Calves

This week’s Focus is the first in a two-part series on calves. Milk replacer costs have increased by an average of 15% compared to this time last year.

It’s a significant increase but it ignores the fact that it has fallen considerably in price compared to where it was just a few months ago. As dairy commodity prices fall, so too will milk replacer costs.

It’s important to compare like with like when looking at the difference in costs between milk replacer and whole milk.

On the face of it, milk replacer is much cheaper per litre, but in most cases there will be a lot more grams of protein in every litre of whole milk fed compared to milk replacer. About 20% more milk replacer would need to be fed to get the same level of protein intake from whole milk at 3.5% protein.

Elsewhere, experts answer some common questions on calf care. They are notably lukewarm on two things I see a lot more of on farms now – calf jackets and microbe supplements.

On microbes, they say the majority of international research suggests no improvement in growth, feed efficiency or health by offering probiotics.

On calf jackets, they say experiments conducted in Ireland and Northern Ireland found no benefits in weight gain were achieved by using calf jackets.

Farmers should always ask for independent research results on a product before spending money. If a product is as good as is being claimed the manufacturers should have no difficulty in putting the product into independent testing.

Insurance

Under-insurance on farms is an issue that some farmers are discovering to their cost. The problem is that rebuild costs are greater now than they were 18 months ago, and in many cases dairy farms have increased the amount of labour employed.

The number of employees has a big bearing on risk.

Many farmers will look at the total sum insured and think that they are well covered, even if the total sum insured is less than the cost of rebuilding all insured buildings.

But in the event of a claim, the amount that can be paid out for any one incident will be reduced by the percentage underinsured. Best policy is to contact the insurance company and ask them to review the sums insured.

Slurry

Farmers on dry land in Zone A and B started spreading slurry earlier this week. I’ve heard a few farmers say that it was only when the contractor left the yard that they realised what rate it was being spread at.

Rather than spreading at the desired 2,500 gallons/acre, slurry went out at nearly 4,000 gallons/acre. It seems to be a particular problem with umbilical systems.

Tractors need to be travelling fast when using low emission slurry spreading (LESS) if they are to spread at the correct rate, whether that’s with a tanker or pipes.

Spreading 4,000 gallons/acre of slurry now is equivalent of spreading around 38 units/acre of nitrogen, which is nearly twice what is recommended.

This is not only an environmental risk but an awful waste of money because if that slurry was spread over a larger area a lot less chemical nitrogen would be needed in spring.