Welsh dairy farming.

[fgc325j]

All that land probably already qualifies on every metric, so why not count all that land against the 20% they require EVERY farm to effectively take out of serious food production? Why not allow farmers the freedom to farm, like they do in America?

Probably bevause they don't want American type beef feedlots in this country.

 

[Cowabunga]

Probably bevause they don't want American type beef feedlots in this country.

But that is just what they are going to get as a result of these policies. A massive consolidation into mega-farms while smaller farms fail. The demand for extra land from the highly committed farmers will push land prices muck higher in dairy areas due to slurry and NVZ limits.

 

[DairyNerd]

@Cowabunga I agree most of the current policies being bought in are misguided, they will as you say have the reverse of the intended effect. For example, spoke to one land agent the other day who has several retired farmers taking land back in house as they can earn more under SFI than from renting it out. There also has to be some regulation in farming as there is in every sector. One simple easily implemented policy they could bring in is a stocking rate cap (generous) on 'grazable acres' to stop this nonsense of carting slurry/maize etc half way round the country in a big way. Even if you set it at 5 cows/Ha it would put a limit on the job.

 

[Cotlandfarmer]

@Cowabunga I agree most of the current policies being bought in are misguided, they will as you say have the reverse of the intended effect. For example, spoke to one land agent the other day who has several retired farmers taking land back in house as they can earn more under SFI than from renting it out. There also has to be some regulation in farming as there is in every sector. One simple easily implemented policy they could bring in is a stocking rate cap (generous) on 'grazable acres' to stop this nonsense of carting slurry/maize etc half way round the country in a big way. Even if you set it at 5 cows/Ha it would put a limit on the job.

Under NVZ rules the stocking rate is 170 kg/ha of animal nitrogen.
Eg my 200 ha farm can carry 340 cows producing 5500 litres head, 80 R2s and 80 R1s.

 

[DairyNerd]

@Cotlandfarmer course you are right, forgot the thread title, was thinking of England. Round here it is extreme. That sounds about right stocking rate to me. How much bagged N can you use?

 

[Cowabunga]

Under NVZ rules the stocking rate is 170 kg/ha of animal nitrogen.
Eg my 200 ha farm can carry 340 cows producing 5500 litres head, 80 R2s and 80 R1s.

That is a very low stocking rate by today’s standards and an even lower output of milk per hectare. 9350litres/hc 3740 litres/acre.

That compares to my moderate output of 13500litres/hc 5500/acre plus 35 livestock units of replacements on the same allocated area plus 300 tack sheep over winter. I’m very average these days. I have to double my slurry storage plus export 900 tons of slurry to some other land or buy more land or cut down my stock and output by nearly half. None of which is either viable or something I would do at my stage in life anyway. However if I were thus inclined, and plenty of younger farmers are, by far the best strategy would be to buy more land, forget the tack sheep, ideally with slurry storage already provided. This would avoid finding third party land for exporting a million litres of slurry. I think this would be the solution for very many current fairly intensive committed dairy farmers.

 

[Cotlandfarmer]

That is a very low stocking rate by today’s standards and an even lower output of milk per hectare. 9350litres/hc 3740 litres/acre.

That compares to my moderate output of 13500litres/hc 5500/acre plus 35 livestock units of replacements on the same allocated area plus 300 tack sheep over winter. I’m very average these days. I have to double my slurry storage plus export 900 tons of slurry to some other land or buy more land or cut down my stock and output by nearly half. None of which is either viable or something I would do at my stage in life anyway. However if I were thus inclined, and plenty of younger farmers are, by far the best strategy would be to buy more land, ideally with slurry storage already provided. This would avoid finding third party land for exporting a million litres of slurry. I think this would be the solution for very many current dairy farmers.

It is a low stocking rate but it's just within the limit, prior to NVZ the plan was to push up to 400 cows.
I have planning passed to double slurry storage.

The drawback of exporting slurry is TB, if locked up with TB you aren't allowed to export slurry off your holding.

The 170kg limit is going to be very painful for many intensive dairy farms of all herd sizes.

 

[Cowabunga]

It is a low stocking rate but it's just within the limit, prior to NVZ the plan was to push up to 400 cows.
I have planning passed to double slurry storage.

The drawback of exporting slurry is TB, if locked up with TB you aren't allowed to export slurry off your holding.

The 170kg limit is going to be very painful for many intensive dairy farms of all herd sizes.

It buggers my business up completely as I am at an age where expansion and debt is not an attractive or even viable option. Yes the TB situation makes exporting a no-go risk proposition so the solution for the many younger farm families, that wish to continue, is to buy more land. The price of which will almost certainly rise as a result and become very short supply in many milk-field areas. So just maybe, bite the bullet quick and see your investment rise in value, at least for a while.

 

[Cowabunga]

It is a low stocking rate but it's just within the limit, prior to NVZ the plan was to push up to 400 cows.
I have planning passed to double slurry storage.

The drawback of exporting slurry is TB, if locked up with TB you aren't allowed to export slurry off your holding.

The 170kg limit is going to be very painful for many intensive dairy farms of all herd sizes.

In your case it seems to me that the most profitable way to carry on would be to keep to the same number of cows but to increase their yield to an easy 8000litre or higher. That’s £1000 more milk per cow for maybe £400 more feed cost. £350k extra income for £140,000 cost, £200k net extra/year which sounds good to me. No more slurry, cows or much extra N involved. For others it might be to become a flying herd, letting others breed replacements for them. There are all kinds of permutations that will suit different farms, including my option of ending milk production and retiring, which will feed the need that others have for more land.

 

[Cotlandfarmer]

In your case it seems to me that the most profitable way to carry on would be to keep to the same number of cows but to increase their yield to an easy 8000litre or higher. That’s £1000 more milk per cow for maybe £400 more feed cost. £350k extra income for £140,000 cost, £200k net extra/year which sounds good to me. No more slurry, cows or much extra N involved. For others it might be to become a flying herd, letting others breed replacements for them. There are all kinds of permutations that will suit different farms, including my option of ending milk production and retiring, which will feed the need that others have for more land.

If I upped yield to 8000, the herd jumps up to the next production band, I'd have to reduce cow numbers unless I add more land.

 

[vantage]

Under NVZ rules the stocking rate is 170 kg/ha of animal nitrogen.
Eg my 200 ha farm can carry 340 cows producing 5500 litres head, 80 R2s and 80 R1s.

If I upped yield to 8000, the herd jumps up to the next production band, I'd have to reduce cow numbers unless I add more land.

I was just about to mention, don’t whatever you do produce 6001ltires a cow, as your stocking rate will drop from 2.2 LSU, to 1.7 LSU, why 1 litre makes a difference, God alone knows, why is there a straight line graph, rather than steps?

 

[Cowabunga]

If I upped yield to 8000, the herd jumps up to the next production band, I'd have to reduce cow numbers unless I add more land.

Are there production bands? Why? The emissions, such as they are, reduce per litre of production as yield increases, because less forage is consumed, which is what ferments in the rumen. And on your current stocking rate, which is already at the extensive end of the spectrum? The system is crazy if so. Correction, it’s as crazy as crazy gets anyway.

Yet the powers that be are expecting a 0.6% increase in animal productivity consistently through to 2050 by which time they expect 30% less production, which with the compounded extra productivity will mean 50% less cows. Half the stock we currently have but with average yield increased from the current 8000+ litres to 10,000+ litres per cow. Those are the approximate projections the halfwits designing this scheme have made with my interpretation of the implications.