Feeding Management Practices

on California Dairies

N. Silva-del-Río, DVM, PhD –UC Cooperative Extension Tulare Co. J. M. Heguy, MS – UC Cooperative Extension Stanislaus & San Joaquin Co.

Alfonso Lago, DVM, DAVP-Dairy, PhD – APC Inc.

1. Describe current feeding management practices on California’s Central Valley dairies.

2. Identify opportunities to optimize feeding management.

Objectives

Methodology

In summer 2009, a feeding

management survey was

mailed to dairy producers in

Tulare, Stanislaus, and San

Joaquin; the first, third and

seventh largest dairy

counties in California.

Methodology

Producers received an envelope containing:

1) an invitation letter to participate in the study,

2) a double sided one-page survey, and

3) a pre-paid return envelope.

Participant Dairies

Response rate was 16.9% (120/710).

Herd size range: 160 to 6,600 lactating cows (median=950).

Results Outline

Feeds used in Central Valley’s dairies

TMR Preparation and Mixing Equipment

Feed Bunk Management Practices in High Producing Pens

Software and Monitoring Tools

Feeds

ForagesWhat forages do you feed?

Alfalfa

hay

Corn S

illage

Oat ha

y

Cereal

silag

es

Whe

at str

aw

Alfalfa

Sila

ge

Sudan

gras

s

Rice S

traw

Alfalfa

fresh

chop

Corn E

arlag

e

Dai

ries

(n)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Alfalfa hay and corn silage are the two most common forages fed to dairy cows in California dairies. Cereal hay and silage are also frequently fed.

Byproducts and Grains

Very diverse byproducts are incorporated into dairy rations. This is a result of a vibrant local agriculture industry. Almond hulls and cottonseed (whole lint and pima) are the two most common byproducts.

What byproducts and grains do you fed?

Almon

d Hull

s

Canola

pelle

ts

Corn gr

ain, fl

aked

Cotton

seed

who

le lin

t

Soybe

an, m

eal

Corn gl

uten m

eal

Cotton

seed

, pim

a

Distille

r's gr

ains

Molass

esW

hey

Fat (in

ert, a

nimal,

liquid

)

Whe

atmidd

s/millr

umUrea

Soy hu

lls

Citrus p

ulp

Beet p

ulp

Cotton

seed

, mea

l

Rice br

an

Barley

Roll

ed

Brewer'

s grai

ns

Corn gr

ain, g

round

Linds

eed,

meal

Hominy

Soyplu

s/Soy

best

Corn, g

erm

Carrot

pulp

Linds

eed,

pelle

ts

Brandy

Pomac

e

Dai

ries

(n)

0

20

40

60

80

100

What byproducts and grains do you feed?

Other IngredientsFeed Additives

Rumensin, anionic salts, sodium bicarbonate and yeast supplements are common additives used in dairy rations.

Rumen

sin

Anionic

Salt

s

Sodium

bica

rbona

teYea

st

Niacin

Methion

ine

Dai

ries

(n)

0

20

40

60

What additives do you feed?

TMR Preparation and Mixing Equipment

Truck M

ounte

d

Trailer

Mou

nted

Station

ary

Horizo

ntal

Vertica

l

Dai

ries

(n)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

What type of mixer wagon do you have? Primary Mixer Wagon

Primary mixer wagons are either truck mounted or trailer mounted. Vertical mixers are more popular than horizontal mixers.

Type of Mixer Wagon

(n=112/120)

Truck M

ounte

d

Trailer

Mou

nted

Station

ary

Horizo

ntal

Vertica

l

Dai

ries

(n)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

TMR 2:TypeWhat type of mixer wagon do you have? Secondary Mixer Wagon

No one type of mixer wagon is more popular than another.

Type of Mixer Wagon

In which order are feeds added to the mixer?

HayVertical Mixer Wagon Horizontal Mixer Wagon

1 2 3 4 5

Dai

ries

(n)

0

20

40

60

80

100

1 2 3 4 51

1 2 3 4 5

Dai

ries

(n)

0

20

40

60

1 2 3 4 5Order of Ingredients

1 2 3 4 5

Dai

ries

(n)

0

20

40

60

80

100

HaySilage

1 2 3 4 5

Dai

ries

(n)

0

20

40

60

Vertical Mixer Wagon Horizontal Mixer Wagon

1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5Order of Ingredients

In which order are feeds added to the mixer?

1 2 3 4 5

Dai

ries

(n)

0

20

40

60

80

100

HaySilageGrains

1 2 3 4 5

Dai

ries

(n)

0

20

40

60

Vertical Mixer Wagon Horizontal Mixer Wagon

1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5Order of Ingredients

In which order are feeds added to the mixer?

1 2 3 4 5

Dai

ries

(n)

0

20

40

60

80

100

HaySilageGrainsMin Vit

1 2 3 4 5

Dai

ries

(n)

0

20

40

60

Vertical Mixer Wagon Horizontal Mixer Wagon

1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5Order of Ingredients

In which order are feeds added to the mixer?

1 2 3 4 5

Dai

ries

(n)

0

20

40

60

1 2 3 4 5

Dai

ries

(n)

0

20

40

60

80

100

HaySilageGrainsMin VitProtein Mix

Vertical Mixer Wagon Horizontal Mixer Wagon

1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5Order of Ingredients

In which order are feeds added to the mixer?

TMR Mixing Time (min)

How long is the TMR mixing time (addition of first ingredient to the end of mixing before feed delivery)?

The distribution of the targeted TMR mixing time varies widely (range: 3-35 min).

<=5

6-10

11-15

16-20 >2

0

Dai

ries

(%)

0

10

20

30

(n=94/120)

TMR Mixing Time (min)

How long is the TMR mixing time (addition of first ingredient to the end of mixing before feed delivery)?

The distribution of the targeted TMR mixing time varies widely (range: 3-35 min).

<=5

6-10

11-15

16-20 >2

0

Dai

ries

(%)

0

10

20

30

(n=94/120)

What explains this distribution?

Should we be concerned about it?

Do you evaluate particle length of TMR using a Penn State Separator?

Frequency of particle size separator use

Only forty-three percent of producers evaluate TMR particle length at least once a month.

1x d

1x w

k

2x m

on

1x m

on4x

yr

1-2x y

rNev

er

Dai

ries

(%)

0

10

20

30

40

50 (n=112/120)

43%

Do you evaluate particle length of TMR using a Penn State Separator?

Frequency of particle size separator use

Only forty-three percent of producers evaluate TMR particle length at least once a month.

1x d

1x w

k

2x m

on

1x m

on4x

yr

1-2x y

rNev

er

Dai

ries

(%)

0

10

20

30

40

50 (n=112/120)

43%

How often is it necessary to monitor particle length?

Is once a month enough?

How often do you calibrate the mixer wagon scale?

<1x m

on4x

yr2x

yr1x

yrNev

er

Dai

ries

(%)

0

10

20

30

40

50

Frequency of checking mixer scale

Seventy-nine percent of producers checked the mixer scale at least once a year. But, only 19 % checked it at least monthly. The mixer wagon was calibrated by an outside service (60%) or an in house employee (40%)

(n=101/120)

79%

How often do you calibrate the mixer wagon scale?

<1x m

on4x

yr2x

yr1x

yrNev

er

Dai

ries

(%)

0

10

20

30

40

50

Frequency of checking mixer scale

Seventy-nine percent of producers checked the mixer scale at least once a year. But, only 19 % checked it at least monthly. The mixer wagon was calibrated by an outside service (60%) or an in house employee (40%)

(n=101/120)

79%How important is the mixer calibration?

How often should we do it?

Feed Bunk Management Practicesin High Producing Pens

How many times a day is the TMR fed?

Most producers, 64%, fed TMR twice a day (range=1-6).

1 2 > 3

Dai

ries

(%)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Times a day TMR is fed

(n=111/120)64 %

How many times a day is the TMR fed?

Most producers, 64%, fed TMR twice a day (range=1-6).

1 2 > 3

Dai

ries

(%)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Times a day TMR is fed

(n=111/120)

Is 1x/d feeding enough, especially in summer?

What are the advantages of 6x/d feeding?

64 %

1-4 5-8 9-12 >13

Dai

ries

(%)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Times a day the feed is pushed-up

How many times a day is the feed pushed-up?

Half of the producers pushed-up the fed 1 to 4 times a day. Only 10% of the dairies pushed the feed 9 or more times (range:1-20).

(n=111/120)47 %

1-4 5-8 9-12 >13

Dai

ries

(%)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Times a day the feed is pushed-up

How many times a day is the feed pushed-up?

Half of the producers pushed-up the fed 1 to 4 times a day. Only 10% of the dairies pushed the feed 9 or more times (range:1-20).

(n=111/120)

Does pushing the feed 1-4 times guarantee that cows always have feed available?

47 %

Do you feed for refusals? What percentage?

44.4% YES(n=115)

< = 3 > 3 to 5 > 5

Dai

ries

(%)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Refusals (%)

Do you feed for refusals? What percentage?

44.4% YES(n=115)

Fifty-four percent of producers feeding for refusals are targeting 3% or less (range: 1- 10%)

54%

< = 3 > 3 to 5 > 5

Dai

ries

(%)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Refusals (%)

Do you feed for refusals? What percentage?

44.4% YES(n=115)

Fifty-four percent of producers feeding for refusals are targeting 3% or less (range: 1- 10%)

What are the practical implications of feeding for 1 vs10% of refusals?

54%

Discard

ed

Lacta

ting c

ows

Dry co

ws

Heifers

Combin

ation

Dai

ries

(%)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

What do you do with the refusals?

Refusals are commonly feed to heifers.

Destination of Refusals

How many times a week are feed bunks cleaned?

1 x wk 2 x wk 3-6 x wk 7 x wk

Dai

ries

(%)

0

10

20

30

40

50

Frequency of feed bunk cleaning

1x wk 3-6x wk2x wk 7x wk

Forty percent of the dairies clean feed bunks daily. However, 23% of dairies clean feed bunks only once a week.

(n=101/120)43 %

How often was the ration for high producing cows reformulated in 2008?

1 2 3 4 5

Dai

ries

(%)

0

20

40

60800800 - 1600>1600

1 2-4 5-7 8-10 >10

Forty-two percent of small herds reported that rations were reformulated between 2 to 4 times a year.

Frequency of ration reformulation in 2008

≤800>800 - <1600≥1600

(n=105/120)

42 %

How often was the ration for high producing cows reformulated in 2008?

1 2 3 4 5

Dai

ries

(%)

0

20

40

60800800 - 1600>1600

1 2-4 5-7 8-10 >10

Forty-one percent of medium size herds reported that rations were reformulated between 5 to 7 times a during 2008.

Frequency of ration reformulation in 2008

≤800>800 - <1600≥1600

(n=105/120)

41 %

How often was the ration for high producing cows reformulated in 2008?

1 2 3 4 5

Dai

ries

(%)

0

20

40

60800800 - 1600>1600

1 2-4 5-7 8-10 >10

Thirty-seven percent of large dairies reported that rations were reformulated more than 10 times during 2008 (range: 1-24).

Frequency of ration reformulation in 2008

≤800>800 - <1600≥1600

(n=105/120)

37 %

< 1wk1x w

k2x m

on1x m

on6x y

r2x y

r1x y

r

Dai

ries

(%)

0

10

20

30

40

How often do you evaluate corn silage dry matter?

Corn silage dry matter was evaluated at least once a month in 52.3% of dairies. Only 8.3% of dairies determined DM weekly, or more often. Most dairies delegated DM determination to an outside nutrition consultant (86.6%).

Frequency of dry matter determination

(n=101/120)52 %

< 1wk1x w

k2x m

on1x m

on6x y

r2x y

r1x y

r

Dai

ries

(%)

0

10

20

30

40

How often do you evaluate corn silage dry matter?

Corn silage dry matter was evaluated at least once a month in 52.3% of dairies. Only 8.3% of dairies determined DM weekly, or more often. Most dairies delegated DM determination to an outside nutrition consultant (86.6%).

Frequency of dry matter determination

(n=101/120)

How often should forage dry matter be determined?

52 %

Software and Monitoring Tools

Dairy Comp 305 DHIA-Plus

Do you have herd management software?

None

Dairy C

omp 3

05

DHI-Plus

Others

Dai

ries

(%)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Dairy Comp 305 and DHI-Plus are the most commonly used herd management software.

(n=112/120)

Herd Management Software

Do you have feed management software?

Forty four percent of dairies utilize feed management software. EZ-feed and Feed Watch are the most popular software programs.

None

Feed W

atch

EZ-Feed

Others

Dai

ries

(%)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60(n=112/120)

Feed management software

What do you monitor with your feed management software program?

Feed management software programs are commonly used to monitor intakes (91%) and less used to check inventory (50%).

Intak

es

Errors

by fe

eders

Cost o

f feed

TMR ingre

dient

order

Feed d

elive

ry tim

e

Inven

tory

Dai

ries

(%)

0

20

40

60

80

100 (n=46/46)

Feed software uses

Do you monitor feed efficiency and milk urea nitrogen?

Sixty-two percent of the dairies monitor feed efficiency. Thirty-four percent of the dairies monitor milk urea nitrogen.

Feed Efficiency MUN1 2

Dai

ries

(%)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70 YESNO

Feed Efficiency MUN

Do you monitor feed efficiency and milk urea nitrogen?

(n=90/120)(n=86/120)

Only 17% of the dairies returned the survey. It is unknown if the results from this survey represent Central Valley dairies (selection bias).

Dairy owner and manager responses are subjective and their responses may not represent actual feeding management practices at the dairy (information bias).

Results from this survey suggest that feeding management practices vary greatly across dairies. And, we still need to know ….

Results Interpretation

We Still Need to Know …

If producers are doing what they are reporting.

If feeding management practices vary across dairies in response to individual needs.

If current feeding management practices are leading to desirable outcomes (particle length of the ration, feed availability in the feed bunk, weight accuracy of ingredients, etc).

If the ration fed differs from the ration formulated and how feeding management practices impact that (calibration of the wagon scale, forages dry matter, feeders errors, etc).

If undesirable outcomes and errors impact health and production.

What bottlenecks that prevent the implementation of “best” feeding management practices can be overcome (managerial, resources, educational, etc).

California Dairy Producers

Tulare DHIA

Dr Steve Stewart

Manuel Soares

Acknowledgements

http://cestanislaus.ucdavis.edu/Agriculture/Dairy_Science.htm

http://cetulare.ucdavis.edu/Dairy/

THANKS