Reports - Nutreco Canada

0LNEJC
&OCUSON
#OW,ONGEVITY
Reports
Boonstra Farms Ltd.
Blanshard Holsteins
Sunny Glade Farms
AT A GLANCE, SPRING 2009
Lindsay Bridge, B.S.A
Dairy Business Manager
Western Region
Landmark Feeds
IN THIS ISSUE
Editorial
2
Focus on Longevity
3
Rumen Modifiers and NEWTON
4
Impact of Culling on Longevity
7
Impact of Lameness on Longevity
9
Cow Comfort and Longevity
10
Transition Management:
Impact on Cow Longevity
12
Boonstra Farms Ltd.
14
Blanshard Holsteins
16
Sunny Glade Farms
18
Young Farmers in action
20
About
AT A GLANCE
Each version of At a glance has a key theme. So far we have focused on new
technologies, the power or research and maximizing feed value. This edition’s theme
focuses on another critical element for successful dairy farming, lifetime longevity.
According to an old adage, “if you treat the cows well, they will treat you well.” This is
certainly true, but as farms become larger and different strategies for managing the
cows are utilized, it is important to review these strategies with lifetime longevity in
mind. Dairy farming is both a way of life and a business, and it is our sincere desire
to see you successful in both aspects. We hope that this edition of At a glance gives
you some ideas and information that will assist you with this process and help you
achieve the return on investment or profit that you are working towards.
In this edition of At a glance you will find a number of articles that are all focused
on the different areas that impact lifetime longevity and profitable production. The
articles focus on the impact of cow comfort, the transition cow program, lameness
and culling.
One of the articles also focuses on the importance of taking into account rumen
modifiers and their benefits when balancing a ration. We are very proud to be the
only company that has NEWTON, the world’s first ration balancing system that
utilizes Dynamic Energy and has the ability to assess the benefits of rumen
modifiers. This is not only more economical, but it helps you make better decisions
on which additives will give you the greatest return on your investment.
Your comments
are always welcome!
Send them to Kim Kaminsky
By mail:
Box 27, Otterburne
MB R0A 1G0
By e-mail: [email protected]
By fax:
204 433-7003
22
Lindsay Bridge, B.S.A, Dairy Business Manager
Western Region
Bill Woodley
Ruminant Technical Services Manager
Shur-Gain Central Region
&/#53
/.,/.'%6)49
% of Cows by Health Problems
NAHMS
Dairy 1996
13.40%
NAHMS
Dairy 2007
16.50%
Lameness
10.50%
14.00%
Respiratory
2.50%
3.30%
Retained Placenta
7.80%
7.80%
Infertility Problems
11.60%
12.90%
Milk Fever
5.90%
4.60%
Displaced Abomasum
2.80%
3.50%
Problem
Clinical Mastitis
Trend
Over the last 10 years there has been tremendous improvements
in cow management, barn and stall design and nutritional knowledge,
yet some of the key culling reasons have persisted. The NAHMS data
comparing 1996 to 2007 indicates that the death loss has increased
and the reasons for culling have increased in key areas such as
lameness and reproduction. Voluntary culling, which is linked to milk
production and culling less profitable animals, had actually decreased
from 21.4% to 16.1%, respectively.
Other factors that are linked to longevity and overall herd profitability
are the success of the transition cow program and the ability to raise
adequate heifers to replace cows leaving the herd.
The 2007 NAHMS survey indicates that 24.1% of the cows that leave
the dairy herd do so in the first 60 days. Whether this is due to voluntary or involuntary culling, it represents the “worst case” scenario for
longevity and lifetime production. The animal that leaves the herd
Raising adequate numbers of replacement animals that are genetically
superior to herd mates is a critical strategy for improving longevity
and lifetime production. The NAHMS study illustrates that the number
of calves that were born alive as a percentage of total cow inventory
has decreased from 1996 (93.4%) to 2007 (86.0%). Mortality, for both
unweaned and weaned calves, has improved from 1996 (13.2%) to
2007 (9.6%). This is a significant improvement but far from a realistic
benchmark of < than 5% mortality.
Culling a 1st lactation heifer within the first 60 days of lactation due
to transition problems is especially detrimental to profitability.
David Galligan from the Pennsylvania School of Veterinary Medicine
estimates that it takes one full-lactation for a heifer to offset her
rearing costs. The heifer must remain in the herd until halfway through
her second lactation to actually turn a profit. Focusing on improving
heifer mortality, heifer growth management and heifer transition
management will lead to improved lifetime production. David Galligan’s
chart (below) examines the costs and revenue over the lifetime of
a dairy cow. The cumulative revenue, which examines when the dairy
animal is both generating and not generating revenue, isn’t in
a positive position until the 2nd lactation.
Cash flows of a cow’s life, monthly and cumulative
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
250
200
150
100
50
0
-50
-100
-150
0
-1000
-2000
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Total Dollars
The NAHMS (National Animal Health Monitoring System) survey from the
US market indicates that in many scenarios the dairy industry has not
improved health and culling statistics an d in some scenarios the numbers have worsened. The attached comparison from the 1996 and 2007
NAHMS data set examines health problems. This data shows that the only
improvement was a slight reduction in the cases of recorded milk fever.
at this stage has incurred the cost of the dry cow program and the
lactation potential has been lost. In many scenarios, dairy producers
are not accurately recording the incidence of post-calving metabolic
disorders. The culls are labeled as production, lameness, etc without
establishing the link with metabolic disorders.
Dollars per Month
Longevity evokes the impression of profitability within a dairy
operation. Yet in many cases longevity is based on a series of
decisions and events that have forced the producer to keep
unprofitable and perhaps “broken” cows. Longevity should be
linked with the term “lifetime and profitable production”. The
ability to cull animals from the herd on a voluntary basis has
been a major challenge for many dairy producers. The average
turnover rate for North America is estimated at approximately
38% - in some herds this can be profitable while in others this
could be financially disastrous.
70
Cow Age
Daily
Cumulative
Longevity and profitable lifetime production are affected by a myriad
of factors from nutrition to barn design to cow comfort but most of
all herd management decisions. Understanding the “hows” and “whys”
of cows and heifers leaving the dairy herd will allow the producer
to make management decisions based on profitability and lifetime
production.
3
Douglas F. Waterman, Ph.D.
Director, Dairy Technology Application
Nutreco Canada Agresearch
John A. Metcalf, Ph.D.
Ruminant Nutrition Research Manager
Nutreco Canada Agresearch
Special recognition to Todd Duffield for allowing us to use the meta-analysis information.
2UMEN-ODI¸
.%74/.
AND
In a previous issue of At a Glance, we discussed in general terms
the concepts and reasons for using rumen modifiers. Anyone
who feeds cows is aware of the large number of additives and
the claims of improved animal performance, but it is often
difficult to determine whether the additive is having the desired
effect, or more importantly, if it is cost effective.
Before including a rumen modifier in the NEWTON feed program a
number of steps are taken by the Shur-Gain research team to ensure
that dairy producers are getting value for their money. Initially a lot of
time is spent on the mode of action of the product and a review of the
relevant literature. Next the effect on the animal is examined using the
Shur-Gain research facilities in Burford, Ontario. The additive is finally
incorporated in NEWTON as a rumen modifier, allowing us to decide
whether the inclusion of the additive is cost effective.
To demonstrate these steps and to provide more information on
an important rumen modifier we have chosen Rumensin premix as
an example. A large number of studies have been conducted with
Rumensin on dairy cows over the past 20 years.
Rumensin works by changing the bacterial populations, reducing
those that produce acetic and butyric acid and allowing for a higher
proportion of propionic acid producing bacteria. The benefit from this
is that more energy is available for milk production when carbohydrate
is fermented to propionic acid compared to acetic or butyric acid.
FORAGE
S
CONCENT
RATES
Usable energy
derived per mole
of glucose
(kcal)
Methane and CO2
(wasted energy)
419 ACETIC ACID
OR
524 BUTYRIC ACID
OR
734 PROPIONIC ACID
Rumensin allows for more energy from any ration, freeing up space
in the ration for more forage, which translates into healthier rations.
Not only does Rumensin improve the energy in a dairy cow’s diet,
it also has the benefit of reducing the production of methane.
SO HOW DOES RUMENSIN WORK?
Volatile fatty acids (VFA) provide a significant (˜70%) portion of
the energy requirements of cattle. VFA are produced in the rumen by
fermentation of carbohydrates by bacteria. The primary VFA produced
in the rumen are acetic, butyric, and propionic acid.
4
Environment Canada has provided (accredited) Rumensin with an
Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) claim for reducing
methane emission and fecal nitrogen levels by 20% each. Not only
does Rumensin provide more energy out of the feed, it is also having
a positive effect on the environment.
ERS
Recently a quantitative summary of the research results (metaanalysis) for Rumensin was conducted by Dr. Todd Duffield. The
results from this meta-analysis support previous findings and provide
some new insight into Rumensin’s effects on production and health.
Here’s an excerpt of the findings.
Using Rumensin in Lactating Dairy Cows:
How to maximize the benefit for your dairy herd?
By Todd Duffield, D.M.V., DVSc
Associate Professor, Population Medicine
University of Guelph
efficiency claim. Overall there was no significant effect of Rumensin
on milk fat yield. However, there was variation in milk fat yield
response from trial to trial. This variation is most likely caused by
differences in diet. This supports other studies that have identified
dietary interactions such as adequacy of particle size that may
interact with Rumensin to effect milk fat. Thus diets high in PUFA
(polyunsaturated fatty acids) and low in effective fibre are likely to
intensify a reduction in milk fat when Rumensin is included. However,
little effect on milk fat yield with Rumensin is to be expected with these
dietary ingredients properly controlled in the diet.
Summary of Production Outcomes-Amounts
Rumensin use in lactating dairy cattle and its effect on metabolism,
health, and performance was recently evaluated. A total of 59 publications from around the world were summarized for this meta-analysis.
Variable
Weighted mean
difference
% change
Milk yield
+0.7 kg/cow/day
+2%
Metabolic Findings
DMI
-0.3 kg/cow/day
-2%
Rumensin was found to significantly decrease ketones (acetoacetate
and beta-hydroxybutyrate) and non-esterified fatty acids (NEFA –
a form of mobilized fat). Rumensin increased blood glucose. These
findings strongly support a beneficial effect of Rumensin on energy
metabolism of the cow.
Milk production efficiency
+2.04%
+2%
Milk fat yield
-0.002 kg/cow/day
-0.02%
Milk protein yield
+0.01 kg/cow/day
+1%
BCS
+0.07
+2%
BW change
+6.3 kg
+1%
Milk Production Findings
Rumensin decreased dry matter intake (DMI) and increased milk
yield and milk protein yield, which supports a milk protein production
5
CONCLUSIONS
The findings from the meta-analysis give strong support for the use
of Rumensin during the transition period (for the energy and health
benefits) and throughout lactation for the efficiency benefit. NEWTON
accounts for the energy benefit of Rumensin within the program. In
doing so, the overall ration cost of producing the same amount of milk
is reduced since the cost of the rumen modifier and benefits to the cow
have been taken into account.
Table 1. Effects on costs of including rumen modifiers
in formulated diets
Good Quality
Forages
Treatment
In summary, when you choose a rumen modifier such as Rumensin,
you can be sure of the following:
Milk Yield, kg
35
Days in Milk
150
Milk Fat content, %
3.80
Milk protein content, %
3.40
Liveweight, kg
Dry matter intake, kg/day
1
The product has been thoroughly researched and proven;
2
There are no negative effects on the animal;
3
It is cost effective.
Control
Concentrate cost, $
PCON
RM
Concentrate cost, $
PCON
READ ABOUT HOW NEWTON AND RUMENSIN HAVE WORKED
FOR THESE PRODUCERS
Here are examples of how the NEWTON program accounts for the
energy value of Rumensin and the savings it can provide on your farm.
2nd RM
Concentrate cost, $
PCON
3rd RM
Concentrate cost, $
PCON
675
22.0
4.247
53.3
3.997
53.3
3.597
53.3
3.725
53.0
NEWTON is a unique and powerful tool for making an objective
assessment of whether or not an additive should be used. Based
on the situation of your herd, it can determine which additive is most
profitable for you to use on your farm. It’s up to you to take advantage
of the benefits provided by NEWTON.
Features and Advantages
of the NEWTON Software
Origin and purpose of the new feed software:
U Developed by the Shur-Gain research team;
U Used to formulate rations for your herd.
Rumen modifiers are currently used as feed additives:
UÊOn top of an already balanced ration;
U When the expected result is an increase in performance.
The system includes two main features:
U A dynamic approach to calculate energy;
U The incorporation of rumen modifiers.
The Dynamic Energy system now assesses the modifier
as a nutrient source.
New rumen modifier assessment module:
U This module is used to assess the effect of additives
in the rumen.
6
No other current feed model has the following capacities:
U Automatically formulates rations taking into account
the advantages of rumen modifiers;
U Does all this at least cost.
Bryan Van Gorp, D.V.M.
Dairy Specialist
Shur-Gain Central Region
)MPACTOF#ULLING
ON,ONGEVITY
As stated in the introduction, the length of time a cow remains
in the herd directly impacts her contribution to the farm’s
profitability. Key measures for assessing cow longevity are
Turnover and Cull Rate. The turnover rate is defined as the total
number of cows that left the milking herd (dead and sold) divided
by the average herd inventory (milking and dry). For example,
if 7 cows died and 31 were sold for various reasons from a herd
that averaged 83 milking and 17 dry cows, the turnover rate
would be 38% (38 divided by 100). This is the average for herds
in North America. The cull rate for the same herd would be 27.5%.
This refers to the total number of cows sold divided by the total
number of cows in the herd (38 divided by 138).
When would having a low turnover rate not be the best decision?
When the turnover rate is low because of a poor reproductive program
and the producer simply does not have enough heifers to replace
non-profitable cows. Or when the herd replacement program is
underperforming because of a high incidence of dead on arrival (DOA),
mortality, morbidity and/or an extended average first calving (AFC).
Both of these will result in less herd replacements and would lead to a
low turnover rate or a decline in total cow numbers. Another example
would be if the producer simply chooses to sell heifers for dairy
purposes. This practice may limit genetic gain, but it does generate
more income than the average cull cow.
Unless the herd is growing via purchases or internal herd growth, the
turnover rate will typically equal the number of herd replacements.
In our herd of 100 cows used as an example, there would be about
40 heifers per year, so the turnover rate would be around 40 animals
or 40%. Generally speaking if we can lower the Turnover Rate/Cull
Rate and cows are in the herd for more lactations, this should improve
the profitability of the farm. However, simply lowering the turnover
rate may not necessarily be a worthwhile goal.
7
Turnover can also be low because the producer decides to keep wrecked
or low producing animals beyond their profitable life. Simply having
a low turnover rate does not necessarily mean it is the right choice
or the most profitable choice. Lowering involuntary culls (animals
that leave because they are broken or dead) so more animals can be
sold for dairy purposes or voluntarily replacing animals with a higher
income generating potential is usually the best economical decision.
Do you know the true impact of your turnover rate? When considering
the impact of turnover rate, you also need to take into account the
Turnover Cost. Turnover cost is the “Cost” of the animals entering the
herd minus the price of animals leaving the herd times the number of
animals turned over. A 2007 study from the University of Wisconsin
done on 62 farms of various sizes, including some commercial heifer
growers, determined that the average cost of raising heifers was
$2,149 (includes a cost of $500 per calf). If we apply these costs to
our initial herd scenario what would the turnover cost be? The producer
would receive $0 for 7 dead cows. The 31 head that were sold
averaged $400 ($200 for a lame thin cow to $600 for a big failureto-breed cow). So, in this case, turnover cost would be (38 x $2,150) –
[(31 x $400) + (7 x $0)] = $69,300. This would calculate out to be $3.47
per cwt of milk for a herd making 70 lbs of milk. Turnover cost can never
be reduced to $0, but lowering your turnover cost provides a great
opportunity to generate real improvement in profits and cash flow.
In order to correct turnover problems and provide a solution,
accurate information is a must. If the records show a cow
was culled because of low milk production, but she was
400 DIM, the cause was not low milk production. At 400 DIM,
she was probably not breed back, so the issue was poor
reproduction. However, if she did not breed back because she
was lame and thin, the reason for culling was lameness, not low
production or reproduction. In both scenarios, the information
is misleading and you cannot make appropriate adjustments with
inaccurate information.
8
Based on Michigan DHIA data from 1959 to 2001, the turnover
rates increased from 29% to 41% and deaths went from 1.8%
to 6.9%. Much of the increase in Turnover Rate is related to an
increase in the death rate, and dead cows do not generate much
income.
Many people focus only on pounds of milk sold per cow
to dilute operating costs. There is another potentially more
potent diluter of costs and that is to keep cows in the herd longer.
Diluting out the $2,150 cost of raising a heifer over more
lactations and therefore producing more pounds of milk over time
can reduce the cost of production.
Research has shown that there is some antagonism between high
production and longevity. With all other factors being equal,
increased production increases the incidence of mastitis, decreases
the likelihood of pregnancy, and increases the incidence of lameness.
Based on the 2007 NAHMS survey, cows leave the herd for five main
reasons:
Ê
Ê
Ê
Ê
Ê
U
U
U
U
U
Reproduction (21.2%)
Udder and mastitis (18.5%)
Lameness and injury (12.9%)
Death (19.5%)
Poor production (13%).
(Low production maybe an overestimate because
of the inaccuracy in recording, as mentioned before)
A high Turnover Rate may be good or bad depending on your farm.
Collect good information, then determine what approach is best for
you to generate the most income.
Bryan Van Gorp, D.V.M.
Dairy Specialist
Shur-Gain Central Region
)MPACTOF,AMENESS
ON,ONGEVITY
Lameness and injury result in low value culls, with some being
euthanized and others making it to slaughter typically thin. In
addition, it should be recognized that lameness and injury will
contribute to other reasons for culling, especially reproduction
and low production. Based on the above information it can be
calculated that the cost of culling for lameness and injury in an
average herd is greater than $9000 per 100 cows. This does not
take into account cows that died or were euthanized on-farm.
A University of Wisconsin study showed the average incidence
of lameness in large herds was greater than 40%. In addition,
there are the costs of trimming, footbaths, and treatment. So,
we can see that on average, herd lameness and injury cost
approximately $378 per head per year (Guard 2006). Of course
half the herds are worse than average.
Lameness is typically underdiagnosed. For example, in one
study in Michigan involving 95 herds, producers identified 4.5%
of the cows as lame while veterinarians identified nearly 52% as
lame. For this reason, one of the necessary steps in dealing with
lameness problems is education of the producer, so that priorities
can be correctly set.
Another important step in the process is to make an accurate diagnosis of the cause of lameness. Possible causes include infectious
diseases (foot rot, interdigital dermatitis), laminitis (white line
disease, abscesses, ulcers), and injuries (falling injuries, calving
injuries, hock abrasions, foot injury from stepping on something
sharp or getting the foot caught). Laminitis problems must be
differentiated by cause. There are three potential causes: 1. Severe
inflammation such as mastitis or metritis (rare); 2. Nutritional
imbalance caused by overfeeding rumen available carbohydrates
(RACHO) or inadequate effective fiber; and 3. Poor cow comfort
leading to excess standing time on concrete. As with most health
problems the causes are often multifactorial and interrelated.
Animals can often overcome one or two insults, but when the
cumulative stresses from several factors combine we get disease.
A reasonable goal is to have less than 10% of the cows with a
lameness score of 3 or greater and less than 2% of cows culled for
feet and leg issues. A good way to determine the lameness score
is to stand where you can watch cows exit the barn or parlor and
use a pad of paper to mark each cow on a 1 to 5 scale. Wait for the
entire group to pass because lame cows will usually be last. Cows
scoring 3 or higher are lame and should receive treatment unless
they are chronically lame (treated several times with little or no
improvement). A high incidence of lameness over an extended
time nearly always indicates cow comfort issues. Cows do not
have a footbath or trimming requirement. We know this because
there are many herds that rarely or never use these tools and
have a very low incidence of lameness.
9
Brian Tarr
Ruminant Nutritionist
Shur-Gain Central Region
#OW#OMFORT
The reasons why cows leave the herd are often not recorded
accurately. However, the underlying reasons for leaving
often start with poor cow comfort and its consequences. This
emphasizes the importance of cow comfort with respect to
cow longevity.
Cow comfort, a function of the facility and management, is the all
encompassing term that reflects the animals’ well being and productivity. Animal welfare is greatest when cows can behave naturally.
How cows are housed and managed affects their production, health,
and behaviour and consequently longevity and profitability. There are
many signs of poor cow comfort – some of the physical lesions are
very obvious while some of the behavioural signs are more subtle.
Comfort is important at all times and to every cow in the herd.
However, the transition and fresh to mid-lactation periods are
particularly critical times to provide optimal cow comfort. There are
three major behaviours to consider: eating, resting and rumination.
Cow behaviour in these areas and activities is affected by facility
design features and decisions made by the producer. The feeding
system and stall design are important to ensure that cows are
comfortable eating and lying down respectively. However, even when
the facility is well designed, producer decisions can introduce stress.
Decisions such as overstocking, both pens and bunk, poor grouping
10
AND
strategies and too much time spent away from feed, water and stalls
negatively affect cows.
How do we evaluate cow comfort? The main consequence of poor
cow comfort is lameness, which leads to reduced milk production and
reproductive performance. Other obvious signs are hair loss,
abrasions, and swollen hocks that sometimes get infected. There
may be other consistent abrasions on cows that indicate that there is
a problem with the facility. Cows being dirty, particularly on the hind
legs, udder, lower belly and tail, is a sign of poor cow comfort. Looking
at the production records, high somatic cell count can usually be
associated at least in part with poor cow comfort.
There are slightly more subtle observations that suggest cow comfort
is compromised. Cows standing in the stalls or perching for extended
periods of time before lying down are a subtle sign of a problem. When
cows have difficulty rising in stalls, this indicates that the stalls are
incorrectly designed, uncomfortable or that the cows are in some
,ONGEVITY
discomfort. Too many cows standing in alleys or lying in alleys
should alert us to serious comfort problems. Cows suffering from heat
stress may not be that obvious to spot since the initial signs may be
quite subtle. By the time cows are observed panting, heat stress is
quite severe.
Then there are cow comfort aspects that are very difficult to quantify
in the barn by simple observation. Adequate lying or resting time is
critically important to cows. Cows with less than 12 hours lying time
are more likely to reduce feeding time as well. More time resting and
ruminating is associated with better rumen health, milk production
and better component production. Cows with adequate lying time have
less stress on the hoofs, less fatigue stress and greater blood flow to
the udder. The extent to which cows are displaced at the bunk reduces
feed intake, particularly in submissive cows.
with so many other cow comfort parameters; for example cows can’t
lie down for 12 hours per day or they don’t have adequate access to
feed and water, and there may be problems with mobility in the barn,
especially for subordinate or lame cows.
The cumulative effects of poor cow comfort are clearly reflected
in poor milk production, poor reproduction and premature culling.
This reduces longevity and profitability.
Overstocking is one of the most contentious issues facing producers and has a marked impact on cow comfort. Overstocking interacts
11
Andrée Bourgeois, Agr.
Director, Polygastric Technical Services
Shur-Gain Eastern Region
4RANSITION-ANAGEMENT
)MPACTON#OW
Every year a large number of cows leaving the herd are doing
it without this being a voluntary decision on the part of the
producer. This situation directly impacts the profitability of the
farm operation. Based on the NAHMS 2007 survey, 24.1% of cows
leave the herd by 60 days in milk. A turnover rate of <6% should
be achievable, but in reality it is significantly higher and not
getting any better. The bottom line is that cow longevity has a
direct impact on your farm’s financial well-being.
TRANSITION PHASE
An excellent place to start would be the evaluation of your transition
cow program. The transition phase is considered to be 3 weeks
prior to calving to 3 weeks after calving. This phase is critical for
optimizing milk production and cow health. In the past, a lot of
emphasis has been placed solely on the transition ration. Pre-fresh diets
were implemented to assist in adapting the rumen from a high-forage,
low-energy dense diet to a lactating cow diet. However, fresh cow
disorders are still an issue. There is more and more evidence that
the ration is not the only factor affecting early lactation cow health.
New research conducted by several universities has shown that there
is a link between management, facilities, and fresh cow health.
Things to consider:
Change in dry matter intake
U Research conducted by Urton (2004) on feeding behavior before
and after calving demonstrated that for every 10-minute decline
in average daily feeding time, cows were twice as likely to be
diagnosed with metritis.
U General factors such as ration, animal and management were
assessed for their impact on variation in dry matter intake
during the transition period. Grummer (2005) stated that 30% of the
variation was related to the animal, 70% to management, and 0%
to the ration.
Stocking density
U Figure 1 clearly shows the effect of close-up pen density on dry
matter intake of the group. The information was collected on two
different farms. The cows in Dairy 2 consumed 32 lbs of dry matter
Figure 1: Impact of Crowding in the Close-up on DMI
Pre-Fresh DMI and Pen Crowding
(Two New Mexico dairies)
Dry Matter Intake, lbs/day
36
34
32
30
28
26
24
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
Cow in Pen/Headlocks, %
12
Dairy 1
Linear (Dairy 1)
105
110
115
Buelow, unpublished; Nordlund et al., 2006
Dairy 2
Linear (Dairy 2)
,ONGEVITY
at 80% pen stocking density. As the number of cows in the group
increased, dry matter intake decreased to 28 lbs. This amounts to
four pounds less dry matter consumed! This can significantly affect
rumen function and nutrient supply to the cow. The recommendation to improve and maintain dry matter intake is not to go above
80% stocking density (animals to stalls) and provide a minimum
of 30 inches of feed bunk space.
Time spent in maternity pen
Another aspect of dry cow management to consider is the time spent
in the maternity pen. Table 1 shows that cows in herd 1 averaged
4.5 days in the maternity pen. In this herd, 112 cows were in the pen
for less than 3 days, and exhibited a 3.6% culling rate for the first
60 days in milk (DIM). This compares to 182 cows which spent more
than 3 days in the maternity pen and showed a 9.3% culling rate. A
similar pattern was observed in herd 2 with a 2.6% culling rate when
cows were in the pen less than 3 days, compared to 9.3% for cows
staying more than 3 days.
Table 1: Time Spent in the Maternity Pen
Herd 1 (4.5 days in pen)
<3 days ≥ 3 days
Δ
Calvings
112
182
Culled by 60 days, %
3.6
9.3
Calvings
34
129
Culled by 85 days, %
2.9
9.3
3.1x
Subclinical ketosis, %
6.9
16.0
2.3x
Displaced abomasum, %
2.9
5.4
1.9x
Note that the level of subclinical ketosis in herd 2 went from 6.9%
to 16% as the time spent in the maternity pen increased. The only
difference reported in these trials was the time spent in the maternity
pen. It was suggested that nonesterified fatty acid (NEFA) concentrations may have been elevated in a greater proportion of cows that had
spent 3 or more days in the maternity pen (Cook and Nordlund 2004).
There are a lot of factors that can affect cow longevity, but the
transition period is definitely a key factor. We have shown in this article
that changes in dry matter intake, stocking density, and time spent
in the maternity pen influence the success of the cow’s transition
period. Factors such as heat stress will also have a negative impact
on cow health.
One final point: When trying to address an issue with your transition
cow program, it is essential to have good data, e.g. the percentage of
the cows leaving the herd before 60 DIM and overall cow turnover rate.
If you have any concerns about your transition program, talk with
your dairy nutrition advisor, he or she is trained to look at every aspect
of the farm with you and uncover potential opportunities.
2.6x
Herd 2 (5.9 days in pen)
Oetzel, unpublished data, 2003
13
AT A GLANCE, SPRING 2009
Boonstra Farms Ltd.
A Passion for Cows and Good Business Sense
In 1940, Brian and Rob Boonstra’s grandfather moved from the
Netherlands to Canada and started operating the farm, which
was later taken over by his two sons, Bert and Carl, who farmed
together until 1995. In the year 2000, Bert’s sons, Brian and
Rob, bought the farm from their father, who continued to live
on it and see it grow. Bert remained an indispensable ally
throughout the development of the family farm, helping out with
the field work, a task for which his sons are very grateful.
Several changes have taken place since then. “We have been very
fortunate,” state the two brothers. “When we bought the farm from
our dad in 2000, we were milking 75 cows and farming 2000 acres
of land. We expanded at a rapid pace and took on a lot of risks,
but it was all worth the effort.” Their positive attitude certainly helps
them to reach their goals. The Boonstras are of those people who have
a strong determination. ‘Keep moving forward’ is their motto, which
is very representative of their motivation to always go further.
Today, the business has a total area of 5,000 acres used to grow canola,
winter wheat, spring wheat, silage corn, alfalfa, oats and barley. The
current herd is made up of 620 head of cattle, including 270 cows
in milk, and the official production average of the business is F 221,
P 220, M 220. In terms of classification, the herd has 3 EX, 67 VG,
170 GP, 73 G and 3 F. Brian and Rob hire 4 full time and 2 part-time
employees. “We have incredible employees. Michael Smith came to us
with experience in operating a large herd. As our herdsman, he shares
the same passion and love of cows that we do. John Billings has worked
for us for almost 10 years and is someone we know that we can count
on,” state Brian and Rob.
The thing that the two brothers are the most proud of is their family.
Brian and his wife Jackie have four children: Jonathan (15 years old),
Emily (13), Madeline (7) and Thomas (3). Rob, who’s married to Tammy,
has 3 children: Chelsea (13), Chantal (10) and Gerrit (6). When we
New barn built in 2004
14
ask the two fathers about the younger family members who may be
interested in taking over the operations, they answer as follows:
“Jonathan helps out with feeding the calves and milking. He puts in
long hours at harvest on the grain cart and on the semis during silage
harvest. As far as what the future holds, we can’t be sure yet. The girls
are young and involved in sports, and Thomas and Gerrit love to go with
their dads to the field and the barn.”
Jackie and Tammy are both co-owners and stay-at-home moms. They
are very involved in the farm operations and bring a precious support.
They love farming and think that this is a family-focused profession.
This enables them to raise their family in a healthy environment where
they can learn to take on responsibilities and appreciate what life has
to offer them.
The thing that the two producers like the most about their profession
is classification and breeding good cows. “On our last classification, we
had a cow score of EX 7E (Boonstra Lincoln Anne) at 16 years of age
and another cow score of EX 92 4E (Boonstra Storm Bella) at 10 years
of age. These cows have the longevity that we strive for. Our oldest cow
is Boonstra Rus Connie (VG 87) and she will be 18 years old this April.
Brian, Jackie, Rob and Tammy have a trusting relationship with their
Landmark dairy nutrition advisor, Kim Kaminsky. “She’s fantastic. Kim
is extremely thorough and very organized. She takes great pride in her
work and we know that she values us as a customer,” they confirm.
They choose to work in partnership with the Landmark Feeds team
because the people there are always available to help them reach their
goals. “Landmark Feeds has an excellent reputation. We can count on
them because they also work as a team. When we have a problem, Kim
has a group of people behind her that she can count on. Landmark has
always been there for us, and has never let us down,” they state.
Harvesting winter wheat
Mike, Rob, Brian and John
Boonstra Farms Ltd.
Brian and Rob
“The thing that the two producers like
the most about their profession is classification
and breeding good cows.”
REPORTS
The Boonstra Family
Farm profile
Boonstra Farms Ltd., Marquette, Manitoba
Owners: Brian and Jackie − Rob and Tammy Boonstra
Herd size: 620
Cows in milk: 270
BCA: F221-P220-M220
Herd classification: 3 EX, 67 VG, 170 GP, 73 G, 3 F
Production average: 10,413 kg
Available land: 5,000 acres
Service center: Landmark Feeds Otterburne
Dairy Nutrition Advisor: Kim Kaminsky
Kim Kaminsky, Dairy Nutrition Advisor, Landmark Feeds, Otterburne
“Having the opportunity to work with the Boonstra’s and their dairy operation has always been a pleasure. The years of
planning they have put into the construction of their new barn put cow comfort and longevity first and foremost towards
a successful future in the dairy industry. The strength of their management is reflected in their success and it is a real
pleasure to see such devotion and commitment to the farm from the entire family. I have always enjoyed being able
to work with Brian and Rob and I wish them all continued success in the future.”
15
AT A GLANCE, SPRING 2009
Blanshard Holsteins
Technology and Efficiency Combined!
At Blanshard Holsteins Farm, passion for agriculture is passed
on from generation to generation. Dick Heapy remembers first
shipping milk in 1960, working out of a red hip roof barn. He and
his wife Ivy had a son, Darcy, who started helping them on the
farm after he came home from the University of Manitoba in 1992.
Then three years later, Darcy and his wife Lori became partners
in the operations of the farm and started milking 30 Holsteins
in the same red hip roof barn!
In 1998 Darcy and Lori built a new barn with 48 tie stalls. Today
the property includes 1,120 acres with a total of 800 acres used to
grow crops. This includes 80 acres of corn, 70 acres of hay, and the
remainder in wheat, barley and canola. The herd totals 119 head and
the farm’s official production average is 1 EX, 18 VG, 25 GP and 13 G.
Lori is a physical education teacher who decided to be a full-time
mother and a dedicated dairy farmer. The couple has 3 children:
Brayden (9 ½ years old), Kassidy (7), and Kate-Leigh (4 ½). Even
at their young age, they are interested in the farm. They go to the
barn each day and help by doing basic chores. They have all shown
Holsteins and enjoy doing it. They obviously love the lifestyle on a
farm. “It’s a value that we try to share with them, just like my parents
did with me,” Darcy comments.
Dick and Ivy continue to work with them on the farm and are proud
of their son and daughter-in-law. They are happy to see that their farm
has grown into the large dairy and grain operation that it is today.
And there are more developments in store for the future. “We hope to
increase our production further,” states Darcy, who has just finished
a major upgrade with a new vacuum line, pipeline and 6 automatic
New barn
16
take off milking units. He strives to keep the facilities current and
would also love to build a heifer barn.
Already, it’s a big accomplishment to increase the operation from
7,000 kg per cow to 10,000 kg per cow and to build a modern and
up-to-date facility, always making sure that the dairy is clean and
organized in spite of the hard work every day. “We believe that what
you put into the dairy is what you get out of it. We feel that we are very
efficient and organized in keeping our dairy. This allows us to have lots
of quality time left to spend with our young family,” states Darcy.
In addition to working on the farm and spending time with their family,
Darcy and Lori are involved in many projects within their community.
Darcy is president of the Oak River rink. He enjoys playing men’s recreational hockey when time permits. Lori is president of the Oak River
nursery school and secretary-treasurer of the Keystone Holstein Club.
The Heapy family is glad to be able to count on a team that is as
involved and passionate as they are. They truly believe that the
Landmark Feeds team is responsible for a large part of their success.
“We feel we should have switched to Landmark Feeds sooner. We lost
precious time and money due to less than optimal feed,” confirms
Darcy. But now that they are in good hands, they know they can
look toward the future, which promises to be full of great
achievements!
Kate Leigh with her calf
Blanshard Holsteins
“We believe that what you put into
the dairy is what you get out of it.”
REPORTS
From left to right: Dick, Ivy, Lori, Darcy and in the front is Brayden, Kate Leigh and Kassidy
Farm profile
Blanshard Holstein, Oak River, Manitoba
Owners: Darcy, Lori, Brayden, Kassidy and Kate-Leigh Heapy
Dick and Ivy Heapy (Darcy’s parents)
Herd size: 119
Cows in milk: 48
BCA: 216M-215F-211P
Herd classification: 1 EX, 18 VG, 25 GP, 13 G
Production average: 10,000 kg
Available land: 1,120 acres (800 of which are cultivated)
Service center: Landmark Feeds Otterburne
Dairy Nutrition Advisor: Lindsay Bridge
Lindsay Bridge, B.S.A, Dairy Business Manager, Western Region, Landmark Feeds, Otterburne
One step into the barn at Darcy and Lori Heapy’s, and immediately you feel the pride they take in their dairy operation. This
is a true family run farm, as it is common for each of the children to help out with chores in some manner, alongside Darcy
and Lori. Darcy makes a point of getting out to all industry related meetings to keep up-to-date on the future trends of the
business. He is an active participant of the Keystone Holstein club. Through the support of Darcy’s parents, Dick and Ivy,
the transition has been smooth, with Darcy and Lori becoming partners in the family dairy operation. Darcy and Lori have
been very supportive of Landmark Feeds, whether it is promoting our business to other producers, or taking a load of feed
to fill a truck. It is a pleasure to work with people like Darcy and Lori who take the time to make sure their children appreciate
growing up in the dairy industry. I look forward to many more years of working together with Blanshard Holsteins.
17
AT A GLANCE, SPRING 2009
Sunny Glade Farms
A Strong Vision of the Future
It all began in 1946 when Ben R. Plett moved his family along
with the 16-cow herd started by his father Henry, from the Plett
village, which was located ½ mile south of Blumenort, to
the present site 2 miles east of Blumenort. Menno and Jessie
became involved in the farm in the 60’s where together with their
children, Royden, Welden, Renita and Renalda, they built the farm
up from 50 cows to 100 cows. During this time Jessie worked
alongside Menno doing the milking, feeding calves, hauling grain
and silage and whatever else was needed. In the late 80’s, Menno
and Jessie’s son Welden and his wife Angela became partners
in the family operation.
The farm is now owned jointly by Welden and Angela Plett and Menno
and Jessie Plett, and four hired employees work with them. Today
Sunnyglade Holsteins includes 320 acres of corn, 250 acres of alfalfa
and 150 acres of soybeans. There are now 300 head of Holsteins on
the farm, including 150 milking cows.
Welden and Angela have 5 children: Nicole (17 years old), Jeremy (15),
Adam (13), Ben (11) and Joseph (6). On a farm, everybody has to help
out. When the kids aren’t busy with dance, basketball, hockey and
drama, they take their regular shifts either milking, feeding or cleaning
the barn.
Welden and Angela are optimistic about the future and not afraid of
seeing their children pursue the same path as they did. “We think the
future of the dairy industry is very bright,” they like to emphasize.
Their positive outlook is based on the fact that the demand for their
product is growing and dairy products are once again seen as a
healthy choice. The only thing that scares the Pletts is that
government rules and regulations are not based on science (i.e. BSE
and the hog industry in Manitoba).
Chopping second cut alfalfa silage.
18
Challenges and opportunities motivate the Pletts to always go
further in their profession. “Our 5-year goal is to produce 200 kg
of quota out of our present facility, milking 160 cows. Once we have
reached our five year goal, if any of the children are interested in
continuing with the dairy we would then consider expanding our
facilities” states Welden.
The Plett family has a big interest in breeding good cows, and when we
asked them about a particularly good memory, they answered with no
hesitation: “Our first VG cow and our first EX cow but really, it’s all about
family: the birth of each of our children, watching them grow up and
mature, succeed, and also fail at times because they will have to learn
to handle the hard times,” agreed Welden and Angela. They are happy
to have the chance to do what they love most, and be able to share it
with their family.
According to Welden, the biggest quality it takes to succeed in this
profession is to enjoy what you do and be surrounded by people you
can trust. “I have enjoyed farming ever since I was a little boy,” he says,
“and I continue to be satisfied with the experience that it gives me.
I appreciate the people I meet in the business and the challenge of
the profession. As we get bigger, it becomes more of a people management thing.”
To help the Plett family realize their projects and support them with
the day-to-day effort they have to make to accomplish their goals,
Landmark Feeds is present for them at all times. “It is always a
pleasure to have Lindsay come around. He is willing and eager to work
with our goals, abilities and limitations. When there is a problem we
sit down and work it out. Lindsay is not just our feed rep, he has also
become a friend.”
Dad and Joseph planting corn.
Adam operating the feed cart.
Sunny Glade Farms
“Challenges and opportunities motivate the Pletts
to always go further in their profession.”
REPORTS
Sunny Glade is a family farm of 3 generations working hard. From left to right, back row: Welden, Angela, Jessie, Jeremy, Menno, Adam
and Nicole. Front row: Ben and Joseph.
Farm profile
Sunny Glade Farms, Blumenort, Manitoba
Owners: Welden and Angela Plett − Menno and Jessie Plett
Herd size: 300
Cows in milk: 150
BCA: M203-F215-P203
Herd classification: 1 EX, 11 VG, 65 GP, 78 G
Production average: 9,250 kg
Available land: 720 acres
Service center: Landmark Feeds Otterburne
Dairy Nutrition Advisor: Lindsay Bridge
Lindsay Bridge, B.S.A, Dairy Business Manager, Western Region, Landmark Feeds, Otterburne
Landmark Feeds is proud to say that it has dealt with Sunny Glade Farms for over 20 years. Welden has been actively
involved in the Eastern Holstein Club, serving as president in past years. Monthly visits to the farm are enjoyable, as we
talk about cows, feed, industry and family. Welden is a very busy man, milking 150 cows, growing cash crops, as well
as being actively involved in the Steinbach Minor Hockey Association, serving as president for the past 4 years. Welden’s
easy going nature is appreciated by the staff at Landmark Feeds, from the order desk to production and trucking staff.
I look forward to our continued relationship with Welden, his family and the staff at Sunny Glade Farms.
19
9OUNG&ARMERS
IN!CTION
“Jonathan’s positive attitude and
friendly disposition are key qualities
when working with his family
and other employees.”
Jonathan Boonstra (15 years old)
Jonathan Boonstra is the eldest son of Brian and Jackie, who
together with Rob and Tammy own the Boonstra Farms featured in this
issue of At a Glance.
Jonathan has been involved in the family farm since a very young
age. He puts in long hours in the field and helps out in the barn with
chores. He enjoys working on equipment in the shop and driving all the
machinery. He is definitely not afraid of hard work.
He is also interested in all the aspects of farming: operating the grain cart,
hauling silage, feeding the calves, checking the barn at night, bringing in
groups of cows for milking, helping with the feeding, etc. Jonathan is into
everything and has a lot of passion for whatever he does.
In the meantime, his parents recognize his contribution to the farm while
still giving him the opportunity to participate in other off farm activities.
Jonathan’s positive attitude and friendly disposition are key qualities
when working with his family and other employees. This makes him a
precious asset to the business.
Congratulations, Jonathan!
A Taste for a Job Well Done!
Derek Reimer
Landmark Feeds is proud to introduce Derek Reimer, a new dairy nutrition
advisor who recently joined the team after being involved in the dairy
industry for the last 15 years.
Derek, who is better known by his nickname of Ringo, is a jovial person
who likes to make the most out of life. He is easy to approach and a
well-informed advisor who always works in the best interest of his
customers and is eager to see them attain their goals.
Derek has extensive experience in the industry and a lot of passion for
his work. He has been involved in several fields related to agriculture,
which include operating an auctioneering and cattle brokerage business
for 7 years, working at cattle sales and shows country wide, and owning
a Western store with his wife Tara, in Steinbach for the past 4 years.
It is a privilege to welcome him
on the Landmark Feeds team!
Welcome Derek!