2005 Winter Dairy Management Series:
“Enhancing Dairy Farm Profits
through Internal Growth”
“Internal Growth” encompasses many aspects of your
business; we will stay on message to address the breadth:
Agenda
What’s the Internal Growth Level in your Herd?
Welcome
Capturing the Economic Value of Internal Growth
Introduction of the Case Farm(s)
Assessing, Improving and Minimizing Broken Cows
Analyzing Internal Growth Components in the Case Farm
How we Limit Broken Cows in the Case Farm, Mastitis & Foot Health
Lunch
Many Cows Break in the Transition Possible Fixes
Transition Cow Management in the Case Farm
Optimizing Replacement Enterprise for Profitable Internal Growth
Ins & outs of the Case Farms Replacement Enterprise
Farm-Specific, Goal-Driven Reproductive Management
How Repro is handled on the Case Farm
Where do we start? Modeling Improvements to IG and Predictable Gains
Final questions & Evaluation
Many people across the NYS Dairy Industry had
a hand in pulling this together…
Agricultural Finance and Management at Cornell
Department of Applied Economics and Management
… the most important of whom are our Case Farms
who you soon will meet. They generously opened
their farms’ data for our better understanding
Internal Herd Growth
Generating Profits through Management
Agricultural Finance and Management at Cornell
Department of Applied Economics and Management
What is Internal Herd Growth
Generating more dairy replacements than you
need to maintain herd size.
Interaction of two components:
How many replacements do you need to maintain
herd size?
How many replacements are you generating?
Many different areas of farm operations impact
these two components.
Agricultural Finance and Management at Cornell
Department of Applied Economics and Management
How Many Replacements do
You Need?
Centered in the milking herd.
How many cows have to be replaced?
Why do they have to be replaced?
Died
Mastitis
Reproduction
Low milk production
Etc.
What could be done to decrease the number that
need to be replaced?
Agricultural Finance and Management at Cornell
Department of Applied Economics and Management
Economics
 By requiring fewer replacements to maintain herd size,
you minimize expenses associated with maintaining herd
size.
If paying $1,500 per replacement with a replacement rate of
50%, you will spend $150,000 per year to maintain a 200 cow
dairy.
If you can lower replacement rate to 30%, you will spend
$90,000 to maintain same 200 cow dairy.
Agricultural Finance and Management at Cornell
Department of Applied Economics and Management
Total Cost per Year to Maintain Herd Size
Purchasing All Replacements
Herd Size
200 Cows
Cow
Replacement
Rate
22%
Price of Dairy Replacements
$1,600
$1,700
$1,800
$1,300
$1,400
$1,500
$1,900
$2,000
$2,100
57,200
61,600
66,000
70,400
74,800
79,200
83,600
88,000
92,400
26%
67,600
72,800
78,000
83,200
88,400
93,600
98,800
104,000
109,200
30%
78,000
84,000
90,000
96,000
102,000
108,000
114,000
120,000
126,000
34%
88,400
95,200
102,000
108,800
115,600
122,400
129,200
136,000
142,800
38%
98,800
106,400
114,000
121,600
129,200
136,800
144,400
152,000
159,600
42%
109,200
117,600
126,000
134,400
142,800
151,200
159,600
168,000
176,400
46%
119,600
128,800
138,000
147,200
156,400
165,600
174,800
184,000
193,200
50%
130,000
140,000
150,000
160,000
170,000
180,000
190,000
200,000
210,000
Prepared by: Jason Karszes, Senior Extension Associate, PRO-DAIRY, Cornell University
Agricultural Finance and Management at Cornell
Department of Applied Economics and Management
Economics
Lower or little financial gain from internal
herd growth if:
Attain IHG by keeping unprofitable and/or
low profit cows in the herd.
Costs associated with preventing cows from
leaving the herd too high.
Agricultural Finance and Management at Cornell
Department of Applied Economics and Management
How Many Replacements
are You Generating?
Combination of milking herd and replacement
program.
How many calves born per year?
Calving interval
Ratio of heifer calves to bull calves.
How many heifer calves born dead?
DOA
How many calves don’t complete replacement
program?
Non-Completion percent – or “heifer cull rate”
Agricultural Finance and Management at Cornell
Department of Applied Economics and Management
How Many Replacements
are You Generating?
 If all four in your favor, you can generate many
replacements.
 If 3 in your favor, may still be able to generate more
heifers than needed.
 If 2 in your favor, will be difficult to generate excess
heifers.
 If only one factor in your favor, may be difficult to
maintain herd size.
Agricultural Finance and Management at Cornell
Department of Applied Economics and Management
Required Number of Heifer Calves per Year to Maintain Herd Size
For Various Non-Completion Rates and Dairy Replacement Rates
Herd Size
200
DOA Rate^
5%
Non-Completion
Rate*, Percentage
Cow Replacement Rate, Percentage
29
33
36
20
23
26
39
42
45
2
43.0
49.5
55.9
62.4
71.0
77.4
83.9
90.3
96.8
4
44.0
50.5
57.1
63.7
72.5
79.1
85.7
92.3
98.9
6
44.9
51.7
58.4
65.2
74.2
80.9
87.6
94.4
101.1
8
46.0
52.9
59.8
66.7
75.9
82.8
89.7
96.6
103.4
10
47.1
54.1
61.2
68.2
77.6
84.7
91.8
98.8
105.9
12
48.2
55.4
62.7
69.9
79.5
86.7
94.0
101.2
108.4
14
49.4
56.8
64.2
71.6
81.5
88.9
96.3
103.7
111.1
16
50.6
58.2
65.8
73.4
83.5
91.1
98.7
106.3
113.9
18
51.9
59.7
67.5
75.3
85.7
93.5
101.3
109.1
116.9
* Non completion rate represents the percent of heifers that start the replacement system that don't enter the dairy herd.
^ DOA Rate represents the percent of heifer calfs that are born dead.
Prepared by: Jason Karszes, Senior Extension Associate, PRO-DAIRY, Cornell University
Agricultural Finance and Management at Cornell
Department of Applied Economics and Management
Economics
By generating more heifers than needs,
you have the ability to generate additional
earnings:
If need 50 replacements and only generate
50, no gain.
If generate 60, have 10 more than needed.
If generate 40, have to purchase 10 to
maintain herd size.
Agricultural Finance and Management at Cornell
Department of Applied Economics and Management
Economics
Lower or little financial gain from internal
growth if:
The cost to raise the heifers is high.
Labor
Feed
Inventory – older calving age
If the quality of the replacement is low.
Less profitable animal in the herd: i.e. stunted or
fat
Agricultural Finance and Management at Cornell
Department of Applied Economics and Management
Capturing the Value of
Internal Growth
Internal growth is having more animals than
you need.
Capturing value becomes a management
decision.
Many different ways to capture value.
Mission, vision, values, goals of family and
business important when evaluating.
Agricultural Finance and Management at Cornell
Department of Applied Economics and Management
Growing Herd Size
 The extra animals generated enter the dairy herd.
 Grow herd size without purchasing outside animals.
 Have the ability to handle increased numbers or can
easily add the capacity.
 Increase profits through increased utilization of assets.
 If not full or not at maximum size for site, may be best
means to capture value.
Agricultural Finance and Management at Cornell
Department of Applied Economics and Management
Key Factors
Control genetics and quality of
replacements.
Slow steady growth over time.
Can grow with closed herd.
Operating expenses (feed, labor, etc). used
to build balance sheet assets (cattle).
Has to be economical to grow.
Agricultural Finance and Management at Cornell
Department of Applied Economics and Management
Selling Milking Cows
All replacements enter the herd.
Sell the least profitable dairy cows in the
herd.
Market them for dairy purposes.
Average a higher price then beef price.
Agricultural Finance and Management at Cornell
Department of Applied Economics and Management
Key Factors
Stable herd size.
Keep replacements – may be better genetics.
Keep calf that replacement heifer is carrying.
Improve dairy herd by replacing less profitable
cows.
Increase value of animals sold through higher
price for dairy vs beef.
Capturing most of the calf crop.
Agricultural Finance and Management at Cornell
Department of Applied Economics and Management
Selling Springing Heifers
Raise heifers.
Sell excess animals at calving for
replacements purposes.
Agricultural Finance and Management at Cornell
Department of Applied Economics and Management
Key Factors
Stable herd size.
Pick which animals enter herd vs are sold.
For animals sold – no risk if they don’t
make it through calving.
Possible loss of genetic progress:
replacement and calf she’s carrying.
Possible fewer calves entering system.
Agricultural Finance and Management at Cornell
Department of Applied Economics and Management
Selling Calves
Sell excess heifers early in age.
Only raise enough that are needed to
maintain herd size.
Agricultural Finance and Management at Cornell
Department of Applied Economics and Management
Key Factors
Stable herd size.
Limited replacement program capacity.
Pick which calves to raise.
Minimized replacement expense.
Increased calf sales.
Limited number of heifers if unusual event in
dairy or replacement program.
Agricultural Finance and Management at Cornell
Department of Applied Economics and Management
Leasing Animals
Keep all animals.
Lease out excess milking animals.
Agricultural Finance and Management at Cornell
Department of Applied Economics and Management
Key Factors
Building herd size – increasing assets.
No investment in buildings/land, etc.
Keep all genetics and calves.
If animals come home – no longer closed
herd.
Make return on investment in cattle.
Return may be negative!
Agricultural Finance and Management at Cornell
Department of Applied Economics and Management
Take Home Points
Internal herd growth is a profit source under
control of management.
Interaction among many areas of the business.
Operational costs building assets on the balance
sheet, not just maintaining assets.
Means of capturing value is a management
choice.
Agricultural Finance and Management at Cornell
Department of Applied Economics and Management
We are privileged to have been able to work with our 3
“Internal Growth” Case Farms:
Hal and Kerry Adams
Manchester, NY
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
Cows
Beginning
Purchased
Died
Beefed
Sold Dairy
Heifers Freshened
75
0
3
19
0
25
78
0
1
32
1
32
76
0
0
15
1
29
89
0
1
23
0
38
103
0
3
39
0
48
109
0
4
18
0
31
End
78
76
89
103
109
120
IHG
4.0%
-1.3%
18.4%
15.7%
5.8%
8.3%
We are privileged to have been able to work with our 3
“Internal Growth” Case Farms:
Nathan, MaryLou and Steve Durfee
Chittenango, NY
Steve and MaryLou Durfee
Number of cows (ave.)
Heifers - all ages
Milk Sold/Cow (lbs.)
Total Milk Sold (lbs.)
Culling Rate %
Internal Herd Growth %
Heifers Sold
2000
180
164
25,159
4,528,561
33
7.9
0
2001
184
191
24,993
4,587,591
34
12
0
2002
180
181
25,708
4,627,504
33
11.8
20
2003
186
161
25,098
4,668,287
33
7.9
25
2004
197
225
24,591
4,598,605
30
9.6
We are privileged to have been able to work with our 3
“Internal Growth” Case Farms:
Pat and Marty Hanehan
Saratoga Springs, NY
Pat and Marty Hanehan
Number of cows
Bred Heifer #
Open Heifer #
Calves # (0-6 mos.)
Milk Sold/Cow (lbs.)
Total Milk Sold (lbs.)
Culling Rate %
2000
339
104
65
65
20051
29
2001
2002
2003
2004
401
495
519
560
131
148
203
204
104
121
132
151
84
96
105
114
21337
22688
22861
23354
7,979,994 10,164,432 11,361,881 12,797,792
21
30
31
29
 Case Herds were selected from search of either Farm
Credit or Cornell Dairy Summaries (or both).
 Primary search item was multi-year Internal Growth.
 As you will see, each herd arrived at good level of growth
differently, and captured the dividend differently as
well.
 While there is a mountain of “measurables” we’ll be
looking at, the most important trait linking these
businesses is more observable than measurable.
 Positive Attitude
 Bias for Action
 Realistic View of the Changing Dairy Industry (Vision)
 Reconfiguring Business to fit that Vision (Mission)
 Knows how to Implement Measured Improvements
 Particularly Good at Problem Solving
 Excellent with People
Pat & Marty Hanehan Hanehan and Sons Dairy
Pat and Marty Hanehan
Number of cows
Bred Heifer #
Open Heifer #
Calves # (0-6 mos.)
Milk Sold/Cow (lbs.)
Total Milk Sold (lbs.)
Culling Rate %
Bst
2000
339
104
65
65
20051
29
------
2004
2003
2002
2001
560
519
495
401
204
203
148
131
151
132
121
104
114
105
96
84
23354
22861
22688
21337
7,979,994 10,164,432 11,361,881 12,797,792
29
31
30
21
--------almost none
Profitability - The Real Indicator
Hanehan Large Herds 300+ Cows
2002 8.65%
1.10%
2003 6.96%
1.60%
2004 15.96%
8.50%
Rate of Return on all Capital (w/o apprec.)
Profitability - The Real Indicator
18.00%
16.00%
14.00%
12.00%
10.00%
8.00%
6.00%
4.00%
2.00%
0.00%
15.96%
8.50%
8.65%
6.96%
1.10%
2002
1.60%
2003
2004
Hanehan Large Herds 300 Cows
2004 year end numbers
What Really Matters…
Learning from How and When Cows “Break”
John Conway
Bill Stone
Jerry Bertoldo
Not so useful:
Cull Rates
 May include those sold
for Dairy
 Says nothing about
underlying problems
 But may “light up” the
need to look deeper
Not so useful:
DHI Cull
Codes
Left for Dairy
Left for low production
Left for reproduction
Left for injury/other
Left – died
Left for mastitis
Left for feet/legs
Left for udder
Left – no reason
 Better than “cull rate”
 Does not allow for full
sequence of insults
 Lean on details for
quick, deep analysis
 Some are “fast and
loose” with single code
 May allow analysis of
trends over time
What Really Matters is…
Learning from How and When Cows “Break”
Who?
Connecting to a
memory of an
individual may
bring back the
seriousness of
the insult
When?
How?
Analysis
Gives you the
advantage of
seeing trends
over time -- i.e.
rash of fresh cow
problems when
transition group
size goes beyond
threshold.
Exactly what
symptoms were
observed &
treated.
Becomes part of
readily
searchable
record.
Why?
Gets to the root
cause. Best way
to improve
processes &
practices in a
way that’s
meaningful.
For a great array of Dairy
Production analytical tools go to:
http://www.ansci.umn.edu/dairy/toolbox/toolbox.htm#mgmttools
(especially note UW Vets’ # 4: Goal Form - Estimate of Economic Losses)
Lameness:
Causes and Sequence of Events
Nutrition
• Excessive Grain
• Finely Chopped Forage
• Improper Feeding Management
• Incorrect Ratio of Concentrate to Forage
Increased Lactic Acid Production
Lowered pH
Death of Gram Negative Bacteria
Molds/Mycotoxins
Infectious Diseases
• Metritis
• Mastitis
• Retained Placenta
Endotoxin Release
Histamine
Genetics
Metabolic Disorders
• Milk Fever
• Ketosis
Vaso-Constriction/Dilation (Hoof Corium)
Weakened Claws (Hooves)
• Breakdown in Supportive Connective Tissue
• Poor Quality Horn Formation
Manifestations
• Yellow Soft Horn
•Deformed Claws
• Double Sole
•Sole or Toe Ulcer
• White Line Disease •Hemorrhage
Environment/Management
• Stress
• Trauma
• Exercise
• Trimming
Lameness!
Adapted from Hoof Care for Dairy Cattle, 1992. J.E. Nocek
Internal Growth at Hanehan Dairy
Bill Stone
Pro-Dairy
Cornell University
Snapshot of Hanehan Dairy
How do dairies grow internally?
Heifers
• Low rate of still borns
• Don’t lose calves
• Grow heifers properly and breed them on time
Cows
• Minimize transition cow problems
• Successful reproduction program
• Control mastitis
• Sound feet and legs
• Will result in a low cull rate
– but do cull unprofitable cows
Started new protocol…
Stillborn calves – Goal < 5%
Total freshenings
Good
Stillborn calves in 1st lactation animals
Started new protocol…
Fluke, error, or something exciting?
(These heifers came in off of pasture!)
DOA from a dairy that has been getting smaller…
DOA in 1st lactation animals at this same dairy
IG: Don’t lose calves
Goal: Calf mortality of < 1%
38 “sold”
475 heifers
(8%)
… includes calves lost
in new calf barn while
trying to tweak
ventilation system
Heifer
Repro
Results
Goals:
HDR > 60%
CR
> 60%
PR
> 25%
Pregnancy Rate
Heat Detection Rate
CR = 32%
Heifer Repro Results
Aborts or bred xx times
32
30
28
26
24
22
24 months average AFC
Goal, %
<
Health events during 2004
6
7
25
8
2
2
5
10
17
11
3
5
11
3
552 cows (514 milking, 38 dry) in herd
Milk by DIM for the entire herd
Lact = 1 Milk by DIM
115
100
80
Lact = 2 Milk by DIM
140
110
80
Lact > 2 Milk by DIM
160
120
80
Lact = 1 Milk by DIM
Lact > 2 Milk by DIM
When they left the herd…
552 cows (milking and dry) in herd
168/552 = 30% cull rate
(48+21)/168 = 41% of culls left within 60 days
Why they left the herd
1.5%?
Cow
Repro
Results
Goal:
> 20% PR
Pregnancy Rate
37% CR
Heat Detection Rate
DIM at first breeding
DIM
Udder Health – Previous LS by LS
New infections
Chronic cows
Goal < 5%
Goal < 10%
Clean
Cures
79/552 =
14%
Cows that may make the dairy more money
by being replaced…
Why has Hanehan Dairy grown this past year?
•Average DOA but moving in right direction
•Above average heifer reproductive results
•The vast majority of cows freshen well
•Very low mastitis rate
•Above average cow reproductive results
•Don’t have to sell many cows
Lameness:
Causes and Sequence of Events
Nutrition
• Excessive Grain
• Finely Chopped Forage
• Improper Feeding Management
• Incorrect Ratio of Concentrate to Forage
Increased Lactic Acid Production
Lowered pH
Death of Gram Negative Bacteria
Molds/Mycotoxins
Infectious Diseases
• Metritis
• Mastitis
• Retained Placenta
Endotoxin Release
Histamine
Genetics
Metabolic Disorders
• Milk Fever
• Ketosis
Vaso-Constriction/Dilation (Hoof Corium)
Weakened Claws (Hooves)
• Breakdown in Supportive Connective Tissue
• Poor Quality Horn Formation
Manifestations
• Yellow Soft Horn
•Deformed Claws
• Double Sole
•Sole or Toe Ulcer
• White Line Disease •Hemorrhage
Environment/Management
• Stress
• Trauma
• Exercise
• Trimming
Lameness!
Adapted from Hoof Care for Dairy Cattle, 1992. J.E. Nocek
Lameness prevalence as a function of
housing type and stall surface
•30 herds - 14 stanchion/tie-stall, 16 free-stall
•Herds averaged 67 (tie-stall) and 175 (free-stall) cows
•Cows were lameness scored in summer and winter
1 = normal
2 = slight lameness
3 = moderate lameness
4 = severe lameness
•>3,600 cows evaluated
•Stall base
Sand
Non-sand
(rubber mat, rubber filled mattress,
concrete with added straw, shavings, etc.)
Cook, JAVMA 2003:1324
Interaction between locomotion score & stall
base and its effect on time standing up in stall
% of cows lame
40
35
30
25
Summer
Winter
20
15
10
5
0
a
FS
Sand
Cook et al., JDS 87:2912
a b
FS
Non-sand
b a
TS
Sand
a
TS
Non-sand
Effect of free stall surface on daily activity
patterns in dairy cows
Twelve herds
6 sand based
6 mattress filled with
rubber crumbs, organic
bedding on cover
Video cameras, 1 sec per 30 sec
10 cows per herd (60 sand, 60 mattress)
Lameness scored
Cook et al., JDS 87:2912
Effect of free stall surface on daily activity
patterns in dairy cows
Herd parameters
Herd size, #
Cows in pen, #
Stocking rate
RHA, lbs.
Mattress
305
77
108
24,800
Annual turnover rate 36.5%
Herd prevalence of
24.0%
clinical lameness
Sand
298
96
108
26,728
P
28.8%
11.1%
.09
<.001
.12
Cook et al., JDS 87:2912
Effect of free stall surface on daily activity
patterns in dairy cows
Daily activity, h/d
Mattress
Time lying in stall
11.7
Time standing in stall 3.4
Time up in alley
2.3
Sand
12.0
1.8
2.3
P
Time up feeding
Time up milking
4.6
3.2
.03
4.1
2.6
.002
Cook et al., JDS 87:2912
Interaction between locomotion score & stall
base and its effect on time standing up in stall
14
Hours/day
12
10
Mat-Lie
Sand-Lie
Mat-Stand
Sand-Stand
8
6
4
2
0
11
2
2
33
41
52
Mattress
Sand
Lameness score
Cook et al., JDS 87:2912
63
Interaction between locomotion score & stall
base and its effect on time standing up in stall
Time up in stall, h/d
12
10
8
Mat
Sand
6
4
2
0
0
Cook et al., JDS 87:2912
1
2
3
Lameness score
4
Mastitis Problem Solving Scheme
Mastitis Problem Solving Scheme
STEP 1
Identify Mastitis Problem
11 11 1
STEP
11 1
Identify Mastitis Problem
11 11 1
New Clinical Cases
11 Acute Mastitis
>1% per year
>2% per month
Acute Mastitis
New Clinical Cases
>1% per year
>2% per month
Bulk Tank SCC
>150,000
Bulk Tank SCC
>150,000
DHI Test Day Ave. LS >4.5
>10%
DHI Test Day Ave. LS >4.5
>10%
Bacteriologic Cultures: Bulk Tank and/or Individual Cows
STEP1 2
STEP
11 112 1
STEP
STEP
STEP
11 1 2
11 112 1
STEP
11
Bacteriologic Cultures: Bulk Tank and/or Individual Cows
Determine Causative Organisms
Determine Causative Organisms
Environmental Organisms
Environmental Organisms
Coliform
Strep spp.
Staph spp.
Contagious Organisms
Contagious Organisms
Staph aureus
Mycoplasma
Strep ag.
Coliform
Mycoplasma
Strep spp.
Staph spp.
Staph aureus
Strep ag.
STEP 3
Generate Prevention and Treatment Solutions
333323
STEP
11 1131
Generate Prevention
and Treatment
Solutions
Create Diagnostic
& Treatment
Protocols
333323
11
11 11 1
Create Diagnostic & Treatment Protocols
11
Systemic
Intramammary Treatment
Culture Herd; Segregate Positives; Treat and
Treatment and
resample Strep ag; Cull chronic Staph aureus & all
& supportive care
Systemic
Intramammary
Treatment
Culture
Herd; Segregate Positives; Treat and
Supportive Care
Mycoplasma
Treatment and
resample Strep ag; Cull chronic Staph aureus & all
& supportive care
Supportive Care
Mycoplasma
Coliform
STEP 3
333323
11 11 1
11
Strep spp.
Staph aureus
Mycoplasma
Strep ag.
Generate Prevention and Treatment Solutions
Create Diagnostic & Treatment Protocols
Systemic
Treatment and
Supportive Care
Intramammary Treatment
& supportive care
PREVENTION
Clean, Dry Environment
Clean Cows
Adequate Bedding
Premilking Hygiene (clean
dry teats)
STEP 4
333323
11 11 1
11
STEP 5
333323
11 11 1
11
Staph spp.
Culture Herd; Segregate Positives; Treat and
resample Strep ag; Cull chronic Staph aureus & all
Mycoplasma
PREVENTION
Proper Milking Procedures
Routine Milking Machine Maintenance
Pre and Post milking Teat Dipping
Dry Cow Therapy
Nutrition (Adequate Energy, Se & Vit E
Culling Strategy
PREVENTION
Culture Clinical Cases Fresh
Animals and New purchases.
Maintain Closed Herd.
(Biosecurity – NYSCHAP
ENROLLMENT
Generate Strategic Plan - Establish Herd Goals
Generate Tactical Plan
Operational Tactical Plan – Standard Operating Procedures
Management Tactical Plan - Employee Training & Evaluation
- Effective Records System
STEP 4
333323
11 11 1
11
STEP 5
333323
11 11 1
11
Generate Strategic Plan - Establish Herd Goals
Generate Tactical Plan
Operational Tactical Plan – Standard Operating Procedures
Management Tactical Plan - Employee Training & Evaluation
- Effective Records System
STEP 6
333323
11 11 1
11
Monitor Performance, Reassess Goals, and Tactical Plans
DHI SCC Reports
Milk Plant Quality Reports
Test Day Average linear score
Clinical Infections Rate
New & Chronic Infection Rates
Cure Rate
QMPS Reports
Pathogens
Effective transition cow management to
maximize Internal Herd Growth
Thomas R. Overton, Ph.D.
Department of Animal Science
Cornell University
Our charge

Devise and employ nutritional management strategies and
nutritional tools to support metabolic adaptation to
lactation




Macromineral metabolism (manage DCAD)
Glucose metabolism (provide fermentable carbohydrate)
Fat metabolism (minimize BCS loss)
Minimize potential negative effects of nonnutritional
factors on metabolic adaptation to lactation





Overcrowding
Environmental stress (temp., ventilation)
Infectious challenge/hygiene
Grouping/regrouping
Comfort
Big rocks from the nutritional side
(common themes in our case farms)

Manage DCAD
 Start with including low potassium forages in dry
period diets

Sufficient energy and protein intake from a dry period
diet of moderately high nutrient density

Thinner (within reason) is better

Trends toward shortened dry periods and one-group
nutritional strategies for dry cows
Breakpoint
Heat stress
Overcrowding
Social stress
Poor housing
Metabolic stress
Drackley, 2002
Resources for production
Resources to stress response
Effects of multiple stressors
accumulate...
Transition period indices relating to
Internal Herd Growth

Nondairy cull rate during first 60 days in
milk

Incidence of metabolic disorders
 Related to likelihood of high milk
production
 Tied to reproductive performance
% Cows Leaving That Left in the 21 Day Period
0%
21 DIM Interval
420-440
399-419
378-398
357-377
336-356
315-335
294-314
10%
273-293
252-272
210-230
231-251
189-209
147-167
168-188
126-146
105-125
84-104
63-83
42-62
21-41
0-20
When Cows Leave the Herd
(MN DHIA 10/96 – 10/01) Godden et al., 2003
12%
624,614 Cows Leaving
5,749Herds
8%
6%
4%
2%
Nondairy cull rate during the first 60
days in milk




Captures dead cows and cows sold for nondairy
during first 60 days in milk
Crude index of overall transition management
Minnesota workers (previous slide) reported that
25% of cows that leave herds leave during the first
60 days in milk
We look at the number of cows dead and sold for
nondairy as a percentage of the number of
calvings
Fresh cow loss as a percentage
of calvings

Typical values in well-managed herds are 10
to 12% (unacceptable)

Best herds consistently average 5 to 6%

Can be as high as 25% during train wrecks
Our case farms
Farm
Hanehan
Durfee
Adams
Dead and
sold/calvings
74/605
20/213
5/107
Percentage
12.2%
9.4%
4.7%
Incidence of metabolic disorders

Combination of objective (retained
placenta, displaced abomasum) and
subjective (hypocalcemia, ketosis, metritis)

Goals for each usually set by survey data
Transition cow survey
Conducted by Buzz Burhans and
colleagues
 27 herds in Vermont and New
Hampshire
 Over 600 cows in the dataset

Occurrence of Disorders at the Herd Level
Holsteins
Event
Ketosis
Milk Fever
Off Feed
Displaced Abomasum
Digestive/Diarrhea
Mastitis
Edema
Dystocia
Twins
Stillbirths
Retained Placenta
Metritis
Abortions
N
13
14
7
10
9
10
7
13
12
8
13
14
Jerseys
min
p50
max
N
min
p50
max
2.10% 14.70% 50.00% 4 6.30% 8.30% 15.80%
2.60% 10.10% 26.30% 6 8.10% 37.70% 60.00%
2.30% 4.80% 21.40% 4 2.70% 6.50% 10.50%
3.60% 8.10% 14.30% 2 2.70% 2.90% 3.10%
2.10% 5.60% 11.80% 2 3.10% 4.20% 5.30%
2.60% 7.10% 15.80% 5 5.30% 10.00% 13.50%
5.10% 7.10% 40.90% 2 22.20% 25.20% 28.10%
2.10% 5.60% 16.70% 2 2.70% 4.70% 6.70%
2.10% 5.70% 18.80% 1 3.10% 3.10% 3.10%
2.60% 6.50% 12.50% 3 3.10% 5.40% 6.70%
2.90% 11.80% 23.70% 1 3.10% 3.10% 3.10%
4.30% 11.20% 39.30% 3 3.10% 5.40% 15.80%
None Reported
None Reported
Total
N
17
20
11
12
11
15
9
15
13
11
14
17
min
2.10%
2.60%
2.30%
2.70%
2.10%
2.60%
5.10%
2.10%
2.10%
2.60%
2.90%
3.10%
p50
13.20%
11.10%
6.30%
7.30%
5.30%
7.10%
13.20%
5.60%
5.60%
5.90%
11.20%
11.10%
max
50.00%
60.00%
21.40%
14.30%
11.80%
15.80%
40.90%
16.70%
18.80%
12.50%
23.70%
39.30%
Burhans et al., 2003
Health Events by Category at the Herd Level
Holsteins
min
p50
Jerseys
max
N
min
p50
Total
Factor
N
max
N
min
p50
max
Problem Cow
19 18.80% 47.40% 73.70% 6 24.30% 47.00% 60.00% 25 18.80% 47.40% 73.70%
Metabolic Problem
18 14.70% 30.30% 65.80% 6 12.50% 40.00% 60.00% 24 12.50% 32.20% 65.80%
Infectious Problem
16 4.30% 16.20% 39.30% 5
6.70% 12.50% 16.20% 21 4.30% 14.30% 39.30%
Energy Problem
18 3.70% 19.60% 53.80% 5
5.40%
6.70% 15.80% 23 3.70% 14.70% 53.80%
Bad Calving
17 3.40% 11.10% 25.00% 3
5.40%
6.30% 13.30% 20 3.40% 11.10% 25.00%
Preventable Problem 18 14.70% 36.00% 68.40% 6 18.80% 40.00% 60.00% 24 14.70% 36.00% 68.40%
Problem Cow: Any problem (Dystocia, Mastitis, Abortion, Twinning, Stillbirths,
Retained Placenta, Milk Fever, Digestive, Ketosis,Metritis,Edema, Displaced
Abomasum, Off Feed)
Metabolic Problem: (Milk Fever, Retained Placenta, Digestive, Ketosis,
Displaced Abomasum and Off Feed)
Infectious Problem: All cows with Mastitis, Metritis
Energy Problem: (Digestive, Ketosis, Off Feed, Displaced Abomasum)
Bad Calving: (Dystocia, Abortion, Twinnings, Stillbirths)
Preventables: (Mastitis, Retained Placenta, Milk Fever, Digestive/Diarrhea,
Ketosis, Metritis, DA, Off Feed)
Burhans et al., 2003
Achievable goals for metabolic
disorders
Milk fever -- < 5%
 Retained placenta/metritis -- < 9%
 Displaced abomasum -- < 5%
 Clinical ketosis (blood BHBA > 27
mg/dl) -- < 5%
 Subclinical ketosis (blood BHBA > 14.4
mg/dl) -- < 15%

Our case farms
Farm
Hanehan
Durfee
Adams
Milk fever
2.8
<5
1.8
RP
11.7
~ 10
10.0
Metritis
2.6
DA
5.6
~5
4.5
Ketosis
11.6
Framework for actualizing “optimum”
nutritional management strategies on
commercial dairy farms in the context of
shortened dry periods
What are our nutritional goals and
how do we achieve them?


The Goals
 Moderately high DMI of well-formulated close-up
diets while attempting to minimize extent of DMI
decrease during the prepartum period
How do we achieve them?



Many herds still struggle to get ENOUGH dry matter intake
in close-up cows (goal Holstein 26 to 28 lb/d of suggested
close-up cow diet)
In herds where close-up cows are consuming large amounts
of DM ( > 30 to 33 lb/d), limit grain-type forages and other
very palatable feeds to control intake within goal and
complement with a consistent, low potassium forage source
(preferably bulky)
The challenge – extent of DMI decrease extremely
difficult to characterize in group-fed animals
Far-Off Dry Cows
• Dry-off until ~ 3 weeks pre-freshening
• Ration considerations
NEL 0.59 to 0.63 Mcal/lb for maintenance
BCS
Do not want to overfeed (Dann et al., 2003)
Stone, 2001
General goals for diet formulation for closeup cows and
one-group dry cow systems up to 40 days
Partial anionic
Full anionic
• NEL, Mcal/lb
0.68 to 0.70
• Metabolizable protein, g/d
1100 to 1200
• NFC, %
34 to 36
• Starch, %
19 to 21
• Dietary Ca, g/d
100
140
• Dietary Ca, %
0.90
1.2
• Dietary P, %
0.30 to 0.35
• Mg, %
0.40 to 0.42
• Cl, %
0.3
0.8 to 1.2
• K, %
< 1.3
< 1.3
• Na, %
0.10 to 0.15
• S, %
0.20
0.3 to 0.4
• Vitamin A (IU/d)
100000
100000
• Vitamin D (IU/d)
30000
30000
• Vitamin E (IU/d)
1800
1800
Prefer use of organic trace elements, including organic Se
Advantages of shorter dry period

Avoid forfeiting milk during late lactation

Simplify dry cow management and decrease
cost of dry cow housing (one dry cow group)

Decrease sociological stress associated with
multiple group changes, etc.

More closely match dry period length with
biologically required length (~ 25 days)
Summary of research on planned shorter
dry period length

Milk yield similar between cows managed for 40 vs. 60
days dry – 65 herds in NY


Milk yield after 49- or 70-d dry periods comparable; 28d dry reduced subsequent milk yield


Sorensen and Enevoldsen, 1991
Milk yield comparable for cows managed for 60 vs. 30
to 35 d-dry periods


Coppock et al., 1974
Shairer, 2001; Bachman, 2002; Gulay et al., 2003
Comparable milk yield for 60 vs. 30-d dry; continuous
lactation decreased subsequent milk yield (differences
greater in primiparous cows)

Annen et al., 2003; Rastani and Grummer, 2003
Cornell study

Two commercial dairy farms (cows over 27 kg/d at 60
d before expected calving)

Treatments
 60 d dry period, label bST (two group dry cow
management)
 40 d dry period, label bST (moved to closeup
group at 40-d dry
 Continuous lactation, label bST (stop bST at
calving and resume during 9th week of
lactation) – remained on lactating cow ration for
the duration
Fernandez et al., 2004
Least squares means for milk yield and milk composition during the
first 6 months of the subsequent lactation for cows managed for 60,
40, or zero days dry.1
Treatment
Item
# of cows
60-d dry
22
40-d dry
23
0-d dry
22
SEM
Average days dry
57
41
1
Milk yield, kg/d
47.1a
46.3a
37.1b
Fat, %
3.51
3.62
3.40
0.14
Fat yield, kg/d
1.68a
1.62a
1.28b
0.09
True protein, %
2.74a
2.84b
2.83b
0.06
True protein yield, kg/d
1.31a
1.30a
1.06b
1Means within a row with different superscripts differ, P <0.05.
1.8
0.04
Fernandez et al., 2004
The Economics – 60 versus 40 days dry
Average milk yield, lb/d
Item
50
60
$140
$168
Lactating diet
$48
$56
Closeup diet
$14
$14
Variable cost
$15
$15
Total expenses
$77
$85
Net per cow
$63
$83
Marginal income
Milk ($0.14/lb)
Marginal expense
Current thinking on management
considerations for 40-d dry period

Either two-group or one-group nutritional strategies
acceptable
 Marginal feed cost approximately $15 per cow for
20 additional days fed close-up diet
 One-group dry cow program fits better with
shortened dry period

Moderate NFC/energy close-up diet acceptable to
feed for 40 d dry, regardless of DCAD strategy

Continue to require far-off type diet to feed to cows
with dry periods longer than 40 days
Transition cow management outcomes and
strategies – Pat and Marty Hanehan
Hanehan -- special needs facility
Hanehan – managing for shorter dry periods
and a one-group dry cow nutritional program
Hanehan – sand freestalls for dry cows
Hanehan – cows imminent to calve separated
by a cable
Hanehan – cows imminent to calve fed the
same diet
Hanehan – calving pack