A farmer recently contacted me regarding a planned farm project for his dairy enterprise, which would consist of 100 cubicles and a 20-unit parlour. The project was likely to see the cubicle shed built first, but it was key to design it in such a way that the cubicle shed would tie in with the future parlour.
You might say that projects such as this are a rarity now, but there is still a cohort of farmers that are in need of developing their yard, with older accommodation past their working life. The issue with so many farmyards is that the future is not considered when locating buildings.
A 16ft feed passage was twice too wide in the 80s, but with the growing size of machinery now, 16ft is what farms should be aiming for. Cubicle houses are built beside older parlours that are due for an upgrade, only for there to be no room for a larger parlour thereafter.
Happy marriage between feed space and cubicles
So many farmers concentrate on the cubicle spaces in a shed. ‘’How many cubicles can I fit in there?’’ Is too often asked. It’s more a case of working backwards from feed space and seeing how many cubicles can be accommodated based on this. A recommended 600-700mm should be factored in.
Failure to have this feed space will result in bullying of cows, with first-calved heifers being the primary target. I have heard of cases where farmers were struggling to get young cows back in calf, with poor body condition being the main issue. Tracing this back, a lack of feed space in early lactation was the primary culprit. Where feed space is lacking, segregation of younger or thinner animals can aid. A good rule of thumb is that for every double row of cubicles, you will require one side of the shed to be feed space, eg one double row=one side, two double rows=feeding on both sides. Where there are three rows of head-to-head cubicles, feeding will likely have to be on all four sides, with sheds tending to be narrower than they are long.
Crossover points
The first thing to remember is to avoid dead ends. If we are to design the shed with two rows of head-to-head cubicles, we will lose at least 24 cubicle spaces from either end of the rows, with three cubicle widths having to be lost for crossover points. Every bay of the shed will be capable of holding 16 cubicles, where head-head-to-head rows are used. An eight-bay shed can theoretically hold 128 cubicles in it. However, we have to subtract 24 cubicles for our crossover points at each end, with another 12 cubicles lost through a mid-way crossover point, which should be installed every four to five bays.
This results in our eight-bay shed only being fit to hold 92 cubicles. An additional bay (nine-bay shed) will hold 108 cubicles, which should be sufficient for the farmer’s needs.
Taking our standard bay length of 4.8m, we have a total feed space of 86.4m (nine bays, feeding on both sides). At 0.6m/cow, we have feed space for 144 cows to all eat at once. Even at 0.7m, we will have ample room for 120 cows, ensuring that even if we do not segregate, younger cows will not be bullied away from the barrier.
If we had included a third row of head-to-head cubicles, we would have 138 under the roof, meaning we are tight on feed space. Even though it may not seem like a lot to be short, it will mean that lighter cows will consistently be pinched.
Slurry storage
While current recommendations are for 0.33m³/cow/week, the likelihood is that this has been underestimated for years and will increase to 0.4m³/cow/week. Budgeting for 120 cows over an 18-week winter, we require 864m³ of slurry capacity (190,053 gallons). Most cubicles houses are designed with tanks at the end of the shed, scraped down with scrapers, with some opting to install a tank at the midway point.
If we are running a tank at the end of the above shed, using a 2.5m overhand each side, 4m passage along the barrier, a 3.6m passage between rows of cubicles and our head-to head cubicles measuring 4.2m in length, our tank will have to be a minimum 25m in length to keep our agitation points the required 1.5m out from our feed canopy.
Using a tank depth of 2.7m, and excluding 200mm for freeboard, our internal tank width must be 13.8m to accommodate all our required slurry. A double tank with a spine wall, and using 16ft 6in slats, will give us a capacity of 590m³, meaning an additional single tank, again using a 16ft 6in slat, will be required, which will bring our capacity up to 885m³, which will be sufficient for our needs.
Cost
Many farmers contact me querying approximate costs for building, but there is such variability in projects that it can be hard to give a straight answer. Where bedrock is present for digging tanks, then costs can quickly rise, while different specifications surrounding cubicles, barriers and cladding will cause a major difference in price. As a rough rule of thumb, a slatted tank will cost €120/m³, or €900/cow. Therefore, our above tank at 885m³ will cost approximately €106,200 + VAT.
The accommodation itself will in the region of €2,200/cow, or a total cost of €237,600.
This leaves our shed at a cost of €343,800 for our 108 cubicles and slurry capacity for 120 cows, or €3,183/cow.
This is approximately double what would have been expected as a cost per cow nine to 10 years ago, which shows the astronomical rise in farm infrastructure costs.
Slow down in development
There’s been a marked slow down in developments this year, from talking to farmers on the ground as well as builders and providers. Feed costs have driven profit margins to next to nil for some, pinched by grass growth, while the uncertainty surrounding the potential loss of the derogation has farmers questioning both the need to build and the very real potential that they may not have the repayment capacity should they be forced to cull cow numbers. The NISS (Nutrient Importation Storage Scheme) was lauded as a way for farmers facing a cut in cow numbers to export slurry in lieu of culling; though analysis by the Irish Farmers Journal has shown that transportation and spreading costs are equal to the value of slurry at current fertiliser prices. The reality is that with dairy expansion now stagnated, we will see less and less grand developments and more repairs and retrofits carried out.
In short
Feed space is the base point for accommodation. Calculate the requirement and work backwards to cubicle spaces thereafter.Budget for 0.4m³/ cow/ week when planning on slurry accommodation.Costs for cubicle accommodation and slurry storage are now over twice what they were 10 years ago.Where feed space is lacking, segregation of younger or thinner animals can aid.Farm developments have slowed amid tight farm margins and the uncertainty around the derogation.
A farmer recently contacted me regarding a planned farm project for his dairy enterprise, which would consist of 100 cubicles and a 20-unit parlour. The project was likely to see the cubicle shed built first, but it was key to design it in such a way that the cubicle shed would tie in with the future parlour.
You might say that projects such as this are a rarity now, but there is still a cohort of farmers that are in need of developing their yard, with older accommodation past their working life. The issue with so many farmyards is that the future is not considered when locating buildings.
A 16ft feed passage was twice too wide in the 80s, but with the growing size of machinery now, 16ft is what farms should be aiming for. Cubicle houses are built beside older parlours that are due for an upgrade, only for there to be no room for a larger parlour thereafter.
Happy marriage between feed space and cubicles
So many farmers concentrate on the cubicle spaces in a shed. ‘’How many cubicles can I fit in there?’’ Is too often asked. It’s more a case of working backwards from feed space and seeing how many cubicles can be accommodated based on this. A recommended 600-700mm should be factored in.
Failure to have this feed space will result in bullying of cows, with first-calved heifers being the primary target. I have heard of cases where farmers were struggling to get young cows back in calf, with poor body condition being the main issue. Tracing this back, a lack of feed space in early lactation was the primary culprit. Where feed space is lacking, segregation of younger or thinner animals can aid. A good rule of thumb is that for every double row of cubicles, you will require one side of the shed to be feed space, eg one double row=one side, two double rows=feeding on both sides. Where there are three rows of head-to-head cubicles, feeding will likely have to be on all four sides, with sheds tending to be narrower than they are long.
Crossover points
The first thing to remember is to avoid dead ends. If we are to design the shed with two rows of head-to-head cubicles, we will lose at least 24 cubicle spaces from either end of the rows, with three cubicle widths having to be lost for crossover points. Every bay of the shed will be capable of holding 16 cubicles, where head-head-to-head rows are used. An eight-bay shed can theoretically hold 128 cubicles in it. However, we have to subtract 24 cubicles for our crossover points at each end, with another 12 cubicles lost through a mid-way crossover point, which should be installed every four to five bays.
This results in our eight-bay shed only being fit to hold 92 cubicles. An additional bay (nine-bay shed) will hold 108 cubicles, which should be sufficient for the farmer’s needs.
Taking our standard bay length of 4.8m, we have a total feed space of 86.4m (nine bays, feeding on both sides). At 0.6m/cow, we have feed space for 144 cows to all eat at once. Even at 0.7m, we will have ample room for 120 cows, ensuring that even if we do not segregate, younger cows will not be bullied away from the barrier.
If we had included a third row of head-to-head cubicles, we would have 138 under the roof, meaning we are tight on feed space. Even though it may not seem like a lot to be short, it will mean that lighter cows will consistently be pinched.
Slurry storage
While current recommendations are for 0.33m³/cow/week, the likelihood is that this has been underestimated for years and will increase to 0.4m³/cow/week. Budgeting for 120 cows over an 18-week winter, we require 864m³ of slurry capacity (190,053 gallons). Most cubicles houses are designed with tanks at the end of the shed, scraped down with scrapers, with some opting to install a tank at the midway point.
If we are running a tank at the end of the above shed, using a 2.5m overhand each side, 4m passage along the barrier, a 3.6m passage between rows of cubicles and our head-to head cubicles measuring 4.2m in length, our tank will have to be a minimum 25m in length to keep our agitation points the required 1.5m out from our feed canopy.
Using a tank depth of 2.7m, and excluding 200mm for freeboard, our internal tank width must be 13.8m to accommodate all our required slurry. A double tank with a spine wall, and using 16ft 6in slats, will give us a capacity of 590m³, meaning an additional single tank, again using a 16ft 6in slat, will be required, which will bring our capacity up to 885m³, which will be sufficient for our needs.
Cost
Many farmers contact me querying approximate costs for building, but there is such variability in projects that it can be hard to give a straight answer. Where bedrock is present for digging tanks, then costs can quickly rise, while different specifications surrounding cubicles, barriers and cladding will cause a major difference in price. As a rough rule of thumb, a slatted tank will cost €120/m³, or €900/cow. Therefore, our above tank at 885m³ will cost approximately €106,200 + VAT.
The accommodation itself will in the region of €2,200/cow, or a total cost of €237,600.
This leaves our shed at a cost of €343,800 for our 108 cubicles and slurry capacity for 120 cows, or €3,183/cow.
This is approximately double what would have been expected as a cost per cow nine to 10 years ago, which shows the astronomical rise in farm infrastructure costs.
Slow down in development
There’s been a marked slow down in developments this year, from talking to farmers on the ground as well as builders and providers. Feed costs have driven profit margins to next to nil for some, pinched by grass growth, while the uncertainty surrounding the potential loss of the derogation has farmers questioning both the need to build and the very real potential that they may not have the repayment capacity should they be forced to cull cow numbers. The NISS (Nutrient Importation Storage Scheme) was lauded as a way for farmers facing a cut in cow numbers to export slurry in lieu of culling; though analysis by the Irish Farmers Journal has shown that transportation and spreading costs are equal to the value of slurry at current fertiliser prices. The reality is that with dairy expansion now stagnated, we will see less and less grand developments and more repairs and retrofits carried out.
In short
Feed space is the base point for accommodation. Calculate the requirement and work backwards to cubicle spaces thereafter.Budget for 0.4m³/ cow/ week when planning on slurry accommodation.Costs for cubicle accommodation and slurry storage are now over twice what they were 10 years ago.Where feed space is lacking, segregation of younger or thinner animals can aid.Farm developments have slowed amid tight farm margins and the uncertainty around the derogation. 
This is a subscriber-only article
SHARING OPTIONS: