Hashing out herd size & manure management
Growing the size of the dairy herd means looking at what to do with the additional manure.
These considerations can affect both the farm and the environment. Jason Karszes, Lainey Koval and Kirsten Workman, all with Cornell PRO-DAIRY, discussed “Acres, Cows & Nutrients: Financial & Environmental Considerations” at the recent Northeast Dairy Management Conference, presented by PRO-DAIRY and Northeast Dairy Producers Association.
Koval referenced Dairy Farm Business Summary & Analysis data from 2018-2023 about farm expansion on New York dairies growing grain. “We looked at non-forage acres per cow, if there’s any grain going on. The success of this practice is determined by financial environmental and agronomic factors.”
Koval looked at whether growing grain improves the financial performance of the farm. Lower purchased grain costs by feeding homegrown grain would seem a big plus. Other factors include using farm equipment over more acres, having flexibility of how acres are used for feed risk management purposes, more labor utilization, higher investment and potential impacts on other farm operations.
Tillable acres per cow in 2022 were divided into all forage acres (LQ); majority forage with some grain (Q2); more forage and more grain (Q3); and almost one acre per cow in grain (HQ). Q2 tended to match the largest herds in the study. LQ and Q3 had similar herd sizes; HQ farms had smaller herds on average.
Over the four years studied, “these changed slightly,” Koval said. “Herd size increased over time in all groups.”
The farm capital breakdown in 2024 tended to increase from the lowest non-forage acre group to the highest group. This could be the result of higher investment in machinery, equipment and real estate.
“High Q stands out in real estate and machinery compared with lower groups,” Koval said. “More machinery is needed for grain operators.”
Labor efficiency of cows per worker revealed that farms with higher non-forage acres per cow tended to be less labor efficient on average. Potentially more labor is needed on the crop side and it’s spread over fewer cows.
“There are, however, businesses in the high quartile achieving strong labor efficiency,” Koval said.
As for crop expense per acre, the low grain group had the lowest crop expense per acre; Q2 had the highest expense per acre in two years; and the high grain production group experienced the highest expense per acre in two years.
“In a particular year, the cost of growing a crop is the crop that is fed to the herd the next year,” Koval added.
When looking at dairy grain and concentrate per hundredweight, in all the years, the high grain group achieved the lowest grain cost, feeding homegrown grain and purchasing little. The LQ and Q2 groups had the highest grain cost per cwt. in all years of the study.
The HQ group sold crops in 2024 with nearly $1/cwt. of cash sales, as 2024 was a strong crop year in New York, seen with positive changes in inventory.
The total cost of producing milk per cwt. from 2021-2024 showed that the LQ and HQ groups had the highest cost to produce milk in all years except 2021.
Net farm income without appreciation per cow indicated that the LQ and HQ operations had the lowest net farm income in all years except 2021.
Karszes said, “The rate of return on all capital is important. Owning more land and more cows raises the return on investment.”
The LQ and HQ operations had the lowest return on all capital from 2021-2024. 2023 was the only year where the high group did not have the lowest return on all capital without appreciation.
“It seemed like that third group struck out a little bit,” Workman said. She added that perhaps the first step isn’t going into grain farming in a big way but looking at nutritional variability and working to improve grain quality to promote herd health.
“The reason we do it is it’s a reliable way to relate the carrying capacity of the land,” Workman said.
When expanding the herd, farmers must also consider their ability to manage the manure the larger herd would produce. Instead of estimating what the land capacity is by animal, since animals vary by size and eat and defecate at different rates, Workman said it’s more accurate to look at “animal units.” The best feasible measurement of what land can bear is 0.80 animal units/acre.
“What we found is for a 1,400-lb. Holstein cow and her replacement for every two acres,” Workman said. “A 1,650-lb. cow makes more milk and manure and require 2.7 acres for each cow and replacement.”
By using accurate density ratings, farmers can help avoid purchasing forage.
“Purchasing forage is a good strategy as long as manure goes back on the land,” Karszes said. “Having additional acres can be a flexible strategy for risk management.”
Farmers purchasing forage would need to work with their forage providers so they can spread manure from the dairy on the acres they’re growing.
Workman suggested growing perennial legumes as an option for ensuring manure has a place to go, since soybeans won’t use as much nitrogen.
