Archive for federal milk marketing orders

Why Are Class III Milk Prices So Low? Causes, Consequences, and Solutions

Uncover the factors behind the low Class III milk prices and delve into practical measures to enhance milk protein and butterfat content. What strategies can producers and processors implement for adaptation?

The U.S. dairy industry faces a critical challenge: persistently low Class III milk prices. These prices, which comprise over 50% of the nation’s milk usage and are primarily used for cheese production, are vital for the economic stability of dairy farmers and the broader market. The current price indices reveal that Class III milk prices align with the average of the past 25 years, raising concerns about profitability and sustainability. This situation underscores the urgent need for all stakeholders in the dairy industry to come together, collaborate, and explore the underlying factors and potential strategies for improvement.

Class III Milk Prices: A Quarter-Century of Peaks and Troughs

Over the past 25 years, Class III milk prices have fluctuated significantly, reflecting the dairy industry’s volatility. Prices have hovered around an average value, influenced by supply and demand, production costs, and economic conditions. 

In the early 2000s, prices rose due to increased demand for cheese and other dairy products. However, the 2008 financial crisis led to a sharp decline as consumer demand dropped and exporters faced challenges. 

Post-crisis recovery saw gradual price improvements but with ongoing unpredictability. Stability in the mid-2010s was periodically interrupted by export market changes, feed cost fluctuations, and climatic impacts on milk production. Increased production costs from 2015 to 2020 and COVID-19 disruptions further pressured prices. 

In summary, while the average Class III milk price may seem stable over the past 25 years, the market has experienced significant volatility. Understanding these trends is not just important; it’s critical for navigating current pricing issues and strategizing for future stability. This understanding empowers us to make informed decisions and take proactive steps to address the challenges in the dairy industry.

The Core Components of Class III Milk Pricing: Butterfat, Milk Protein, and Other Solids

Examining Class III milk prices reveals crucial trends. Due to high demand and limited supply, butterfat prices have soared 76% above their 25-year averages. Meanwhile, milk protein prices have dropped by 32%, impacting the overall Class III price, essential for cheese production. Other solids, contributing less to pricing, have remained stable. These disparities call for strategic adjustments in pricing formulas to better align with market conditions and ensure sustainable revenues for producers.

Dissecting the Price Dynamics of Butter, Cheese, and Dry Whey in Class III Milk Pricing 

The prices of butter, cheese, and dry whey are crucial to understanding milk protein prices and the current state of Class III milk pricing

Butter prices have skyrocketed by 70% over the 25-year average due to increased consumer demand and tighter inventories. This marks a significant shift from its historically stable pricing. 

Cheese prices have increased slightly, indicating steady demand both domestically and internationally. This trend reflects strong export markets and stable milk production, aligning closely with historical averages. 

In contrast, dry whey prices have remained steady, reflecting its role as a stable commodity in the dairy sector—consistent demand in food manufacturing and as a nutritional supplement balances any supply fluctuations from cheese production. 

Together, these trends showcase the market pressures and consumer preferences affecting milk protein prices. Understanding these dynamics is critical to tackling the broader challenges in Class III milk pricing.

Decoding the USDA Formula: The Intricacies of Milk Protein Pricing in Class III Milk

Understanding Class III milk pricing requires examining the USDA’s formula for milk protein. This formula blends two critical components: the price of cheese and the butterfat value of cheese compared to butter. 

Protein Price = ((Cheese Price – 0.2003) x 1.383) + ((((Cheese Price – 0.2003) x 1.572) – Butterfat Price x 0.9) x 1.17) 

The first part, ((Cheese Price—0.2003) x 1.383) depends on the cheese market price, which has been adjusted slightly by $0.2003. Higher cheese prices generally boost milk protein prices. 

The second part, ((((Cheese Price – 0.2003) x 1.572) – Butterfat Price x 0.9) x 1.17), is more intricate. It adjusts the cheese price by 1.572, subtracts 90% of the butterfat price, and scales the result by 1.17 to match industry norms. 

This formula was based on the assumption that butterfat’s value in cheese would always exceed that in butter. With butterfat fetching higher prices due to increased demand and limited supply, the formula undervalues protein from cheese. This mismatch has led to stagnant protein prices despite rising butter and cheese prices. 

The formula must be reevaluated to align with today’s market, ensuring fair producer compensation and market stability.

Unraveling the Web of Stagnant Pricing in Class III Milk

Stagnant pricing in Class III milk can be traced to several intertwined factors. Inflation is a key culprit, having significantly raised production costs for dairy farmers over the past 25 years—these increasing expenses span wages, health premiums, utilities, and packaging materials. Yet, the value received for Class III milk has not kept pace, resulting in a perceived price stagnation. 

Another factor is the shift in the value relationship between butterfat and cheese. Historically, butterfat’s worth was higher in cheese production than in butter, a dynamic in the USDA pricing formula for milk protein. Today’s market conditions have reversed this, with butterfat now more valuable in butter than in cheese. Consequently, heavily based on cheese prices, the existing formula must adapt better, contributing to stagnant milk protein prices. 

Also impacting this situation are modest increases in cheese prices compared to the substantial rise in butterfat prices. The stable prices of dry whey further exert minimal impact on Class III milk prices. 

Addressing these challenges requires a multifaceted approach, such as reconsidering USDA pricing formulas and strategically managing dairy production and processing to align with current market realities.

Class III Milk Producers: Navigating Low Prices through Strategic Adaptations

Class III milk producers have adapted to persistently low prices through critical strategies. Over the past 25 years, many have expanded their herds to leverage economies of scale, reducing costs per gallon by spreading fixed costs over more milk units. 

Additionally, increased milk production per cow has been achieved through breeding, nutrition, and herd management advances. Focusing on genetic selection, high-productivity cows are bred, further optimizing dairy operations

Automation has also transformed dairy farming, with robotic milking systems and feeding solutions reducing labor costs and improving efficiency. These technologies help manage larger herds without proportional labor increases, counteracting low milk prices. 

Focusing on higher milk solids, particularly butterfat, and protein, offers a competitive edge. Producers achieve higher milk quality by enhancing feed formulations and precise nutrition, yielding better prices in markets with high-solid content.

An Integrated Strategy for Optimizing Class III Milk Prices

Improving Class III milk prices requires optimizing production and management across the dairy supply chain. Increasing butterfat levels in all milk classes can help align supply with demand, especially targeting regions with lower butterfat production, like Florida. This coordinated effort can potentially lower butterfat prices and stabilize them. 

Balancing protein and butterfat ratios in Class III milk is crucial. Enhancing both components can increase cheese yield efficiency, reduce the milk needed for production, and lower costs. This can also lead to better control of cheese inventories, supporting higher wholesale prices. 

Effective inventory management is critical. Advanced systems and predictive analytics can help producers regulate supply, prevent glutes, and stabilize prices. Maintaining a balance between supply and demand is crucial for the dairy sector’s economic health. 

These goals require collaboration among producers, processors, and organizations like Ohio State University Extension, which provides essential research and services. Modernizing Federal Milk Marketing Orders (FMMO) to reflect current market realities is also vital for fair pricing. 

Addressing Class III milk pricing challenges means using technology, improving farm practices, and fine-tuning the supply chain. Comprehensive strategies are essential for price stabilization, benefiting all stakeholders.

Strategic Collaborations: Empowering Stakeholders to Thrive in the Class III Milk Market

Organizations and suppliers play a critical role in optimizing Class III milk prices. Entities like Penn State Extension, in collaboration with the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture and the USDA’s Risk Management Agency, offer valuable resources and guidance. These organizations provide educational programs to help dairy farmers understand market trends and best practices in milk production. 

The Ohio State University Extension and specialists like Jason Hartschuh advance dairy management and precision livestock technologies, sharing research and providing hands-on support to enhance milk production processes. 

The FMMO (Federal Milk Marketing Order) modernization process aims to update milk pricing regulations, ensuring a more equitable and efficient market system. Producers’ participation through referendums is crucial for representing their interests. 

Processors should work with packaging suppliers to manage material costs, establish contracts to mitigate financial pressures and maintain stable operational costs

These collaborations offer numerous benefits: improved milk yield and quality, better financial stability, and a balanced supply-demand dynamic for butterfat and protein. Processors benefit from consistent milk supplies and reduced production costs. 

In conclusion, educational institutions, agricultural agencies, and strategic supply chain collaborations can significantly enhance the Class III milk market, equipping producers and processors to handle market fluctuations and achieve sustainable growth.

The Bottom Line

The low-Class III milk prices, driven by plummeting milk protein prices and stagnant other solids pricing, highlight an outdated USDA formula that misjudges current market conditions where butterfat is valued more in butter than in cheese. Compared to the past 25 years, inflation-adjusted stagnation underscores the need for efficiency in milk production via larger herds, higher yields per cow, and automation. 

To address these issues, increasing butterfat and protein levels in Class III milk will improve cheese yield and better manage inventories. Engaging organizations and suppliers in these strategic adjustments is crucial. Fixing the pricing formula and balancing supply and demand is essential to sustaining the dairy industry, protecting producers’ economic stability, and securing the broader dairy supply chain.

Key Takeaways:

  • Class III milk, primarily used for cheese production, constitutes over 50% of U.S. milk consumption.
  • Despite an increase in butterfat prices by 76%, milk protein prices have plummeted by 32% compared to the 25-year average.
  • The USDA formula for milk protein pricing is a critical factor, with its reliance on cheese and butterfat values leading to current pricing challenges.
  • Inflation over the last 25 years contrasts sharply with stagnant Class III milk prices, necessitating strategic adaptations by producers.
  • Key strategies for producers include increasing butterfat levels, improving protein levels, and tighter inventory management for cheese production.
  • Collaborations between producers and processors are essential to drive changes and stabilize Class III milk prices.

Summary:

The U.S. dairy industry is grappling with a significant challenge: persistently low Class III milk prices, which account for over 50% of the nation’s milk usage and are primarily used for cheese production. These prices align with the average of the past 25 years, raising concerns about profitability and sustainability. Over the past 25 years, Class III milk prices have fluctuated significantly, reflecting the dairy industry’s volatility.

In the early 2000s, prices rose due to increased demand for cheese and other dairy products. However, the 2008 financial crisis led to a sharp decline as consumer demand dropped and exporters faced challenges. Post-crisis recovery saw gradual price improvements but with ongoing unpredictability. Stability in the mid-2010s was periodically interrupted by export market changes, feed cost fluctuations, and climatic impacts on milk production. Increased production costs from 2015 to 2020 and COVID-19 disruptions further pressured prices.

The core components of Class III milk pricing include butterfat, milk protein, and other solids. Butterfat prices have soared 76% above their 25-year averages due to high demand and limited supply, while milk protein prices have dropped by 32%, impacting the overall Class III price, essential for cheese production. Other solids, contributing less to pricing, have remained stable.

Understanding the price dynamics of butter, cheese, and dry whey in Class III milk pricing is crucial for navigating current pricing issues and strategizing for future stability. Butter prices have skyrocketed by 70% over the 25-year average due to increased consumer demand and tighter inventories. Cheese prices have increased slightly, indicating steady demand both domestically and internationally, while dry whey prices have remained steady, reflecting its role as a stable commodity in the dairy sector.

Understanding Class III milk pricing requires examining the USDA’s formula for milk protein, which blends two critical components: the price of cheese and the butterfat value of cheese compared to butter. This formula undervalues protein from cheese, leading to stagnant protein prices despite rising butter and cheese prices. The formula must be reevaluated to align with today’s market, ensuring fair producer compensation and market stability.

The stagnant pricing in Class III milk can be attributed to several factors, including inflation, the shift in the value relationship between butterfat and cheese, and modest increases in cheese prices. To address these challenges, a multifaceted approach is needed, such as reconsidering USDA pricing formulas and strategically managing dairy production and processing to align with current market realities.

Class III milk producers have adapted to persistently low prices through critical strategies, such as expanding herds to leverage economies of scale, increasing milk production per cow through breeding, nutrition, and herd management advances, and focusing on higher milk solids, particularly butterfat, and protein. This has led to better control of cheese inventories, supporting higher wholesale prices.

Improving Class III milk prices requires optimizing production and management across the dairy supply chain. Balancing protein and butterfat ratios in Class III milk is crucial, as it can increase cheese yield efficiency, reduce milk needed for production, and lower costs. Effective inventory management is essential, and advanced systems and predictive analytics can help producers regulate supply, prevent glutes, and stabilize prices.

Collaboration among producers, processors, and organizations like Ohio State University Extension, which provides essential research and services, and modernizing Federal Milk Marketing Orders (FMMO) to reflect current market realities is also vital for fair pricing. Comprehensive strategies are essential for price stabilization, benefiting all stakeholders.

Organizations and suppliers play a critical role in optimizing Class III milk prices. Entities like Penn State Extension, in collaboration with the Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture and the USDA’s Risk Management Agency, offer valuable resources and guidance to dairy farmers. They provide educational programs to help dairy farmers understand market trends and best practices in milk production.

The FMMO modernization process aims to update milk pricing regulations, ensuring a more equitable and efficient market system. Producers’ participation through referendums is crucial for representing their interests. Processors should work with packaging suppliers to manage material costs, establish contracts to mitigate financial pressures, and maintain stable operational costs.

In conclusion, educational institutions, agricultural agencies, and strategic supply chain collaborations can significantly enhance the Class III milk market, equipping producers and processors to handle market fluctuations and achieve sustainable growth. The low-Class III milk prices, driven by plummeting milk protein prices and stagnant other solids pricing, highlight an outdated USDA formula that misjudges current market conditions where butterfat is valued more in butter than in cheese.

Dairy Cooperative Pushes for Timely Payment Rule in Farm Bill to Protect Farmers

Can timely milk payments protect dairy farmers? Discover why Edge Dairy Farmer Cooperative is pushing for new rules in the farm bill to safeguard their livelihoods.

Imagine the dedication of a dairy farmer, tending to a herd of cows before sunrise every day, regardless of the season. This commitment is not just a personal choice but a crucial part of maintaining the stability of the dairy industry. Dairy cooperatives play a significant role in this, providing regular payments and assisting farmers in selling their milk, thereby ensuring the industry’s stability.

Processors under the Federal Milk Marketing Orders (FMMO) must pay farmers at least twice a month. Still, not all milk is insured by the FMMO, which increases financial risk.

Tim Trotter of Edge Dairy Farmer Cooperative says, “The risk we have right now, especially in the upper Midwest, is there’s an increasing amount of milk deployed and not covered by the FMMO.”

The issue of timely payments is not just a financial concern but a matter of urgency. Farmers in Minnesota, Wisconsin, northern Iowa, northern Illinois, and eastern North and South Dakota areas, where most of the country’s milk is outside the marketing pool, live in financial instability without the legal mandate for timely payments. Immediate action is needed to address this pressing issue.

Delayed payments affect individual farmers and have a ripple effect on the community’s well-being and agricultural operations. To prevent such social and economic disruptions, the farm bill needs to clearly outline and enforce conditions regarding timely milk payments.

The Untold Challenges of Depooling: Navigating the Complexities of Federal Milk Marketing Orders (FMMOs) 

Federal Milk Marketing Orders (FMMOs) guarantee producers are paid fairly and help maintain steady milk prices. These rules help manage cash flow and financial stability by requiring milk processors to pay dairy farms at least twice a month.

But “depooling” ruins this mechanism. Milk is taken from the controlled price pool depools, exempting it from the FMMO payment schedule. This might result in uneven and delayed payments, significantly affecting farmers in places where much milk is deployed.

Risk of Financial Instability for Dairy Farmers in Federal Order #30: The Urgency for Timely Payment Requirements

For farmers, particularly those under Federal Order #30 covering portions of Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Illinois, North Dakota, and South Dakota, the absence of prompt payment obligations for deployed milk exposes particular dangers. Although processors pay farmers twice a month under FMMOs, this regulation does not cover deployed milk, exposing producers to payment delays.

This financial volatility is problematic, given that 30% of the country’s milk comes outside the marketing pool and might cause cash flow problems. Delayed payments impede everyday spending, long-term sustainability, and farm upkeep.

Producing most of the deployed milk, farmers under Federal Order #30 need more with quick payment assurances. Legislative action mandating prompt payment for all milk might provide more security and assist in operational management and growth by farmers.

Advocating for Dairy Farmer Security: Why Timely Milk Payment is Crucial for Federal Order #30 Farmers

Under Tim Trotter’s direction, The Edge Dairy Farmer Cooperative seeks timely milk payments included in the farm bill. They contend this will financially safeguard dairy producers, particularly in milk deploying cases from Federal Milk Marketing Orders (FMMOs). Historically, processors have paid on time, but this is only assured with a legislative mandate. About thirty percent of the milk in the country is outside the marketing pool. Hence, prompt payment policies are significant for farmers—especially those under Federal Order #30—to minimize financial uncertainty.

Unbiased Milk Quality Assessments: The Imperative of Third-Party Verification Services for Accurate Component Testing

Verification services guarantee accurate and consistent milk component testing. These outside assessments validate the tools used to evaluate milk components like lactose, fat, and protein. This ensures exact measurements, which directly impact financial stability and payment computations. These services should be codified in the agriculture bill. It guarantees precise and objective quality tests for every dairy farmer, even those with deployed milk, safeguarding their income and encouraging industry openness.

The Bottom Line

Protecting dairy producers impacted by milk depooling depends on the farm bill, which includes prompt payment rules and verification tools. Verifying third-party milk quality and requiring processors to pay twice monthly helps lower financial risks and ensure correct pay. These steps support a consistent agricultural economy and guarantee the stability of the more significant dairy sector.

Key Takeaways:

  • Federal Milk Marketing Orders currently require processors to pay dairy farmers at least twice a month.
  • Farmers face a growing risk, particularly in the upper Midwest, as more milk is depooled and falls outside the protection of FMMOs.
  • Approximately 30% of the nation’s milk is outside the marketing pool, with many affected farmers in Federal Order #30 covering parts of the Midwest.
  • The cooperative seeks to ensure the payment requirement is legally mandated to guarantee its continuance.
  • Third-party verification services for component testing are also needed to ensure accurate milk checks, especially for depooled milk.

Summary:

Dairy farmers are vital to the dairy industry’s stability, providing regular payments and assisting in milk sales. However, not all milk is insured by the Federal Milk Marketing Orders (FMMO), leading to financial risk. Farmers in certain areas, such as Minnesota, Wisconsin, northern Iowa, northern Illinois, and eastern North and South Dakota, face financial instability without legal mandates for timely payments. Depooling disrupts the FMMO mechanism, causing uneven and delayed payments and impacting cash flow and farm upkeep. The Edge Dairy Farmer Cooperative advocates for timely milk payments in the farm bill to safeguard dairy producers, especially those under Federal Order #30. Codifying verification services in the agriculture bill would ensure accurate and consistent quality tests for every dairy farmer, safeguarding their income and encouraging industry openness. Protecting dairy producers impacted by milk depooling depends on the farm bill, which includes prompt payment rules and verification tools. Ensuring third-party milk quality and requiring processors to pay twice monthly can lower financial risks, support a consistent agricultural economy, and provide dairy sector stability.

Learn more:

National DHI Test-Day Data Shows 2023 Somatic Cell Count Average Drops to 181,000

Find out how U.S. dairy farmers lowered the average somatic cell count to 181,000 in 2023. What drove this enhancement in milk quality?

The 2023 Dairy Herd Improvement (DHI) test-day data, a significant milestone in the dairy industry, reveals that U.S. milk producers have successfully reduced their herds’ average somatic cell counts (SCC). With a drop of 1,000 cells from last year, the new average SCC stands at 181,000 per milliliter, indicating a significant improvement in milk quality. This is the first drop since 2020, marking a positive trend in the industry.

The average of 181,000 cells per mL for 2023 is a testament to the continuous advancements in mastitis control policies and herd health management across American dairy farmers. This deliberate effort, which is the backbone of the industry, significantly improves cow health and milk quality, leading to better financial returns for dairy farmers.

Milestone in Milk Quality: U.S. Dairy Farms See First Dip in Somatic Cell Counts Since 2020

YearAverage SCC (cells per mL)Change from Previous Year
2020178,000-9,000
2021180,000+2,000
2022182,000+2,000
2023181,000-1,000

The national Dairy Herd Improvement (DHI) test-day average somatic cell count (SCC) for 2023 was 181,000 cells per milliliter (cells per mL). From 2022, this marks a slight decline of 1,000 cells per mL, the first year-to-year decline since 2020. Source from the USDA’s Animal Improvement Programs Laboratory and the Council of Dairy Cattle Breeding (CDCB), this data shows a continuous trend toward better milk quality throughout U.S. dairy farms. The DHI test-day findings show the constant efforts of dairy farmers to reduce somatic cell counts, a main gauge of milk quality and udder health.

Comprehensive Data Collection Offers a Clear Snapshot of Dairy Health 

The somatic cell count (SCC) test-day data provides key new information on milk quality and herd health. This information originates from many Dairy Herd Improvement (DHI) test programs involving owner-sampler tracking. These plans span herds of various sizes and management styles, reflecting the health of the dairy sector. With 8,947 herds and almost 3.8 million cows among the 2023 figures, the data is strong and representative of national trends.

Diving into State-by-State Dairy Health Metrics 

StateHerd Test DaysAvg. Cows per HerdAvg. Daily Milk Yield (lbs)Avg. SCC (cells/mL)% Test Days > 750,000 cells/mL% Test Days > 400,000 cells/mL
California36,1121,26380172,0001.8%6.1%
Wisconsin15,87416784172,0001.5%5.8%
New York10,48931484177,0002.1%7.4%
Idaho6,1221,59486165,0000.9%2.9%
Pennsylvania8,26312573190,0002.5%8.8%
Texas4,1121,32087170,0001.0%4.2%
Michigan6,47934685178,0002.3%7.0%
Minnesota7,32619082175,0001.7%6.2%
Washington3,78178984160,0000.8%3.0%
Ohio4,61211279185,0002.4%8.0%

The specific state data we provide is a valuable tool for you to understand your herd’s test days, average cow count per herd, daily milk supply, butterfat and protein percentages, and their average SCC. This information empowers you to make informed decisions and take necessary actions to improve your herd’s health and milk quality.

Because of production conditions and management variations, herd test days range significantly among states. Higher herd test days for Minnesota and Michigan represent specific information on their dairy businesses.

The average herd numbers also vary. While Maine and West Virginia have relatively modest numbers, states like California often have more than 1,000 cows per herd. These differences may affect SCC control.

Still, another important statistic is daily milk yield. States like Washington and Oregon record yields around the national average of 83 pounds per cow daily; Kansas and Montana might exhibit minor differences depending on regional feed and climatic variables.

Butterfat and protein ratios strongly influence milk price and profitability. Higher averages in leading states like Vermont and Wisconsin help dairy producers.

Somatic cell count (SCC) shows notable variations among states. There are two critical SCC threshold categories: 

  • Over 750,000 cells per mL: This flags test days exceeding the federal limit for Grade A producers. States like Alabama and Oklahoma report higher percentages in this category, indicating mastitis challenges.
  • Over 400,000 cells per mL: This aligns with the maximum SCC level for export milk. States like Idaho and California focus on keeping SCC below this limit for export markets.

High Standards, High Rewards: The Impact of Stricter State Somatic Cell Count Limits

Federal rules provide a broad maximum for bulk tank somatic cell counts (SCC) at 750,000 cells per milliliter (cells per mL) for Grade A milk producers. Other states have tougher criteria, though: California (600,000 cells per mL), Oregon (500,000 cells per mL), and both Idaho and Washington (400,000 cells per mL).

These tighter restrictions concentrate on milk quality and marketability, as lower SCC milk suggests better cows and quality. Producers may develop a competitive advantage in these states and demand more money.

Under Federal Milk Marketing Orders (FMMOs), which vary compensation depending on SCC levels, SCC limitations also affect payments, rewarding lower counts and punishing higher ones. This system is designed to encourage manufacturers like you to maintain low SCC levels, thereby raising general dairy quality and health standards. This not only benefits the industry but also holds the promise of improved profitability for you.

Federal Milk Marketing Orders: Incentivizing Quality for Fair Pricing

Federal milk marketing orders (FMMOs) guarantee equitable pricing by varying compensation depending on somatic cell counts (SCC) in raw milk. Every 1,000 cells per mL variance from the 350,000 cells per mL baseline is adjusted every hundredweight (cwt). Higher SCC leads to negative adjustments; lower SCC results in positive payment adjustments.

The monthly variations depend on the wholesale cheese price. These promote methods to reduce SCC levels, therefore improving milk quality for consumers and the dairy sector. Four areas—Central, Mideast, Southwest, and Upper Midwest—among the eleven existing FMMOs change payouts, according to SCC. This advances better milk quality and general industry health.

Climatic Conditions Drive Diverse Somatic Cell Count Averages Across States 

Variation in SCC across states is still quite different, partly shaped by factors like temperature and humidity. With Vermont and North Dakota topping the field with the lowest counts, the yearly average SCC for sixteen states falls below or below the national average. By contrast, Alabama, Arkansas, Oklahoma, and Tennessee have the highest average SCC—more than 300,000 cells per mL.

Eleven of the 22 states that exhibited improvement in their yearly average SCC in 2023 had reductions of 10,000 cells per mL or more. Notable gains were seen in New Jersey, North Dakota, and Rhode Island. Conversely, 22 states had annual SCC increases year over year. In particular, Alabama, Oklahoma, and Colorado had their SCC values grow by 30,000 cells per mL or more, highlighting the variances across several areas.

Herd Size Matters: Analyzing the Impact on Somatic Cell Count Levels

Herd SizeSCC (cells per mL)
< 50 cows175,000
50-99 cows182,000
100-299 cows179,000
300-499 cows187,000
500-999 cows189,000
1,000-3,999 cows176,000
> 4,000 cows190,000

Changes in cow numbers affect SCC levels by herd size. Up by 18 cows from the previous year, DHI herds in 2023 averaged 288 cows per herd, and this increase had varied SCC effects.

Herds with more than 4,000 cows saw the most SCC increase; those with 500– 999 cows also somewhat increased. On the other hand, herds with 50–299 cows and those with 1,000–3,999 cows could reduce their SCC levels.

These differences highlight how milk quality is influenced by herd management and possibly hereditary elements. For the dairy business, smaller to mid-sized herds lowering SCC show an encouraging trend.

Monthly Trends Unveiled: Fluctuations in Somatic Cell Counts Throughout the Year 

MonthAverage SCC (cells per mL)Change from Previous Year
January178,000-2,000
February176,000-4,000
March182,000+1,000
April186,000+3,000
May179,000-1,000
June177,000-2,000
July189,000+5,000
August190,000+6,000
September180,000-1,000
October184,000+2,000
November181,0000
December178,000-2,000

SCC levels vary monthly according to trends. March and April saw increases from last year. Jan-Feb and May-Sep experienced substantial declines. October slightly rose; November stayed the same; December finished with a drop.

Seasonal Peaks and Valleys: How Monthly Variations Shape Milk Quality

The test-day average milk output marginally changed this year, increasing almost half a pound to reach 83 pounds. The protein content climbed to 3.26%; the fat percentage grew by 0.07% to 4.15%.

Ideal for creating rich dairy products, milk produced in November and December had the most significant fat and protein levels. By comparison, July and August had the lowest component percentages.

These seasonal variations highlight how herd management and climate circumstances affect milk composition—more significant fat and protein levels in colder months point to improved management methods throughout these seasons.

The Bottom Line

The findings of the 2023 DHI test day for milk quality reveal an excellent trend; national SCC averages are lowering for the first time since 2020. Though state-specific, this improvement is seen all over due to climate and laws. Additionally, pushing this good shift are tighter state regulations and financial incentives from Federal Milk Marketing Orders.

For a dairy farmer, these realizations underline the need to follow rules and maintain herd health. Reduced SCC levels improve milk quality and increase financial returns. Look for practical ideas from states with lower SCC averages that could apply to your farm. With these steps, the good trend will be maintained, and the dairy sector will generally be supported.

Act in response. Examine the SCC statistics for your farm, identify areas needing work, and use local DHI resources to reach and maintain reduced SCC levels. Your dedication to excellence helps the whole dairy community and your herd.

Key Takeaways:

  • National average somatic cell count (SCC) dropped to 181,000 cells per milliliter, marking the first decrease since 2020.
  • The 2023 results included data from 8,947 herds and approximately 3.8 million cows.
  • 22 states improved their annual average SCC in 2023, with significant gains in Rhode Island, North Dakota, and New Jersey.
  • States with stricter SCC limits include California (600,000 cells per mL), Oregon (500,000 cells per mL), and Idaho and Washington (400,000 cells per mL).
  • Four Federal Milk Marketing Orders (FMMOs) adjust payments based on SCC, promoting higher milk quality.
  • Average herd size in DHI programs increased to 288 cows in 2023.
  • Seasonal variation in SCC was observed, with fluctuations throughout the year.

Summary: The 2023 Dairy Herd Improvement (DHI) test-day data shows that U.S. milk producers have reduced their herds’ average somatic cell counts (SCC), marking a significant improvement in milk quality. This is the first drop since 2020, a positive trend in the industry. The average of 181,000 cells per milliliter for 2023 is a testament to continuous advancements in mastitis control policies and herd health management across American dairy farmers. This deliberate effort significantly improves cow health and milk quality, leading to better financial returns for dairy farmers. State-by-state data is available, providing valuable tools for understanding herd test days, average cow count per herd, daily milk supply, butterfat and protein percentages, and SCC. Federal milk marketing orders (FMMOs) ensure fair pricing by varying compensation based on SCC in raw milk.

Learn More:

Stay updated with the latest trends and analysis in the dairy industry by exploring more of our expert articles: 

Send this to a friend