Housing the suckler cow

Teagasc Suckler Beef

Mis results, compiled by Bernard Smyth and Matt Barlow, indicate farm profit levels of £392 per ha (£178 per acre) for the period 1994 to 1997. This is equivalent to £18,000 on a 40 ha (100 acre/farm). There is no doubt that 1998 income levels will be lower.

Tony Pettit, Teagasc

It should be noted that Teagasc Suckler BeefMis results are representative of financial performance on the top 15 to 20 per cent of suckler farms. Clearly, there is insufficient income to fund any substantial farm building programme on the majority of full-time cattle farms.

Is borrowing an option?

Building costs can exceed £700 per suckler cow, depending on the type of shed built and the facilities incorporated.

Typical repayments on a £700 investment amount to £120 to £140, depending on the terms of the loan. Based on Teagasc BeefMis farm profit figures of £392 per ha (£180 per acre) on efficient farms, very few full-time cattle farmers could service any significant level of borrowing.

However, farms with off-farm income are in a much stronger financial position to fund or service capital investment.

Part-time farming

Pressure on farm incomes is forcing substantial growth in part-time farming. Recent Teagasc National Farm Survey (NFS) results indicate that over 40 per cent of all farmers had off-farm incomes. The level can be significantly higher (55 to 60 per cent) in certain cattle enterprises in parts of the country.

The move to part-time farming has positive spin-offs in relation to farm buildings. Time is precious to part-time farmers. There is an ever increasing demand for convenient, labour-efficient farming systems. Part-time farmers want herding and feeding to be a simple operation.

REPS boost

REPS provides an incentive to building development. Around 40,000 farmers are involved in REPS. Most are engaged in cattle farming. Many also have off-farm incomes. These farms are often willing to use payments to fund building work.

Type of housing?

There are over one million suckler cows in the national herd, spread across more than 80,000 herds. For part-time farmers the main demand will be suckler cow housing and, to a lesser extent, weanling and store cattle housing.

The scale of units being constructed on part-time farms is in the region of 20 to 60 animals (including cows and dry cattle).

A number of different house designs are suitable for sucklers:

Slatted housing

Slatted housing is the most popular type of suckler housing. It is particularly convenient for part-time farming as no bedding is necessary.

Advantages

Built in solutions to bedding and slurry storage.

Extremely flexible; most types of cattle can also be housed on slats.

Cows can be grouped by pen according to calving date and body condition.

Disadvantages

Tighter stocking rates on slats reduce exercise area and increase the risk of injuries.

More difficult to run a bull on slats in autumn calving herd.

Cows require 600mm feeding space per head if roughage is rationed. This poses problems in double slatted sheds with 12 to 13 cows per pen. Silage or roughage may have to be fed at the front and the rear of the pen to ensure adequate feeding space.

Key design features

The required lying areas are shown in Table 1. With all housing systems, insufficient lying area will increase animal stress levels, lead to reduced animal performance and increase the risk of dirty cattle. Cows with calves at foot require more space than dry cows.

A floor area of 2.5 to three square metres (26.9 to 32.3 square feet), depending on circumstances, is recommended. Average sized suckler cows (500 kg) will require approximately 0.31 cubic metres (10.9 cubic feet) of tank slurry storage capacity per week.

Rubber mats on slats

Scottish research suggests that animals prefer to lie on rubber mats if given a choice. There is some evidence that cattle may be dirtier with rubber mats. The type of rubber used can be an important factor. Teagasc, Grange, is currently evaluating different products.

Straw bedded loose house

The traditional straw bedded loose house is suitable, provided ample straw is available at a reasonable cost. For most of the country, a guaranteed supply of straw is not available, so straw bedded sheds tend to be confined to southern and eastern areas.

Advantages

Simple, comfortable, reasonably cheap structure.

Permits flexible use of building.

Can be modified into a slatted unit or cubicle house at a later stage.

Disadvantages

High pollution risks if using traditional open yard with self-feeding silage system.

Bedding can be expensive if straw is not available on farm.

System is more labour intensive.

Key design features

A useful rule of thumb is 0.7 to 0.8 square metres per 100 kg bodyweight. (four to five sq ft per cwt. bodyweight). It is better to be generous rather than mean with Iying area allowances and straw. The higher ranges should be used for easy feeding layouts. The eave height should be high enough (at least three to 3.6m) for tractor access, to clean out the building and allow for dung pack build-up.

A tank should be provided to collect urine seepage from the straw bedding. The alternative is to use sufficient straw to absorb all potential seepage. This could amount to 50 kg of straw per cow per week. Easy feeding designs can be incorporated.

Slats with straw

The Iying area can be straw bedded while the feeding area is slatted. Many existing loose sheds can be modified in this fashion. This type of shed is quite popular on drystock/tillage farms.

Advantages

Comfortable Iying area.

Incorporates easy feed layout.

Less straw required.

Slatted tank provides additional slurry storage.

Cheaper than completely slatted house, but the differences may not be substantial, depending on shed design.

Peat bedding

Peat has been used as an alternative bedding to straw on some farms. A layer of peat to the depth of 300 to 335mm (12 to 14 inches) will usually provide adequate bedding for four to six weeks, depending on the stocking rate in the shed.