Archive for Herd Size

Why “Crowded Cows” Are a Growing Concern: The Impact on Dairy Farm Production

Uncover the obscured expenses associated with “crowded cows” in agriculture and animal welfare. What repercussions does this practice have on our food supply and the health of livestock?

Overcrowding in dairy production, sometimes called ‘crowded cows,’ has become a significant worry for agricultural communities. Farmers must prioritize herd care and enhance productivity to meet the increased demand for dairy products. Overcrowding harms cow health, reducing farm output and sustainability. It causes sickness, stress, inefficiencies in milk production, and greater death rates. Stress and lack of relaxation may lead to a 10% loss in milk supply, costing a farm up to $50,000 per year. However, tackling ‘packed cows’ and encouraging sustainable and humane dairy farming may help livestock and livelihoods while increasing the dairy industry’s economic sustainability.

The Consequences of Spatial Overload in Dairy Farming 

Cow DensityNumber of Stalls per Cow
Low (<80% stocking)1.2
Moderate (80%-100% stocking)1.0
High (>100% stocking)0.8

Crowded cows occur when the number of animals exceeds the required space for their health, production, and well-being. This problem stems from a lack of bunk space, resting locations, and restricted supplies such as water and food. A dairy cow requires around one stall. For pasture operations, they need about 120 square feet per cow. Exceeding this limit has negative repercussions, including increased resource competition, reduced dry matter intake (DMI), and decreased milk production. However, farmers may dramatically increase their herds’ well-being and productivity by emphasizing cow comfort and following these geographical guidelines.

The Impact of Overcrowding on Dairy Cow Welfare: Stress, Health, and Behavioral Issues 

MetricOptimal ConditionsOvercrowded ConditionsPercentage Difference
Milk Production (liters/day)2518-28%
Incidence of Mastitis (%)10%30%+200%
Average Longevity (years)64-33%
Feed Conversion Efficiency1.51.2-20%

Overcrowded circumstances harm dairy cows’ welfare, causing physical pain and other issues. Competition for food and rest places leads to elevated stress levels, which may weaken immune function and increase susceptibility to illnesses like mastitis and respiratory infections. Crowded herds might lead to behavioral difficulties. Cows become more aggressive as they fight for space, inflicting injuries and disrupting herd peace. Stress and dissatisfaction may cause aberrant repeated behaviors like frequent licking and pacing, indicating significant welfare inadequacies.

Overcrowding FactorImpact on Milk Production
Increased Competition for FoodDecreased nutrient intake, leading to lower milk yield
Elevated Stress LevelsReduction in milk quality due to hormonal imbalances
Limited Resting SpaceReduced time for necessary rest and rumination, impacting milk production
Poor VentilationHigher susceptibility to respiratory diseases, adversely affecting milk yield.

The Ripple Effect: From Stress to Severe Health Complications in Dairy Cows 

Overcrowding has significant health consequences beyond acute stress, including lameness, mastitis, and respiratory difficulties. These circumstances jeopardize dairy cows’ well-being and production while imposing significant economic expenses on producers. Lameness, caused by extended standing on hard surfaces and little rest owing to restricted space, hinders movement and lowers feeding, influencing nutrition and energy intake, both of which are critical for milk production. Poor mobility might lead to increased stress and decreased milk supply.

Mastitis, an inflammatory illness of the udder, is aggravated by overcrowding, significantly when hygiene standards deteriorate owing to overpopulation. This illness lowers milk quality and quantity, needing expensive veterinarian interventions and lengthy therapies. Respiratory problems are common in overcrowded barns with poor ventilation, promoting diseases that quickly spread across the herd and reduce output. Chronic respiratory difficulties often result in higher culling rates, lowering each animal’s lifetime and return on investment.

Finally, these health conditions considerably impair dairy cows’ productivity and lifetime, resulting in lower milk output, medical costs, and profitability. Overcrowding poses health risks that must be addressed to maintain a healthy dairy enterprise.

Compromised Milk Production: The Immediate Impact of Overcrowding 

Overcrowding LevelMilk Production (lbs/day)Impact on Production (%)
Optimal Conditions70 lbs0%
10% Overcrowded67 lbs-4.3%
20% Overcrowded64 lbs-8.6%
30% Overcrowded60 lbs-14.3%

Dairy overpopulation’s most immediate consequences are decreased milk output and quality. Keeping cows in confined quarters reduces their daily dry matter intake (DMI), resulting in inadequate nutritional absorption for optimum milk production. Cow rivalry intensifies with limited bunk space, prompting some to eat less feed. 

Overcrowding triggers deep physiological stress reactions. Stress causes the production of cortisol, a hormone that disrupts reproductive systems and immunological responses. Chronic stress limits the release of oxytocin, which is required for milk letdown, reducing milk quantity and quality.

Furthermore, tight confinement raises the risk of physical injuries and infections such as mastitis, which directly affects milk safety and quality. Cows that lack enough room are more likely to lie in damp or filthy circumstances, increasing the risk of pathogen exposure and milk contamination.

Finally, producers must maintain an ideal group size, ensuring that cows spend less time in holding pens and have easy access to feeding places. Balancing herd size and facility capacity improves cow comfort and productivity, ensuring milk output and quality.

The Unseen Burden: Environmental Stressors Aggravating Dairy Cow Overcrowding 

Environmental factors enhance the impact of overpopulation in dairy farms. Poor ventilation may quickly raise ammonia and toxic gasses, aggravating cow respiratory systems and exacerbating illnesses like pneumonia. Inadequate bedding exacerbates this problem, producing comfort issues, foot abnormalities, and increased mastitis rates owing to unsanitary surroundings. Overcrowding often results in restricted availability of food and water, affecting feeding activity and dry matter intake (DMI). Dairy cows need a balanced diet and constant water supply for maximum health and output. Due to limited bunk space, fewer cows can eat the appropriate feed, resulting in decreased DMI, poor body condition, and restricted milk output. This creates a loop in which stressed, undernourished cows are more prone to sickness, lowering herd output. Farmers must manage herd numbers so that each cow has enough room, resources, and comfort. Strategic planning and management are essential for reducing environmental stresses. Addressing these concerns is critical for animal welfare and sustainable dairy production operations.

The Economic Ramifications of Overcrowding in Dairy Farms: A Deep Dive into Profitability and Sustainability 

Economic CostDescriptionEstimated Financial Impact
Veterinary CostsIncreased frequency of disease and illness due to stress and inadequate living conditions$50 – $100 per cow annually
Feed EfficiencyHigher competition for feed leads to inefficient feeding practices and uneven weight gain5% – 15% increase in feed costs
Milk Yield and QualityReduced milk production and quality, leading to lower market prices2% – 10% drop in revenue
Infrastructure MaintenanceAccelerated wear and tear on facilities due to higher occupancy$200 – $500 annually
Labor CostsIncreased need for labor to manage overcrowded conditions and stressed animalsAdditional $10,000 – $15,000 annually per farm

Overcrowding on dairy farms substantially influences the industry’s profitability beyond just animal welfare concerns. Crowded circumstances increase veterinarian expenditures due to mastitis, lameness, and respiratory problems. These health issues raise veterinarian expenditures and result in continuous costs for chronic illnesses.

Overcrowding has a direct effect on milk output. Stressed cows consume less, resulting in reduced milk output. Studies indicate that adjusting bunk space and group sizes helps sustain milk production levels. For example, moving a herd from one to two groups may boost fat-corrected milk (FCM) by 1% to 3%. Reduced milk production immediately affects the farm’s capacity to satisfy supply obligations, perhaps resulting in financial fines or lost business.

Furthermore, overcrowding may harm a dairy farm’s image in a market where customers increasingly demand ethically produced goods. Farms notorious for poor animal care may lose their competitive advantage, resulting in lower sales and perhaps expensive marketing attempts to improve their public image.

Regulatory Frameworks and Ethical Considerations: The Backbone of Humane Dairy Farming Practices 

To address overpopulation in dairy farms, it’s important to consider regulatory frameworks and ethical principles for animal care. Several jurisdictions have enacted regulations to reduce overcrowding and safeguard the health of dairy cattle. These restrictions prioritize humane procedures, including enough space, nourishment, and general animal well-being. The Animal Welfare Act in several nations ensures humane treatment by promoting natural behaviors and well-being. Guidelines frequently specify stocking density limitations to minimize overpopulation. The European Union’s farm animal welfare regulation establishes minimum space requirements and feed and water availability. Organizations like the American Dairy Science Association and the World Organization for Animal Health recommend best practices beyond legal standards, such as providing enough bunk space and reducing pen time. These criteria emphasize the ethical need to balance production and a healthy animal living environment. Noncompliance may result in penalties, license revocation, and reputational harm. Ethical farming techniques prioritize animal care and promote the sustainability and economic viability of the dairy sector.

Proactive Solutions and Best Practices to Address Overcrowding in Dairy Farms 

Improved management approaches are critical for addressing dairy farm congestion. Herd size has to be carefully planned, and cow behavior and health must be monitored. Data analytics can identify ideal group sizes based on feeding activity, milk output, and space availability.

Investing in improved housing facilities with enough sleeping space and rest places decreases stress and health problems. Flexible group size, in line with parlor capacity and holding pen time, ensures efficiency and comfort.

Adherence to animal welfare standards, as set by the Animal Welfare Institute and Michigan State University, promotes a compassionate and successful agricultural environment. Meeting these requirements improves cow welfare, farm sustainability, and customer confidence in dairy products.

The Bottom Line

Overcrowding in dairy farming has profound implications that must be addressed immediately. Overcrowding increases stress, health difficulties, and behavioral problems, lowering milk supply and affecting animal welfare and economic returns. Environmental factors exacerbate these difficulties. Herd density management is critical for both long-term sustainability and profitability. Optimizing welfare and economic viability requires correct grouping tactics, lowering group variance, and improving facility design and administration. Compliance with regulatory and ethical norms is vital for humane and sustainable activities. Our job is to improve procedures that benefit the animals and the industry. These methods balance production and animal care, promoting long-term profitability and sustainability in dairy farming.

Key Takeaways:

  • Proper spatial management in dairy farming is crucial for the well-being and productivity of dairy cows.
  • Overcrowding leads to increased stress, health issues, and behavioral problems among dairy cows.
  • The ripple effect of stress from overcrowding can escalate into severe health complications.
  • One immediate impact of overcrowding is a notable decline in milk production.
  • Environmental stressors can exacerbate the negative effects of overcrowding on dairy cows.
  • Overcrowding has significant economic ramifications, affecting profitability and sustainability of dairy farms.
  • Regulatory frameworks and ethical considerations are fundamental to implementing humane farming practices.
  • Adopting proactive solutions and best practices can effectively address the issue of overcrowding in dairy farms.

Summary:

Overcrowding in dairy production, also known as ‘crowded cows,’ is a significant issue that affects cow health, farm output, and sustainability. It can lead to sickness, stress, inefficiencies in milk production, and increased death rates. Overcrowding can cost farms up to $50,000 per year. To address this issue, farmers should focus on sustainable and humane dairy farming and follow geographical guidelines. The recommended number of stalls per cow is 120 square feet or one stall. Exceeding this limit can lead to increased resource competition, reduced dry matter intake, and decreased milk production. Farmers can improve their herds’ well-being and productivity by emphasizing cow comfort and following geographical guidelines. Overcrowding conditions also cause physical pain, competition for food and rest places, elevated stress levels, limited resting space, and poor ventilation. These factors lead to increased competition for food, decreased nutrient intake, reduced milk quality due to hormonal imbalances, and respiratory diseases. Overcrowding triggers physiological stress reactions, leading to the production of cortisol and limited release of oxytocin, reducing milk quantity and quality. Proactive solutions to address overcrowding include improved management approaches, careful planning of herd size, monitoring cow behavior and health, investing in improved housing facilities, and adhering to animal welfare standards set by organizations like the Animal Welfare Institute and Michigan State University.

Learn more:

Choosing the Right Teat Dip: Myths and Facts for Dairy Farmers

Are you using the right teat dip for your dairy farm? Discover how to choose the best one to prevent mastitis, save money, and ensure high-quality milk production.

Have you thought about the significant influence the teat dip you apply has on your dairy farm? The condition of your cows and the quality of your milk output depend much on this little choice. Not only are teat dips essential, but they also serve as the first line of protection against mastitis, a disorder directly influencing production and quality. Join us as we bust common misconceptions regarding teat dips and help you decide which best fits your farm. The proper mix improves the quality of your milk, your dairy’s profitability, and your herd’s general state. Come along as we dispel misconceptions and provide practical guidance on choosing the best teat dip for your farm. By then, you will be ready to make decisions to safeguard your herd and boost production.

The Role of Teat Dips in Dairy Farming 

To protect against infections, teat dips—liquid disinfectants—are applied to dairy cows’ teats before and after milking. These dips, which serve as the first line of defense against mastitis, an inflammatory udder condition, are crucial for dairy farming operations. Their role in reducing the bacteria count on the teat skin not only ensures the production of high-quality milk but also provides a reassuring barrier against illness.

Beyond simple contamination prevention, teat dips are essential for preserving udder health in dairy production. The correct application guarantees uniform coating, forming a barrier against external factors and lowering fissures and sores where germs may flourish. Teat dips can include emollients like glycerin or lanolin to keep the skin flexible and stop dryness and chapping.

Furthermore, teat dips may significantly avoid mastitis, one of the most expensive illnesses in dairy production. Following pre- and post-milking dipping procedures helps farmers improve milk quality while also helping to maintain a low somatic cell count in the milk—an indication of excellent udder health. This monitoring is crucial for securing quality premiums and guaranteeing economic sustainability.

Teat dips are critical for preventing mastitis and enhancing udder health. Farmers can guarantee sound milk output and protect the welfare of their herds by choosing the correct teat dip and consulting milk quality experts.

Debunking the Iodine Myth: Exploring Diverse Germicide Options for Teat Dips

Although most dairy farms believe iodine is the best teat dip germicide, current developments have provided other substitutes with either similar or better effects. For high-yield operations where udder health is critical, chlorhexidine—for example—is hailed for its broad-spectrum antibacterial qualities and long-lasting residual action and known for their efficient cleaning and mildness on teat skin, hydrogen peroxide-based dips shine, especially in challenging weather or with sensitive animals.

Furthermore, lactic and salicylic acids are well-known for their quick action and adaptability in various surroundings. These substitutes challenge iodine’s supremacy and let dairy producers choose the most suitable germicide for their situation, improving udder health and milk quality.

Eventually, the emphasis should be on knowing the many germicides accessible rather than depending only on iodine. This will help dairy producers make wise judgments that guarantee their teat dips fit their particular agricultural environment.

The Synergy Between Germicides and Emollients: Ensuring Comprehensive Teat Health 

Any conscientious dairy farmer must realize that a germicide in a teat dip only counts somewhat. Although they destroy microorganisms well, germicides cannot guarantee the cow’s teats’ general protection. Emollients then become necessary.

Emollients assist in preserving and rebuilding the skin’s natural barrier. Varying weather and frequent milking may dry and split teats, increasing their infection susceptibility. Emollients improve cow comfort by keeping the teat skin smooth and less injury-prone, avoiding pathogen entry into the udder.

Formulating a teat dip requires balancing emollients and germicides to improve effectiveness. The proper proportion guarantees that the germicide kills dangerous bacteria without compromising the integrity of the skin. Specific formulas, for instance, have a vivid green hue that ensures coverage and efficacy for apparent assurance of appropriate dipping.

A premium teat dip, made under Good Manufacturing Practices (GMPs), aggregates these elements to provide complete protection. GMPs ensure that the teat dip is produced in a clean and controlled environment, free from contamination. Regular assessment of dipping techniques and full execution of dipping rules help strengthen this protection, improving udder health and producing better-quality milk.

Dispelling the One-Size-Fits-All Myth: Tailoring Teat Dip Formulas to Individual Farm Needs 

Many people think that the same teat dip recipes apply everywhere. However, this needs to include the particular requirements of every dairy. Herd size, environmental factors, and specific farm needs vary substantially. A method perfect for a small farm may not work well for a large-scale business. Larger herds could require stronger germicides, whereas smaller farms might concentrate on emollients for improved skin conditions.

Another very vital factor is the weather conditions. While farms in humid climates may need moistening dips to avoid chapping, farms in brutal winters might need fast-drying dips to prevent frostbite. Customizing the teat dip to the particular situation of your farm guarantees good disinfection and enhances teat health.

Think through your farm’s particular requirements. While some might find recipes suited for all-year-round housed herds, others would benefit from colored dips for visual coverage checks. By tackling these many elements, farmers may pick the best teat dip, thus improving udder health, keeping low somatic cell counts, and guaranteeing top-notional milk output.

Strategic Teat Dip Selection: Safeguarding Herd Health and Maximizing Dairy Farm Profitability 

Selecting the correct teat dip to protect your herd against mastitis is crucial. Customizing the mixture to fit your farm’s environmental demands guarantees good teat protection and sanitization. In winter, a fast-drying cream decreases chapped teats, lowering infection risk. The complete coating reduces the likelihood of bacteria entering the teat canal by dipping or spraying.

Economically, a good teat dip may result in huge savings. Reasonable mastitis control helps to lower veterinarian expenses and the necessity for culling resulting from ongoing infections. Reduced mastitis instances assist in preserving and improving milk production and quality. Udder health depends on a low somatic cell count (SCC), affecting milk quality and influencing farm profitability, which may attract premium prices. This financial benefit should motivate you to make strategic teat dip selections.

Using items based on good manufacturing standards (GMPs) guarantees consistent performance. Frequent updates to pre- and post-dip treatments support udder health all year round. A local milk quality professional may provide customized advice, achieving a balanced approach to mastitis avoidance, cost savings, and maximum milk output.

The Critical Importance of Choosing the Right Teat Dip: Science and Real-World Evidence 

Dairy producers trying to preserve herd health and maintain milk quality must choose the appropriate teat dip. Mastitis may be much reduced using teat dips created based on scientific study. For instance, studies supported by data showed that teat dips significantly reduced mastitis cases and enhanced udder health, lowering somatic cell numbers.

Actual instances confirm this. Six months after changing to a scientifically validated teat dip, a Midwest dairy farm saw mastitis cases decline from 12 to three per month. This action also improved their milk quality premiums, demonstrating the sensible advantages of well-informed judgments.

Certain clinical benefits from using teat dips have been confirmed. Farmers improve herd health and structure their activities to be successful in the long term. See a local hygiene and milk quality professional to identify a proven teat dip catered to your farm’s requirements.

Harnessing Expertise: The Vital Role of Local Hygiene and Milk Quality Specialists 

Depends on local hygiene and milk quality experts’ output. These professionals provide customized recommendations based on every farm’s circumstances and difficulties. Their observations guarantee that your teat dip schedule is ideal for optimal efficacy, helping fight certain infections and adapt formulas for each season. Before altering your teat dip schedule, it is highly advisable to consult these experts to avoid mastitis, save expenses, and maintain a low somatic cell count.

The Bottom Line

High-quality milk production and herd health depend on ensuring the teat dip is used most effectively. Dairy farmers may limit mastitis incidence and optimize profitability by eliminating iodine fallacies, knowing the synergy between germicides and emollients, and avoiding a one-size-fits-all strategy. Iodine is not always the best choice, even if it is conventional. Teat health depends on the interaction between germicides and emollients. Hence, customized teat dip formulations are essential considering every farm’s situation. See local hygienic and milk quality experts and use items with scientific backing. Effective farm management depends on strategic teat dip choices, influencing operating costs, herd health, and milk quality premiums. A good dairy runs on an educated, customized strategy alone. See your local hygienic and milk quality professional to guarantee the optimal teat dip for your farm’s requirements, avoiding mastitis and promoting a healthier herd.

Consult your local milk quality and hygienic professional to ensure you utilize the best teat dip. Using the correct strategy guarantees a better future for your dairy farm and the prevention of mastitis. Your decision on the appropriate teat dip now goes beyond immediate advantages to open the path for consistent herd health, better milk quality, and more income.

Key Takeaways:

  • Teat dip selection aligns directly with the production of high-quality milk and the minimization of mastitis incidence.
  • Effectiveness varies by formula, farm conditions, and pathogen strains, necessitating tailored choices over generic solutions.
  • Research-backed teat dips offer proven efficacy, making scientific validation a critical factor in selection.
  • Diverse germicides beyond iodine present viable options, broadening choices for specific farm needs and pathogen challenges.
  • The synergy of germicides and emollients is essential for comprehensive teat health, not just pathogen eradication.
  • Engaging local hygiene and milk quality specialists ensures informed decisions, optimizing herd health and profitability.
  • Clinical testing under experimental and natural conditions confirms the real-world applicability and effectiveness of teat dips.
  • Regular veterinary observations are pivotal in monitoring teat conditions and adjusting protocols as needed.
  • Understanding that every farm is unique, pushing against the one-size-fits-all myth, and preemptively assessing specific needs improve outcomes.

Summary:

Teat dips are essential in dairy farming to protect against infections and mastitis. They reduce bacteria count on the teat skin, ensuring high-quality milk production and providing a reassuring barrier against illness. Emollients like glycerin or lanolin help keep the skin flexible and prevent dryness and chapping. Farmers must follow pre- and post-milking dipping procedures to improve milk quality and maintain low somatic cell count. Good Manufacturing Practices (GMPs) ensure clean and controlled production. Customizing teat dip formulas to individual farm needs is crucial for udder health, low somatic cell counts, and maximum milk output. A good teat dip can result in significant savings, as it helps lower veterinarian expenses and the need for culling due to ongoing infections.

Learn more: 

USDA Reports 10-Month Decline in U.S. Milk Production: May Numbers Drop 1%

Find out why U.S. milk production has been decreasing for the past 10 months. Learn how cow numbers and milk output per cow are affecting the dairy industry. Read more.

The USDA’s preliminary May Milk output report shockingly reveals a consistent drop in U.S. milk output extending for ten months. With May showing a 1% decline from the same month last year, this steady dip points to significant shifts within the dairy sector. The continuous drop has changed the scene of milk output worldwide and pushed industry players to change their plans.

The ten-month run of low milk supply draws attention to systematic problems U.S. dairy producers face: narrow revenue margins, changing feed prices, and bad weather.

Reviewing the USDA’s data, we see: 

  • U.S. milk production fell to 19.68 billion pounds in May 2024, down 0.9% from the previous year.
  • Cow numbers decreased by 68,000 head, reflecting broader herd management strategies.
  • The average milk production per cow dropped by 3 pounds, influenced by various regional factors.
MetricMay 2024May 2023Change
U.S. Milk Production (billion pounds)19.6819.86-0.9%
U.S. Cow Numbers (million)9.359.418-68,000 head
Average Milk per Cow (pounds)2,1052,108-3 pounds
24-State Milk Production (billion pounds)18.87519.009-0.7%
24-State Cow Numbers (million)8.8938.945-52,000 head
24-State Average Milk per Cow (pounds)2,1222,125-3 pounds

A Deeper Dive into USDA’s May 2024 Dairy Estimates 

CategoryMay 2024May 2023Change
U.S. Milk Production (billion pounds)19.6819.86-0.9%
U.S. Cow Numbers (million head)9.359.42-68,000 head
U.S. Average Milk per Cow (pounds)2,1052,108-3 pounds
24-State Milk Production (billion pounds)18.8819.01-0.7%
24-State Cow Numbers (million head)8.898.94-52,000 head
24-State Average Milk per Cow (pounds)2,1222,125-3 pounds

The early projections for May 2024 from the USDA show significant changes in American dairy output. Down 0.9% from May 2023, the total U.S. milk output is 19.68 billion pounds. 9.35 million, U.S. cow counts have dropped 68,000 head from the previous year. Down three pounds year over year, the average milk output per cow is 2,105 pounds.

Milk output in the 24 central dairy states dropped 0.7% from May 2023, coming to 18.875 billion pounds. Down 52,000 head from the year before, cow counts in these states are 8.893 million. With an average milk yield per cow of 2,122 pounds, the milk output has slightly dropped from the previous year—3 pounds less.

Delving into the Dynamics of Cow Numbers: A Tale of Decline and Resurgence

YearTotal U.S. Cow Numbers (millions)24-State Cow Numbers (millions)
20209.458.92
20219.508.95
20229.478.91
20239.358.84
20249.358.89

Cow counts from the USDA show declining and then rising trends. The U.S. dairy herd dropped 68,000 head starting in May 2023, underscoring continuous industry difficulties. However, there has been a slight rise since October 2023, which has driven herd size to its most significant since late 2023.

The 24 central dairy states had a similar trend. From the year before, the combined herd of these states dropped 52,000 head, yet it somewhat recovered with a 5,000 head rise from April 2024. This points to a partial recovery in certain areas while others continue to suffer.

It’s important to note the stark differences at the state level. While Florida and South Dakota saw a gain of 27,000 heads, New Mexico experienced a dramatic drop of 42,000 heads. These variations underscore the influence of local elements such as climate, feed availability, and state-by-state economic forces.

Interwoven Influences on Milk Output per Cow: The Balance of Weather, Feed Costs, and Income Margins 

StateMay 2024 (lbs)May 2023 (lbs)Change (lbs)Change (%)
Florida2,0001,970301.52%
Minnesota2,2102,180301.38%
Wisconsin2,1002,075251.20%
Illinois2,1502,120301.42%
Iowa2,3002,270301.32%
Kansas2,1202,100200.95%
California2,0502,075-25-1.20%
Vermont2,0002,025-25-1.23%
Pennsylvania1,9802,005-25-1.25%
Indiana2,1002,125-25-1.18%

Income margins, feed prices, and regional weather have all played a role in the decline in milk yield per cow. Adverse weather patterns, such as droughts or excessive rainfall, can impact feed and water availability, which in turn can influence cow health and output. High feed prices might drive farmers to choose less nutritious substitutes, which can also affect milk output. These factors highlight the need for a comprehensive approach to address the issue, including strategies to manage weather risks and stabilize feed prices.

Income margins are crucially important. Tight margins often force difficult choices on herd management, reducing expenditures on premium feed or healthcare and, therefore, affecting milk yield per cow.

States like Florida, Minnesota, and Wisconsin reported increases in milk yield, up 15 to 30 pounds per cow, presumably owing to better local circumstances and enhanced procedures compared to year-to-year improvements.

States like California, Vermont, Pennsylvania, and Indiana reported losses of 15 to 25 pounds per cow, on the other hand. California’s ongoing drought and other difficulties, such as changing feed prices and economic pressures, highlight the careful balance between environmental elements and farming methods.

The Bottom Line

The USDA report by May shows a continuous drop in important dairy indicators—ten consecutive months of declining U.S. milk output; May 2024 down about 1% over last year. Though there have been some recent increases, national cow counts have dropped by 68,000 head. Because of regional variations in feed prices, weather, and economic constraints, milk yield per cow decreased somewhat.

These patterns point to a declining milk supply, which would be expected to raise milk prices. This change in prices could benefit medium-sized manufacturers, but it also poses challenges for the sector, including high feed prices and economic difficulties. These factors are driving the industry towards farm consolidation and increased use of technology. The decline in milk output also underscores the need for innovation and policy support to ensure sustainable development in the sector.

Given these trends, it’s clear that the sector needs to innovate to counter these challenges. Strategies such as improving feed efficiency, genetic selection, and dairy management could prove beneficial. Moreover, policy support is not just beneficial, but crucial for ensuring sustainable development in the industry.

Key Takeaways:

  • U.S. milk production for May 2024 is estimated at 19.68 billion pounds, a decrease of 0.9% compared to May 2023.
  • U.S. cow numbers have dropped to 9.35 million, down 68,000 head from the same month last year.
  • The average milk production per cow in the U.S. has marginally declined by 3 pounds, totaling 2,105 pounds per cow.
  • In the 24 major dairy states, milk production is down 0.7%, with total output at 18.875 billion pounds.
  • These 24 states have seen a reduction in cow numbers by 52,000, now standing at 8.893 million.
  • Despite the overall decline, some states like Florida and South Dakota show robust growth in cow numbers and milk output.
  • Conversely, significant decreases in milk production have been observed in states such as New Mexico and California.

Summary: 

The USDA’s preliminary May Milk output report shows a 1% decline in U.S. milk output for ten months, indicating significant shifts within the dairy sector. The ten-month run of low milk supply is attributed to narrow revenue margins, changing feed prices, and bad weather. The total U.S. milk output is 19.68 billion pounds, with cow numbers decreasing by 68,000 head. The average milk production per cow dropped by 3 pounds, influenced by regional factors. The U.S. dairy herd dropped 68,000 heads starting in May 2023, underscoring industry difficulties. However, there has been a slight rise since October 2023, driving herd size to its most significant since late 2023. Interwoven influences on milk output per cow include income margins, feed prices, and regional weather. States like Florida, Minnesota, and Wisconsin reported increases in milk yield, while California, Vermont, Pennsylvania, and Indiana reported losses.

Learn more:

Avian Influenza Outbreak: How US Dairy Cows Are Suffering

Explore the devastating effects of the avian flu outbreak on U.S. dairy cattle, recognizing the surge in mortality rates and culling practices among farmers. What implications does this hold for the future landscape of dairy farming?

The U.S. dairy industry is grappling with an unprecedented crisis as the avian flu, a disease typically associated with poultry, has now infiltrated dairy cows across multiple states. This alarming development has resulted in significant cattle losses, with infected cows either succumbing to the virus or being culled by farmers due to the lack of recovery prospects. These measures are dealing a severe blow to the sector, given the higher cost of raising dairy cows compared to poultry. 

Bird flu in cows could take a more significant economic toll than initially thought. 

For farmers, the avian flu outbreak is not just a health crisis but also an economic disaster. The need to prioritize containment efforts is adding to the financial pressures on struggling producers. The situation is further complicated by secondary infections, which are causing higher mortality rates and management challenges, thereby exacerbating the economic implications. 

  • Increased culling of infected dairy cows
  • Secondary infections elevating mortality rates
  • Long-term impact on milk production and market prices

As the virus spreads, the agricultural sector’s resilience is being tested, but it’s also a testament to the industry’s ability to adapt and overcome. This makes long-term adaptations critical for survival, but it also instills a sense of hope that the sector can weather this storm.

Avian Flu Strikes Dairy Industry: A Significant Economic Threat

StateInfected CowsCulled CowsSecondary Infections
South Dakota1,7002412
Michigan2002010
ColoradoUnavailableReportedReported
OhioUnavailableReportedReported
TexasUnavailableReportedReported
New MexicoUnavailableReportedDecreased
North CarolinaNoneNoneNone
KansasNoneNoneNone
IdahoUnavailableNo ResponseNo Response

Reuters’ Leah Douglas and Tom Polansek highlighted a critical issue in the agricultural sector: dairy cows in five U.S. states have died or been culled due to the avian flu. State officials and academics confirmed that the affected cattle either died from the virus or were euthanized by farmers after failing to recover. This development could have significant economic implications, considering the higher costs of raising dairy cows than poultry.

The Financial Fallout: Avian Flu’s Deep Economic Impact on Dairy Farms 

The economic ramifications of the avian flu outbreak in dairy cattle are severe, straining farmers already on thin margins. Dairy cows represent a much more significant investment in cost and maintenance than poultry. Raising a cow involves substantial feed, healthcare, housing, and labor expenses over several years, making the financial stakes high. 

As dairy operations confront this crisis, culling infected cows adds economic pressure. Each lost cow means a direct financial hit and disrupts milk production cycles, affecting farm income. The smaller herd size reduces milk output, lowering sales and profits. The costs of rebuilding herds and replacing culled cows add further stress. These impacts can be devastating for small to mid-sized farms and may lead to closures. 

The impact of the avian flu outbreak extends far beyond individual dairy farms, affecting the entire agricultural sector. The ripple effects of the outbreak are felt by feed suppliers, veterinary services, and dairy product distributors, all of whom experience a drop in demand due to the reduced number of cows. This highlights the need for robust disease management and support systems to mitigate future outbreaks and protect the livelihoods of those dependent on the agricultural sector.

Secondary Infections: The Underestimated Threat to Dairy Cattle Health 

Secondary infections significantly contribute to the mortality of dairy cattle affected by avian flu. As the virus weakens their immune systems, cows become vulnerable to other infections they would usually resist. 

Russ Daly from South Dakota State University explains, “Some animals died not from avian flu, but from secondary infections that thrived in their weakened state.” 

Olga Robak from the Colorado Department of Agriculture adds, “Infected cows often didn’t recover their health because secondary infections took hold after their immune systems were compromised.” 

Phil Durst of Michigan State University Extension notes, “In Michigan, secondary infections are notably high among infected cattle, further depleting herds struggling to recover.” 

Ohio Department of Agriculture spokesperson Meghan Harshbarger confirms, “Most deaths in Ohio are due to secondary infections, rather than the avian flu virus itself.” 

Therefore, while the initial avian flu infection is severe, the subsequent secondary infections are proving fatal for many dairy cows, complicating herd management during an outbreak.

Case Studies: Devastating Impact of Avian Flu on Dairy Farms

In South Dakota, a dairy farm had to cull 24 cows—12 that did not recover from the virus and another 12 that succumbed to secondary infections. This illustrates the drastic measures needed to maintain farm health

In Michigan, about 10% of a farm’s 200 infected cows were culled due to their inability to recover from avian flu, highlighting the severe impact on large-scale dairy operations. 

Colorado dairies also culled cows that failed to return to milk production, showing how the virus can significantly disrupt milk output and economic stability.

State Responses: A Patchwork of Impact and Strategies Amid Avian Flu Crisis

State responses to avian flu in dairy cows vary significantly. In Ohio and Texas, officials reported that most cow deaths resulted from secondary infections. Similarly, New Mexico’s state veterinarian indicated that early culling due to reduced milk production has diminished as recovery rates improved. Conversely, North Carolina and Kansas officials reported few to no cow deaths, suggesting a more contained situation.

Expanding Crisis: Avian Flu’s Relentless Spread Across U.S. Dairy Herds

The situation continues to worsen, with avian flu affecting dairy herds in Minnesota and Iowa. This brings the total infected dairies to 86 across 11 states. Since May 30, 18 new herds have tested positive. Recent USDA data shows new cases in three Texas dairies and another in Idaho. Increased voluntary testing by the USDA suggests more cases may emerge as the virus spreads.

USDA’s Pilot Program: A Crucial Weapon in the Fight Against Avian Flu in Dairy Herds

The USDA’s pilot program is a critical strategy in tackling the avian flu outbreak in dairy herds. By urging producers to test their herds voluntarily, it aims to identify H5N1 cases and quickly limit the virus’s spread. Farms must test negative for three consecutive weeks using ‘on-farm bulk milk’ or similar samples to be designated as ‘negative status,’ ensuring herd health and industry integrity.

Achieving a ‘negative status’ is crucial. It provides a framework for disease monitoring and control, preventing outbreaks from becoming more significant crises. Rigorous testing protocols help identify infected animals early, reducing economic losses from culling and secondary infections. Additionally, it restores consumer confidence in the safety of dairy products, which is essential for market stability. Such measures are vital in safeguarding public health and the dairy industry’s future.

Ensuring Food Safety Amid Avian Flu: USDA’s Assurance in the Integrity of Meat and Milk Supplies

As avian flu affects dairy cattle, food safety remains a top concern. The USDA assures that both meat and milk supplies are safe. Rigorous inspections by Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) veterinarians at federal slaughter facilities ensure that only healthy cattle enter the human food supply. Any cattle that do not pass these inspections are excluded. 

Additionally, the USDA confirms that milk from healthy animals is safe for consumption, highlighting ongoing efforts to protect public health. These measures not only reassure consumers but also maintain the integrity of the U.S. food supply chain, instilling confidence in the safety of dairy products.

The Bottom Line

The avian flu’s penetration into the U.S. dairy industry is causing significant economic fallout. Dairy cows are dying or being culled due to the virus and secondary infections. Robust responses from state and federal agencies are now more critical than ever. Case studies from states like South Dakota, Michigan, and Texas highlight the dire impact. The USDA’s pilot program and testing efforts are essential for crisis management, food safety, and public trust. While current meat and milk supplies are safe, continuous monitoring and effective strategies are paramount to protect the agricultural economy and public health.

Key Takeaways:

  • Economic Impact: The culling and deaths of infected dairy cows are creating substantial financial strain on farmers, as cows are significantly more costly to raise compared to poultry.
  • Secondary Infections: Many cows are dying not directly from avian flu, but due to secondary infections that take advantage of their weakened immune systems.
  • State Reports: Multiple states, including South Dakota, Michigan, and Colorado, have reported significant losses, with differing responses and outcomes based on local conditions and strategies.
  • Rising Infections: The spread of avian flu continues to escalate, with new cases recently confirmed in Minnesota and Iowa, bringing the total number of affected states to 11.
  • Testing Initiatives: The USDA has initiated a pilot program encouraging dairy farms to test herds more frequently, aiming to identify negative status herds and curtail the spread of the virus.
  • Food Safety Assurance: Despite the outbreak, the USDA maintains that the U.S. meat supply remains safe due to stringent inspection processes ensuring only healthy animals enter the food supply.
  • State Variations: Impact and response strategies vary across states, reflecting a patchwork approach in managing the outbreak and its aftermath.

Summary: The U.S. dairy industry is facing an unprecedented crisis as the avian flu infiltrates dairy cows across multiple states. This has resulted in significant cattle losses, with infected cows either succumbing to the virus or being culled by farmers due to the lack of recovery prospects. The outbreak is not just a health crisis but also an economic disaster for farmers, with prioritizing containment efforts adding financial pressures on struggling producers. Secondary infections, causing higher mortality rates and management challenges, further complicate the situation. The agricultural sector’s resilience is being tested, but it is also a testament to the industry’s ability to adapt and overcome. Long-term adaptations are critical for survival, but it also instills hope that the sector can weather this storm. State responses to the avian flu in dairy cows vary significantly, with most cow deaths resulting from secondary infections. The USDA’s pilot program is a critical strategy in tackling the avian flu outbreak in dairy herds by urging producers to test their herds voluntarily.

Comparing Dairy Feed Systems: Predicting Essential Amino Acid Outflows in Cows

Discover which dairy feed system best predicts essential amino acid outflows in cows. Are NRC, CNCPS, or NASEM systems more accurate for your herd’s nutrition?

The dairy industry thrives on the delicate balance between nutrition and productivity, with essential amino acids (EAA) playing a pivotal role. These building blocks are crucial for dairy cows’ health, growth, and milk production, serving as the foundation of successful dairy farming. But how do farmers ensure their herds get the right EAA mix? The answer lies in advanced feed evaluation systems that predict and optimize EAA outflows. This article explores the effectiveness of three such systems: the National Research Council (NRC), the Cornell Net Protein and Carbohydrate System (CNCPS), and the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM). 

Optimal EAA delivery in dairy diets boosts cow health and productivity and enhances overall farm sustainability through efficient nutrient utilization. 

This study compares these three systems, focusing on their ability to predict post-ruminal outflows of EAAs. Analyzing data from 70 duodenal and 24 omasal studies aims to determine which method offers the most reliable predictions, guiding better feed formulations and promoting improved dairy cow health and productivity.

Essential Amino Acids in Dairy Cows

Essential amino acids (EAA) are vital nutrients that dairy cows must obtain through their diet. They are critical for protein synthesis, enzyme activity, and other metabolic processes

In dairy nutrition, EAAs are vital to maintaining optimal milk production. An imbalance in amino acid ratios can lead to nutrient waste and inefficient milk production. Proper balance ensures that dietary proteins are used effectively, producing higher milk yield and quality. 

Deficiencies in EAAs like methionine and Lysine can reduce milk protein synthesis, impacting milk production and cow health. Addressing these deficits through precise ration formulation sustains high milk yield and ensures cow well-being.

Dairy Feed Systems

In addition to the three dairy feed evaluation systems, the feed delivery method is crucial for amino acid absorption and utilization. Total Mixed Ration (TMR) and Partial Mixed Ration (PMR) are the two central systems. 

Total Mixed Ration (TMR): This system mixes all dietary components into a single blend, ensuring each bite is nutritionally balanced. 

Partial Mixed Ration (PMR): This method combines forage and concentrate portions separately, providing flexibility but potentially less consistency in nutrient intake. 

Pros of TMR: 

  • Ensures balanced nutrient intake in every bite, improving amino acid absorption.
  • Promotes stable rumen fermentation, essential for microbial protein synthesis and cow health.

Cons of TMR: 

  • Requires costly specialized mixing equipment.
  • Less flexible in adjusting to individual cow needs or changes in forage quality.

Pros of PMR: 

  • Offers flexibility to manage forage and concentrate portions for individual cow needs.
  • It is cheaper to implement as it doesn’t require sophisticated mixing equipment.

Cons of PMR: 

  • This may lead to inconsistent nutrient intake, affecting amino acid absorption.
  • It can cause sorting behavior, leading to imbalanced nutrition.

When choosing between TMR and PMR, consider: 

  • Equipment and Cost: Initial investment and maintenance of feeding equipment.
  • Nutritional Consistency: TMR ensures balanced intake, which is crucial for amino acid absorption, while PMR needs careful management.
  • Cow Behavior: Feeding systems should align with cow behavior to maintain milk production and health.
  • Flexibility: PMR might be preferable for operations requiring quick ration adjustments.

Both TMR and PMR have merits and limitations. The choice depends on farm-specific factors like resource availability, herd size, and management goals. Implementing the right feeding strategy with accurate feed evaluation optimizes amino acid absorption, ensuring better productivity and health in dairy cows.

Predicting Essential Amino Acid Outflows

Predicting essential amino acid (EAA) outflows in dairy cows accurately is vital for crafting balanced rations that boost health and productivity. Three primary dairy feed evaluation systems are in use: the National Research Council (NRC), the Cornell Net Protein and Carbohydrate System (CNCPS), and the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM). 

These systems use models based on rumen-undegradable, microbial, and endogenous protein outflows. The NRC model underpredicts most EAAs, while CNCPS overpredicts amino acids like Arg, His, and Lys. On the other hand, NASEM occasionally overpredicts Lysine but is more accurate overall in predicting absolute values. 

Several factors affect amino acid absorption and metabolism, including the cow’s physiological state, feed composition, and microbial protein synthesis efficiency in the rumen—the sample collection site, whether omasal or duodenal, significantly impacts model accuracy. Changes in crude protein and EAA chemistry in feed also influence predictions, highlighting the complex relationship between diet formulation and nutrient absorption. 

Accurate EAA outflow estimates are crucial for ensuring dairy cows receive proper nutrition, which optimizes milk production, enhances feed efficiency, and improves reproductive performance. Misestimations can result in nutrient deficits or excesses, with economic and health impacts. Therefore, continually refining these prediction models is essential to meet the evolving needs of dairy nutrition and maintain productive, healthy herds.

Comparative Analysis: NRC vs CNCPS vs NASEM

Evaluation SystemPrediction Accuracy (EAA Outflows)Mean BiasLinear Bias of ConcernStrengthsWeaknesses
NRCAccurateUnderpredicted most EAA (5.3% to 8.6%)HisHigher concordance correlation in duodenal studies
Slight superiority in predicting dietary change responses
Underprediction of most EAA except Leu, Lys, and Val
NASEMAccurateOverpredicted Lys (10.8%)NoneSmall superiority in predicting absolute valuesOverprediction of Lys
CNCPSVariableOverpredicted Arg, His, Lys, Met, and Val (5.2% to 26.0%)All EAA except Leu, Phe, and ThrLowest mean bias for Met in omasal studiesMean and linear biases of concern for many EAA

Analyzing raw observed values, the NRC system underpredicted EAA outflows, with deviations ranging from 5.3% to 8.6% of the observed mean except for Leu, Lys, and Val. Conversely, NASEM overpredicted Ly’s outflow by 10.8%. CNCPS overpredicted multiple amino acids, with deviations from 5.2% to 26.0%. 

Regarding linear bias, NASEM showed no significant biases for any EAA, highlighting its robustness. NRC only had a linear bias of concern for His at 6.8%, while CNCPS had biases for almost all EAAs except Leu, Phe, and Thr. 

For dietary changes, NRC showed fewer EAAs with linear biases of concern, precisely only two. NASEM and CNCPS had biases for four and six EAAs, respectively. Notably, He exhibited linear biases across all three systems. 

The variability in sampling sites—omasal versus duodenal—revealed systematic discrepancies in Met outflows. NRC performed better with duodenal studies, while CNCPS showed the most negligible mean bias for Met in omasal samples. This 30% difference in Met mean biases mirrors discrepancies observed in Met versus nonammonia nitrogen outflows. 

Detailed reporting of crude protein and EAA chemistry for feed ingredients, as observed in 36% of studies, helped reduce linear biases across all systems, emphasizing the importance of precise ingredient characterization. 

Overall, NRC and NASEM showed vital prediction accuracy for EAA outflows, with NASEM excelling in predicting absolute values and NRC in adapting to dietary changes. Despite CNCPS’s broader mean and linear biases, it still offers valuable insights, making the system choice dependent on specific nutritional priorities.

Addressing Mean and Linear Biases in Feed Evaluation Systems

Understanding and addressing biases in feed evaluation systems is crucial for improving amino acid (AA) prediction models. Our meta-analysis of the NRC, CNCPS, and NASEM systems revealed significant insights into their predictive capabilities. 

Mean and linear biases were considered concerning if statistically significant and exceeding 5% of the observed mean, mitigating Type I errors and ensuring actual predictive discrepancies. 

Examining raw observed values, NRC tended to underpredict most essential amino acids (EAA) outflows, with deviations between 5.3% and 8.6% of the observed mean, except for Leu, Lys, and Val. NASEM overpredicted Lys by 10.8%, indicating a need for refinement. CNCPS overpredicted multiple EAAs, with biases from 5.2% to 26.0% for Arg, His, Lys, Met, and Val, suggesting algorithm adjustments. 

Regression analyses indicated that reporting the measured chemistry of crude protein and EAA in feed ingredients, present in 36% of studies, significantly reduced linear biases in all three systems, emphasizing the importance of accurate input data. 

Sampling site differences, particularly between omasal and duodenal studies, also affected mean biases for Met outflows. NRC showed better concordance in duodenal studies, while CNCPS was more accurate in omasal studies. This suggests that feed evaluation system applicability may vary with sampling methodology, warranting a nuanced model application approach. 

This analysis highlights the strengths and limitations of current feed evaluation systems, prompting further refinements for enhanced accuracy and reliability. Addressing biases and leveraging precise feed composition data are essential for advancing dairy feed evaluation frameworks.

Impact of Study Adjustments on EAA Predictions

Adjusting data for the random effect of the study revealed notable changes in the feed evaluation systems’ ability to predict EAA outflows. These adjustments are crucial for reducing biases from study-specific variations, providing a clearer picture of predictive capabilities. The Concordance Correlation Coefficient (CCC), indicating predictive agreement, ranged from 0.34 to 0.55, showing moderate reliability across the systems. 

NRC showed an advantage in predicting EAA responses to dietary changes, with biases of concern for only two amino acids. This could be due to NRC’s fine-tuned foundational equations. In contrast, NASEM and CNCPS displayed more significant biases, with NASEM having four and CNCPS six EAA with linear biases of concern. 

Interestingly, measured crude protein and EAA chemistries in feed ingredients—reported in 36% of the studies—significantly decreased linear biases in all three systems. This underscores the importance of precise ingredient characterization in improving prediction accuracy. 

Histidine (His) outflows showed linear biases of concern across all three systems, suggesting a common modeling issue for this amino acid. Additionally, methodological differences between duodenal and omasal studies are notable; NRC showed better concordance for methionine (Met) in duodenal studies. CNCPS exhibited lesser mean bias in omasal studies. 

Overall, these adjustments highlight the complexities in predicting EAA outflows. While NRC and NASEM are relatively reliable, each with unique strengths, CNCPS’s significant biases suggest a need for refinement. Future work should focus on identifying and correcting the causes of these biases to enhance nutritional precision for dairy cows.

The Bottom Line

The comparative analysis of NRC, CNCPS, and NASEM systems revealed distinct performance traits in predicting post-ruminal outflows of essential amino acids (EAA) in dairy cows. NRC and NASEM demonstrated solid accuracy, with NASEM slightly better at predicting absolute values and NRC superior in dietary change responses. In contrast, CNCPS showed significant biases for various EAAs. 

These insights are crucial for dairy farmers and researchers. Accurate EAA outflow predictions are vital in formulating balanced rations, optimizing milk production, and enhancing overall herd health. The study highlights the need to choose the right evaluation system for absolute values or diet changes. The choice of sampling site, duodenal or omasal, also affects EAA prediction accuracy, which is vital for effective feeding strategies

Future research should focus on reducing biases in feed evaluation systems and improving EAA prediction methods. Developing advanced models that include data from various sampling sites is essential. Further exploration into feed ingredient chemistry and its effects on EAA outflows will drive advancements in dairy nutrition, benefiting both economic and animal welfare outcomes.

Key Takeaways:

  • Essential Nutrients: Accurate prediction of EAA outflows enables better nutritional planning for dairy cows, leading to improved growth, milk production, and overall health.
  • Evaluation Systems: This study compares NRC, CNCPS, and NASEM in terms of their ability to predict postruminal amino acid outflows.
  • Meta-Analysis Scope: The data set includes 354 treatment means from 70 duodenal and 24 omasal studies, ensuring a comprehensive comparison across various methodologies.
  • Bias Consideration: Mean and linear biases are critical factors, flagged if statistically significant and representing more than 5% of the observed mean, to avoid Type I error.
  • Consistent Findings: NRC and NASEM are consistent in their predictions, with NASEM slightly better at predicting absolute values and NRC being superior in predicting dietary change responses. CNCPS, however, exhibits mean and linear biases for numerous EAAs.
  • Practical Applications: Understanding the accuracy and biases of these systems can help farmers and dieticians in optimizing diet formulations, thereby improving the effectiveness of dairy production practices.

Summary: The dairy industry relies on a balance between nutrition and productivity, with essential amino acids (EAA) playing a crucial role in cow health, growth, and milk production. Advanced feed evaluation systems help farmers predict and optimize EAA outflows. This study compares Total Mixed Ration (TMR) and Partial Mixed Ration (PMR) to determine the most reliable predictions for predicting post-ruminal EAA outflows. TMR ensures balanced nutrient intake, improving amino acid absorption and promoting stable rumen fermentation. PMR offers flexibility and is cheaper but may lead to inconsistent nutrient intake and imbalanced nutrition. Both systems have merits and limitations, depending on farm-specific factors. Implementing the right feeding strategy with accurate feed evaluation optimizes amino acid absorption, ensuring better productivity and health in dairy cows.

Where have all the dairy farmers gone? In Depth Analysis of the 2013 U.S. and Canadian National Dairy Herd Statistics

In 2013 more US dairy farmers left the business than in any year since 2007.  For an industry that has seen almost 64% percent of its members leave in the span of one generation, these are not positive stats.  Continued high feed costs, despite high milk prices, have seen margins get tighter and tighter causing over 2,321 dairy farmers to leave dairying in the last year alone.

Figure 1 Licensed US Dairy farms

Click on image to enlarge

TABLE 1: Licensed U.S. Dairy Farms & Average Herd Size by year

NameSireGTPI*OwnerState/Ctry
DA-SO-BURN UNO 781AMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2647Darin & Sonya BurnikelCresco , IA
LARCREST CANTO-ETSEAGULL-BAY SUPERSIRE-ET2626Jon E. LarsonAlbert Lea , MN
T-GEN-AC SUPERSIRE RUTH-ETSEAGULL-BAY SUPERSIRE-ET2619Tim ClarkBrownsburg-Chatham , IA
EDG RUBY UNO RACHEL-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2615Elite Dairy Genomics LLCChebanse , IL
LADYS-MANOR RD SASHAY-ETSEAGULL-BAY SUPERSIRE-ET2598Ladys Manor LLCMonkton , MD
S-S-I JEROD MINAL 8777-ETDE-SU JEROD 1223-ET2598Select Sires Inc.Plain City , OH
EDG HALLIE UNO HEATHER-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2581Elite Dairy Genomics LLCChebanse , IL
CAR-J SUPERSIRE LILA-ETSEAGULL-BAY SUPERSIRE-ET2569Carlton WilliardGraham , NC
COYNE-FARMS UNO MAPLE-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2545Coyne Farms Inc.Avon , NY
EDG RUBY UNO RIZA-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2539Elite Dairy Genomics LLCChebanse , IL
EDG RUBY UNO RANDI-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2535Elite Dairy Genomics LLCChebanse , IL
VIEW-HOME UNO HOPE-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2534Country Dairy Inc.New Era , MI
VIEW-HOME MCC FOUND-ETDE-SU BKM MCCUTCHEN 1174-ET2531Country Dairy Inc.New Era , MI
WOODCREST NUMERO UNO FUN-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2530Woodcrest Dairy LLCLisbon , NY
VIEW-HOME MCC ALABAMA-ETDE-SU BKM MCCUTCHEN 1174-ET2528Country Dairy Inc.New Era , MI
ROORDA MAY MCBABY 15866-ETDE-SU D MAYFIELD 893-ET2522John & Larry RoordaPaullina , IA
ROORDA SS MCJONI 15887-ETSEAGULL-BAY SUPERSIRE-ET2516John & Larry RoordaPaullina , IA
EILDON-TWEED SAJ TANO-ETGIL-GAR DOMAIN SAJAC-ET2516David R. WoodAmsterdam , NY
BUTZ-HILL MAGICGIRL-ETDE-SU FREDDIE GALAXY-ET2513Mark ButzMount Vernon , IA
VIEW-HOME UNO GRACE-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2512Country Dairy Inc.New Era , MI
MS KOENEN NUMEROUNO 5835-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2508Gregory B Moret & Koenen DairyPrairie Du Chien , WI
APRILDAY-CG SS BETTY-ETSEAGULL-BAY SUPERSIRE-ET2502Edward Peck & Charles GarrisonMadison , WI
MS DREARY DRALA-ETSEAGULL-BAY HEADLINER-ET2501Trans-America GeneticsSt-Hyacinthe QC , CA
ROORDA SS MCCARI 15884-ETSEAGULL-BAY SUPERSIRE-ET2500John & Larry RoordaPaullina , IA
EDG HALLIE MOGUL HEART-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2497Elite Dairy Genomics LLCChebanse , IL
MELARRY MOGUL FELICE-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2495Melvin C. & Spencer C. HackettRice , MN
BACON-HILL UNO MAUDE-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2493Bacon-Hill Holsteins LLCSchuylerville , NY
ROORDA CUT MCCINDY 15917-ETDE-SU BKM MCCUTCHEN 1174-ET2493John & Larry RoordaPaullina , IA
ROORDA CUT MCJANE 15914-ETDE-SU BKM MCCUTCHEN 1174-ET2489John & Larry RoordaPaullina , IA
SPEEK-NJ UNO DANCE-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2489Neil McDonahTrempealeau , WI
DE-SU GALAXY 2494-ETDE-SU FREDDIE GALAXY-ET2487Darin MeyerNew Albin , IA
VIEW-HOME UNO FAITH-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2487Country Dairy Inc.New Era , MI
S-S-I GLX MAYBELINE 8725-ETDE-SU FREDDIE GALAXY-ET2487Select Sires Inc.Plain City , OH
MORNINGVIEW MGL ROXY-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2478Tom J. SchmittDurango , IA
ROORDA SS MERRITT 15889-ETSEAGULL-BAY SUPERSIRE-ET2477John & Larry RoordaPaullina , IA
SPEEK-NJ DA MARIAH CAREY-ETMINNIGAN-HILLS DAY-ET2475Neil McDonahTrempealeau , WI
FARNEAR CAM ALL AMBITION-ETSHEMA JEEVES CAMERON-ET2473Bryhill Farm IncOrmstown PQ , IA
LARCREST COTTON-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2469Jon E. LarsonAlbert Lea , MN
NORTH-ECHO MOGUL 2893-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2469Clear Echo Farm LLC & North FoSchuylerville , NY
SEAGULL-BAY MOGUL 1723-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2465Seagull Bay Dairy Inc.American Falls , ID
MORMANN UNO LIVANA 2184-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2465Daniel Sandra & Jennifer MormaNew Vienna , IA
VATLAND MOGUL MOCHA 3665-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2463Josh VatlandCaledonia , MN
COYNE-MCGARR MOGL LOTTIE-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2463Dan McGarr & Coyne Fms Inc.King Ferry , NY
HOLYLAND ECLIPS UNO 2145-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2462Daniel F. & Joseph N. LoehrMount Calvary , WI
LADYS-MANOR HDLR SHASTEE-ETSEAGULL-BAY HEADLINER-ET2461Ladys Manor LLCMonkton , MD
OCD PARISH DAFFODIL-ETPLAIN-KNOLL PARISH 5534-ET2459Oakfield Corners DairyOakfield , NY
REGANCREST NU BENISHA-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2458Regancrest FarmsWaukon , IA
CO-OP RB MIXER OLIVEMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MIXER-ET2454Genesis Cooperative HerdShawano , WI
TJR MOGUL PACIFICA 2192-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2454TJR GeneticsFarley , IA
VIEW-HOME MCC ALASKA-ETDE-SU BKM MCCUTCHEN 1174-ET2452Country Dairy Inc.New Era , MI
SANDY-VALLEY HLNR TILLIE-ETSEAGULL-BAY HEADLINER-ET2449Dave Pat Frank Jr. & Greg BStevens Point , WI
JOOK SUPER SIRE 6839-ETSEAGULL-BAY SUPERSIRE-ET2447Lester C. Jones & Sons Inc.Massey , MD
CO-OP BSF MOGUL LYDIA-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2446Brown Star Farm LLCGillett , WI
DE-SU GALAXY 2486-ETDE-SU FREDDIE GALAXY-ET2445Darin MeyerNew Albin , IA
DINOMI MOGUL DAINTY CRI-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2445Genesis Cooperative HerdShawano , WI
SEAGULL-BAY MOGUL 1725-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2445Seagull Bay Dairy Inc.American Falls , ID
PENN-ENGLAND GIFIAN 9329-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2441Penn England LLCWilliamsburg , PA
ROORDA SS MIRCELA 15882-ETSEAGULL-BAY SUPERSIRE-ET2441John & Larry RoordaPaullina , IA
MS MOVIESTAR UNO MACE-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2439Butler Borba Glaz-Way & DurrChebanse , IL
JOOK HEADLINER 6910-ETSEAGULL-BAY HEADLINER-ET2438Lester C. Jones & Sons Inc.Massey , MD
S-S-I STCHL MICK 8753-ETERBCREST SATCHEL P2438Select Sires Inc.Plain City , OH
JOSEY-LLC UNO SANGARIA-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2437Josey 101 LLCTrempealeau , WI
DE-SU MOGUL 2490-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2437De Su Holsteins LLCNew Albin , IA
SCO-LO ABRA UNO 2022-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2436John CannonDyersville , IA
TJR DAY PAIGE 2208-ETMINNIGAN-HILLS DAY-ET2436TJR GeneticsFarley , IA
MIDAS-TOUCH MCCUT TISHA-ETDE-SU BKM MCCUTCHEN 1174-ET2435Kings-Ransom Farm LLCSchuylerville , NY
T-SPRUCE NUMERO UNO 7322-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2433Arnold B. GruenesRichmond , MN
DE-SU SUPERSIRE 2278-ETSEAGULL-BAY SUPERSIRE-ET2432De Su Holsteins LLCNew Albin , IA
DE-SU SALEEN 2492-ETFUSTEAD SALEEN2432Darin MeyerNew Albin , IA
CO-OP BSF MOGUL LUCY-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2432Brown Star Farm LLCGillett , WI
LARCREST CACHITO-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2432Jon E. LarsonAlbert Lea , MN
DE-SU UNO 2297-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2430De Su Holsteins LLCNew Albin , IA
TJR UNO DEIDRA 2204-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2429TJR GeneticsFarley , IA
SANDY-VALLEY HDLNR THEDA-ETSEAGULL-BAY HEADLINER-ET2429Dave Pat Frank Jr. & Greg BStevens Point , WI
SANDY-VALLEY MG CALAMITY-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2429Dave Pat Frank Jr. & Greg BStevens Point , WI
CO-OP DAY ROSETTE 6920-ETMINNIGAN-HILLS DAY-ET2428Genesis Cooperative HerdShawano , WI
SIEMERS UNO REAL-PRETTY-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2426Siemers Holstein Farms Inc.Newton , WI
S-S-I STRLNG TAYLOR 8728-ETSANDY-VALLEY STERLING-ET2425Select Sires Inc.Plain City , OH
REGANCREST NU BENEA-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2424Regancrest FarmsWaukon , IA
WILRA SUPER SIRE 537-ETSEAGULL-BAY SUPERSIRE-ET2422Wilra Farms Inc.Nashville , IL
STONEHURST NU CHESNI-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2422David & Anne Kulp & Todd GaltoManheim , PA
WA-DEL MOGUL BRENNA-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2422Rick L. WadelShippensburg , PA
STONEHURST NU CHASITI-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2421David & Anne Kulp & Todd GaltoManheim , PA
OAKFIELD MORGAN BUBBLES-ETS-S-I BOOKEM MORGAN-ET2420Alicia LambOakfield , NY
DE-SU EPIC 2515-ETGENERVATIONS EPIC2418De Su Holsteins LLCNew Albin , IA
MORMANN UNO LIQUOR 2209-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2418Daniel Sandra & Jennifer MormaNew Vienna , IA
JOOK MOGUL 6736MOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2416Lester C. Jones & Sons Inc.Massey , MD
END-ROAD MAYFIELD BLAZEDE-SU D MAYFIELD 893-ET2416Duane & Janet MolhoekFalmouth , MI
KHW MCCUTCHEN AFLIRT-ETDE-SU BKM MCCUTCHEN 1174-ET2416High Altitude SyndicatePlatteville , WI
S-S-I OCOSMO MARIAH 8714-ETO-COSMOPOLITAN-ET2414Select Sires Inc.Plain City , OH
LANGS-TWIN-B S-SIRE 4961-ETSEAGULL-BAY SUPERSIRE-ET2414F. & L. Baumann and F. LangMarathon , WI
KP-ACK HUNTER 316-ETCOOKIECUTTER MOM HUNTER-ET2412Kevin & Pete AckermanSauk Rapids , MN
WOODCREST DAY DAWNING-ETMINNIGAN-HILLS DAY-ET2412Woodcrest Dairy LLCLisbon , NY
DE-SU GALAXY 2504-ETDE-SU FREDDIE GALAXY-ET2412Darin MeyerNew Albin , IA
MS PETRONE DONALYNNA-ETWELCOME SUPER PETRONE-ET2412Trans-America GeneticsOakdale , CA
HAR-DALE-ACRES-JP PALACE-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2411Fred & Matt HarderAthens , WI
RI-VAL-RE SUPRSRE NALLIE-ETSEAGULL-BAY SUPERSIRE-ET2410Aaron JorgensenWebberville , MI
END-ROAD MOGUL BLISS-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2410Duane & Janet MolhoekFalmouth , MI
ROORDA UNO MOLLIE 15849-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2410John & Larry RoordaPaullina , IA
AL-LEW MGL ALABAMA 1196-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2409Scott I. SollenbergerSaint Thomas , PA
EDG LACY MCC LOLLIPOP-ETDE-SU BKM MCCUTCHEN 1174-ET2408Elite Dairy Genomics LLCChebanse , IL
DE-SU UNO 2500-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2406De Su Holsteins LLCNew Albin , IA
JB-DOMINIC SAJAC 3249GIL-GAR DOMAIN SAJAC-ET2405James E. BurroughsDenair , CA
CLEAR-ECHO CLARTA 2868-ET2405Clear Echo Farm LLCSchuylerville , NY
JERESA UNO PEPSI-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2405Jere L & Teresa J BrubakerMyerstown , PA
PENN-ENGLAND RUTHIE 9512AMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2404Barry M. & Diane H. EnglandWilliamsburg , PA
COYNE-MCGARR MOGUL BAINA-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2403Dan McGarr & Coyne Fms Inc.King Ferry , NY
FOUR-CAL DAY DARBY-ETMINNIGAN-HILLS DAY-ET2403Four-Cal GeneticsCaledonia , MN
SCHILLVIEW SUPERSIRE GIGISEAGULL-BAY SUPERSIRE-ET2403Michael & Karen SchillerFreeport , MN
ST GENOMICPRO STARRYMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2403Sexing TechnologiesNavasota , TX
DANHOF MOGUL DELARAE-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2402Jason & Sheri DanhofWaukon , IA
AMMON-PEACHEY MSY MIFF-ETCO-OP BOSSIDE MASSEY-ET2402M & J Ammon & G S PeacheyLewistown , PA
CO-OP RB GALAXY GARLIN-ETDE-SU FREDDIE GALAXY-ET2401Genesis Cooperative HerdShawano , WI
MORNINGVIEW UNO REGINA-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2400Tom J. SchmittDurango , IA
SIEMERS DADDY BOMBTASTIC-ETRONELEE SSI O DADDY-ET2400Siemers Holstein Farms Inc.Newton , WI
S-S-I STRLNG SIDNEY 8732-ETSANDY-VALLEY STERLING-ET2399Select Sires Inc.Plain City , OH
CLEAR-ECHO SUPRSIRE 2878-ETSEAGULL-BAY SUPERSIRE-ET2399Clear Echo Farm LLCSchuylerville , NY
MORNINGVIEW MGL RENEA-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2399Tom J. SchmittDurango , IA
T-SPRUCE O-COSMO 7270-ETO-COSMOPOLITAN-ET2399Arnold B. GruenesRichmond , MN
SPEEK-NJ COLBIE CAILLAT-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2397Neil McDonahTrempealeau , WI
OCD PARISH DARLING-ETPLAIN-KNOLL PARISH 5534-ET2396Oakfield Corners DairyOakfield , NY
BLUMENFELD GRAFEETI 4282LADYS-MANOR RD GRAFEETI-ET2395Spring Prairie Colony Inc.Hawley , MN
KERIEL UNO BARBI-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2395Daniel K WiebeWhitewater , KS
FOUR-CAL DAY FELICITY-ETMINNIGAN-HILLS DAY-ET2394Four-Cal GeneticsCaledonia , MN
S-S-I OFFIE TANDY 8638-ETCLEAR-ECHO OBSERVR OFFIE-ET2394Select Sires Inc.Plain City , OH
LARCREST CALADIUM-ETSEAGULL-BAY SUPERSIRE-ET2394Jon E. LarsonAlbert Lea , MN
SIEMERS DADDY BOMBI-GAL-ETRONELEE SSI O DADDY-ET2393Siemers Holstein Farms Inc.Newton , WI
FARNEAR-BH SS MABEL-ETSEAGULL-BAY SUPERSIRE-ET2392Tom SimonFarley , IA
AL-LEW MGL ARCADIA 1194-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2392Scott I. SollenbergerSaint Thomas , PA
VATLAND MOGUL MOLLY 3663-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2391Josh VatlandCaledonia , MN
DE-SU UNO 2514-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2391De Su Holsteins LLCNew Albin , IA
DE-SU UNO 2288-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2390De Su Holsteins LLCNew Albin , IA
STONEHURST NU CHARISA-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2390David & Anne Kulp & Todd GaltoManheim , PA
NORTH-ECHO MOGUL 2856-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2390Clear Echo Farm LLC & North FoSchuylerville , NY
NO-FLA PETRONE 34760-ETWELCOME SUPER PETRONE-ET2389North Florida HolsteinsBell , FL
S-S-I SHAN TEANNA 8755-ETLADYS-MANOR MAN-O-SHAN-ET2388Select Sires Inc.Plain City , OH
ROYLANE BOOKEM MEG 5457-ETDE-SU 521 BOOKEM-ET2388Gary & Bruce RoylanceWarden , WA
ZAHBULLS GOLDEN CRI-ETMOUNTFIELD MSY MAURICE-ET2388Genesis Cooperative HerdShawano , WI
CO-OP BSF MOGUL JASIME-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2387Brown Star Farm LLCGillett , WI
SEAGULL-BAY VN GALAXY-ETDE-SU FREDDIE GALAXY-ET2387Seagull Bay Dairy Inc.American Falls , ID
GIL-GAR S-SIRE SAUCY-ETSEAGULL-BAY SUPERSIRE-ET2387Henry G. StellingPlainview , MN
EDG BRYSHA SS BRYCE-ETSEAGULL-BAY SUPERSIRE-ET2386Elite Dairy Genomics LLCChebanse , IL
KP-ACK MOGUL 320-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2386Kevin & Pete AckermanSauk Rapids , MN
SANDY-VALLEY SPX FREESIA-ETBLUE-HORIZON ALTASUPLEX2386Dave Pat Frank Jr. & Greg BStevens Point , WI
ROSYLANE-LLC MAURICE 5848MOUNTFIELD MSY MAURICE-ET2385Rosy-Lane Holsteins LLCWatertown , WI
PINE-TREE 4283 NUM1 5577-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2384Matthew J. SteinerMarshallville , OH
WELCOME DAY GILDEX-ETMINNIGAN-HILLS DAY-ET2384Welcome Stock Farm LLCSchuylerville , NY
RONELEE SUPERSIRE TAMMY-ETSEAGULL-BAY SUPERSIRE-ET2382Sherman PolinderLynden , WA
FARNEAR-BH SS MYRA-ETSEAGULL-BAY SUPERSIRE-ET2381Tom SimonFarley , IA
WELCOME UNO GORGEOUS CRI-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2379Genesis Cooperative HerdShawano , WI
EDG EVIE LITHIUM EMA-ETS-S-I DOMAIN LITHIUM-ET2379Elite Dairy Genomics LLCChebanse , IL
APRILDAY-CG SS ARETHA-ETSEAGULL-BAY SUPERSIRE-ET2379Edward Peck & Charles GarrisonMadison , WI
TEEMAR MOGUL ARMBAND-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2379Mark P. PaulLuxemburg , WI
S-S-I MASSEY BARRIE 8784-ETCO-OP BOSSIDE MASSEY-ET2379Select Sires Inc.Plain City , OH
UECKER LAYNE JOLILA-ETKELLERCREST SUPER LAYNE-ET2379Dale UeckerForestville , WI
SANDY-VALLEY BILLIE JEAN-ETROYLANE BOXER PUNCH 4311-ET2378Dave Pat Frank Jr. & Greg BStevens Point , WI
ROORDA UNO MCMARY 15844-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2378John & Larry RoordaPaullina , IA
SPEEK-NJ CLAUDET COLBERT-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2378Neil McDonahTrempealeau , WI
SEAGULL-BAY ALEXA II-ETDE-SU BKM MCCUTCHEN 1174-ET2377Seagull Bay Dairy Inc.American Falls , ID
VIEW-HOME MCC GLORY-ETDE-SU BKM MCCUTCHEN 1174-ET2377Country Dairy Inc.New Era , MI
SPEEK-NJ UNO GLENN CLOSE-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2376Neil McDonahTrempealeau , WI
JOOK 1H10297 6667EILDON-TWEED SUPER CHAP-ET2376Lester C. Jones & Sons Inc.Massey , MD
OCD MCCUTCHEN DETROIT-ETDE-SU BKM MCCUTCHEN 1174-ET2376Oakfield Corners DairyOakfield , NY
ROORDA MOGUL DARBY 15796-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2376John & Larry RoordaPaullina , IA
LINERWAY UNO GOGO-ETSAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2375Jeff & Dan LinerVan Dyne , WI
ROORDA MCCUT DANNY 15902-ETDE-SU BKM MCCUTCHEN 1174-ET2375John & Larry RoordaPaullina , IA
BRANDT-VIEW DEAN DOMINGA-ETRONELEE SUPER DEAN-ET2375Brandt-View FarmsAnnville , PA
HONEYCREST MOGUL FANFARE-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2374Honeycrest Farms IncSpring Valley , WI
RO-WEE EXOTIC PARADISE-ETREGANCREST PARADISE-ET2374Robert & Kris WeedenRichland Center , WI
SPEEK-NJ CAROL CHANNING-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2374Neil McDonahTrempealeau , WI
WILRA SUPER SIRE 528-ETSEAGULL-BAY SUPERSIRE-ET2373Wilra Farms Inc.Nashville , IL
LINERWAY UNO GAGA-ETSAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2373Jeff & Dan LinerVan Dyne , WI
DE-SU GALAXY 2513-ETDE-SU FREDDIE GALAXY-ET2372Darin MeyerNew Albin , IA
TJR UNO DAISY 2196-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2372TJR GeneticsFarley , IA
DE-SU GALAXY 2484-ETDE-SU FREDDIE GALAXY-ET2370De Su Holsteins LLCNew Albin , IA
VIEW-HOME UNO LUCIANA-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2370Country Dairy Inc.New Era , MI
HENNIKERS MOGUL REGENIA 2-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2370Holstein UKHerts WD3 3BB ,
DANHOF MOGUL DALLAS-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2368Jason & Sheri DanhofWaukon , IA
BUTZ-HILL MAGICNIGHT-ETDE-SU FREDDIE GALAXY-ET2368Mark ButzMount Vernon , IA
DE-SU LITHIUM 2276-ETS-S-I DOMAIN LITHIUM-ET2367De Su Holsteins LLCNew Albin , IA
WCD-ZBW SUPERSIRE LALA-ETSEAGULL-BAY SUPERSIRE-ET2367Kevin & Barbara Ziemba & WoodcLisbon , NY
HOLEC PANZULMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2367A L H Genetics BVDamwoude ,
LARCREST CABARET-ETGENERVATIONS LEXOR2367Jon E. LarsonAlbert Lea , MN
PFAFFS COCO-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2367Kenneth J. PfaffRochester , MN
SPEEK-NJ UNO DECKLYN-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2366Neil McDonahTrempealeau , WI
COYNE-MCGARR GALAXY BAKA-ETDE-SU FREDDIE GALAXY-ET2365Dan McGarr & Coyne Fms Inc.King Ferry , NY
DE-SU LAYNE 2279-ETKELLERCREST SUPER LAYNE-ET2365De Su Holsteins LLCNew Albin , IA
MS CHASSITY UNO CUTIE-ETAMIGHETTI NUMERO UNO-ET2365Chassity Syndicate LLCOverland Park , KS
SIEMERS DADDY BOMBI-GIRL-ETRONELEE SSI O DADDY-ET2365Siemers Holstein Farms Inc.Newton , WI
CLEAR-ECHO ODADDY 2892-ETRONELEE SSI O DADDY-ET2365Clear Echo Farm LLCSchuylerville , NY
ST GENOMICPRO RAMAH-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2364Sexing TechnologiesNavasota , TX
KERNDTWAY MCCUTCHEN DICE-ETDE-SU BKM MCCUTCHEN 1174-ET2364Mark W. KerndtWaukon , IA
WAKE-UP PETRONE EVE-ETWELCOME SUPER PETRONE-ET2364Wayne HoudekCaledonia , MN
VISION-GEN MOGUL MI14392-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2363VISION GENETICSMount Joy , PA
MILLER-FF SSIRE ELEGANT-ETSEAGULL-BAY SUPERSIRE-ET2363Joshua & Nicole MillerGlenwood City , WI
PENN-ENGLAND GIFIAN 9331-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2362Penn England LLCWilliamsburg , PA
SANDY-VALLEY HUNTER CHAR-ETCOOKIECUTTER MOM HUNTER-ET2362Dave Pat Frank Jr. & Greg BStevens Point , WI
ROORDA MCCUT MOANA 15909-ETDE-SU BKM MCCUTCHEN 1174-ET2362John & Larry RoordaPaullina , IA
KP-ACK MOGUL 319-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2361Kevin & Pete AckermanSauk Rapids , MN
AIR-OSA-EXEL M DEE-ETMOUNTFIELD SSI DCY MOGUL-ET2361Joey Airosa & Henry & CarolynTipton , CA

Of the 84,549 dairies that left the industry in the past 22 years, the majority did so between 1992 and 2002.  Regardless that does not negate the fact that since 2003 the decline every year has been at least 3.3%.

How the West Was Won

TABLE 2 Regional Herds, Cows and Herd Size Since 1992

TABLE 2 Regional Herds Cows and Herd Size Since 1992

Click to enlarge

figure 2 herds by region 2013

Click to enlarge

Despite the reduction in the  number of dairy farmers, national cattle numbers actually held seeing only a 0.1% reduction to 9.221 million cows.,  Production actually increased slightly (0.3%) to 201.2 billion pounds.  However, that is the slowest rate of production growth recorded in the past 5 years.

figure 3 herd size by region 2013

Click to enlarge

An obvious trend over the past 22 years is the significant growth in herd sizes.  The national average herd size has risen from 74 cows per herd in 1992 to 167 cows in 2013.  The biggest change in herd size has occurred in the West where there has been a 58% increase to 279 cows per herd.  In fact that average herd size in the West is more than 5 times the size of the herds in the other regions.

The Story by State

TABLE 3 Dairy Farm Numbers by State

RANKNAMESIRE STACKRZGRZMRZEOWNER
1FAGENOFidji x Ruacana152141121RSH
2RED MISTElburn x Spencer149135120WEU
3ERAGONElburn x Spencer149130127RSH
4ELSPEElburn x Spencer147134122RUW
5TABITTableau x Mr Burns144136120RUW
6MORRISFidelity x Spencer144137121RUW
7DESMONDDesk x Malvoy143136129RUW
8ELLMAUElburn x Carmano142124123RUW
9MILKYWAYMitey x Lawn Boy142132116RUW
10LANZAROTELaron P x Mr Burns142125126RUW
11GEERTFidelity x Spencer141135114RUW
12ATTIKAAxion-Red x Oman141134109RUW
13CAN BECamery ISY x Carmano141124120RUW
14AIRY-P-REDColt P x Pembroke140124118RSH
15FILIASFidji x Mr Burns140126118RSH
16DESKDestry x Gogo140129124RUW
17FIEROFiction x Tocar14014298RUW
18COLOUR PColt P x Destry140123133RUW
19LADYS SONLaron P x Zabing140128124RUW
20TARGETTableau x Ramos140125121RUW
21PASCHA REDSavage x Spencer140126116RUW
22LACOSTELarson x Destry140129132LTR/ZBH
23FALSTERFiction x Mr Burns139135118LTR/ZBH
24DEEPSPACEDeedle x Tocar139139124RUW
25KUMOFiction x Spencer139138105RU

Figure 4 Herds by State Heat Map 2013


The greatest percentage of declines has occurred in the Southeast region (6.5% decline), and the greatest total decrease occurred in the Midwest (1,755).  The only state to actually show an increase was Pennsylvania that had a 60 herd (0.8%) increase in 2013.

TABLE 4 Total Milk Production by State 2013

RANKNAMESIRE STACKRZGRZMRZEOWNER
1ELWOODElayo x September137132119MAR
2MALVOYMarmax RF x Celsius136127109RUW
3SELONOSpencer 2 x Achtung13512999RSH
4LARON PLawn Boy x Shottle133115120ZBH
5LEVANTLawn Boy x Classic132128113WEU
6COLD BOYSpencer 2 x Oman13212093RUW
7TABLEAUTlanet x Faber132121117RUW
8MAXIMO-REDMarmax RF x BW Marshall131137106OHG
9TOCARTopred x Lucky Leo131140106RUW
10JERUDOJerom x Rudolph130121108VOSt
11GOLDEN EYEGogo x Lightning128127106RUW
12LA CROSSEColby-Red x Dutch Boy127132107ZBH
13MALLOWMalvoy x Talent127122117RUW
14SERANOSeptember x Stoll126120102RUW
15FALIPOFaber x Tulip126122106RBW
16LUCATONILaruel x Talent125111116WEU
17CRUNCHCarmano x Lightning125116108WEU
18CAREMCarmano x Colby-Red124112121RUW
19BURLENTMr Burns x Talent124113119RBW
20CARAMELCarmano x Modest123114117RUW
21WESTPOINTWestwind x Kian123104112RUW
22STYLEStabilo x Origin123123106RUW
23STERNBOYStabilo x Komtur12312595MAR
24EMDARUElayo x Talent123124116RSH
25JOTANJordan x Durham123109125MAR

Figure 5 Total Milk Production by State 2013

Figure 6 Production per Herd – By State 2013

Table 5 Dairy Cattle Population by State 2013

RANKNAMESIRE STACKRZGRZMRZEOWNER
1SNOWMANOman x BW Marshall x147145126GOEP
2GUARINIGoldwyn x Oman147131125RBB
3BILLARDBillion 3 x Oman145139110RUW
4MAGORIANMascol x Oman145145102Masterrind
5OMEGAOman x Manat14313695RMV
6MAVIDMascol x Eminenz142137108WEU
7BJÉRKBolton x Oman142139116Masterrind
8MALIXMascol x Oman140128104WEU
9FROSKOFrosty x Shottle139138105LTR
10ENZOEncino x Oman13913598RUW
11OMAGICOman x Lambada13913394RUW
12BAKOMBREBaxter 2 x Goldwyn139131119Masterrind
13MASCOLMtoto x Rudolph138127105LTR
14NOG MATOMascol x Laudan138123115RMV
15MARACASOman x Convincer13813197Masterrind
16BANDINIBillion 3 x Morty137130109RBB
17SHOWTIMEShottle x Brett137131123RMV
18MASCARPONMascol x Oman137130100WEU
19GIBORGibbon x Sunnyboy137120103RUW
20GUNNARGoldwyn x Ford137125128RMV
21MAINAUOman x BW Marshall x136125100Masterrind
22JUGADORJardin x Finley136139118RBB
23WIZZARDWebster x Cash136130101OGH
24STERNGOLDStol Joc x Shottle136117120RUW
25LEKOLaudan x Jocko Besn136126119RBB

Figure 7 Dairy Cattle Population by State 2013

Figure 8 Herd Size by State 2013

Figure 9 Production per Cow by State 2013

Table  6 Top States 2013 by Milk Production Efficiency

NameLPIMilkFatProt%F%PConf
LONG-LANGS OMAN OMAN-ET3212149083820.250.2712
DE-SU GILLESPY-ET298725746969-0.22-0.1213
BADGER-BLUFF FANNY FREDDIE2985171766590.030.025
ENSENADA TABOO PLANET-ET296624978982-0.030.018
FREUREHAVEN NIAGARA2943221091770.10.038
END-ROAD O-MAN BRONCO-ET292322917075-0.1306
REGAN-ALH DIPLOMAT-ET29051382497300.2410
UFM-DUBS ALTAESQUIRE-ET2864973110630.690.273
GEN-I-BEQ BRAWLER285591062460.260.1410
SILDAHL JETT AIR-ET2824129272310.23-0.112
MAPLE-DOWNS-I G W ATWOOD281859662300.370.0919
GOLDEN-OAKS MEDFORD-ET28001555120430.58-0.068
CRACKHOLM FEVER279762056200.32015
DOMICOLE CHELIOS279484578410.440.1114
MAINSTREAM MANIFOLD2789179585700.170.092
O-BEE MANFRED JUSTICE-ET2780144780750.250.25-3
GEN-I-BEQ TOPSIDE2768119772450.260.0512
OCONNORS JAY2764129260740.120.2710
LIRR DREW DEMPSEY275636442340.290.1915
GEN-I-BEQ ALTABUZZER2748141782460.2806
SCHILLVIEW GARRETT-ET2746166965580.030.034
DELABERGE DEMOCRACY274544369470.490.289
HYLLTOP PRESLEY RED273486678560.430.246
BUTOISE BAHAMAS272617255273-0.10.146
WABASH-WAY EUREKA271116795169-0.10.127
CROCKETT-ACRES EIGHT-ET2706120570720.240.280
SANDY-VALLEY BOLTON-ET270620337157-0.03-0.089
EMILANE LARKIN270216464157-0.180.039
DEWGOOD BENEFIT270084145490.130.187
DE-SU BOWMAN-ET2692137771440.19-0.0110
ALLYNDALE-I ATTICUS268019447220.380.1414
CLAYNOOK TENNESSEE267459238400.150.1813
MORNINGVIEW HASKEL2670193587640.150.015
REGANCREST-PJ MAXLIFE-ET266971583450.530.1910
BRAEDALE GOLDWYN265631749280.360.1612
DYMENTHOLM SOLSTICE2655148570680.150.164
GILLETTE WINDBROOK265493762400.260.0715
CHARLESDALE SUPERSTITION-ET265317792857-0.33-0.029
SANDY-VALLEY BRYSON-ET2649160269520.07-0.0210
COMESTAR LAUTREC2648116872470.260.079
UFM-DUBS OLEGANT-ET263912864042-0.070.018
WA-DEL JUNCTION-ET263871193570.620.3-4
ROCKYMOUNTAIN LEGACY2629225788530.04-0.184
COMESTAR LAUTHORITY262852559260.380.0815
COMESTAR BRIGADE2622193977600.06-0.029
WINDY-KNOLL-VIEW PARTNER2617114248640.070.238
WESSELCREST AIRBORNE-ET261515212843-0.24-0.058
JOLICAP CARRERA2612159662580.050.065
VIORIS SLEEMAN260924506889-0.190.074
STANTONS ALTARIC-RED260890671550.350.226
VALBLANC LIBRA260610241833-0.18-0.0113
KARONA FANTASY260518465161-0.1306
BO-IRISH ALTON-ET259822347177-0.090.031
TRAMILDA-N ESCALADE-ET259569352220.24-0.0113
KILOBYTE25918812838-0.050.0811
GINARY ALTABERNIE258718154251-0.21-0.085
BOMAZ OMAN KRAMER 561-ET258521955953-0.2-0.165
CHASIN-RAINBOWS JADON-ET258114324852-0.040.0410
DUDOC MR BURNS258013103267-0.150.27
EXPRESS BOLLY257787654400.20.17
CHARITY ALTAGRATIS-ET257159957440.320.219
HEATHERSTONE-V MCGUIRE-ET257014174929-0.02-0.159
MORSAN BORIS256939857300.410.1511
JEWELED-ACRES SHARKY-ET256422287882-0.040.07-4
GINARY JAKE256326765958-0.33-0.247
GILLETTE CANYON25631214435100.17
GILLETTE JORDAN256284947290.150.0110
DIAMOND-OAK FROSTY-ET2560143166540.120.060
BRYHILL LOYAL256065955290.290.0611
GILLETTE WATCH OUT2558128191430.40.013
PICSTON SHOTTLE-ET2558115646340.04-0.0410
GENO MARITIME2557171365480.03-0.067
SILDAHL AIRRAID2555169082410.19-0.136
TRUE-BLUE SHOWBOAT-ET2552117946500.030.116
R-E-W SUNBURN2551118752550.090.1410
BEAUCOISE RHAPSODY255177532450.030.177
SMITHDEN AARON255196349410.120.0710
GINARY BRAD254516654245-0.16-0.099
GEN-I-BEQ LAVAL254121526561-0.12-0.086
ARDROSS STERLING2539112577590.330.195
CRACKHOLM FOCUS2539116946570.020.173
HARDWOOD BOSTON-ET253946744380.260.27
SMITHDEN ADMIRAL253895673390.350.077
PETHERTON ROX ITAK253687448480.150.175
GREENLEA ARTIE-RED-ET253558936470.140.2411
REGANCREST REGINALD-ET253538641290.260.1414
NURRES SLUGGER-ET253313363960-0.090.147
DEMARC RANCH253215074051-0.130.015
KERNDT BRILLO-ET252823725466-0.28-0.14
REGAN-ALH DU RITE-ET252887850600.160.284
HENDEL BIGSTONE-ET252895861600.240.244
ROCKYMOUNTAIN MARKER252518754851-0.18-0.19
VELTHUIS SOLSTICE252512729310.230.248
BREEZE HILL CIRCUIT2525-33755140.660.2314
COMESTAR LAWMAN2521129372350.23-0.0613
CLEAR-ECHO DRISCOLL-ET252186881340.460.064
MICHERET INFRAROUGE252171029280.030.047
DUDOC RADIUS251813443839-0.11-0.054
GILLETTE STANLEYCUP251160065220.40.0213
GILLETTE WINDHAMMER251160065220.40.0213

Figure 10 Top States 2013 by Milk Production Efficiency


In evaluating which states are doing the best you can look at which states have the most production (i.e. California, Wisconsin & New York), or you can look at which states have the most producers (i.e.  Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and New York).We prefer to rank by which states are producing the most milk per cow from the most efficient herds.  Using that ranking  we see the following top 10: New Mexico; Arizona; Nevada; California; Colorado; Idaho; Texas; Washington; Florida; Utah).  It is interesting to note that all of these herds are located in the West except for Florida and that Wisconsin, despite having the most producers and the most cattle, falls to #23 in the rankings for milk production efficiency.

How Does Canada Compare?

Table 7 – Canadian Statistics

NameLPIMilkFatProt%F%PConf
VEAZLAND MARION-ET212928905664-0.43-0.25-1
KELSTEIN OLIVER244627898289-0.17-0.031
FUSTEAD EMORY BLITZ-ET207327031623-0.71-0.538
GINARY JAKE256326765958-0.33-0.247
DE-SU GILLESPY-ET298725746969-0.22-0.1213
B-HIDDENHILLS MAR MARMAX-ET229425384471-0.43-0.1-2
WILLOW-MARSH-CC GABOR-ET216225122143-0.61-0.323
ENSENADA TABOO PLANET-ET296624978982-0.030.018
STANTONS SILENT204024693159-0.51-0.18-4
BRAEDALE BIGBEN16002463435-0.75-0.382
VIORIS SLEEMAN260924506889-0.190.074
MORSAN ROSETTE218724454348-0.42-0.261
MORNINGVIEW-MT-I LAKEVIEW227123835677-0.28-0.020
KERNDT BRILLO-ET252823725466-0.28-0.14
DRIFTY-HOLLOW MASTODON226523714354-0.39-0.23
END-ROAD O-MAN BRONCO-ET292322917075-0.1306
GINARY ROCKEFELLER195822824937-0.29-0.315
ROCKYMOUNTAIN LEGACY2629225788530.04-0.184
MR MILLION MEGA-MAN-ET213922573536-0.4-0.322
MAINSTREAM CROWN-ET178622522613-0.5-0.514
BO-IRISH ALTON-ET259822347177-0.090.031
JEWELED-ACRES SHARKY-ET256422287882-0.040.07-4
FREUREHAVEN NIAGARA2943221091770.10.038
ETAZON ADDISON170922051165-0.62-0.06-7
COMESTAR EL TOREADOR226722015042-0.27-0.259
REGANCREST LONGTIME237321962457-0.5-0.1310
BOMAZ OMAN KRAMER 561-ET258521955953-0.2-0.165
GEN-I-BEQ LAVAL254121526561-0.12-0.086
BONTEMPS-I ASHTON231021524049-0.34-0.188
GAVOR223721441174-0.580.023
MR ELITE-ET192321362148-0.51-0.190
DA-SO-BURN DAMASK-ET165921221934-0.51-0.3-3
PETHERTON DARBY18992121838-0.6-0.260
VELKOMMEN-VALLEY JORIDY-ET196020941735-0.53-0.282
RENADO ROCKWOOD237120724144-0.31-0.22
CASTEL231020584554-0.26-0.113
MY-JOHN DENBY-ET205320504351-0.28-0.14-4
ROCKYMOUNTAIN LONGSUIT226820405453-0.18-0.117
GEPAQUETTE CYCLONE193020363736-0.33-0.261
SANDY-VALLEY BOLTON-ET270620337157-0.03-0.089
COXLYN CAVAN197120232641-0.43-0.222
LE-O-LA EMERSON CLASSIC-TW239720092055-0.47-0.093
RICH-J SOSA-ET184320091733-0.51-0.28-3
MS POSIBILITY PRODUCER-ET226020034949-0.2-0.134
DELABERGE LAZARO18842000-937-0.72-0.24-3
PREMIER-G BLACKSMITH-ET240719955152-0.19-0.115
RICECREST MURPHY-ET234219785662-0.14-0.02-2
ALTAPPEL GLENDOR242119706943-0.02-0.172
CO-OP LONDON COSMO-ET23411967757-0.56-0.07-1
COMESTAR LITTORAL20781967340-0.61-0.215
SANDY-VALLEY BRISK-ET173419673038-0.37-0.22-6
DOMICOLE CHESTER235919595452-0.18-0.116
BENNER JUDO2345195884440.12-0.175
LA PRESENTATION CHARLY13891955740-0.57-0.21-13
STANTONS ENTER211519491041-0.55-0.191
COMESTAR LOUDANO194019442339-0.42-0.210
BEYERCREST JUDD-ET203019412229-0.43-0.291
COMESTAR BRIGADE2622193977600.06-0.029
MORNINGVIEW HASKEL2670193587640.150.015
WELCOME GARTER-ET209419334949-0.2-0.120
EMERALD-ACR-SA T-BAXTER247319146838-0.02-0.216
THORNSPYC TOYBOY17171907521-0.58-0.353
HORSTYLE MAXWELL-ET218319013467-0.310.044
EMERALD-ACR-VR CHASER-ET212319013053-0.35-0.07-8
LADYS-MANOR LANCE-ET174818871630-0.49-0.28-1
MY-JOHN ROB-ET221218823276-0.340.122
GLEN-TOCTIN LASHBAX-ET230218782453-0.4-0.084
ROCKYMOUNTAIN MARKER252518754851-0.18-0.19
COMESTAR LAUBUCK211918655929-0.07-0.277
GILLETTE WALLACE233318594042-0.26-0.168
GILLETTE WHITEFACE233318594042-0.26-0.168
RALMA-RH TRUMPET-ET222618595535-0.12-0.223
CLOVERHILLFM PLYMOUTH-ET237318576258-0.05-0.033
SUNNYLODGE SEYMORE17721856926-0.52-0.28-1
KARONA FANTASY260518465161-0.1306
GEPAQUETTE MESQUIN216118454154-0.24-0.061
GILLETTE WINDOVER202618431422-0.47-0.328
JNP-ATH-MOR MOSAIC-ET195118333439-0.31-0.191
MOHRFIELD FORM TRADEMARK-ET17381821-226-0.61-0.29-1
GINARY ALTABERNIE258718154251-0.21-0.085
POLY-KOW ALLTOP-ET247918114247-0.22-0.17
MISTER MADAGASCAR195718093137-0.31-0.2-1
STANTONS PRONGER12621806-913-0.69-0.39-1
MAINSTREAM MANIFOLD2789179585700.170.092
CHARLESDALE SUPERSTITION-ET265317792857-0.33-0.029
CRESCENTMEAD-A MOSES-ET14081777624-0.53-0.29-10
ROCKYMOUNTAIN LOCKMASTER226617764731-0.16-0.226
OCD ALTAPAXTON-ET20811771435-0.55-0.191
PLUSHANSKI ATMEN-ET225817672821-0.33-0.318
LEHOUX FESTIVAL219317612336-0.39-0.196
BLOSSOMDAIRY CALVIN183917583336-0.27-0.18-7
HA-HO CUBBY MANFRED-ET226017484752-0.17-0.04-8
JOCKO BESN221517424663-0.170.06-2
GILLETTE WOLF195317342216-0.37-0.344
GILLETTE WYMAN195317342216-0.37-0.344
SPRINGHILL-OH ELLIPSIS-ET17961728619-0.51-0.322
BUTOISE BAHAMAS272617255273-0.10.146
WALLACEVIEW PATTON2411172063410-0.133
BADGER-BLUFF FANNY FREDDIE2985171766590.030.025
RALMA COPPER226617165121-0.12-0.36

*Rankings are where each province would rank in the U.S.

Some interesting stats present themselves when we compare Canada to the U.S.

For example:

  • All of Canada has about the same number of herds as Wisconsin and Missouri combined
  • Both Wisconsin and California have more cattle each than all of Canada
  • More milk is produced in each of Wisconsin and California than in all of Canada
  • The average Canadian herd is about 60% smaller than the average herd in the U.S.
  • The average US cow produces about 5% more milk than the average Canadian cow.  (21,807 lbs vs 20,712 lbs)

The Bullvine Bottom Line

While there are certainly drastic differences in operation size across the different regions in the USA, the trends seem to be the same.  The number of dairy farmers is getting smaller and smaller and production is increasing at a slower rate than that of the U.S. population.  Continued increasing feed costs and decreased margins are only going to cause more producers to leave the US industry.  Since 2009 a perfect storm of plummeting milk prices and high feed costs have combined to push dairy margins to the brink.  Thousands have been forced out of business and many of those who survived are now deeply in debt.  Nationwide, dairy farmers lost $20 billion in net equity between 2007 and 2009.

Increasing global dairy marketplace competition and a US milk price that, although at a record high, remains lower than prices in Canada, China, Australia and New Zealand is driving producers out of the industry.  Unless more is done to protect dairy margins, these alarming trends are going to continue.  The day is coming in the United States when there will be very few milk producers left.  Is the US dairy industry coming to an end or a turning point?

 

 

Get original “Bullvine” content sent straight to your email inbox for free.

 

 

 

Send this to a friend