DHI Notes...

July 2006 | Be an early adopter | Bennet Cassell

State DHI averages for important management areas in June 2006

Management area	June 2006	Change from last year
Rolling herd average milk	21827	+970 lbs.
Peak yield in heifers	75	1 lbs.
Days to first breeding	96	0 days
Days open	163	+5 days
Net Merit of proven service sires	$316	+$39
Herd turnover less dairy sales (%)	29%	+1%
Monthly average SCS	3.0	-0.1
Feed cost per cwt. (milking cows)	$5.25	+$0.18
Milk blend price	$13.67	-$2.24

he rolling herd average for the state has been progressing steadily towards 22,000 lbs for some months now. If the 2006 corn silage crop, which will mostly be in the silo by the time this is published, produces the optimistic results that a late July drive up the Shenandoah Valley would predict, Virginia dairy producers should have the feed supply needed to achieve that average for the first time. We all operate in the present, for the most, part, and the significance of a state average of 22,000 lbs per cow per year tends to get lost on all the details of running dairy farms from day to day. In the files left to Kathy Lee and subsequently to me by Bill Patterson many years ago is a state DHI herd summary sheet from October 1978. A lot of current Virginia Dairyman readers played no role in that state average. Some weren’t yet born! There were 909 herds on test that fall, with an average of 92 cows per herd and a rolling herd average for milk of 14,402 lbs. There were no somatic cell scores and protein tests in those days. Days open averaged 125. Cows tested a bit higher for fat % at 3.7% vs. 3.5% today, but with considerably less fat produced per year (525 lbs vs. 788 lbs today). One other figure really caught my attention: “milk blend price” in October 1978 was $10.79. That’s way too close to what producers are being paid this summer. All the production efficiencies that have been implemented through the years are needed to succeed or even survive as a business. That trend is not about to stop, either. As better ideas for profitable production come forward, they will be adopted first by the innovative (who will make some money on the best ideas but risk losing some as well) and subsequently spread through the industry as the “late adopters” adapt to compete. What is the next good idea that deserves a look – sexed semen, niche milk marketing or agro-tourism, robotic milkers? The message, then as now, is to pick the right ideas and be an early adopter.

 

Bennet Cassell
Genetics and Management