DHI Notes...
April 2006 | Protect your income generating assets | Bennet Cassell
State DHI averages for important management areas in March 2006
Management area |
March 2006 |
Change from last year |
Rolling herd average milk |
21610 |
+896 lbs. |
Peak yield in heifers |
74 |
2 lbs. |
Days to first breeding |
95 |
0 days |
Days open |
163 |
+3 days |
Net Merit of proven service sires |
$307 |
+$35 |
Herd turnover less dairy sales (%) |
30% |
2% |
Monthly average SCS |
3.1 |
0.2 |
Feed cost per cwt. (milking cows) |
$5.05 |
-$0.03 |
Milk blend price |
$15.73 |
-$1.08 |
The last installment of DHI Notes described a very rapid drop in rolling herd average for the state that seemed to defy the other indications of how well cows were milking. The average herd had also become quite a bit smaller in one month’s time. The “problem” wasn’t a problem at all. It was the result of one very large herd with a very high rolling herd average that was not included in the state average that month. This month, that herd is in the state average and the key management areas show much more typical trends. One unfortunate trend, well known to everyone in the dairy business, is that milk prices are headed in the wrong direction. It is only natural for business minded dairy producers to look for new ways to control costs when income declines in the face of constant or even increasing production. It is important, as part of the process, to also look down the road to the time when milk prices recover – and they will, eventually. Be sure that decisions made today don’t jeopardize performance when that day comes. An example of a short term cost control measure that took a long time to overcome occurred in the Virginia Tech herd a few years ago. We chose to reduce purchased protein for the herd because of a state budget crunch. (At that time, the operating budget for the herd was independent of herd production – a situation which no longer exists.) We did cut costs and survived the budget crisis, with the obvious and expected result that milk yield (and income which did not come back to us) went down. Other things that went down were herd health and body condition. Fertility and production in subsequent lactation were adversely affected. It took us over a year after our budget improved to overcome that cost cutting decision. When milk prices go down, cows must be fed properly and health protocols maintained. Good herd production records are even more helpful under financial stress – to locate the cows that don’t pull their weight. Genetic improvement, always a “down the road” income generator, should not be ignored. I would encourage all of you to do your best not to sacrifice the income producing asset of the dairy business – the cow – to meet the challenges of reduced milk prices.
Bennet Cassell
Genetics and Management
