Straw lightens the debt load

Coverall shelter helps Oxford county farmer cut housing and manure handling costs

BY DON STONEMAN

Steve May finds it easier to carry straw for half an hour every day than to shoulder the thousands of dollars in debt load necessary to build a liquid manure system.

May milks 40 cows on 100 acres east of Tavistock, growing his own forages but buying straw for bedding and grain for feed for his dairy cows.

The straw amounts to a considerable purchase, the equivalent of about 9,000 small square bales a year. May houses his cows in a 55x140-foot Coverall shelter, bedding them with about 20 small square bales a day eight months of the year. The resulting manure pack covers a 33x90-foot area and by spring will be as much as eight feet high.

May erected the $36,000 Coverall two years ago on a home-poured concrete foundation. He added the shelter to the back of a 70x100-foot bank barn, which formerly held 40 freestalls. The bank barn now houses 14 freestalls for breeding-age heifers, a maternity and close-up pen, a large holding area, and a homemade, double-six parallel milking parlour.

The parlour is a little large for the size of the herd, but May says it wasn't expensive because it was homemade, and it leaves him open to expand to as many as 100 cows that could be housed in the bedding area.

May's intention was to pack bed his cows for one year, then build a freestall and a liquid manure tank. Instead, he is sticking with the manure pack.

Every winter morning he spends about 30 minutes with a pitchfork, shaking 20 bales of straw on to the manure pack in the middle of the Coverall barn. The pack sits on a layer of hard-packed gravel, which allows it to drain. On two sides of the pack is a 12-foot-wide scrape alley where cows stand when they eat out of the feedbunk. A feeding area also extends around two sides of the 45x100-foot pen.

The manure pack allows him to minimize manure storage facilities. In the spring he cleans out the barn, spreading the manure that he can and stockpiling the rest to spread on fields in the fall. Manure spreading is the only field work that May does. Planting, spraying and harvesting are performed by custom operators.

Pack bedding "is something that everyone is afraid of," May says. Farmers remember the strong ammonia smell that greeted them when manure built up in the old tiestall barns. But May says there is no comparison between the pack bedding in an old conventional tiestall and the pack in a shelter with a 25-foot high ceiling.

Even on a frosty February morning when everything is shut up tight there isn't a whiff of ammonia in the bedding area. And when the weather warms up, May opens the six-foot high side curtain walls to let the wind blow through. "With the curtains down in the summertime you can't beat it," he says. There is little condensation in the barn if the wide curtains are left open to allow the air to circulate.

May says he has milked cows in tiestalls, freestalls and on the bedding pack, and his somatic cell count stays at about 125,000 with occasional upward spikes, a sign that one cow has an infection. The factor common to all three milking operations is efficiency. "It's all in the management," he says.

May started in the dairy business milking cows in a rented barn, and found that returns were favourable.

Milking in rented facilities is a good way to start, but he got tired of not being able to make decisions on improvements to the operation. Then he joined in a large freestall nearby with his cousins, but bowed out of the operation after a year.

There are advantages with economies of scale and labour savings in large operations. But May thinks there will always be room for smaller farms like his. He thinks cows will last longer on bedding rather than on slatted concrete floors, reducing the need for replacements and allowing for more sales of breeding stock.

"I can sell, these guys are buying," May says of the new freestall operations that are springing up around the countryside.

May's pack barn is covered with fabric suspended on a steel frame. He says the barn isn't ideal - a centre ridge lets snow and rain fall onto the bedding pack. In freestalls the centre ridge is usually over an alleyway, so cows remain dry. "Chimneys would be better," he says. He would also like to see more overhang on the sides of the roof to keep out water during heavy summer rains.

Ben Hogervorst, of Coverall Building Systems of Ontario, Lucknow, says his newer buildings are made with a heavier fabric, which has a 15-year guarantee. Hogervorst says a new 62-foot-wide model is now available. It is built on eight-foot high wooden posts, which make side curtains easier to install. There are also extended eaves that keep out the rain, and Hogervorst has also put chimneys in barns made to house livestock.

© copyright 1999 Agricultural Publishing Company Limited.


back

Be mindful of mastitis

Sentinel project reveals that many farmers don't ask the right health questions when expanding herds or buying replacements

BY DON STONEMAN

There's good news and bad news on the mastitis front, says Dave Kelton, Department of Population Medicine, Ontario Veterinary College.

Across Ontario the incidence of most types of mastitis has fallen, but herds free of contagious types of mastitis - staph aureus, in particular - are few and far between. Staph aureus lives on the udders of most cows and can spread from cow to cow on milking machines and milkers' hands.

Another alarming trend Kelton notes is that relatively few farmers ask a lot of questions about the health status of cows when they buy new animals to expand their herd.

For the last couple of years, Kelton has been supervising the Sentinel project, a careful monitoring of 60 herds across Ontario designed to detect health trends.

The project surveys herds of varying sizes and management styles. Regardless of whether they are running tiestall, freestall, large herds or small, most farmers aren't as particular about keeping closed herds as they were 10 years ago. Then, brucellosis and tuberculosis eradication programs kept a tight lid on animal movements, he says.

Today, there is much more animal movement between herds. Kelton says four of five Sentinel herds had bought milking animals within the previous year, most either milking or dry cows.

Kelton has noted that when 48 of these herds brought cows in to supplement milk production in the last year, only 17 asked about the cow's somatic cell count history.

The chances of buying a cow from a staph aureus positive herd are quite high. The challenge is to keep infected cows out of herds, he says.

Farmers should be asking about the tank somatic cell count; the number of cows with mastitis; whether infected cows were isolated; and what proportion of cultured cows are positive, Kelton says.

When mastitis is in the herd, the challenge is to keep it at a low level. Pre-milking procedures are key, Kelton says. The goal is to wash the teats and dry them before attaching the milker.

Dry wiping, leaving washed teats wet, using baby wipes, or using no pre-milking prep are all unacceptable, Kelton asserts.

Because a cow tests clean on one test doesn't mean she is free of a contagious mastitis, Kelton says. Cows in herds where inadequate procedures are followed are five times as likely to harbour staph aureus on three or four cultures.

Farmers should be checking their cows for infection and milking infected cows last. Post-milking teat dip also helps.

Kelton's survey of Sentinel herds found that 58 of 60 herds surveyed used a post-milking treatment: 48 dipped teats and 10 used a spray. Both treatments seemed to be equally effective. That's a big improvement from 15 years ago when a survey of Ontario herds found that less than half teat dipped after milking.

Staph aureus is particularly difficult to treat in cows once it enters their mammary glands. It is possible to treat infected cows with antibiotics while they are being milked, but treatments seem to be more successful after dry off. Still, success is limited to a 20- to 25-per-cent cure rate. "Maybe what we need to do is cull the cow," Kelton says.

But many farmers are unwilling to ship good producing cows. In this situation, Kelton suggests moving the offending cow to the end of the milking order. Another option is to simply dry off a cow's problem quarter. Kelton says compensatory production from the other quarters make up for nearly all of the milk loss.

© copyright 1999 Agricultural Publishing Company Limited.


back

Genetics help diversify N.Y. family farm

Milking 270 cows is easy stuff compared to the "brain wracking" experience of collecting embryos

BY K.O. WILSON

Top-quality Holsteins are the focus at Larry and Jean Peck's Clear Echo Farms in Saratoga county, N.Y.

The Pecks, who farm with their son Kevin, milk 270 cows and run a sire and embryo business at this diversified family dairy.

Larry says if farmers use top Holstein sires and produce cows that look good and produce about 75 pounds of protein, the cattle are perfect candidates for the high genetics embryo business.

The Pecks use a USDA index that rates cows for milk, fat and protein. "It's an elite few of them in a herd that rate," says Larry Peck. "We have only eight or 10 such cows here. We'll merchandise those cows and sell the bull calves, and do 25 to 30 flushes a year." Overall, Peck makes about 20 sales a year, domestically and abroad.

Although the family hopes to stimulate from five to 10 eggs in heifers, two recent flushes produced 18 and 21 flushes, respectively. "Both heifers are mine," Jean says.

A week following fertilization the flushed embryos are implanted in recipient heifers. "It's been fun for all of us, because it's something we really enjoy. It's brain wracking, too, because you have to watch your recipients for heats and your donors for heats, so they're both in at the same time," says Larry.

The USDA Holstein Association rates the Pecks' herd at 12 excellent cows, 67 very good, 77 good plus and 27 good. The rolling herd average is 22,500 pounds with 883 pounds of fat and 700 protein.

Five years were needed to achieve these numbers and move the herd from 140 milkers to 270 after a recent expansion. High milk production numbers were difficult to maintain after new cows bought in to help fill the barn were not followed with adequate replacement heifers.

"Now that we're finally filled, the problem we've run in to with nearly 300 cows and some 200 head of young stock is trying to grow enough forage for them all," says Kevin.

Last year the Pecks grew 320 acres of corn and 250 of hay. Half the corn is chopped for silage with the remainder stored as high-moisture shelled corn.

Liquid manure is spread at a rate of 7,000 gallons per acre on corn. Getting all that manure out takes time, meaning the Pecks usually plant up to a week later than other area farms, but large corn yields and a fertilizer bill that is halved make the manure wait easy to tolerate.

Last spring a pre-fresh barn was constructed that Larry describes more as a lean-to. In this 19x60-foot extension off the main barn, which features 15 stalls with rubber mattresses, cows are balanced and readied for milking two weeks prior to calving.

The Pecks milk with a Westfalia double-10 rapid-exit, herringbone system. Larry and Kevin particularly like its digital records program, which is connected in-line with the milking. Cattle wear individual transponders that allow for instantaneous milk records recall.

"That has been a great management tool for us," says Kevin. "The system taught us a great deal about the capabilities of computers, something neither of us knew a lot about before."

Their rapid-exit parlour allows 10 cows to pass through one at a time, increasing productivity by moving animals faster. Kevin says his team isn't as fast as they should be, but he's not complaining. One person in the parlour generally milks a cow per minute. Two workers milk about 90 cows an hour. At that pace everyone milking is able to spend a fair amount of time with each cow, checking udders, wiping down teats and pre-dipping.

With a high-value registered herd, "we don't want any of them to get sick," Kevin says. "We take extra time with every cow that comes through."

© copyright 1999 Agricultural Publishing Company Limited.


back

Ontario neospora study gets OK

Neospora, a disease linked to increased incidence of abortion in dairy cows, has captured the attention of the province's entire cattle industry.

Last month, Dairy Farmers of Ontario and the Ontario Cattlemen's Association each kicked in $15,000 for a research study conducted by Ontario Veterinary College researcher Todd Duffield.

The study is investigating risk factors on farms where neospora is thought to have caused abortions, and will assess the economic impact on herds that contain neospora-positive animals.

One California study attaches a US$1,000 per animal financial cost to the abortion-causing protozoa. In addition to milk loss, the study found that animals testing positive for neospora antibodies in their blood were more likely to be culled than cows that tested negative.

But that study was conducted on only one herd, Duffield says. He wants to expand on the California study. "Is that just a one herd thing, or is that real?" Duffield asks.

Duffield also plans to examine farm factors that make animals more likely to be infected and abort.

The predominant method of spreading the disease in a herd is through the uterus, from mother to daughter. The presence of a dog on the farm appears to be a factor in introducing new infection into a herd.

Duffield also hopes to shed light on whether farms that habitually buy and sell cattle are more vulnerable to the disease.

"It's one thing to bleed all the cows and find which ones are positive. Then, what do you do with them?" Duffield asks. "Do you get rid of them, or keep them in the herd and don't keep their daughters?"

Duffield says a review of available neospora research indicates that incidence in herds is lower than expected. Only seven per cent of samples tested were found to be positive for the disease.

But the number of positive animals varies from zero in some herds tested to 38 per cent in others. "That's quite a range," Duffield says. - Don Stoneman

© copyright 1999 Agricultural Publishing Company Limited.


back

Fighting antibiotic resistance

Agriculture will be asked to help fight growing antibiotic resistance, but the industry's role in creating the problem has yet to be determined

BY DON STONEMAN

Animal agriculture may have little to do with increasing bacteria resistance to antibiotics, but it will play a key role in fighting that resistance, says Dr. John Prescott, Ontario Veterinary College.

Antibiotic resistance has turned into a broad agricultural issue, encompassing cattle as well as pigs and chickens, and it may spark a trade war with Europe, the veterinarian told the Ontario Cattlemen's Association meeting in Toronto last month.

The use of antibiotics is being re-evaluated, especially those used for growth promotion. Prescott believes some products will be withdrawn from the marketplace.

Canadian farmers will feel the effects, Prescott predicted. Farmers who adminisiter drugs as growth promotants and at sub-therapeutic levels will be most affected.

Prescott predicts in the future there will be no new drugs approved for over-the-counter sale to farmers at livestock medicine outlets.

Record-keeping will be mandatory, and farmers won't be able to buy existing products without a livestock medicines certificate.

Farmers may be certain they aren't contributing significantly to the antibiotic resistance problem, but they need to be able to prove that assertion, Prescott said.

Compared to Europe, Canada and the U.S. appear lax in how agriculture handles antibiotics. North American record-keeping on how drugs are used pales in comparison. There are only estimates of the amount of drugs used in feeding and treating livestock.

As much as 48 per cent of the antibiotics used in agriculture in North America are used in livestock, or about 8,500 tonnes anually. By comparison, Denmark, which has been at the centre of this crisis in Europe, "can account for every kilogram going into agriculture," Prescott said.

Antibiotic resistance is a genuine medical crisis, Prescott said. Middle ear infections have become increasingly common in young children, and the tools to deal with these infections are wearing thin. Social change is part of the problem. Children as young as four months of age are placed in daycare centres where they are exposed to a wide variety of ailments in other children. "It's much worse than in a feedlot," Prescott said.

Many children are on antibiotics for ear infections, maladies that have become increasingly antibiotic resistant. Fully 50 per cent of the strains of bacteria causing ear infections are resistant to the drugs used to treat them.

The medical community is already making efforts to cut down on drug use, having launched an advertising campaign to persuade doctors not to use antibiotics. Perhaps only one-quarter of drug use in medicine is now considered to be appropriate, Prescott said. Doctors are re-examining their treatment and prescription practices. Children are being sent home with Tylenol now, rather than antibiotics.

And agriculture is under scrutiny. "Is agriculture being made into a scapegoat?" Prescott asked. He said there is a danger of agriculture being the brunt of criticism, and that while the connection between antibiotic resistance and agriculture "is sparse, nevertheless it can be demonstrated."

The medical community is unsympathetic to farmers. Doctors understand the therapeutic use of drugs, not the non-therapeutic use, Prescott said. In some cases of resistance, agriculture takes the blame, but the evidence says otherwise. For example, one of the so-called "superbugs" is enterococci, which is responsible for some of the headline-making disease outbreaks in hospital wards.

The only drug that can fight it is called vancomycin. A related drug, avopacin, was used for years in Europe raising chickens, pigs and calves. Ironically, avopacin has never been approved for use in North America, is illegal here, and isn't available through mainstream channels. But vancomycin-resistant enterococci has been a problem in the U.S., and not in Europe where the drug was used in animals.

Europeans - citing the Swedish experience, where antibiotic use in husbandry and treatment protocols has been halved in recent years - say they can raise animals without antibiotics.

"They say it's possible; it's been done," Prescott said. But it adds about one cent a pound to the cost of raising pork and chicken. At that rate, such a ban in the U.S. would have a relatively minor financial impact on individual consumers, but a major cumulative effect country-wide.

When the final tabulation is complete, costs would reach about $15 to $20 per person per year or $2.5 billion annually.

© copyright 1999 Agricultural Publishing Company Limited.


back