will represent a significant energy source.
Heifers that are over conditioned are primarily a function of consuming
excess energy in relation to their growth and maintenance requirements.
Our “1960’s” heifer had a higher maintenance energy demand due to
inclement weather conditions and more physical activity (walking).
This was coupled with a lower energy intake due to the consumption
of lower energy forages and grains. The shift to confinement housing
with a full-fed TMR has dramatically changed these two factors –
energy requirement versus energy consumption. Other factors that
have confounded this trend are:
Comfortable barns with easy access to feed
This would be described as a “low maintenance energy environment”.
A shift from dry forages to fermented forages
Dry hay can provide high amounts of energy for the heifer but like
any forage it is dependant on quality. The shift to feeding fermented
forages in many situations has led to an improvement in digestibility
due to an improved harvesting window. This can translate to higher
energy intake for the growing heifer. The trend to incorporating corn
silage into the diet has also had an impact on weight gain. Corn silage
can have a high proportion of grain (ranging from 30-50%) of the
DM weight.
A shift to one-group TMR feeding rather than feeding
for different groups
This practice tends to compromise performance of heifers at different
stages of growth – the post-bred heifers often gain too much body
fat in this situation.
The practice of feeding one TMR to all of the heifers rather then feeding
according to age requirements can lead to over-conditioned heifers.
The example below examines feeding a 1/2:1/2 mixture of good
quality haylage and corn silage as the primary forage source to
two groups of animals – 10-15 months and 15-22 months of age.
In both age groups the growing heifers have excess energy consumption without feeding any grain! To bring the energy consumption
down to requirement, a high level of straw or mature dry hay must
be incorporated into the diet.
A shift from long forages (hay, baleage) to finely chopped forages
Short particle length could increase the DMI due to higher passage
rate. This will lead to higher energy consumption.
7
How do we know what is more
digestible for the animal?
To determine the amount of “true fiber” in your forages (It's the portion
that is fermented in the rumen and subsequently meets a high percentage
of the energy needs of the cow.), Shur-Gain has introduced two new analyses
over the last few years: potential digestibility and insoluble fiber. These
analyses are unique to Shur-Gain and are one of the reasons why we can
claim that the NEWTON program is the best in the market.
Feeding a 1/2: 1/2 mixture of good quality haylage and corn silage
kg
Energy
Req.
mj
Energy
Intake
mj
Energy
Excess
mj/day
Additional
Weight Gain
kg
0.0
0.3
53.25
64.20
10.95
0.44
3.0
0.0
1.4
53.25
53.25
0.00
0.00
3.0
0.0
7.0
1.3
53.25
53.25
0.00
0.00
Program #1 (free-choice silage mix)
33.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
72.79
86.26
13.47
0.54
Program #2 (control energy intake with
straw and mature dry hay)
8.0
3.0
6.0
1.4
72.79
72.79
0.00
0.00
Silage Mix
Straw
Hay
Protein
kg
kg
kg
Program #1 (free-choice silage mix)
23.0
0.0
Program #2 (control energy with straw)
12.0
Program #3
(control energy with mature dry hay)
Heifers 10-15 Months
Heifers 15-24 Months
Because of the lack of exercise and easy access to full feed, heifers raised
in a modern confinement facility will have a lower energy demand than
heifers raised in a “harsher” environment. Matching energy demands
with energy requirement is achievable when either lower quality feeds
are used or the heifers are limit-fed. Forages that may not be suitable
for the lactating herd may be the best choice for the heifers.
Feeding growing heifers a diet that has the proper energy consumption
based on requirements can be achieved by:
expensive. In the example below, haylage was fed along with high
quality corn silage. The PD (Potential Digestibility) varied between
samples of haylage from high (80% PD) to low (60% PD). The crude
protein was also altered to reflect a shift to more mature haylage.
The PD has a dramatic effect on the amount of “low” energy feedstuffs
that need to be incorporated into the diet. Using more mature haylage
with lower PD allowed for the exclusion of ingredients such as chopped
straw and dry hay.
• Growing and harvesting heifer “appropriate” forages such as:
More mature haylage or hay
Mature grainlage
Sorghum
• Purchase low energy feedstuffs such as chopped straw
or mature dry hay
• Limit-feeding
Harvesting forages that have less energy than the forages for the
lactating herd provides a good complement for full-feed heifer programs.
This may also provide a more cost-effective program especially in
situations in which ingredients such as dry hay of chopped straw are
8
Potential Digestibility (PD)
Crude Protein
Ingredients (kg)
Haylage
Corn Silage
Mature Dry Hay
Chopped Straw
Protein
High PD
Haylage
80%
20%
Mid PD
Haylage
70%
17%
Low PD
Haylage
60%
14%
8.79
6.00
0.00
2.81
0.52
13.54
6.00
0.50
1.00
0.25
16.04
6.00
0.00
0.00
0.45
The consequence of excess energy consumption for growing heifers is often evidentt
when the heifer enters the milking line-up. Metabolic disorders such as LDA’s, metritis
and dystocia can be prevalent during the postcalving period. This will lead to lower
production potential and higher cull rate. Excess energy consumption will lead to
elevated levels of internal fat depots that are highly labile. The internal fat coupled
with a decrease in DMI in the fresh period will predispose the heifer to fatty liver and
ketosis that could “haunt” her for the rest of her productive life.
Robert E. James
Extension Dairy Scientist
Virginia Tech
Limit Feeding to Lower Cost and
Promote Early Weaning is Not
Cost Effective?
Historically, dairy calves have been limit-fed approximately 4
quarts of milk or the equivalent of 0.45 kg of milk replacer powder
per day. The most common milk replacer powder has contained
20% protein and 20% fat. The logic behind “limit-feeding” is to
make the calves hungry and encourage early consumption of dry
calf starter feeds thereby promoting early weaning and reducing
costs. This practice has been widely adopted in spite of the fact
that milk with 3.8% fat and 3.2% protein contains the equivalent
of 30% fat and 25% protein on a powder basis and the fresh cow
routinely produces more than 4 quarts of milk per day during
early lactation. In fact nearly every other mammalian species
consumes considerably more nutrients in early life than the
limit-fed calf. Has limit feeding impaired calf growth and subsequent biological potential?
Nutrient requirements for growth
More recent research indicates significant advantages of more liberal
feeding recommendations which consider requirements for maintenance and a reasonable rate of growth and factor in the influence
of environment on maintenance nutrient requirements. Nutrient
needs of calves can be partitioned into maintenance and growth.
When calves are limit-fed, they must devote a greater portion of their
daily intake to maintenance, resulting in decreased availability of
nutrients to support growth and lower feed efficiency. When the
temperature drops, more energy is needed to stay warm and even
less is available for growth.
As an example, a 36 kg calf housed at 50°F (10°C) requires 0.4 kg
of milk replacer or milk dry matter to maintain body weight. When
the temperature drops to 5°F (-15°C), maintenance requirements
increase to 0.6 kg of dry matter. If the calf is housed in a wet
environment, maintenance requirements are even higher because
the hair coat has lost its insulating ability and fewer nutrients are
available to support growth. The impact of environment on calf
growth is even more critical when one considers that the newborn
calf has low levels of body fat (3-4%) to draw upon during periods
of high energy demand such as cold weather or illness.
9
Nutrition and calf health
Economics of calf rearing programs
Field studies in Virginia, Minnesota and California have demonstrated
that more liberally fed calves exhibited lower mortality and less
illness during the first two months of life. The relationship of diet to
calf health was best demonstrated in a controlled study conducted
at the University of Minnesota in which over 400 calves were fed
either 4 quarts of pasteurized whole milk or 20:20 milk replacer
containing 0.45 kg of dry matter. A summary of growth and health
is shown in the table below.
Traditional calf feeding programs which involve feeding approximately
1 gallon of milk or an equivalent amount of dry matter from a 20:20
milk replacer have been appealing to the producer due to low cost. In the
examples which follow the 2001 NRC was used to estimate expected
gains at different environmental temperature. Two milk replacer feeding
programs are compared using current market prices.
Pasteurized
Whole Milk
20:20 Milk
Replacer
Average daily gain (kg)
0.47
0.34
Treatment rate – all months
12%
32%
Treatment rate – winter months
20%
52%
Mortality – all months
2.3%
11.6%
Mortality – winter months
2.8%
21%
Measure
(Godden, et al., JAVMA, 2005)
Improvements in body weight gain and health could be attributed
to the fact that calves fed whole milk received 50 g more fat and
30 g more protein daily than calves fed the milk replacer. Virginia
Tech research has also shown that smaller calves (<29.5 kg) require
proportionately more nutrients than larger calves due to their proportionately larger surface area and the propensity for greater heat loss.
Nutrition and mammary development
Research over the past 10 years indicates that a more biologically
normal growth rate (>0.45 to 0.9 kg/day) may have an influence on
mammary development and later lactation yield. Studies in Israel,
Denmark, Illinois and New York have demonstrated that calves fed
more liberally prior to weaning produced as much as 907 kg more
milk during their first lactation. Growth of the mammary fat pad and
in some cases mammary secretory tissue is enhanced in Holstein
calves fed diets which enable gains exceeding 0.68 to 0.9 kg/day. These
differences suggest a developmental advantage for more liberally
fed calves. A retrospective study of preweaning calf growth in nearly
800 calves at Cornell University showed that each kg of preweaning
average daily gain was associated with the production of over 453.6
kg more milk during the first lactation. Their study also attributed
25% of the differences in 1st lactation milk yield to calf growth
prior to weaning. Although there are indications for differences in
mammary development, it is also conceivable that other factors
such as improved health during the early rearing period might
enhance the animal’s ability to achieve higher milk yield during
later life.
10
Conventional
0.45 kg of a 20:20 milk replacer powder fed in a total volume of
1 gallon. Daily intake is 0.09 kg of protein and 0.09 kg of fat.
At 68oF (20°C) this program provides sufficient nutrients to
support approximately 0.23 kg of gain.
At 32oF (0°C) this program does not provide enough energy
to support any gain. The animal must use all the energy to
maintain body temperature and will still lose weight.
Intensive
0.9 kg of a 26:16 milk replacer powder fed in a total daily volume
of 2 gallons. Daily intake is 0.24 kg of protein and 0.15 kg of fat.
At 68oF (20°C) this program provides sufficient nutrients to
support nearly 0.81 kg of gain
At 32oF (0°C) this program still provides enough energy to
support 0.54 kg of gain.
The difference in daily feed cost between the two feeding programs
is $1.42/day. If calves are weaned at 6 weeks of age, the added cost
for the more intensive feeding program is $60. At first glance this
appears to be a significant increase in feed cost which cannot be
tolerated in today’s economic climate.
However, additional factors should be considered. If cost per unit
of gain is calculated, the limit-feeding program is actually more
expensive costing $4.71/kg of gain while the cost is only $2.98/kg
of gain for the faster growing, more intensively fed calves. These
differences occur because the limit-fed calves use a larger
proportion of their nutrient intake to support maintenance with
little left over for growth. The differences become even more
accentuated with young calves (less than 21 days of age) that
become cold stressed at temperatures below 59oF (15°C)!
Results of the Minnesota study indicated a 10% reduction in mortality
when more protein and fat were fed from milk as compared to a
20:20 milk replacer. The higher protein and fat intake found in more
intensive milk replacer feeding programs mimics the benefits found
in feeding whole milk. The additional feed cost of a more intensive
feeding program for 100 calves is about $6,000 given our example
above. Assuming a value of $500 each at birth, $5,000 is recovered
in lower death loss. Additional benefits will be obtained due to reduced
expenses for treating sick calves although these are more difficult
to estimate.
There is sufficient research to suggest that more liberal feeding
programs support higher first lactation milk yield. Using a conservative
estimate of 226.8 kg more milk in the first lactation, 100 calves will
generate an additional $8,000 in gross income during the first
lactation using an average milk price of $16/cwt.
Granted these are estimates, but there is sufficient economic and
practical evidence to justify more liberal feeding programs for dairy
calves. Intensive calf feeding programs are probably better termed
more “biologically normal” as they now resemble how other mammalian
species are fed.
1. Colostrum intake is critical. A gallon in the first 6 hours of life
of high IgG colostrum is requisite to success of any calf feeding
program. Illinois research suggests that calves failing to absorb
sufficient colostrum antibodies will not respond well to improved
nutrition. Additionally, evidence suggests that the colostrum should
have low bacteria counts. High bacterial growth (>100,000 cfu
standard plate count) caused by delayed feeding or delays in
refrigeration has been associated with failure of passive transfer.
Colostrum should be treated in much the same manner as milk
that is destined for human consumption. It should be rapidly
cooled to <40oF (4.4°C) as quickly as possible to limit microbial
growth. This is achieved by placing clean frozen bottle of water
into colostrum to achieve rapid chilling.
Milk replacers are a practical and
economical alternative on many
dairies. Products with at least
26% protein and fat levels
between 15 and 25% promote
more cost-effective gains. Milk
replacer powder should be
diluted with warm water (110oF
(43°C)) to achieve total solids levels between 12 and
17% depending upon manufacturer’s recommendations. More liberal
feeding programs encourage growth which more nearly reflects the
animal’s genetic potential for growth, is more natural and is more
conducive to improved animal welfare.
2. High quality liquid diet fed at the appropriate dilution is essential.
While calves will grow well when fed 6 – 8 quarts of whole milk per
day, failure to pasteurize it successfully exposes calves to risks of
infection by Johne’s organisms, Mycoplasma, E. coli and a host of
other potential pathogens. Successful use of waste milk requires
careful consideration of investment in equipment, additional labor
and quality control testing to assure successful pasteurization.
3. Provide plenty of fresh, clean water.
4. Offer a palatable calf starter containing 18 to 22% crude protein
during the first week and keep it fresh. The calf starter should
contain an anticoccidial such as Bovatec, Rumensin or Deccox.
5. Wean calves when they are eating 0.9 kg of starter per day.
11
Brian Tarr
Ruminant Nutritionist
Shur-Gain Central Region
of Acidified Milk
Acidified milk and milk replacer have been fed
to calves for many years in several other countries
around the world. In Canada, this system has been fed
to young calves for a number of years now and its use
and application continue to grow in the dairy industry.
Acidified milk is also considered a viable alternative as
more countries move to prohibit the use of medicated
milk replacer products.
mixture is prone to separation and needs to be stirred or agitated 3
to 4 times per day, sometimes more often to keep it uniformly mixed.
In partially acidified milk the harmful bacteria are not all killed but are
sufficiently inhibited to allow for a relatively safe product for calves.
There is evidence to suggest that harmful bacteria such as E. coli are
inhibited while the growth of useful bacteria such as lactobacillus
is encouraged using partial acidification. This mixture may only last
for a few hours but the advantage is it does not separate as easily.
Why the growing interest in feeding acidified milk in Ontario? The
single biggest reason is the success producers have raising healthy
calves and low mortality. This is the result of having very clear guidelines that have been established for feeding acidified milk. Directions
for the preparation of acidified milk are well established as well as
different options that producers can use. This feeding system is
simple, inexpensive and easy to use.
Acidified milk is fed at room temperature, but during cold weather it
should be kept at about 68°F (20°C). This is a significant benefit over
having to feed milk replacer at a specific temperature. The longer shelf
life and flexibility also allows producers to feed any extra colostrum
and transition milk and take advantage of this on-farm resource.
ACIDIFYING milk
Bacteria multiply very rapidly under ideal conditions in milk, some
reports claiming that the bacteria double in number every 20 minutes.
There is a real incentive to control this bacterial proliferation and
ensure that calves are fed milk low in harmful bacteria. Acidifying
milk can achieve just that.
The only precaution using acid is it can be hazardous and it needs to
be handled carefully. Always dilute the acid first by slowly adding the
correct amount of acid to the water. Then the most common regimen
in Ontario is slowly adding the diluted acid to the milk while stirring to
achieve a pH 4.0 to 4.5. This is regarded as completely acidified milk.
Alternatively, milk can be partially acidified to a pH of 5.0 to 5.5. Check
the pH to confirm it is at the desired level.
In completely acidified milk, the bacteria are killed and any further
growth stopped making the milk safe to keep for 2 to 3 days during
cold weather and 1 to 2 days during warm or hot weather. However, the
12
Effects on SCOURS
Since bacteria are killed or significantly inhibited in acidified milk, calves
fed on acidified milk stay healthier and have substantially fewer bouts
of diarrhea compared to those fed regular milk or milk replacer. In one
study, researchers reported significant differences in the percentage
of calf days where the faecal consistency score was higher than 3
(3 = diarrhea) in calves on acidified vs “sweet” milk. Calves 4 to 17
days old had 2.85 vs 14.1 percentage calf days with scours and for
4 to 35 days old, 1.56 vs 8.36 respectively. Several studies have
found similar results with markedly reduced incidence of scours
in calves on acidified milk compared to normal (sweet) milk.
The reduced incidence of scours in calves fed acidified milk was also
reflected in better overall health and fewer secondary infections, such
as pneumonia, that are often associated with an initial bout of scours.
BEHAVIOURAL CHANGES with acidified milk
Feeding acidified milk changes the feeding behaviour of calves compared
to traditional twice a day feeding. On average, calves take 7 meals
each lasting about 7 minutes. Various studies report quite a variation
for Calves
in number of meals on acidified milk but the calves on acidified milk
still had at least twice as many meals as the calves on regular milk
and spent more time consuming the milk. Interestingly, calves fed
acidified milk spent significantly less time licking the pens and there
was a marked reduction in sucking other calves navels or ears. This
is an important finding as it makes group feeding calves easier and
reduces the behavioural problems usually associated with this practice.
Acidified milks' effects on STARTER INTAKE
AND RUMEN DEVELOPMENT
Acidified milk is usually fed free choice to calves. Research demonstrated that calves fed free choice consumed significantly more milk
than those restricted and it is generally accepted that calves will drink
9 – 12 litres of acidified milk if offered free choice. At these intakes,
weight gains approach 1 kg/calf/day or more. Calves fed acidified milk
free choice, consumed it in more frequent and smaller meals. This
resulted in fewer digestive upsets.
However, feeding milk free choice delayed the onset of calf starter
intake compared to calves fed a restricted amount of milk. This
affected the amount of calf starter consumed (3.8 vs 1.0 kg/day
reported in one study). This effect can be partially negated by the
choice of milk replacer product fed. The Shur-Gain Advantage Milk
Replacer is formulated to promote earlier calf starter intake. This,
combined with the formulation of highly palatable calf starter
products, Shur-Gain 22% Express Calf Starter Ration and the 22%
Rapid Gain Calf Starter Ration, help mitigate delayed starter intake
when feeding acidified milk free choice.
Acidification specifically, did not affect milk intake, rumen development or weight gain in calves. However, the amount of milk and calf
starter consumed did affect rumen development and weight gain.
On the one hand calves fed restricted amount of milk had increased
rumen wall thickness, longer, wider and a lower density of papillae
but on the other hand they had lower weight gain compared to calves
fed free choice milk. Although some studies showed a small but
non-significant weight gain benefit to feeding acidified milk, several
did not.
Studies also showed that there were no negative effects of acidified
milk on skeletal growth parameters such as height at the withers, body
length and chest depth.
LABOUR BENEFITS on acidified milk
Feeding acidified milk to calves reduces labour requirements which is
almost always limiting on farm. The acidified milk may last 1 to 3 days
which means less time is needed to prepare milk for calves. The other
benefit is the recommendation that all milk and feeding equipment
need only be cleaned every 2 – 3 days compared to after every feeding
with non-acidified milk. Some producers will wash the equipment each
time they mix a new batch of acidified milk. These two aspects alone,
less mixing and cleaning save a significant amount of time.
Feeding acidified milk can be done very simply and inexpensively.
However, some producers have installed more expensive circulating
systems where the acidified milk is pumped under low pressure
around the facility to feed the calves.
Feeding acidified milk to calves has many advantages for producers. The most
important are the ease with which producers can raise healthy, rapidly growing
calves with less labour than is required when feeding a conventional system.
13
Young Farmers
AT A GLANCE, FALL 2010
in Action
Nathan Neeb: Building a Dream
with passion and hard work
Great Passion for Farming
Cow Comfort: a Priority
Nathan Neeb is a 5th generation farmer at Fraserdell Farm just outside
Stratford, Ontario. The “motivation” to farm has been in Nathan’s makeup
since a very young age. He credits John his father and business
partner for the inspiration to work with dairy cattle and choose farming
as a career. Nathan’s inclination to work with his hands, run machinery
and manage cattle developed at a very young age. He was driving the
tractor when he was 11 years old and participated in 4-H that included
Small Engine Mechanics, Farm Safety as well as Dairy Calf Clubs.
Nathan and John’s dedication to animal husbandry, ventilation, water
supply and providing more space is paying off with a steady improvement
in the herd performance. The average DHI test day production over
the past four months is 35.6 kg with days in milk averaging about 170.
The present fat yield per day is at 1.41 kg and protein is at 1.21 kg. Their
milk production is averaging greater that 3 kg per day more than where
it was a year ago. The Current Herd BCA is 226 (milk), 226 (fat) and 226
(protein). They work closely with Dr. John Chesney from the Tavistock
Veterinarian Clinic on their herd health program. Nathan took the Gencor
AI course this past spring and is now doing all of the breeding.
Dream Under Construction...
After graduating from Northwestern Secondary School in Stratford,
Nathan worked in construction for 10 years, initially with his uncle
Bruce Neeb renovating and building barns and then with another
local company that specialized in concrete. He put a good portion of his
earnings towards buying quota and kept choring with John especially
during the winter months when there was more time.
...and Coming True!
The dream of being full time on the farm happened in 2006. Nathan
put his construction skills to work with the renovation and expansion
of the barn to move from 50 cows to 70 cows. They also made some
improvements to their calf facilities and rented a barn across the
road to house heifers. In 2008 they installed new DeLaval automatic
take-off milkers. 2009 involved a significant step when the Neeb family
purchased the farm next to them bringing their total acres to 380. They
were forced to act very quickly in renovating the barn at the new farm
as an untimely fire occurred at the rented heifer barn. Once again,
Nathan put his creativity and “construction hands” to work and spent
a lot of extra hours getting what now is a first class heifer facility up
and running. The Lely heat detection system “Heatime” has been
an important innovation that was installed in the barn. The technology
is used to monitor activity level of cattle and identifies when they
should be bred.
14
About the Nutrition
The one group TMR ration consists of kernel processed corn silage,
haylage, hay, roasted soybean’s, mixed grain, high moisture corn and
a custom lactation supplement that is designed by the Yantzi’s Feed
& Seed and Shur-Gain Dairy Nutrition Advisors using the NEWTON ration
balancing program. Some hay is top-dressed on top of the TMR. The
Neeb’s keep a sharp eye on feeding costs and make use of some key
feed additives when it makes sense. They regularly use RM104,
Levucell Yeast and APF dry fat in the lactation diet. Other Shur-Gain
products that are used include; 22% Express Calf Starter, 20% Textured
Calf Starter, 17% Heifer ration, Dairy Plus Heifer Mineral and the
Propulsion Dry Cow program.
On the Way to Success
Nathan really enjoys the day-to-day challenges of managing the dairy
herd. He likes the benefits of routines but also appreciates that every day
is a little different. “We are always open to learning and trying new ideas,”
says Nathan. He is really positive about the future of the dairy business
and feels that Fraserdell is well positioned to do what it takes to succeed.
We wish Nathan continued success as he emerges as a leader in the
Canadian dairy industry!
T
iff
ere
nce
“The dream of being full time on the farm happened in 2006.
Nathan put his construction skills to work with the renovation
and expansion of the barn to move from 50 cows to 70 cows.”
d
he
Informations:
S h ur- G ain
Owner: Nathan and John Neeb
Fraserdell Farm, 2520 Line 37, R.R. #1, Stratford, Ontario
Average herd size: 170
Cows in milk: 70
Production average: 35.6 kg
Average annual components: 1.41 kg BF 1.21 kg P
BCA: 226-226-226
Types of crops: corn silage, haylage, hay, roasted soybeans,
mixed grain and high moisture corn
Available land: 380 acres
Centre of Excellence: Yantzi's Feed & Seed
Feed aditives: RM104, Levucell Yeast and APF dry fat
15
AT A GLANCE, FALL 2010
Heather Holme Holsteins
Attention to details helps bring out the best
Glen and Vanda McNeil along with their son Curtis operate Heather
Holme Holsteins just outside of Goderich, Ontario. The family is known
nationally and internationally for their commitment to marketing elite
Canadian Holstein genetics. Glen and Vanda purchased half of the
cows and quota from Glen’s parents in 1977 and carried on the Heather
Holme prefix. Glen and Vanda are thrilled to have their son Curtis
farming along side them representing the third generation on the
family dairy operation.
The Breeding Powerhouse: Heather Holme
The Heather Holme prefix is synonymous with elite Holstein genetics.
The lineup of cows at Heather Holme Holsteins is completely home
bred. The current herd classification includes 13 EX, 27 VG, and 3 GP.
The herd was the 1st in Canada to be certified CHAH (Canadian Health
Accredited Herd) and leucosis free. And the McNeil’s have twice been
awarded the prestigious Canadian Holstein Master Breeder Shield.
The family hosts many tour groups and has marketed genetics
internationally to over a dozen countries.
Producing High Quality Feeds
The McNeil’s crop 150 acres and harvest corn silage, baleage, dry hay,
barley and soybeans. The McNeil’s strongly believe that forage quality
and consistency is one of the keys to healthy, milk production. One
of the strategies that the McNeils have employed to achieve this goal
is put up extra inoculated corn silage in an AgBag to ensure high
quality fermented feed year round. Producing high quality baleage
starts with harvesting at lower moisture levels (<30%) for the 1st cut
round bales. The intent is to retain higher levels of sugar which will
ensure palatability, fermentation and good digestibility. With the
second cut and more mature fields Glen and Curtis aim for higher
moisture levels (a50%) to help ensure that the alfalfa plant holds
its leaves and it is a softer product for the cows to consume. The
soybeans are sold as a cash crop and used as part of the crop rotation.
The barley grain is also sold while the barley the resulting straw used
for both bedding and incorporated into the milk cow ration.
16
16
Heather Holme Golden Devine VG 86 2y
Team Work
“Surround yourself with good help, treat them well and make them
feel appreciated are the principals of good management” says Glen.
The McNeil’s really appreciate the support from long time employee
Greg Feagan who helps keep the motors and machinery running.
Curtis has gained specialization in herd health and fresh cow support,
keeping the cows on track during their transition cow period. Vanda
helps in all aspects of the operation but has a great track record getting
calves off to a great start on their journey to the milk cow barn. Glen’s
involvement with the Holstein Canada board of directors can keep
him away from the farm, but has allowed him to gain a wealth of
international contacts.
The power of dynamic energy
Attention to detail helps bring out the best in their cows. The McNeils’
have worked with Bill Woodley, Shur-Gain Technical Services Manager for many years. Bill formulates the diet using the innovative
Shur-Gain NEWTON ration balancing software. The NEWTON Program
uses a dynamic approach to estimate energy consumption for the
dairy herd. Forage digestibility and the addition of appropriate energy
sources play a big role in achieving the energy that is required to
produce over 1.5 kg of milk fat/cow/day.
Cow comfort above all!
The ration balancing, although a critical component for achieving this
production, is only one step in the process. When you enter the barn
you will notice the well kept manger, clean water bowls, good lighting,
and lots of fresh air being pushed through the tunnel ventilated
barn. What you may not notice at first glance is the warm water
(55-60°F (13-15.5°C) in the pipes from the water re-claimer, the freechoice salt bowls, and the fresh feed that is offered throughout the day
in 5 different feedings, in addition the feed is pushed up 5x/day.
The McNeils have been very pleased with the service and attention
to detail from Dauphin Feeds. Glen states “Dauphin Feeds has been
a great business partnership with our herd - they go out of their way
to make sure that we get what we need - when we need it.”
Heather Holme Golden Desiree VG 88 3y
Heather Holme Holsteins
Glen and Curtis McNeil
nce
“Surround yourself with good help, treat
them well and make them feel appreciated
are the principals of good management.”
iff
ere
Farm profile:
Th
Heather Holme Holsteins, Goderich, Ontario
d
eS
h ur- G ain
Owners: Glen, Vanda and Curtis McNeil
Average herd size: 90
Cows in milk: 35
Production average: 11,420 kg (2x day)
Average annual components: 4.3 BF 3.5 P
BCA: 255-280-260
Herd classification: 13 EX, 27 VG and 3 GP
Types of crops: corn silage, baleage, dry hay, barley and soybeans
Available land: 150 acres
"Autumn Opportunity Show 2009" 1st "Breeders Herd"
Centre of Excellence: Dauphin Feeds
Dairy Nutrition Advisor: Bill Woodley
Innovation and efficient management
“Working with the McNeil’s has always been a great pleasure. One of the key attributes that has lead to the success
of this family farm is the drive to bring the latest technology into their dairy operation. Any new ideas or concepts
are carefully evaluated and if warranted, are incorporated into their dairy management and nutrition programs.
The results speak for themselves!”
Bill Woodley, Ruminant Technical Services Manager
17
AT A GLANCE, FALL 2010
Veracity Holsteins
New Heifer Barn facilities: the latest step
in continuous improvement
Leroy and Marianne Cook and their children Celeste and Connor
operate Veracity Holsteins near Stratford Ontario. It is very much a
true family dairy farm with everyone contributing to managing the
72 cow milking herd.
“Farming” with the flow
Leroy describes that choosing farming as a career was just a “natural
flow” from his upbringing across the road at his parent’s (Neil and Merla)
farm–Starhaven Holsteins. “I really enjoyed growing up on a dairy farm
and becoming involved in showing calves through 4-H” states Leroy.
History is repeating itself as both Celeste (17) and Connor (15) are
in the local Perth County Club and enjoy showing, especially at the eight
county championship show that is held each September. Marianne has
also been immersed in dairy farming her whole life, growing up on a
family farm in Oxford County just south of Tavistock. Leroy’s brother
Kevin now operates the original home farm under Cookview Holsteins.
The two brothers farm separately but are always there to help each
other out when extra hands are required.
How it all began
Leroy’s journey to owning his own business began early in his career
when he worked at Tavistock Dairy Sales arena where he met a lot
of other great young farmers that had an interest in good cattle and
dairying. He started gradually buying his own quota in the early
80’s. Marianne and Leroy started their own business in 1992 buying
quota and renting the barn across the road from Leroy’s parents. In
2000, they bought the farm from Neil and Merla and have gradually
progressed to owning 68 kg quota and cropping the 100 acres that
they own and another 60 that is rented.
Continuous capital investment
They have constantly worked on improving their genetics, facilities
and management skills. The Cook family believes in continuous
capital investment as an ongoing strategy. In 2003 and 2004,
they tiled 70 acres which has greatly contributed to crop end of the
business. An extra tower silo was put up in 2004 to help avoid
feeding transition corn silage in the fall. They also added a small calf
barn during the same year. They have invested in manure storage
improvements and feel that environmental stewardship an important
responsibility in farming. In 2008 they built a machine shop and
equipment storage building. 2009 was another important year
with the building of a brand new heifer facility. Young heifers were
overcrowded in the existing barn. Celeste had visited other operations
through her 4-H experience and felt it was an area to improve. They
18
18
Cows in the heifer barn
Connor at 4-H championship show
toured other barns in the community before constructing the 110
X 40 ft open front facility. Leroy states “We really see a difference in
how our heifers are doing; it also saves a lot of labour”. The Lely heat
detection system “Heatime” has been an important innovation that
has contributed to improvements in reproduction. The technology is
used to monitor activity level of cattle and identifies when they should
be bred. “Dr. Jeff Summers from the Milverton–Wellesley Veterinarian
Clinic has been an important advisor to us in getting our new barn
up and running” comments Leroy.
Managing the herd
The herd is averaging around 35 kg per day and is typically about 170
days in milk. Fat yield per day is at 1.32 kg and protein is at 1.09 kg.
The Rolling Herd Average BCA is 214 (milk), 224 (fat) and 213 (protein).
The ration is balanced using Shur-Gain’s NEWTON program. “We really
like the relationship with the Yantzi’s and Shur-Gain. We appreciate
that there are a lot of people behind the product. We change the
program when it needs to be changed based on our forages and
strive to keep the ration stable and consistent. The Nutrition consulting
and delivery service is excellent.” says Leroy. On the farm, they
feed corn silage, haylage, hay, barley and corn with a custom lactation
supplement.
Other Shur-Gain products used include 22% Express Calf Starter,
Advantage Milk Replacer, 20% Textured Calf Starter, Propulsion Transition
NR Dry cow ration, 17% Dairy Heifer Ration and Calibrre Top-dress
supplement that is fed to fresh cows and high producers.
When asked about the future of dairy farming, the Cook’s are very
optimistic. “There is a great need for healthy food products. The
challenge of feeding the global population is important to everyone
working in Agriculture. We like the work that is being done on new
dairy products that are targeted at ethnic communities in large
cities like Toronto.”
What's the secret to success?
The Cooks also have lots of enthusiasm for questions like “What does it
take to be successful in a family farm?” Leroy talks about determination
and working away in a consistent methodical style. Marianne states
“We really like farming as a lifestyle choice, it’s a family operation and
everyone enjoys it! We are proud and thankful and appreciate what we
have because we have built it ourselves pretty much from scratch.”
It is a pleasure to work with Marianne, Leroy, Celeste and Connor!
We congratulate and wish Veracity Holsteins and the Cook family
continued success!
Heifer Barn
Veracity Holsteins
Connor, Leroy, Mairanne and Celeste Cook
ere
nce
“They have constantly worked
on improving their genetics,
facilities and management skills.”
iff
Farm profile:
Th
d
Veracity Holsteins, Stratford, Ontario
eS
h ur- G ain
Owners: Leroy & Marianne Cook
Herd size: 150
Cows in milk: 72
Production average: 68 kg
Average annual components: 1.32 kg BF 1.02 kg P
BCA: 214-224-213
Herd classification: 6 VG, 30 GP, 8 G and 24 NC
Types of crops: corn silage, haylage, hay, barley, straw, feed dry corn
Available land: 100 acres owned + 60 acres rented
Service center: Yantzi’s Feed & Seed Ltd.
Dairy Sales Advisor: Brenda Melville
High Performing Family Business
“It is fantastic to work with everyone at Veracity Holsteins. Communication and trust are key to any partnership and
it is a pleasure to be part of this high performing family business. We focus on achieving great production with high
components and herd health to maximize quota return. The support and training provided by Shur-Gain enables me to
give the best possible service and solutions to my customers with respect to both nutrition and management practices.”
Brenda Melville, Dairy Sales Advisor
19
Your
Passion
rises early
and inspires us to make great innovations.
SGO100619
Passion leads to great accomplishments.