Pakistan is the fourth largest dairy-producing country in the world

Pakistan is emerging as a major export destination for Australian dairy cows and genetics, according to a press release from Genetics Australia.

A new partnership between HRM Dairies in Pakistan and Genetics Australia has led two shipments of semen in late 2021 with further shipments planned in coming months.

The genetics exports follow a surge in shipments of live animals from Australia to Pakistan over the past five years.

Genetics Australia’s partnership with HRM Dairies, was officially launched on 26 December and the corporate farm has become the first in Pakistan to use Australian genetics and genomic testing.

Genetics Australia Export Manager Rob Derksen identified Pakistan as a country of interest for Australian genetics several years ago.

“We were looking for a distributor in Pakistan and appointed two distributors, but both had little interest in genetic merit, they just wanted to focus on getting the cheapest possible product,” Derksen said. “We decided at the time to place greater emphasis on exporting genetics to other countries, particularly China, as they were prepared to focus on better quality genetics and promote the Australian Breeding Value system.”

“China became our number one export market but in more recent years as the relationship between Beijing and Canberra deteriorated, we were unable to obtain import permits for China and decided to again look at options in Pakistan,” he continued. “We decided to appoint HRM as our exclusive distributor because of their interest in breeding better quality animals and their dairy will become a showcase in Pakistan for Australian genetics. Other farmers can’t believe the high production better quality Australian cattle are doing.”

HRM Dairies CEO Mudassar Hassan moved to Australia in 2003 but wanted to retain a connection to his homeland.

“I saw in 2017 that there was a huge gap between supply and demand in Pakistan and the quality of dairy cattle in Pakistan wasn’t up to the mark,” Hassan said.

He eventually secured Holstein cows from three different farms; Emu Banks, Eclipse and Vala Holsteins, with an emphasis on high quality genetics.

“We lead from the front and do a lot of trials and studies at our farm,” Hassan said. “There were Holsteins in Pakistan but not to the genetic quality I was after.”

The barn-based farm is now milking nearly 400 cows and has introduced Jersey and Aussie Reds crosses. Hassan hopes to be milking 1,000 cows by 2024.

Hassan predicts the industry could grow immensely. “If I talk in dairy language, Pakistan is just at the weaning stage,” he said.

While Pakistan is the fourth largest dairy producing country in the world, it still needs imported cattle and can struggle with what Hassan describes as “non-descriptive” stock.

“Like Australia, Pakistan wants a stronger cow that has good feet and legs, an open chest, dairy strength, good mammary systems, are healthy and fertile and able to cope with hot and humid conditions.”

HRM Dairies and Hassan’s social media profile – where he produces videos of interviews with Australian farmers attracting up to 100,000 views – have helped to educate Pakistani farmers about Australian genetics.

“People thought Australia only imported genetics from the US or Europe to AI [artificially inseminate] their cows,” he said. “We have changed that now and people realise Australia is independent in terms of producing genetics.

“This is the first time in Pakistani history that Australian genetics has come to Pakistan and we can show them the bull’s daughters performing in another country, as well as those in our own herd,” he added. “It’s a showcase to farmers that it really works.”

Hassan said the shortage of quality cattle and genetics held back Pakistani dairy farming.

“Cattle numbers aren’t the problem; it’s the shortage of quality genetics and the main challenge is education,” he said. “At the moment, farmers are increasing their herds without knowing the strengths and weaknesses because of the lack of genomic testing.”

HRM is the only farm in Pakistan doing genomic testing and Hassan hopes to help farmers understand the value of good genetics in improving fertility, health and profitability.

“Profit is not all about milk production; profit also means less expenses,” he said. “If your cow is doing 12,000 litres but having mastitis twice and taking four doses to get pregnant, you won’t be making that much profit, but if she’s producing 8-9000 litres and getting pregnant easily and not having health problems, she’s probably more profitable.”

Last year, almost 97% of the HRM herd got pregnant, it had very low mortality rates and high production. Minimum production from any cow was 10,000 litres but the average was more than 12,000 litres, which Hassan attributes to genetics, management and nutritional control.

Hassan is a firm believer that Australian cows and genetics work in Pakistan. “It’s a huge market but in Australia it is very underrated; Australia could do way more to capitalise on the potential,” he said.

Derksen said there was also a great opportunity for Australian farmers to sell better quality surplus heifers to Pakistan.

“Pakistani farmers are now recognising their first-cross animals with poor breeding are not performing anywhere near the level of the Australian cows,” he said. “HRM has demonstrated there is real merit in better quality genetics.”

Source: thedairysite.com

A Sunshine Coast hinterland dairy farmer is maximising his herd’s milk production thanks to a by-product from the production of one of Australia’s finest rums.

Ray DeVere, River Ridge Dairies, Kureelpa, says feeding his herd dunder, a by-product from locally produced Nil Desperandum rum, had resulted in his herd is producing up to an extra 250 litres of milk a day.

“The cows have a choice in what they eat,” Mr Devere said.

“The paddocks are full of dense grass, but all 250 head of cattle race to drink the 1000 litres of dunder we put out each day,” Mr DeVere said.

Nil Desperandum’s Michael Conrad said the dunder was a produced from Australia’s first-ever organically certified molasses.

“At Nil Desperandum, we’re not producing a regular Queensland rum, we’re producing the single malt of rums,” Mr Conrad said.

“To make something exceptional, we’ve used exceptional ingredients including the very best unprocessed, pure, natural, and only certified organic molasses in Australia.

“High quality molasses gives rum that smooth, deep, warm flavor – and now we know it also makes cattle happy, fat and highly productive.”

Nil Desperandum(Latin for ‘nothing to despair’ or ‘no worries’ in the venacular) is donating more than 5000 litres of dunder each week to local farmers.

“We never imagined that in an attempt to make liquid gold for everyone’s bar we’d also make liquid gold for an animal feeder,” Mr Conrad said.

Wagyu producer Jeremy Atkins is mixing the dunder with brewers grain.

“My livestock have never been healthier,” Mr Atkins said.

“The Nil Desperandum dunder delivery days are the best days of the week. The cattle love the thick, sticky, yeast-rich liquid and I enjoy the results on the scales.

“It combines to make a sweet and luscious, protein-rich porridge, which healthily conditions a beast quickly. But it also makes a positive stance towards holistic land management – because what goes in must come out.

“We’ve discovered the animal waste is far more mineral rich from the dunder, so we are seeing signs of the added benefits of fertilising those nutrients back into our soil and pastures.”

The first batch of Nil Desperandum was launched this month, and the overwhelming demand for this new-styled Queensland rum means the team will be producing a lot more rum … and dunder.

“The more rum we sell the more dunder we have available. It’s a win-win, and based on the results we’ve seen with Ray and Jeremy’s livestock, we hope to expand the dunder donation program,” Mr Conrad said.

Nil Desperandum’s limited-edition rum ‘FIRST’ is available either online or the distillery door in Woombye. Future releases will include blended rums and additional limited editions.

Source: Queensland Country Life

Waikato dairy farmers have received a dollop of cream on the top of a pavlova of prosperity, in the form of a nine-year high point on the Global Dairy Trade price index.

But whether that cream will be skimmed off by rocketing inflation before the farmers get to take a bite remains to be seen.

The boost in the average international price of whole milk powder comes just weeks after Fonterra lifted its forecast milk payment to a new record level of between $8.90 and $9.50 per kilogram of milk solids – equating to a $13.8 billion contribution to the nation’s economy.

Milk powder gained 4.2 per cent to US$4503 (NZ$6649) a tonne, the highest level since 2013. Whole milk powder has gained 16.5 per cent over the last three auctions and is sitting 25 per cent higher than at the same time last year.

Overnight on Tuesday the index reached 1516, just shy of the all-time record of 1573 set in April 2013. Prices rose more than 4 per cent for the third consecutive fortnightly auction.

Federated Farmers’ Waikato dairy chairman Andrew Reymer reckoned a good portion of the milk money would be soaked up on the farm, with “agricultural inflation” estimated to be soaring at between 30 and 40 per cent.

“You think it’s bad in the supermarket, but farmers are having to deal with rampant cost increases. Any time we get good financial news it’s usually the signal for agricultural suppliers to put their costs up.”

While the index figures were symptomatic of ongoing good times for the industry, Reymer said they would be mainly of academic interest to Waikato farmers, with little tangible impact on their coffers.

“[The figures are] probably best described as a marker for what the milk price is going to be. Fonterra announced the milk price a couple of weeks ago, and this announcement does not really make one cent of difference on the farm.

“But the figure is a good one and it should give farmers confidence that the milk price will probably strengthen again next season.

“Think of it as a green light that you can see a little bit further down the street.”

Infometrics principal economist Brad Olsen had a similar view.

“You can’t blame the farmers for not exactly jumping for joy. The index payment is a dollop of cream on the top of a pretty good year for the sector, but the very high inflation rate is going to skim most of that cream off.

“The costs of fertiliser and feed are making things very difficult. The other thing is that it’s getting really tough to find workers. There’s a lot of work to go round, but fewer people to do it.”

North Waikato dairy farmer Andrew Allen described the price index bump on the heels of the milk payment as “fantastic news”, and doubted it would be entirely negated by inflation.

“It will allow us to buy a few things we need and share the wealth with the workers a bit more as well … My guys would have got an inflation-based wage rise anyway, but it all helps.”

Usually when the global price index got too high other countries – mainly the United States – would temper the demand “by simply turning the milk tap on,” Allen said.

“For a variety of reasons they have not been able to do that as quickly this time. They are under a lot of different kinds of pressure at the moment, just like the farmers here.”

Fellow farmer Johan Van Ras, from Morrinsville, also declared the price index announcement to be “really good news … the whole agricultural industry is experiencing really good times at the moment. It’s great to see.

“Of course, you don’t want to skite too much about how well you are doing because there are a whole bunch of people in other industries who are doing it really tough at the moment. You have to feel really sorry for the guys in the tourism sector.”

Source: stuff.co.nz

Kenya’s dairy sector is estimated at 14 per cent of Kenya’s agricultural GDP. Milk is primarily produced by smallholder dairy farmers who account for 56 per cent of total output. It is estimated that the sector has 1.8 million smallholder farmers (about 80 per cent of producers). The remaining 44 per cent of milk output comes from large commercial farmers.

Kenya has three main production systems. Intensive production where animals are fully housed (zero-grazed); open grazing where animals roam fields; and semi-intensive systems where animals are partly zero-grazed and taken to fields.

Dairy cattle in Kenya consist of indigenous and exotic breeds; as well as crosses between the two varieties. There are more than five million dairy cattle producing an estimated four billion litres of milk annually. Milk production is projected to grow by about 150 per cent by 2050.

Kenya has the highest per capita milk consumption in sub-Saharan Africa, at 110 litres. The demand, currently at 8 billion litres, is also expected to grow with the population increase.

The government has therefore prioritised the industry in national strategy and plans, such as the Agricultural Sector Transformation and Growth Strategy (2019-2029) and the president’s Big Four Agenda. There’s also a dairy master planto guide the development of the industry up to 2030.

But the sector faces significant challenges that affect the realisation of its full potential. As a result, Kenya has to importfrom neighbouring countries to meet demand.

One of the reasons is the low average annual dairy productivity which ranges between six to eight litres per cow per day. It is important to highlight that productivity varies with production systems. The highest productivity is attained under intensive production systems. A low level of productivity increases the cost of production and affects the competitiveness of the industry.

Choice of breeds

Based on our studies at the Egerton University’s Tegemeo Institute, the dairy industry in Kenya is yet to reach its potential. To make it competitive, all players must work together to improve productivity at farm and improve efficiency of dairy markets.

Firstly, a dairy animal’s milk yield is determined by its genetic composition. Exotic cows produce much higher volumes compared to indigenous breeds. But indigenous breeds are hardier and are able to withstand harsh conditions.

The choice of breed is informed by production system, ability, experience or expertise of the farmer, and environmental factors such as climate. Artificial Insemination is the most preferred method to improve animal breeds. The artificial insemination was previously offered by the government but the service was privatised in the late 1980s as part of Kenya’s Structural Adjustment Programs. This was meant to improve the reach to farmers by private service providers.

The government supports the AI service providers by subsidising prices. The number of service providers has significantly improved, cost of the service has dropped and the access distance reduced. However, the quality of services still varies across regions.

Improving regulation and supervision of insemination, and enhancing the supply of supporting infrastructure such as semen storage, will improve the genetic composition of dairy animals.

Feed quality and cost

Secondly, feeds are essential to dairy productivity. Dairy farmers grapple with low quality and high cost of feeds. Studiesshow that improving the quality of fodder significantly improves milk productivity.

Fodder varies in quality based on nutrients. High quality fodder are grown. Fodder yield depends on seed quality and farm level agronomic practices. Furthermore, a farmer must have know-how on mixing different types of fodder to attain the nutrition level required by the animal. Therefore, improving farmers’ knowledge is critical.

The cost of feed and fodder varies by the production system. In intensive production systems, feed and fodder account for 55% of the cost of producing a litre of milk, while it’s 44% in open grazing systems and 37% in semi-intensive systems. For producers under intensive systems, the high costs erode profitability despite productivity being highest.

Rising costs of commercial feeds drive the cost of production up. Feed prices have continued to rise even after government waived the duty on imported raw materials.

There’s also policies such as the ban on genetically modified products which prevent feed manufacturers from accessing cheaper raw materials.

Extension services

Animal husbandry plays a critical factor in improving productivity. This is directly affected by farmers’ access to extension services. Farmers in high potential dairy production areas have formed cooperatives. These provide extension services in some areas following the collapse of government services.

However, this strategy primarily benefits farmers in high dairy production areas, mainly under extensive systems and partly in semi-extensive systems. Development partners and civil society organisations have further strengthened the role of cooperatives in delivering knowledge and technologies to farmers.

Cooperatives have suffered from governance problems, causing exit of members. The Ministry of agriculture in December 2021, reviewed the Cooperative Act in a bid to tighten the policy framework. But a stricter supervision and punishment for those abusing position of trust, can improve appeal of the societies.

Animal health

Animal health affects both productivity of milking heads and the quality of milk. Responsibility for animal health is shared between the national and county governments. Both have been working to enhance disease monitoring and surveillance by launching vaccination campaigns, especially in the open grazing areas. Regulation of veterinary service providers remains critical, especially as it pertains to safety.

Issues such as microbial resistance in both humans and animals has been linked to misuse of medicines. The government has a policy to address this. However, stringent implementation of measures on animal health and food safety is required.

Marketing

The marketing of milk and dairy products remains a key talking point for the industry. The informal market dominates the raw milk segment. This is because there are a large number of smallholder producers who are not organised in groups or cooperatives.

The informal market, however, offers a higher return to producers. A key criticism is that the milk is unsafe due to poor handling or adulteration. Defining and enforcing food safety standards for milk value chain can improve safety.

The standards should define how milk is handled, transported and packaged. Awareness among actors and consumers in the informal market could have greater results in ensuring the safety of milk to consumers.

Government policy encourages value addition and processing by cooperatives, but progress has been slow because of market concentration at processing. The largest processor controls more than a third of the market, and two processors control two-thirds of the market. The regulator should regularly monitor changes in market structure to ensure farmers receive competitive prices.

To support cooperatives in value addition, both the national and county governments have distributed milk coolers to cooperatives. However, most of these remain collection centres for processors, and few have engaged in processing. Besides, milk imports and dairy products from neighbouring countries such as Uganda, are favoured by consumers because of lower prices.

Capital

Other key challenges affecting the sector include access to capital for both farmers and value chain actors. This prevents critical investments in the industry. Furthermore, supply of public goods such as improved rural roads adversely affects the collection and delivery of milk, especially during the rainy seasons.

To revitalise the dairy industry, improving coordination across the government and stakeholders in the industry is a first step. Next, the government must address the policy incoherence in the industry.

Source: DownToEarth

Many of the questions that we field in the office at the Pennsylvania Milk Marketing Board come from a circulating rumor, which we all know can take root and spread quickly.

I thought it would be a good idea to talk about some of the things we hear and to provide the correct information as we know it.

I want to preface the discussion by stating that I am grateful that people do contact me to ask questions about what they have heard.

Where is Your Milk Being Processed?

Recently, I was told that Walmart is destroying the Pennsylvania dairy industry because the stores are bringing in milk from Walmart’s Indiana processing plant.

There may be some Indiana milk going into Walmart stores in Pennsylvania, but I can also state with certainty that there is a lot of Pennsylvania-produced and -processed milk in Walmart’s stores. Just because the cartons have a store-brand label does not mean they are processed in a store-owned plant.

You can easily check where milk comes from — state and actual plant location — by looking at the plant code that will be somewhere on the carton. Each state is given a two-digit code followed by a dash and another number (one to five digits).

Pennsylvania’s state code is 42. If you see the code 42-136 on the carton, that milk was processed at Harrisburg Dairies. A code of 42-146 indicates the milk was processed at United Dairies in Uniontown.

Any plant location can be identified through the website whereismymilkfrom.com. Just enter in the plant code from a carton of milk to find where that milk was processed.

I have been sharing for some time that 60% to 70% of Pennsylvania-produced milk goes out of the state for processing or sales.

There is a myth that this milk is being replaced (or pushed out) by milk coming into the state due to our higher wholesale and retail prices.

Milk is leaving the state because Pennsylvania produces more milk than our state consumers will buy.

That is not a bad thing, and many of our small farms are kept in business because our state’s processors buy their milk and continuously look for new markets.

Over-Order Premiums

Most of the conversations on this topic are centered on the over-order premium, which I have written about a lot lately. This article is not about OOP, so I won’t add comments about it other than to reinforce that the board and its staff are very much aware of the issues and are working to find a way to address them to help our producers.

I wrote a column once that stated I often feel like King Solomon when asked to provide opinions or make decisions when our various stakeholders may be at odds with one another.

I feel that way when a producer tells me he/she feels the cooperatives are trying to take over the entire state and want to put our independent processors out of business.

The board, its staff and I need to have positive, productive working relationships with all our constituent groups and, as best as we can, we must remain apolitical in situations in which any of the groups have disagreements.

What I can state about that situation is that we are all about preserving the ongoing viability of Pennsylvania’s dairy industry. We recognize the contributions of all groups with which we work. We value and appreciate all our producers — large and small — and want to do our part to maintain the business health of our independent processors.

However, we also recognize that our cooperatives provide markets for many producers who would not have one otherwise and have played a valuable role in the economics of our dairy industry.

On Minimum Wholesale Prices

One more rumor has its basis in something written in the law.

The Milk Marketing Law requires that board-established minimum wholesale prices include a 2½ to 3½ rate of return to dealers. Many people would assume, then, that processors make that much profit.

Our records indicate that most of our fluid milk processors do not make that much profit and rely on the diversification of their businesses to cover any shortages in the dairy end of their businesses.

The bottom line is this. Please contact me when you hear something that seems outrageous, confusing or doesn’t make sense, or with any other question or concern you may have.

I or another staff member will respond with the facts and provide you with other resources if needed. I can be reached at 717-210-8244 and by email at chardbarge@pa.gov.

Demand for cheese in China is on the rise and the forecasts for growth are bullish but there remain barriers to consumption. GlobalData Consumer puts forwards ways in which manufacturers could capitalise on increased interest in the product.

China’s cheese market is small when compared to dairy segments such as liquid milk and drinkable yogurt – but it is expanding and is forecast to see solid growth.

However, most Chinese consumers are still not used to the flavours and aroma of cheese. Therefore, knowing how to change Chinese consumers’ taste preferences will be the key to opening up the market further to more shoppers.

GlobalData research from August showed 32% of consumers in China were looking to increase their dairy intake as much as possible, with a further 47% are trying to consume a moderate amount. In the same survey, when asked which foods they preferred to snack on, more than half (53%) of consumers said dairy items.

This data suggests Chinese shoppers see dairy as a desirable part of their diet. However, China’s average cheese consumption is still relatively low, especially compared to neighbouring countries, such as Japan and South Korea. According to the OECD, Japan and South Korea’s cheese consumption per capita stands at 2.35kg and 3.09kg respectively, while China is lagging behind at 0.3kg.

In the past, the biggest cheese consumers in China were ethnic minorities, such as Mongolians, or citizens returning from travels abroad. Despite growing interest, flavour and how to combine cheese with other foods remain barriers to consumption.

In China, cheese products that are targeted at children are the most popular cheese offerings. Liyi, Mengniu Dairy, Bright Dairy are among the dairy majors that have cheese products aimed at kids. Those born in the 1980s and 1990s are starting to become parents and they are seeking more nutritious foods for their children. Most cheese products aimed at kids tout their high calcium and protein levels, while they also come in a stick shape or even on a stick (like an ice lolly) for easier child-friendly consumption. This new generation who are growing up consuming cheese will be another big potential consumer group to capitalise on in the future.

There is an increasing number of food and drink brands that have begun to launch cheese flavours as part of new snack and dairy offerings. The Xiangpiaopiao brand offers an instant milkshake that comes in a sea salt and cheese blended flavour, while the Qiaqia brand has released cheese-flavoured sunflower seeds. These new launches provide the opportunity for consumers to become accustomed to the taste and smell of cheese and its different uses in food.

Elsewhere, creating a fusion dish with cheese by combining it with local foods could provide a new marketing opportunity to manufacturers.

A trend that was witnessed in Japan during the 1990s saw consumers opting for toast for breakfast and this provided the opportunity for manufacturers in Japan to market a processed cheese specifically for that meal occasion. Now, ‘toast cheese’ has become an important product on the Japanese market.

In South Korea, meanwhile, there is a fusion dish that involves a Korean hot dog filled with cheese or corn cheese (a Korean dish made of sweetcorn and mozzarella cheese). Although China does not currently have any well-known fusion dishes using cheese, there are opportunities for manufacturers to get creative and introduce the product to the Chinese market in new and exciting ways.

According to GlobalData, the value of China’s cheese market is expected to grow from a forecasted US$1.06bn in 2020 to US$1.96bn in 2025, a compound annual growth rate of circa 13%. China’s cheese market is growing rapidly and knowing how to capitalise on new trends will be vital for manufacturers hoping to profit from the potential cheese boom.

Source: FoodTalks

Protestors hold up a banner outside Hannaford’s corporate headquarters in Scarborough on Saturday. The rally was organized by Migrant Justice, a Vermont-based farmworker rights group that has been pressuring Hannaford to join its Milk with Dignity program for several years.

Migrant Justice held a protest at Hannaford supermarket’s corporate headquarters in Scarborough on Saturday, calling on the company to adopt stronger labor protections in its dairy supply chain. The rally also drew attention to a recent legislative setback for farmworkers in Maine.

The action, organized by the Vermont-based group Migrant Justice, was the latest in a long-running campaign to pressure Hannaford to join the Milk with Dignity Program, and drew about 50 people.

One of the people who spoke at the rally was a dairy worker named Emilio, who gave only his first name. Speaking in Spanish, Emilio said the program would ensure higher pay, better living conditions, and paid time off.

Emilio said paid time off is especially important, because currently many workers can’t afford to stay home when they’re sick.

A young girl holds up a photo of a Vermont dairy worker at the protest outside Hannaford’s corporate headquarters in Scarborough on Saturday. Migrant Justice, the group that organized the protest, said they brought the photos to remind Hannaford of the people who produce the company’s dairy products.

Also speaking at the rally was Maine state Rep. Thom Harnett, a Democrat from Gardiner. He said farmworkers deserve the same protections that other employees receive.

“The people that produce the milk that [Hannaford] sells deserve nothing less than to be treated like human beings and treated fairly where they work,” Harnett said.

The protest came after Gov. Janet Mills vetoed a bill Harnett had introduced that would have allowed farmworkers in Maine to engage in collective bargaining.

In a statement, Hannaford said it requires all its suppliers to follow labor laws and treat workers fairly and humanely, and is conducting farm audits to make sure these expectations are being met.

Source: mainepublic.org

DairyNZ requested that 1,500 international workers be allowed into New Zealand in 2022

A recent announcement by New Zealand’s federal government regarding the re-opening of borders brought much-needed clarity to the country’s many dairy businesses, according to DairyNZ. The country’s dairy businesses have been desperately seeking international workers to fill vacant roles on farms.

DairyNZ chief executive Tim Mackle said the dairy sector is not unique in needing more workers, and appreciates the Government granting permission to bring in 200 international workers through border class exceptions in 2021.

However, Mackle said that without the ability to get the workers through the border the class exception was not achieving its goal of allowing international workers onto farms.

“We have been working with the Government, putting forward several suggestions as to how our sector could manage the balance between the health risk and our labour needs, such as exploring how on-farm isolation would work,” he said. “It is rewarding to see how this planning has paid off today.”

While the changes announced on 4 February are helpful, Mackle said there is still work to be done to ensure that the sector gets the people it needs to address a severe labour shortage.

“With a shortfall of about 4,000-6,000 dairy workers we have asked the Government for a further 1,500 international workers be allowed into New Zealand in 2022,” Mackle added.

New data shows the New Zealand unemployment rate recently fell to 3.2% – the lowest rate in over thirty years.

“Without enough staff, animal welfare is at risk, environmental progress is limited, and high levels of stress affect people’s health and safety, and enjoyment of work.”

The changes announced 4 February will allow nearly 200 international workers who are eligible for a dairy class exception visa to enter New Zealand in mid-March (after their visas are approved) and go into on-farm isolation.

Dairy class exception visas holders have to be fully vaccinated to enter New Zealand.

Mackle said it is also pleasing to see that the Government will be considering allowing more critical workers into New Zealand under class exceptions in April, alongside some international dairy workers who hold a current visa.

He said having a new pathway for some international dairy workers earning above 1.5 times the median wage to enter New Zealand from mid-March is also positive. Typically these people have worked on New Zealand dairy farms previously and their contribution will be recognised through this pathway.

The dairy sector also recently launched a new ‘Join Us’ campaign aiming to connect dairy farmers and New Zealanders and inviting Kiwis to join a dairy job.

Source: thedairysite.com

We are at a crossroads of sorts, one at which change in our industry is needed but few people are available to guide the process. Add to this the competing agendas of the various stakeholders, and I think you can see the problem.

Past views of the change process focused on what individuals had to do to effect change, but we now know that things such as organizational memberships, community values and personal beliefs influence how much and what type of change may occur.

There has also been a misguided belief that acceptance of change is somehow congruent with implementation.

I have written about the board’s competing constituent groups — producers, dealers, retailers, consumers — on many occasions, but never including much more than a small mention of the emotional entanglements that most likely would drive (or inhibit) change for them.

This column is going to focus on some of the theories surrounding change and what industry leadership can do to move us forward.

We first have to recognize that not only do individuals in each of the groups have a value set, but the “group” itself is embedded with values. The groups are not neutral when it comes to thinking about needed change.

What the producers see as beneficial to their long-term viability may not match what present-day consumers believe.

And, considering the small volume of dairy sold by retailers when compared to their total store sales, they are not likely to be as sympathetic toward the needs of milk producers as the need for change may dictate.

The question has to be, “Why would anyone in any group of our constituents resist (explicitly or implicitly) a change or innovation that would benefit a large group of individuals and potentially have a sizable positive impact on the economy of the commonwealth?”

Change in the dairy industry — however you define or describe that — requires interaction and integration of ideas, jointly explored potential solutions, and sincere efforts at compromise. For these things to happen there has to be a series of steps that begin with the realization that change is necessary.

This is not always easy and must occur on an individual level as well as in “the group.” In other words, it isn’t just necessary for individual owners of a processing company to accept that change is needed; the majority of companies must believe the same thing.

A second but no less important step is for someone or some organization to lead the efforts to communicate, bringing people together to brainstorm about necessary changes, considering all opinions and ideas, and weighing each against potential costs and benefits.

I need to digress somewhat at this point. We are talking about large-scale industry changes here, not individual company changes. The best place to begin is to develop a picture of what the industry needs to look like, what it needs to grow, and how government and Milk Marketing Board constituent groups need to individually change to make that vision a reality.

This is what I see as the greatest sticking point — the individual constituent groups have individual needs (too often focused upon) but they are there and have to be considered. How to be considerate of those needs when we have not characteristically adopted strategies to benefit the whole at a sacrifice to some is a serious challenge.

Beginning with the vision, however, enables each group to act as part of a “whole,” or a larger structure with interdependent others and then begin to develop solutions and a plan that works by give and take.

I don’t believe those of us who care so much about the industry can even think about developing a plan for change until we conduct some internal research to learn about the value systems and beliefs of the constituent groups.

An understanding of those, how they affect any group and organizational behaviors and statements, and where conflicts exist between values and beliefs of the groups, is necessary to even begin the process.

The Milk Marketing Board and staff are reacting to the recent Farm Bureau members’ decision on the over-order premiumby adopting a listening posture. We also have spoken to legislators, cooperative administrators and others with intent to listen more.

Our chair has indicated that the situation is serious enough to possibly hold another series of listening sessions around the state. I am also in favor of some smaller, structured focus groups at which we could gain information on some key specific points of interest and contention.

Change is about learning, learning that what works for producers may have negative effects on consumers. What is valued by large-scale, regional processors may conflict with those things valued by our many family-owned processors in the commonwealth.

I continue to mull all this over and I hope to be part of a beginning change process before I leave PMMB.

We are always available to respond to questions and concerns. I would love to hear your thoughts about industry changes. I can be reached at 717-210-8244 or by email at chardbarge@pa.gov.

Source: lancasterfarming.com

Canadian dairy farmers reduced their carbon footprint by 22% between 1990 and 2019

The Dairy Farmers of Canada (DFC) unveiled a goal to reach net-zero greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions  from farm-level dairy production by the year 2050, with a milestone in 2030.

This is a continuation of the ongoing efforts by the dairy industry related to environmental stewardship and much of the work necessary to meet the target has already begun. For example, from 1990 to 2019, Canadian dairy farmers reduced the carbon footprint of milk production by 22% through improved management practices.

“For generations now, Canadian dairy farmers have been stewards of the land, adapting their practices based on science and innovation,” says Pierre Lampron, President, Dairy Farmers of Canada. “Our leadership in the area of sustainability is already recognized internationally, as we have one of the lowest carbon footprints per litre of milk produced.”

This goal not only aligns with the Government of Canada’s goal of net-zero GHG emissions by 2050, but international commitments, as well. The Paris Agreement, for instance, aims to foster climate resilience and lower greenhouse gas development, as well as to make climate flows consistent with a pathway toward a lower carbon future. Last fall, DFC joined 11 of the world’s largest dairy organizations in supporting Pathways to Dairy Net Zero, a Global Dairy Platform-sponsored commitment towards net-zero GHG emissions.

“A global effort is underway to cut emissions and reduce the direct costs of climate change on our health, our environment and our economy,” says Steven Guilbeault, the federal Minister of Environment and Climate Change. “Every economic sector and every region needs to step up to reduce emissions. The Dairy Farmers of Canada’s commitment to achieving net-zero shows important leadership and our Government will continue to support our collective efforts to get there.”

“The Federal government set the objective, but can only achieve it with the support of industry partners,” Lampron added. “Achieving this objective will require dairy farmers to adapt, but will also require that effective government supports are in place.”

Reaching ‘zero’ will be done through emissions reduction and GHG removal offsets. Other strategies will include qualitative targets related to soil and land, water, biodiversity, waste, and energy.

“We have committed to an objective, we have key strategies, and now we will further engage with our dairy farmers in the development of the basket of initiatives from which producers can choose to move the dial on sustainability, while respecting the uniqueness of each farm,” concluded Lampron.

Source: thedairysite.com

Scientists of the Stavropol State Agrarian University are implementing an ambitious strategic project for the development of dairy cattle breeding as part of the Agroinnopolis-2030 program.

The set of analytical system “CombiFoss 7 DC” by Foss Analytical A/S (Denmark) will allow for the first time in Russia to start large-scale breeding in order to create dairy herds with a given protein and fatty acid composition of milk. This will make it possible to develop fundamentally new functional dairy products with a biologically active composition and medicinal properties.

In particular, there will be more polyunsaturated fatty acids in milk, which means that its antioxidant properties will increase. Such dairy products will help lower blood cholesterol levels and improve the functioning of the cardiovascular system in consumers.

The analytical system will be installed in the laboratory for selection control of milk quality, created on the basis of the biotechnological faculty of the Stavropol State Agrarian University. This will significantly expand the service for breeding farms and conduct research on the quality of dairy raw materials at the level of ICAR / IDF world standards.

Practice-oriented training of students of the Stavropol State Agrarian University will also receive a new positive impetus.

“The laboratory for selective milk quality control of the Stavropol State Agrarian University serves 80% of the breeding farms in the region. There is no such coverage of agricultural enterprises in any university in the country. Our students undergo training and internships on the basis of the Center for the Management of Animal Genetic Resources, which includes a laboratory, as well as control-assistant and expert-boniter services. The acquired competencies allow our graduates to work successfully in the leading breeding farms of the region,” said Alexander Trukhachev, Acting Rector of the Stavropol State Agrarian University.

Learn more here. 

Canadians are paying more for milk this week.

Steep price increases, which took effect at many grocery stores on Tuesday, are as high as 15 per cent in some provinces and coincide with a spike in the price farmers are paid for the milk they produce.

This dramatic price hike will affect everyone who consumes milk, but it will hurt low-income and food-insecure families most, consumer advocates say.

”If families start being unable to provide milk to their kids or they start rationing it or diluting it, you’re going to start to see an increase in health concerns,” said Arianna Scott, CEO of Alberta Food Banks.

Global News reporters in multiple provinces compared the price they paid for a four-litre bag or jug of milk this week with the price they paid in January.

In Toronto, the price jumped to $5.39 from $4.69 at two grocery stores: NoFrills and Loblaws, which are both owned by Loblaw Companies.

That’s a 14.9 per cent increase. At Longo’s, the price increased to $5.49 from $4.79.

In Halifax, the price at Atlantic Superstore, also owned by Loblaws, went to $6.29 from $5.79. That’s an 8.6 per cent increase.

And in Calgary, the price at Superstore went to $5.39 from $4.65. That’s a 15.9 per cent increase. Price hikes were the same at grocery stores in B.C.

Jeff Doucette, general manager of Field Agent Canada, a digital marketing company based in Calgary that tracks the price of milk across Canada, said this week’s increase is the “biggest we’ve seen in one stroke” since it began reporting on milk prices in 2015.

“Supermarkets are not going to eat the price increase that dairy farmers are passing along to them,” he said.

Doucette said other supermarkets which had not yet put their prices up to match Loblaw’s would likely do so in the coming weeks.

Multiple requests for comment from Loblaws, Longo’s, Walmart and Sobey’s were ignored.

A spokesperson for Metro, which also owns Food Basics, refused to answer questions, saying: “Metro does not comment on future pricing or pricing strategies.”

The government didn’t answer any questions about the increased cost of dairy and whether it was justified given the economic strains many Canadians are facing due to rising inflation and the ongoing pandemic.

The Canadian Dairy Commission announced in November that farmers would receive an 8.4 per cent increase to the price they’re paid for the milk they make beginning Feb. 1.

This is the largest annual increase in history and nearly twice the previous record.

The price increase is meant to offset rising costs for dairy farmers, especially feed costs, which the commission said have gone up by as much as 30 per cent over the past two years. The commission said the price hike is also meant to give farmers a chance to recuperate some of the higher costs associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.

“This decision, which represents six cents per litre of milk leaving the farm, was made after careful consideration and consultation with all the stakeholders across the supply chain,” said commission spokesperson Chantal Paul in a written statement.

“Farmers must be able to meet their expenses and pay their local suppliers and employees. These trends exist in all parts of the agriculture sector.”

But a Global News investigation found the record-breaking price hike was pushed higher by dairy farmers who asked for steeper increases than what retail and consumer groups wanted.

And while Doucette said he believes the increase given to dairy farmers this year was justified, he also said the whole pricing system, along with the regulation around dairy in Canada, is “really, really wonky.”

“You can buy a two-litre bottle of coke at Walmart (in Calgary) and in Mississauga and it will be the same price,” he said. “But at the same two stores, there’s a $1 difference in a four-litre jug of milk.”

This is partly because farmers pass on their costs of production, Doucette said. If production costs go up, these costs are passed on to processors with the approval of the dairy commission. If production costs go down, the dairy commission would need to consider reducing the price farmers are paid. Doucette said this limits incentives for farmers to find efficiencies and cost savings.

According to the 2021 Field Agent report, the cheapest place in Canada to buy a four-litre bag of milk, which is used as a benchmark due to a lack of price fluctuations across different stores in each province, is Sudbury, Ont., where shoppers pay an average of $4.68. Prices differ across the rest of the country, from $7.19 in Moncton, N.B., to $6.86 in Quebec City to $4.65 in Winnipeg.

The most expensive milk is in St. John’s, N.L., at $1.95 per litre, as the province doesn’t stock four-litre bags. The report didn’t include the country’s territories.

Differences in provincial regulations and the size of local markets also lead to varying prices, he said. In Atlantic Canada — where milk prices are highest — farms are smaller and there are fewer customers.

But it’s not just consumers who are being forced to pay more for their dairy this week — processors are feeling the squeeze, too.

Processors buy raw milk from farmers and then turn it into end products for the consumer, such as butter, cheese and yogurt. Those processors then sell their products to retailers. This leaves several opportunities throughout the supply chain for costs to be added to the final price consumers pay at the cash register.

Ashley Chapman, vice president of Chapman’s Ice Cream, said that along with the eight per cent increase paid to farmers for drinkable milk, other milk prices have skyrocketed, including a 22 per cent increase for skim milk powder and a 53 per cent increase for dairy whey. Both of these products are used to make ice cream.

“In the past 14 months, not only has every single component to make my product gone up, but everything that supports my business in a 360 degree way has gone up — whether it’s a bolt for a machine or a cleaning product,” he said.

Chapman said he’s forced to guess what a large chunk of his costs will be each year because retailers, such as major grocery store chains, allow companies like his to negotiate prices for their products only once a year. This happens before increases to milk prices are announced.

Chapman also said he supports supply management — which maintains a fixed price for farmers to protect them from market volatility — because it supports local dairy farmers, but the intricate system doesn’t work because there “doesn’t seem to be any end to the rising cost of doing business.”

The increased price paid to farmers is only part of the reason why milk prices have gone up. Other costs, from processing to transportation, plus retailer’s costs, are also factored into the final prices that appear on grocery store shelves.

Mathieu Frigon, president and CEO of the Dairy Processors Association of Canada, said the increase given to farmers is only part of the equation; processing and distribution costs also need to be added.

Frigon wouldn’t comment on what those additional costs are, but said Statistics Canada data shows processing costs for dairy products increased 11.5 per cent in 2021 compared with the previous year.

“How those inflationary pressures are dealt with is obviously up to each individual dairy processor,” Frigon said.

Canada has three main dairy processors: Lactalis, Agropur and Saputo. Agropur and Saputo did not respond to requests for comment.

Mark Taylor, Lactalis Canada’s president and CEO, said all communications about pricing with retailers are “private and confidential.” But he confirmed the company has increased costs above and beyond the increase farmers started receiving on Feb. 1.

“Dairy has been … doubly impacted by both inflationary and regulatory increases including, but not limited to, manufacturing, transportation, ingredients, packaging and distribution costs,” Taylor said.

Source: globalnews.ca

In the early days of communism in Cuba, Fidel Castro had pledged that every child under seven would have a liter of subsidized milk every day.

Slow growth is expected for 2022

According to a special report on the retail dairy market in 2021, published by the UK’s Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board (AHDB) , easing COVID-19 restrictions allowed a return to the eating-out market for some consumers, which meant 2021 grocery sales were unable to retain the volumes seen during the height of the pandemic. However, due to price inflation, the market value remained stable at -0.1%, according to data fro Kantar.  

The story for animal dairy is in line with total grocery, said the AHDB report. Unsurprising, as 77% of consumers say dairy is a vital part of their everyday food, making it a staple in the shopping basket, and reflected in that 99.5% of households shopped the category every month in 2021.

Spend in retail is flat year-on-year, while volumes are down -1.2%. When comparing back to pre-pandemic levels (2019), so a more normal time, animal dairy remains significantly elevated at +11.3% in value and +6.3% in volume. The biggest driver of this is existing shoppers buying more per trip to cater for the increased need for in-home food occasions.

As a comparison, dairy alternatives are seeing year-on-year volume growth and increases of 37% versus 2019. However, the market remains small at only 5% of total dairy volumes.

According to AHDB, dairy will continue to do well in 2022. However, as 2020 was such an extraordinary year for grocery, growth throughout 2021 has slowed overall as restrictions have eased. Despite this, the dairy category remains elevated versus 2019 in retail and AHDB predicts this will be the same for 2022. A continuation of more in-home occasions will drive this. However, changed financial situations, coupled with high price inflation, means the category should focus on value for money. As well as this, the dairy industry should aim to address health and sustainability concerns, as according to IGD, the dairy category over indexes versus total grocery on purchase drivers such as healthier options, environmentally friendly packaging and being ethically produced (Category Benchmarks 2021).

Source: thedairysite.com

A dairy farming couple are continuing to teach children how to lead calves in East Otago, despite Covid-19 disrupting events to show cattle.

Otago Fresh Milk owners Shelli and Steve Mears invited children to their dairy farm on State Highway 1, about 1km north of Palmerston, to learn how to lead calves so they could show them at the Palmerston and Waihemo A&P Show this weekend.

However, Mrs Mears, the show cattle convener, said because New Zealand was in the Red setting of the Covid traffic light system, the committee decided to postpone the show until a return to Orange.

“Goodness knows when that will be.”

Mrs Mears said their children showed cattle at A&P shows and had since left home.

“We wanted other kids to have the same opportunity to bond with an animal.”

She told the children the No1 rule for leading cattle was “don’t let go”.

Rachel Sheat (17), of Palmerston, said the first time she led a calf was at Otago Fresh Milk. She hoped she could lead cattle at A&P shows for the first time soon.

Source: odt.co.nz

Oregon dairies, big and small, are investing in innovations and it’s paying off

According to a press release from the Oregon Dairy and Nutrition Council, Oregon’s dairy farmers have been committed to taking care of the environment for generations, and technology and innovation are helping them to further enhance their sustainability efforts while protecting animal welfare, increasing productivity, and reducing environmental impact.

“From soil testing to soft starts on all of our motors, energy-efficient lighting and recycling water multiple times, every decision made on the farm is made with the animals and environment in mind,” said Louie Kazemier, owner of Rickreall Dairy in Rickreall, Oregon. “We want to pass this land on to the next generation and when we do, we want it to be better than when we inherited it.”

Oregon is home to four nationally recognized recipients of the US Dairy Sustainability Awards, including Rickreall Dairy and Threemile Canyon Farms. Located in Boardman, Oregon, Threemile Canyon Farms has been innovating since its inception in 2001. They combine dairy farming with conventional and organic crop farming to create a closed-loop system where nothing is wasted.

“The cornerstone of Threemile’s sustainable system is the methane digester, which converts manure to renewable natural gas (RNG) that can be used to heat homes, generate electricity and as an alternative to fossil fuel-based sources of transportation,” said Jennifer Maleitzke, director of communications and external relations for Threemile Canyon Farms. “While RNG is fully interchangeable with natural gas in terms of its use, its production is superior because it is carbon negative.”

According to a study in the Journal of Animal Science, the environmental impact of producing a gallon of milk in 2017 required 30% less water and 21% less land while creating a 19% smaller carbon footprint than ten years prior in 2007.

“The technology to recycle manure is getting better and more cost effective for dairies like ours, which makes it possible for us to utilize all the nutrients found in the manure of our animals and in turn, reduces the farm’s carbon footprint,” Kazemier said. “Farmers were environmentalists long before the term was coined. We’ve always cared about our animals and the environment.”

Kurt Mizee of Tilla-Bay Farms in Tillamook, Oregon, used to own a Lely dealership that sells robotic equipment to dairy farms. He also uses this technology on his own farm.

“The Lely Vector feeding robot reduces feed waste by increasing the accuracy and consistency of feed delivered to the cows,” Mizee said. “Since the Vector replaces the feed truck, it also significantly reduces diesel usage.”

According to Threemile Canyon Farms, their digester converts methane into the energy equivalent needed to power over 30% of their annual operations and sequesters 136,000 metric tons of CO2 per year, which is the equivalent to the greenhouse gas emissions from 28,875 passenger vehicles. In addition to RNG, the output from the digester makes clean, comfortable bedding for cows and natural fertilizer for crops.

“As dairy farmers, we are committed to continuous improvement, and technology helps us to take even better care of our cows and our natural resources,” Maleitzke said. “Sustainability is a journey and not a destination; it’s something we are committed to every day.

Source: thedairysite.com

Dairy industry executives gathered in Palm Desert Jan. 23-26 for Dairy Forum 2022 to learn what’s “New, now and next” for the US dairy industry. In the opening session, Michael Dykes, president and chief executive officer of the International Dairy Foods Association, Washington, said the United States is poised to become the world’s dominant supplier of dairy products.

“While serious headwinds continue, the outlook for our industry is bright, thanks to your ability to embrace innovation, invest in growth and remain unified,” Mr. Dykes said.

He highlighted four areas where the industry needs to continue to focus to achieve this status. First is to build a more resistant and flexible supply chain. The second is to move to more sustainable dairy. Currently, 75% of the milk produced in the United States is in a commitment to be net zero by 2050. But sustainability is more than the milk that’s produced. 

“We’re also talking about the packaging that the product is in,” Mr. Dykes said. “And we can’t forget that when it comes to sustainability in dairy, we do have animals involved. So, we’ve got to think about animal welfare, and what are we doing, and how are we caring for the animals, and caring for the workers.

“Sustainability is moving from storytelling to accountability, with real science-based metrics that are measurable. And when we get things that are measurable, that means we can track them.”

The metrics, which initially will be self-reported and then likely move to independent auditing, will be monitored by investors and stakeholders. The metrics will drive decisions, much like a financial profit and loss statement. Metrics will become a condition of sale and it all starts on the farm. 

“Our farmers are doing some amazing, incredible things with nutrition and with genetics,” Mr. Dykes said. “They’re becoming incredibly efficient. Our farmers today are producing about twice as much milk today with half as many cows as we did 60 years ago. A glass of milk today has a carbon footprint that’s two-thirds smaller than it was. The things they’re doing with components, butterfat, protein, somatic cell counts, it’s absolutely phenomenal.”

That brings us to the third area of focus, which is harnessing technology and innovation. This goes beyond the dairy farm. 

“Growth is so important to the processing industry as well as to the producing industry,” Mr. Dykes said. “We have seen about $2 billion invested over the last couple years, and there’s approximately another $2 billion slated for the next three years. That equates to nearly 2,000 jobs.”

Recent investments cited included a new cheese and whey plant in St. Johns, Mich., which is a joint venture between Glanbia Nutritionals, Dairy Farmers of America and Select Milk Producers. Leprino Foods has invested $870 million into a new mozzarella and dairy ingredients plant in East Lubbock, Texas. 

The fourth area of where to focus to make the United States the global leader in dairy is to attract and retain the best people. The IDFA has been working on this during the past three years and currently has five people programs opened to its membership. They are: the next-gen leadership class; women in dairy; dairy diversity, equity and inclusion; human resource leaders in dairy; and the power of people conference. 

The consumer, of course, is key to the industry’s growth. Mr. Dykes believes that a health and wellness positioning of dairy foods, along with constant innovation, will keep consumers interested. 

“Demand is up,” Mr. Dykes said. “The last two years have been the strongest on record. Per capita consumption is up 3 lbs per person. Now, we’re consuming that in different ways. We’re eating more of our dairy than we are drinking. Butter has been crazy. Cheese is driving the bus. Fluid milk is declining, but dairy demand is increasing.”

This is the story in the global marketplace, too. The Foreign Agricultural Service of the US Department of Agriculture, Washington, reported on Dec. 17, 2021, that despite the logistical challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic, US dairy exports were set to record a stellar year led by shipments of skimmed milk powder, cheese and butter. 

“More of US milk production is going into dairy products that are exported than is going into what we drink,” Mr. Dykes said. “This is a relatively new thing in our dairy world, because probably 20 years ago or so, we weren’t exporting that much dairy.” 

Source: foodbusinessnews.net

A generous donation from a Lethbridge-area cattle group has arrived in BC.

The Green Acres Holstein Club (GAHC) jumped into action to help dairy farmers after the November 2021 floods rocked their industry, donating 41 bred heifers to those in need in the Abbotsford area.

Richard Bosma is one of those producers who will never forget the day the flooding began.

It was early morning on Nov. 16 that he received notice to evacuate his farm and spent the day moving cows and calves, with the help of many neighbours and dairy producers.

“That night, Tuesday night, was an evening where I didn’t know what I would find the next morning,” said Bosma.

The floods impacted milk production for many Abbotsford area dairy farmers, including Bosma.

Through Holstein Canada, Bosma connected with a few members of the GAHC, including Gys Van Den Pol.

It was Van Den Pol who came up with the idea to help out devastated farmers and a committee was formed that reached out to the community.

“Within three days, we had 36 heifers that were pledged for this project,” said Tim Hummel, president of the GAHC.

“We ended up with 41 in total because that is all that could fit on the liner. We ended up turning a few farms away because we had too many.”

Once the Coquihalla Highway opened up, the heifers were rounded up and eventually shipped off to their new homes.

“They were about seven or eight months pregnant, so they are due to calve end of January to sometime in April. That way, they have time to acclimatize to the area before they calve out. They’ll be in milk fairly quickly so [farmers] can recover some lost production,” said Hummel.

Industry partners donated approximately $5,000 to cover the bill to transport the animals.

The donation was distributed to affected B.C. dairy farmers with the help of a committee that assessed the need for heifers.

Bosma ended up with four bred heifers and said the quality of the donated animals was amazing.

THANK YOU to the Green Acres Holstein Club of Alberta who donated a liner load of bred heifers from the Lethbridge area and sent them to Abbotsford, BC to assist dairy producers affected by the Nov 15 flood. This incredible gift was practical, valuable and very much appreciated! pic.twitter.com/B8LGZ5u62h

— Richard Bosma (@Richard__Bosma) January 19, 2022

“We’re just blown away by their generosity,” he said.

Eleven farms received the donation of heifers from 25 farms in southern Alberta. The 41 head are valued at $85,000 to $100,000.

“It was farmers helping farmers in the best way that they knew possible,” said Bosma. “This act of generosity will not be forgotten, and we can only hope to pay it forward.”

Source: globalnews.ca

The Michigan State University Department of Animal Science recognizes Tubergen Dairy Farm in Ionia as its 2022 Dairy Farmer of the Year.

Dennis and Doris Tubergen founded their dairy farm in 1982 with just 20 cows and 80 acres. After several expansions, the family now milks 1,400 cows and farms more than 2,000 acres. They currently have a rolling herd average of 31,037 pounds, with 1,134 pounds of fat and 954 pounds of protein. In 2020, they averaged over 97 pounds of milk per cow per day. The farm raises corn, alfalfa, and wheat for dairy purposes.

In its 40 years of operation, the farm has frequently served the community as a model of agricultural success and supporter of community events.

“The Tubergens have opened up their farm to the community many times over the years, including farm tours for the general public as well as industry specific tours that allow the farm to showcase its use of technology and teach others in the industry about their farm,” said Tubergen Dairy Farm’s anonymous nominator. “In addition, the farm donates to the local ‘Purple Committee’ for cancer survivors. They also contribute to the local scholastic book fair so that underprivileged families can purchase books and they are active in fundraising activities for the Ionia County FFA.”

“The Tubergen’s attention to animal care and employee training is a testament to their commitment to quality,” said Cathy Ernst, chair of the Animal Science department. “They are dedicated to sharing their story through opening their farm to the community, and we have appreciated their contributions to the training of our undergraduate students. We are excited to recognize Tubergen Dairy Farm as the 2022 MSU Dairy Farmer of the Year.”

The farm is a family operation with management duties shared between Dennis, Doris and their children, Kurt and Todd Tubergen and Amber Alexander.

Todd handles production, herd health and reproduction of the dairy herd and maintains the farm’s milking systems. He also uses his Spanish speaking background to train employees and communicate scheduling. Amber manages financials and heads the pre-weaned calf care program. Kurt operates the farm’s nutrient management program, including the Michigan Agriculture Environmental Assurance Program and the CAFO certifications. He heads the cropping enterprise and oversees the farm’s sand separation facility. The farm has 25 employees.

Tubergen Dairy Farm was recognized as a DFA Member of Distinction in 2015 and a National Dairy Quality Award – Platinum winner in 2013.

Todd currently serves as the Young Cooperators representative for the Dairy Farmers of America Mideast Area Council. In 2017, Tubergen Dairy Farm was showcased in the Alta Genetics Advantage Showcase Tour, and in 2015, it hosted Michigan Farm Bureau’s Family Fun on the Farm.

Tubergen Dairy Farm takes great pride in providing the highest quality and most up-to-date animal care methods and technologies and provides extensive employee training to ensure the welfare of its herd.

“The management style at Tubergen Dairy can best be described as ‘paying attention to detail.’ Their commitment to the highest animal care starts with employee training. Every farm employee uses the Dairy Care 365 portal to learn about low stress animal handling. Since management roles are split between the family farm owners, each manager has the time to do hands on training with employees including training in pre-weaned calf protocols and milking procedures,” the nominator said. “By using some of the most up to date management tools and technologies, they are helping to lead the Michigan dairy industry into the future.”

“The selection committee was impressed with this family’s ability to effectively share management responsibilities and achieve excellence across all aspects of the operation,” said Barry Bradford, C. E. Meadows Chair in Dairy Management at MSU. “In our visit to the farm, it was clear that the Tubergen family is constantly looking for the next steps to make their farm more sustainable, with an eye on what will be needed 10 to 20 years down the road. We are proud to honor Tubergen Dairy Farm for their commitment to excellence.”

Since 1958, MSU has awarded the Dairy Farmer of the Year award to farmers who exhibit outstanding management of their dairy farm business and leadership in the Michigan dairy industry or their community.

Source: canr.msu.edu

A DAIRY farmer has warned of a milk shortage threat in the UK as he explained how his business needs 40p a litre to make a profit.

“There are things that we can’t do effectively individually that we can do collectively’ – that’s the message Western Australian farmer Peter Evans would like fellow dairy farmers to consider in the lead-up to Dairy Poll 2022.

Mr Evans said he had been supporting an increase to the dairy service levy at the March poll in order to ensure continued investment in the industry’s future by Dairy Australia, for the collective benefit of all farmers.

Dairy farmers could do so much more together than individually, he said.

“For instance, I can run little experiments on my farm to answer questions I might have, but I still need the whole of industry to invest in bodies such as DairyBio and DataGene,” he said.

“That sort of research has got to be done on a whole-of-industry basis; we just cannot do it individually.

“There is no point in me running down to my local supermarket, trying to promote healthy bones – no one is going to listen to me, but if this is done on a collective basis, by professional people in an organised way, then we have far more hope of getting the message through (to consumers).

“There is also no point in me making animal welfare arguments on my own, but if we as an industry can demonstrate what we are doing animal welfare-wise, it is far more likely that it will be accepted.

“Which is why I say there are things that we can’t do effectively individually that we can do collectively.”

Mr Evans, who describes himself as a “future-focused person”, farms at Jindong with son Grant, milking 850 cows in a split-calving herd on 488 hectares.

A lifelong dairy farmer, Mr Evans is a passionate dairy industry advocate, having been Western Dairy chairman from 2005 to 2007 and from 2019 to 2021, WAFarmers Dairy Section president from 2007 to 2012 and Australian Dairy Farmers vice-chair from 2011-2012.

He is urging all levy payers to vote in the poll, encouraging them to take a long-term view when considering the future level of the levy.

“I will be voting in the 2022 dairy poll because I see the need to invest in the future of the dairy industry, particularly in terms of productivity, industry protection and promotion,” Mr Evans said.

“The important part is the investment in the future, and that is not a short-term thing – it’s for the medium and long-term.”

Mr Evans encourages levy payers to consider the levy not as a cost to their business, but as an investment in the industry.

“A lot of farmers see the levy as an expense rather than as an investment in the future, so if you are in the mood to cut expenses, then the levy is an expense you might like to cut,” he said.

“But it truly is an investment, and you need to think a bit more deeply about it than just seeing it as an expense.

“You need to ask yourself: ‘What does the levy do that I couldn’t do by myself?’.

“When you think about it, it’s really not very much money for research, development and extension, plus industry protection.”

In an upcoming information memorandum on the poll, which will be sent to all levy payers, Dairy Australia sets out the four key areas for investment going forward – labour, regional services, climate and policy.

The document details how Dairy Australia will deliver in all of these areas under each of the poll options (no increase, 15 per cent increase, 20pc increase, 25pc increase).

Mr Evans said it was clear these areas were of high relevance and concern to dairy farmers, and deserved detailed consideration by farmers.

“These priorities came out of the development of the Australian Dairy Plan, so those four areas are very much the result of grassroots farmer input,” he said.

“Regardless of the levy level, DA is committed to spending some money on those four things plus their existing commitments; so if there is no increase in levy, the money that is spent on this existing commitment is going to be somewhat crimped.

“In terms of the level of levy increase, the higher it is then the more money that will go into those four key areas.”

Mr Evans has a particular interest in seeing improvement in employment and career pathways in dairy.

“From an industry perspective, it would be nice if we could get the pressure off farmers,” he said.

“The constant time commitments are difficult for many – there are many challenges around resourcing labour, particularly managerial level labour onfarm.”

According to Mr Evans, it does not matter what stage someone was in their dairy farming journey, it was important to participate in the poll.

He said the outcome of the poll would have implications on the industry well into the future, which could have a major effect on farmers, their families and their businesses, and levy payers should reflect on this.

“If there is no increase, for example, if the status quo option prevails – people probably won’t notice much change next year necessarily, but they will notice in five years’ time and 10 years,” Mr Evans said.

He encouraged levy payers to read the information memorandum and other information, attend poll-related events and ask questions.

“Become informed, think about your future and vote for what you believe is best for the industry,” Mr Evans said.

Source: farmweekly.com.au

The marked changes in US dairy markets and policy during the late 20th and early 21st centuries are discussed.

Correlation analysis suggests current US dairy policy provides less protection against declines in net return for the smallest dairy farms. This finding prompts a policy equity issue: “Should dairy policy be fair across herd sizes?” If it is decided that this issue is worth addressing, a per cow payment for a policy specified, limited number of cows is a potential policy option.

Brief History of US Dairy Policy:

The Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933 designated milk and its products as basic commodities (National Agricultural Law Center, 2021). Marketing agreements were instituted in a number of fluid milk areas that raised producer prices by controlling the volume and timing of milk sales. Support prices were imposed for milk during World War II and retained after the war.

Prices were supported by government purchases of butter, cheese, and nonfat dry milk. Payments for producing milk started in 1999 when ad hoc Market Loss Assistance Payments were authorized for milk and other farm commodities in response to a sizable decline in commodity prices associated with a global financial crisis. Ad hoc payments were also authorized in 2000 and 2001. The 2002 farm bill continued payments by authorizing monthly deficiency payments if the Class I milk price in Boston was less than $16.94 per 100 pounds (cwt.).

The 2014 farm bill replaced both this milk deficiency payment program and the price support program with a Dairy Margin Protection Program. It made payments when the margin difference between US average all milk price received by farms and cost of feeds was less than a specified value. Feeds were corn, soybean meal, and alfalfa. The 2018 farm bill renamed the program, Dairy Margin Coverage (DMC). The basic formula was retained but many payment parameters as well as calculations used in the formula were modified.

Milk Price and Return Variability:

Milk prices have been much more variable (+162%) during the 23 years with dairy payments than during the preceding 23 years (see Figure 1). This widely noted increase reflected federal policy decisions to first lower, then eliminate milk support prices that had kept milk prices higher than market clearing levels. Price variability is measured as (standard deviation of percent change in average annual price per cwt. of milk paid to US farms).

A similar increase in volatility (+155%) occurred in net return above total cost as reported by USDA (US Department of Agriculture) (see Figure 2). Net return volatility is measured as (standard deviation of annual change in net return above total cost in $/cwt. of milk). Milk cost and return data were first reported for 1980. The increase in variability of milk price and net return was one reason US dairy policy changed from a price support to a milk price-feed cost margin program.

Milk Production:

US production of milk has grown on average 18% faster per year since 1998, the period of dairy policy payments (see Figure 3). One reason is that the elimination of price supports increased competitiveness of US dairy exports. When measured on a skim solid basis, US commercial dairy exports increased from a 5% share of total use at the turn of the century to 22% currently. The increase is less dramatic but still notable when measured on a fat basis: 1% to 5%. Growth differs because world demand is relatively stronger for milk solid products, such as skim milk powder and lactose, while US demand is relatively stronger for milk fat products, such as cheese and butter.

Variability of US milk production also declined (-38%). Years in which production declined from the prior year dropped a dramatic -71% (see Figure 3). Since 1998, US milk production declined only in 2001 (-1.2%) and 2009 (-0.4%). The last decline is 12 years ago and counting.

Herd Size:

US farms producing milk declined from 333,620 in the 1978 Census of Agriculture (see Data Note 1) to 54,599 in the 2017 Census of Agriculture, an 84% decline. As with most of US farming, surviving producers have gotten larger on average. Share of dairy cows on the largest 1.3% of US dairy farms increased from 10.8% to 31.7% between the 1978 and 2017Censuses (see Figure 4). These farms had 200+ cows in 1978 but 2000+ cows in 2017. The increase in share of cows on the largest dairy farms roughly matches the decline in share of cows on the smallest 50% of dairy farms (see Figure 5). It is not possible to create the same exact share of dairy farms across agricultural censuses because each census reports data for only certain herd sizes.

Using data from the 1997 Census of Agriculture as a midpoint observation reveals that the transfer of cows from roughly the smallest 50% to largest 1% of dairy farms has been continuous since 1978. A likely reason for the consistent shift is economy of size in producing milk. Total cost per cwt. declines sharply as herd size increases (see Figure 6). The largest dairy herds produce milk at less than half the total cost of the smallest dairy herds ($40.06/cwt vs. $18.02/cwt.). Primary driver of economies of size is nonfeed cost. For example, relative to the smallest herd, cost advantage of the largest herd is 71% for nonfeed ($7.57 vs. $26.25/cwt.) vs. 24% for feed ($10.45/cwt. vs. $13.80/cwt.).

Policy across Herd Size:

Current US dairy policy makes payments when the milk price-feed cost margin is below a specified value. Policy effectiveness across herd sizes thus depends on the correlation of changes in milk-feed margin across herd sizes. This effectiveness is explored by computing the correlation for (net return above feed cost reported by USDA for all herd sizes) with (net return above feed cost for a given herd size). All correlations are very high. Smallest is 0.96 for 1-49 cow herds (see Figure 7 and Data Note 2). Perfect correlation is 1.0. The high correlations likely reflect in part relatively similar feed rations, which in turn results in relatively similar feed cost per cwt. across herd size (see Figure 6).

However, feed is not the only cost. Moreover, non-feed cost vary notably by herd size (see Figure 6). Efficacy of a program based on the milk–feed margin thus depends on how closely correlated are (changes in milk–feed margin) with (changes in net return above total cost). This effectiveness is examined by calculating the correlation between (year-to-year changes in net return above feed cost for all herd sizes) and (year-to-year change in net return above total cost for each herd size).

Dairy herds with less than 50 cows have a notably smaller correlation of 0.79. Correlation is 0.95 for herds of 50-100 cows and exceeds 0.98 for all larger herds. The differences in correlations are more important than they may appear. The reason is that the share of year-to-year change in net return above total cost for a given herd size that is explained by year-to-year change in net return above feed cost for all herd sizes is the square of the correlation. This value varies from 63% (0.79 times 2) for herds of less than 50 cows to 90% for 55-99 cow herds to 97% for all larger herd sizes. Compared with herds of more than 100 cows, changes in the milk-feed margin explain substantially less of the changes in net return above total cost for dairy herds with 1-49 cows. Thus, a milk-feed margin program provides the smallest dairy farms as a group with less protection against declines in net return.

Summary Observations

Since the US began transitioning to a milk payment program from a milk price support program in the late 1990s, variability of milk price and net return has increased notably.

Analysis in this article suggests a program that bases dairy policy payments on the milk price-feed cost margin, such as the current DMC program, provides the most protection against decline in milk profitability for the largest dairy farms. Protection is notably less for dairy farms with less than 50 cows, with some slippage for dairy farms with 50-99 cows.

This finding prompts a policy equity issue: “Should dairy policy be fair across herd sizes?”

If policy deliberations conclude that this fairness issue should be addressed, a per cow payment for a policy specified, limited number of cows per dairy operation is a potential policy option.

This policy option is in essence a policy addendum to DMC to mitigate an equity issue created by DMC without changing DMC.

It could be implemented by basing the per cow payment on the decline in net return not covered by the change in DMC’s milk-feed margin for dairy operations with less than a given number of cows.

Payment could be restricted to herds with less than the given number of cows. However, such limits are usually difficult to effectively implement because farms rearrange their operation to qualify for payments. A per cow payment up to the given number of cows could thus be made to all dairy operations. Small dairy farms would however receive the greatest benefit since a larger share of their cows receive a payment.

Source: thedairysite.com

Subsidy reductions, imported feed costs and inflation cited as causes

Saudi Arabia’s Almarai, the Gulf’s largest dairy company, reported on Sunday a 14.7% drop in fourth quarter profit, citing subsidy reductions, imported-feed costs and inflation for farm and dairy commodities, reported Reuters.

Almarai made a net profit of 286.5 million riyals ($76.38 million) for the three months through 31 December, down from 335.9 million riyals in the same period a year earlier ($1 = 3.7509 riyals).

The company said it was hurt by the lack of subsidies for corn and soy last year. Results were also affected by alfalfa feed consumption moving to a 100%-import basis. General cost rises for farm and dairy commodities also hit its margins, mostly in the second half of the year, Almarai said.

Source: Reuters

The outlook for milk production remains subdued despite strong farm gate prices, reported Patty Clayton, Lead Analyst for Dairy at the UK’s Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board. 

Latest forecasts for 2022 suggest 0.6% annual growth in milk supplies, equivalent to an additional 1.8bn litres of milk. This follows a low growth year in 2021, with estimated* milk production up by 0.9% for the year, wrote Clayton.

Although milk prices are currently strong, high input costs, labour shortages and increasing greening requirements are pushing profits downwards. Clayton said there’s no relief in sight in terms of inflation, at least for the first half of the year, leaving little incentive for farmers to push for higher milk yields. 

If the weather is favourable come spring, supplies could rise slighting, but overall, Clayton said the outlook for feed, fertiliser and energy costs remains bullish. Labour challenges, shipping delays and environmental requirements will also play a role in determining supply, she added. 

“The limited increase in milk supplies will continue to support current price levels, with some potential for further increases as demand continues to recover to its pre-pandemic levels,” she said. “There are, however, some risks of softer demand from further Covid outbreaks or reduced purchasing as buyers use up some of the security stocks held in response to delivery delays.”

Source: thedairysite.com

The outlook for milk production remains subdued despite strong farm gate prices, reported Patty Clayton, Lead Analyst for Dairy at the UK’s Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board. 

Latest forecasts for 2022 suggest 0.6% annual growth in milk supplies, equivalent to an additional 1.8bn litres of milk. This follows a low growth year in 2021, with estimated* milk production up by 0.9% for the year, wrote Clayton.

Although milk prices are currently strong, high input costs, labour shortages and increasing greening requirements are pushing profits downwards. Clayton said there’s no relief in sight in terms of inflation, at least for the first half of the year, leaving little incentive for farmers to push for higher milk yields. 

If the weather is favourable come spring, supplies could rise slighting, but overall, Clayton said the outlook for feed, fertiliser and energy costs remains bullish. Labour challenges, shipping delays and environmental requirements will also play a role in determining supply, she added. 

“The limited increase in milk supplies will continue to support current price levels, with some potential for further increases as demand continues to recover to its pre-pandemic levels,” she said. “There are, however, some risks of softer demand from further Covid outbreaks or reduced purchasing as buyers use up some of the security stocks held in response to delivery delays.”

Source: thedairysite.com