Stop recycling cows, and target two separate herds was the main message from last week’s liquid milk meetings run by Aurivo Co-op and Teagasc.

Teagasc dairy specialist Joe Patton told farmers that one of the main issues with liquid herds is the recycling of cows with poor fertility from the autumn herd into the spring herd, leading to an increased calving interval.

He advised farmers to think of each herd as a completely separate unit and to avoid recycling cows as in most cases the cost of carrying the empty cow outweighs the benefits of reduced culling.

Joe outlined that the average cow in a liquid milk herd in Aurivo’s supplier base has a calving interval of 408 days, which means she is slipping by about two months each year.

He also outlined that the volume of milk solids produced per cow and the number of AI bred replace-ments are lower in the area compared to the national average.

He warned farmers not to chase milk yield. “There is no relationship between milk yield and margin.”

He told the crowd that although they hear about 10,000 litre cows all the time, in reality there are only about four herds in the country that have average yields of over 8,000 litres. He asked why do farmers with high-yielding cows target supplementation based on higher-yielding cows?

Patton told farmers that feeding to yield and reducing the meal input to lower yielders will have a much larger impact on total supplementation. He said that, like spring herds, they should be trying to reduce meal inputs during the summer months in a bid to reduce the supplementation bill.

One of the pitfalls many liquid suppliers fall into is supplying too much milk over the winter months. Because the price premium is paid only on the liquid contract, it is not cost effective to oversupply milk at a time of the year when the costs of production are at their highest.

Patton said that liquid producers should match the number of cows calving in the autumn herd to the liquid contract. Where extra milk can be produced, target this to the spring herd where the costs of production are lower.

When choosing the types of feed to supplement with, Patton advised farmers to keep it as simple as possible. He said the target should be to produce the first 4,000 litres from forage, with concentrates making up the rest.

This can be done through improving grassland management which in turn will increase solids and output. He also said that farmers who are trying to produce milk during the winter months need very good quality silage of over 75 DMD.

Where silage quality is low, it is questionable whether the system will give a return. Patton said that another area farmers need to improve on is grass growth and utilisation. He said if you can grow 12t DM/ha, the target should be to utilise 10t DM/ha.

Fertility

Fertility targets for the autumn-calved herd should be the same as for any spring-calving herd. Ideally a cow should calve every 365 days. The target should be to have the calving interval at about 370 days for a winter herd.

An empty rate should not be over 10% and the six-week calving rate should be targeted at 75%. Because recycling is such an issue with liquid milk herds, he advised farmers not to exceed a 5% recycling rate to the spring herd.

Patton said that to really focus on improving the average yield of the herd, farmers need to stop focusing on milk yield in terms of the breeding strategy. Looking at fertility and fertility targets will increase milk yield through removing inefficient cows and targeting more production during the peak grass-growing months. He advised farmers to use the EBI data to select replacements.

The difference between a low and high EBI cow will mean that the low EBI cow will on average take an extra year to achieve a fourth lactation when compared to a high EBI cow. This will have a large impact on the lifetime yield potential of each cow type. In terms of cow type, he said that studies in the USA have shown that high EBI cows have a much higher culling rate than lower EBI cows.

Post-quota

Patton warned farmers against increasing supplementation levels to boost output post-quota. Even farmers in countries with grass-based systems have drifted towards increased meal supplementation to increase yields. He advised farmers to remain focused on keeping supplementation to a minimum, or at least maintain a clear focus on producing 4,000 litres from forage.

IFA Liquid Milk chairman Teddy Cashman said that studies conducted by the IFA on the cost of producing liquid milk showed that an annualised price of 40 c/litre is required to meet the costs of production. He said that previously the differential in price paid to creamery vs liquid suppliers was 4-6 c/litre. However, he said that in the last year it has averaged out at closer to 1 c/litre.

Cashman said that he is a firm believer in the co-op structure. He said that there has been a significant amount of consolidation over the years and now there are approximately five main players in the market.

He said that farmers need to know their costs and look at how to make their systems more efficient. Liquid milk production is becoming more specialised. “A liquid supplier lost won’t come back. They need to be paid enough to cover their costs and allow them to continue in the system.”

Eoghan Sweeney, general manager of the dairy business at Aurivo, said that in 2014 they sold approximately 85m litres of liquid milk through the Donegal and Connacht Gold brands and another 2m litres in organic milk including the “Organic For Us” milk brand.

He said that since moving all liquid production to the Killygordon site, and through improvements in efficiency, all milk is being processed in one shift.

He told the crowd that 79% of total liquid milk sales are through private label products. They launched a new enriched milk product and increased 3L sales considerably in the past twelve months.