Research for the Benefit of Specific Groups
(in particular SMEs or SME associations)
Ireland, France, The Netherlands, Belgium,
Sweden, Denmark.
SME-AGs from 6 different counties, and 6 RTD
Performers, 2 SME end users
FP7-SME-2012-314879-AUTOGRASSMILK is co-funded by the European Commission
© AUTOGRASSMILK, 2014
Objectives
•
•
•
•
•
1. Develop optimum feeding strategies for dairy cows
incorporating grazed grass and AM for various production
systems in Europe
2. Optimise the integration of AM with cow grazing using
new technologies
3. Increase the sustainability of integrated grazing and AM
technologies
4. Develop tools that will allow dairy farmers to optimise
economic efficiency when combining grazing with AM
systems
5. Continuously disseminate new technology to end-users
in a form that is easily accessible and locally adapted to
improve farm efficiency
FP7-SME-2012-314879-AUTOGRASSMILK is co-funded by the European Commission
© AUTOGRASSMILK, 2014
Why AMS
Technology that releaves farmer from
physical labour, more milk per full time
labour unit
Technology that contributes to social life
(incl.family of farmers)
Milk frequency alligned with yield
Easy data catch and management
FP7-SME-2012-314879-AUTOGRASSMILK is co-funded by the European Commission
© AUTOGRASSMILK, 2014
Why grazing
Cheap foder
Good for cow health and cow welfare
Improved milk quality with fresh grass
Contributes to landscape, biodiversity
What the consumers want
What the farmer wants
FP7-SME-2012-314879-AUTOGRASSMILK is co-funded by the European Commission
© AUTOGRASSMILK, 2014
Monitor farms in all countries
FP7-SME-2012-314879-AUTOGRASSMILK is co-funded by the European Commission
© AUTOGRASSMILK, 2014
Work packages
WP 1 Optimum feeding strategies for dairy cows incorporating grazed
grass with AM for various production systems in Europe
Monitor farms, best practice
Experiments in Denmark, with home grown feed
Different Cow breeds in Ireland and Sweden
Optimising the Irish system with :
•
Increased cow number in herd (80) with one robot
• Supplementation in spring and autumn
FP7-SME-2012-314879-AUTOGRASSMILK is co-funded by the European Commission
© AUTOGRASSMILK, 2014
Work packages
WP 2 Optimise the integration of AM systems with cow grazing using
new technologies.
•
•
•
A GPS farm mapping tool is being developed and demonstrated on
research farms in different countries
The recording of tracking behavior of dairy cows in AM systems is
being evaluated in terms of management decision making
New automated milking technologies such as the mobile AM systems
for fragmented farms and carousel AM systems for larger herd sizes
will is being evaluated in grazing environments.
FP7-SME-2012-314879-AUTOGRASSMILK is co-funded by the European Commission
© AUTOGRASSMILK, 2014
Developed Grasshopper – calibrated automated
measure of for grass height
FP7-SME-2012-314879-AUTOGRASSMILK is co-funded by the European Commission
© AUTOGRASSMILK, 2014
Sensor registration of grazing time
grass height (mm)
dayly growtht (kg DM/ha)
Yield (kg DM/ha)
maj-18 maj-19
mark 1
102,43 96,51
40
35
1551
1772
Yield in kg DM/mm
cløver %
average
outside time (t:min)
outside time (digital)
eating time grazing (timer)
eating time /outside time
grass intake (kg DM/cow/day)
kg DM intakeper hour of grazing
temperature kl. 11:00 (0C )
rain (mm)
15,14
23,75
20,6
07:15
7,25
3,64
0,50
10,6
2,91
10,6
14
18,36
17,5
20,6
07:25
7,41
3,87
0,52
10,6
2,74
7,7
5
FP7-SME-2012-314879-AUTOGRASSMILK is co-funded by the European Commission
© AUTOGRASSMILK, 2014
Mobile automatic milking
Trevarez and Liège and Haderslev
FP7-SME-2012-314879-AUTOGRASSMILK is co-funded by the European Commission
© AUTOGRASSMILK, 2014
Work Package 3
Increase the sustainability of an integrated AM and cow grazing milk
production system
•
•
•
develop a template for sustainability assessment of AM and grazing
Monitor farms will provide data for analysis
Develop a sustainability assessment tool developed for farmers
FP7-SME-2012-314879-AUTOGRASSMILK is co-funded by the European Commission
© AUTOGRASSMILK, 2014
Participatory Sustainability assessment
Domain
Economic
Economic
Economic
Economic
Economic
Economic
Economic
Interesting indicators identified
Indicators
Farm profitability
Debt
Stability in income - Resilience
Production costs
Labour
Investments
Production level
Environmental
Economic
AGM weight
Theme
31
Nutrients
16
Biodiversity
13
16
Water
GHG
23
Energy use
39
11
Farm profitability
Production costs
16
Stability in income - Resilience
14
Labour
10
Investments
5
6
Production level
Debt
18
Animal welfare
19
Working hours
18
Work quality
11
Image and participation
12
Farm continuity
14
Work - life balance
Social
Environmental
Environmental
Environmental
Environmental
Environmental
Environmental
Environmental
Environmental
Environmental
N and P Balance
Biodiversity
GHG
Chemical usage
Energy use
Water use
Atmosphere
Soil
Landscape quality
Social
Social
Social
Social
Social
Social
Social
Social
Animal welfare
Working hours
Farm continuity
Work - life balance
Product Quality
Image and participation
Work quality
Role in the region
Governance
Governance
Governance
Governance
Governance
Governance
Relation and cooperation farmers
Relation and participation in community
Use of consultancy and advice
Education and skilled staff
Diversification and openness farm
CSR
Governance
Economic autonomy
Governance
7
Product Quality
15
17
17
26
14
Relation and participation in community
Corporate Social Responsibility
Relation and cooperation farmers
Education and skilled staff
Use of consultancy and advice
10
Diversification and openness farm
Equal weight
25
25
25
25
14
14
14
14
14
14
14
100
100
50
50
100
100
50
50
100
50
50
100
100
20
20
20
20
20
34
33
33
34
33
33
100
25
25
25
25
34
33
33
50
50
100
100
100
100
100
25
25
25
25
Indicator
Mineral - N Balance, per ha
Mineral - P Balance, per ha
Mineral - efficiency N
Mineral - efficiency P
Basic - number of different crops
Basic - average paddock size
Mineral - N Balance, per ha
Basic - permanent grassland
Biodiversity score - CAP'2er
Basic - intensity grazing (cow/ grazed ha)
Basic - Land under biodiversity scheme
Economics - water costs per cow
GHG balance
Economics - electricity costs per cow (Euro)
Economics - fuel costs per ha of cultivated land
Economics - Farm Net Income (E-G-H) pr. cow
Economics - Variable costs per cow
Economics - exposure to price fluctuations
Economics - dependency on subsidies
Economics - Total labour costs per kg milk
Economics - Costs of invested capital (dairy assets) per FPCM/ECM
Economics - Costs of invested capital per Labour unit (hour)
Economics - Milk production FPCM /cow
Economics - Interest paid per kg milk
Basic - days outside
Economics - health care costs per cow
Minerals - culling rate
Basic - mutilation
Basic - Urea average winter and summer
Basic - Labour hours - Estimated hours worked per week
Economics - Cows per full time worker
Social - overworked
Social - Physical hardness
Social - exposure to hazardous material
Social - atmosphere on farm
Social - PR
Social - Expectancy next decade
Social - Successor
Social - Satisfaction with income level
Social - Survival
Social - Work life balance
Social - Free Time
Basic - Holiday Days
Basic - SSC average winter and summer
Basic - grazing
Social - regional acception
Social - farm visits
Social - relation to other farmers
Social - training days
Economics - use of advisory service (crops, dairy)
Economics - agri-environmental payments
Economics - farm visits income
Economics - Biogas
Economics - Tourism
<2
None
None
None
None
None
None
Reference values Denmark
0
200
20
10
10
>5
8
200
0
0,4
2,5
0
30
1,5
150
40
-1000
4500
80%
20%
0,1
2
3
10000
0,15
0
396
40
100%
4,5
50
50
4
3
0
2
0
2
3 0 and 1
0
0
2
0
0
300
Yes
2
0
2
0
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Example DK1
Value
100
50
5
40
40
Score
129
12
23,7
39
6
4,8
129
2,00%
1
2,9
4%
18
0,9
126
56
517
4068
0,532871383
0,29942482
0,09
13,216
34,334
8948,693
0,11
180
151
35%
100%
3,8
60
77,4
2
3
4
0
0
0
1
0
1
1
1
14
199
2
50
15%
7,1
1
15%
15
0,8
100
100
1000
2000
40%
2%
0,02
35
50
8500
0,05
180
174
25
0%
3,5
37
90
0
0
4
0
4
0
2
4
0
4
21
100
Yes
0
4
0
2
0
2
0
2
Y
N
N
N
Y
47,333333
53,333333
45,666667
96,666667
100
53,333333
47,333333
13,333333
8,9552239
0
23,333333
80
85,714286
48
26,666667
75,85
17,28
66,782154
0
12,585025
33,988765
66,667454
70,087123
40
100
110,36036
264,33333
0
70
0
68,5
50
0
100
100
0
100
100
0
25
50
25
66,666667
50,5
100
100
50
100
100
100
0
0
0
100
Theme
Domain
60,75
35,18408
57,1629051
80
85,714286
37,333333
75,85
17,28
33,391077
12,585025
49,5239429
50,328109
70,087123
40
108,93874
39,5
66,666667
57,7425841
0
56,25
47,222222
75,25
100
50
100
100
100
83
25
Governan
ce
FP7-SME-2012-314879-AUTOGRASSMILK is co-funded by the European Commission
Environm
ental
100
75
50
25
0
Economic
Social
© AUTOGRASSMILK, 2014
Work Package 4
Economic assessment of integrated grazing and AM technologies
•
•
•
An economic comparison of AM on dairy farms where cow grazing is
practiced and where not has been performed in F,NL, and DK
The financial interaction between capital investment, labour
equirements and running costs for integrated grazing and different
AM technologies is being determined based on data from research
farms and monitor farms using the most appropiate bio economic
farm model
A web based decision support tool is being developed to assist EU
farmers to optimize their farm production system.
FP7-SME-2012-314879-AUTOGRASSMILK is co-funded by the European Commission
© AUTOGRASSMILK, 2014
Work Package 5
Dissemination.
•
•
•
•
•
From the RTDs to the SME-AGs
Between the individual SME-AGs and their direct members (SME)
and stakeholders within each country;
From the RTD’s to the scientific community internationally as well as
to extension personnel in the respective countries;
To the wide group of dairy farmers within the EU;
To relevant Government Departments, policymakers and legislators
within the different countries and the EU.
FP7-SME-2012-314879-AUTOGRASSMILK is co-funded by the European Commission
© AUTOGRASSMILK, 2014