kowtow wrote: » Stupid question I am sure, but when we refer to additional profit per cow as a result of a reduced calving interval, where - exactly - is that profit coming from? Are assumptions being made about drying off dates and lost milk as if a herd was already in a tight spring calving pattern, or is it about matching future calving dates to peak grass production? ... I think what I am trying to say is would the additional profit or loss from fertility be the same if a herd was already a deliberately all year round calving herd?
Buford T. Justice V wrote: » It's the extra profit from cows at grass, longer lactations and better calf sales. A cow calving 1st Feb will be in milk longer than the exact same cow calving 3 weeks or 6 weeks later, she will have 3 months to sort out her uterus to go back in calf rather than 2 months or 1 month. Her calf will be bigger and easier to manage in a group rather than being one of the tail enders having to get preferential treatment. She will have a much better chance of going in calf again and again having a longer lactation and likewise any heifer calves she will have. And the majority of her lactation will be at grass which is the cheapest feed we have.
kowtow wrote: All agreed, but most of it only applies in a Spring calving system? i.e. the lost milk is based on you drying her off with the rest of the herd, the time to repair on you wanting to bring her back calving earlier next year, etc. etc. ??
kowtow wrote: » All agreed, but most of it only applies in a Spring calving system? i.e. the lost milk is based on you drying her off with the rest of the herd, the time to repair on you wanting to bring her back calving earlier next year, etc. etc. ??
blackdog1 wrote: » Yea all teagasc care about is spring and it's based in a 5500 litre cow and 300kg of meal. If a 9000 (305 day )litre cow calves every 360 days it's unreal but if she takes 60 days longer to calve she's still a good cow. Problem is if you dry her off in December she might only milk for 7 months so it reduces her profibility from milk. If your in a all year round system she'll still be a very profitable cow.
yewtree wrote: Will that not in time just lead to calving cows all year round, fertility would seem to me to be just as important in winter milk
Mooooo wrote: » Sent 11 cows to factory, should have cheque fri but 10 averaged 980 and 1 with bad legs 500, 6 straight from parlour but were rolled over calved last year
Buford T. Justice V wrote: » While milking on will supply cash flow, does it supply enough profit relative to feed and labour costs to justify not focusing on compact calving for both periods? Especially in low milk price years which now appear to be two out of every three years?
whelan2 wrote: » Party on at your house the weekend so
Buford T. Justice V wrote: » Dont the same principles apply in Autumn calving? Compact calving the minimum numbers in a short period to supply the bonus-ed milk? While milking on will supply cash flow, does it supply enough profit relative to feed and labour costs to justify not focusing on compact calving for both periods? Especially in low milk price years which now appear to be two out of every three years?
kowtow wrote: » I'm sure they do, it must be better to have a cow that goes in calf well and freshens more or less when you want her to whatever time of year - it was really the basis for the profit figure which had me stumped - clearly all the metrics work against the baseline of the ideal Spring Calving herd, which is just fine so far as it goes. And becoming an "accidental winter milker" probably isn't desirable or profitable if you aren't set up for it. The more I think about the detail of the research and the boards I saw yesterday the more I am persuaded that Teagasc have in mind a Spring Calving herd, grass fed, of 100+ cows - which Gerry Boyle apparently thinks is half the herds in the country (although that was corrected on Twitter yesterday). If you take that in conjunction with the recent farm competitiveness report where an "optimal" 110 cow Irish herd is used as an example - labour costs included - I think it is fair to say you can see where they are going with this. And no harm in that, it may well be the direction which most suits most of the herds. But I wonder whether they should try, as the years go by, to make it clearer that they see that as the basis of their mandate and that other systems and herd sizes are essentially "alternative". In a sense that would make things easier for everybody, although I can see that they may struggle to fund research into the alternative systems with budgets tight everywhere. It's very difficult to be all things to all men without being accused of "one size fits all"!
stanflt wrote: » Can't understand how lads don't believe in ebi Teagasc and Fertilty It doesn't matter what system or cow type you have but if you follow the basics as on display in moorepark you will be much better off financially
stanflt wrote: » Milk sold
stanflt wrote: Can't understand how lads don't believe in ebi Teagasc and Fertilty
stanflt wrote: It doesn't matter what system or cow type you have but if you follow the basics as on display in moorepark you will be much better off financially
charolais0153 wrote: » Is abergain ,aberchoice ,tryrella/drumbo the best mix still for grazing
visatorro wrote: » Where are you losing the cent per litre compared to top 10% of glanbia? Don't take question the wrong way just curious because there should be nothing wrong with your figures.
jaymla627 wrote: » The crux of your above slides doesn't paint a full picture though would love to see another proper analysis done and used as a kpi regarding longevity of cows in a herd, its all well and good having a 365 calving interval and 90% 8 week calving rate but if your culling/selling in milk 25-30% of your herd every year to inflate the above figures your basically a hot house herd in America terminology...
jaymla627 wrote: The crux of your above slides doesn't paint a full picture though would love to see another proper analysis done and used as a kpi regarding longevity of cows in a herd, its all well and good having a 365 calving interval and 90% 8 week calving rate but if your culling/selling in milk 25-30% of your herd every year to inflate the above figures your basically a hot house herd in America terminology...
blackdog1 wrote: » Your not exactly farming the teagasc way Stan. Your feeding way too much and have no cross breeds. Your more of an ebi purist which is fine. I don't believe in Teagasc research on cow type or breed. They have very good grass research and I think Riona Sears on disease is exellent.
blackdog1 wrote: » Don't think he's inflating the figures much if anything myself. He probably has a feed to yield system and feeds his cows extremely well and keeps them in good order. Problem is if you put stans cows into a grass based farm feeding only 300kg of feed they would melt and his calving interval would go way up and milk production down. I think him and his brother are good managers and feed they're cows well and he's getting the results. Problem is Stan takes no credit he gives it all to Ebi.
