Search

Nowadays those who live or work in the countryside have increasingly access to technologies that favor the development of their daily activities. Smartphones and tablets with android operating systems, which are every day more accessible to the farmers, offer opportunities for the use of applications that support them in decisionmaking. These new tools are available to the rural man, rural extension and/or technical assistance professionals, and can be used to increase the competitiveness of their properties. This study aimed to assess the C7 Milk II application to find out its strengths and weaknesses, as well as to contribute to the provision of a free management system, which is efficient and easy for the farmers and technicians to use, positively influencing the management of dairy farming properties. Thus we tested the use of this application in two family farms: one in the city of Alto Alegre/RS and another in the city of Espumoso/RS. We accompanied the development of the activities related to the tool use, and recorded the farmers´ perceptions on it. We also used contacts and questionnaires to find out the perception of field technicians who work in the region in order to identify the potential and limitations of the use of the applications among the rural men. At the end of the study, we found out that the application has potential as a tool to give greater precision to the dairy management, since it has several strengths. However, it also has some weaknesses, which need to be improved to have greater acceptance by farmers and technicians. Among the limitations of the application use, there are some difficulties for the farmers to adopt a notes routine about the activity, as well as their lack of ability to work with new technologies. These aspects impair their use in a big scale as a complementary tool in the management of dairy farming. The agility and the mobility of the tool; the generating of information for decision-making with low cost access and application service; and the farmer´s thinking on his activity have being considered potential factors. Atualmente quem mora ou trabalha na zona rural tem cada vez mais acesso a tecnologias que favorecem o desenvolvimento das atividades. Os aparelhos smartphones e tablets com sistema operacional android, cada dia mais acessíveis ao homem do campo, oferecem oportunidades para utilização de aplicativos que auxiliam o produtor (a) rural na tomada de decisões. Estas novas ferramentas disponíveis ao homem do campo, profissionais da extensão rural e/ou assistência técnica podem ser utilizadas para aumentar a competitividade dessas propriedades. Este trabalho buscou avaliar o aplicativo C7 Leite II, seus pontos fortes e a melhorar, com isso, contribuir para a disponibilização de um sistema gerencial gratuito, eficiente e de fácil utilização por parte de produtores e técnicos, influenciando positivamente no gerenciamento de propriedades rurais que trabalham na atividade leiteira. Para esta avaliação foi testado a utilização do aplicativo em duas propriedades rurais da agricultura familiar, uma no município de Alto Alegre/RS e outra em Espumoso/RS, sendo acompanhado o desenvolvimento das atividades de utilização da ferramenta e registro das percepções dos produtores. Também foi levantado através de contatos e aplicação de questionários, a percepção de técnicos de campo que atuam na região de estudo, tentando identificar os potenciais e os limitantes da utilização de aplicativos junto ao seu público assistido. Ao final verificou-se que o aplicativo tem potencial como ferramenta para dar maior precisão no gerenciamento leiteiro, por apresentar vários pontos fortes, mas também precisa melhorar em outros pontos para que tenha maior aceitação pelos produtores e técnicos. Entre os limitantes do uso do aplicativo, aparecem com maior força as dificuldades dos produtores adotarem uma rotina de anotações sobre a atividade, e a falta de habilidade em trabalhar com as novas tecnologias, aspectos que comprometem até certo ponto o uso em maior escala de aplicativos como ferramenta complementar no gerenciamento da atividade leiteira. Já como potenciais aparecem a agilidade e mobilidade da ferramenta, geração de informações para tomada de decisão com baixo custo de acesso e manutenção do aplicativo, e a reflexão gerada no produtor (a) sobre como vem conduzindo sua atividade.

An epidemiological prospective study was carried out in French dairy herds with Holstein, Montbeliarde, or Normande cows and with low herd somatic cell scores. The objective was to identify dairy management practices associated with herd incidence rate of clinical mastitis. The studied herds were selected on a national basis, clinical cases were recorded through a standardized system, and a stable dairy management system existed. In the surveyed herds, mean milk yield was 7420 kg/cow per yr and mean milk somatic cell score was 2.04 (132,000 cells/mL). Overdispersion Poisson models were performed to investigate risk factors for mastitis incidence rate. From the final model, the herds with the following characteristics had lower incidence rates of clinical mastitis: 1) culling of cows with more than 3 cases of clinical mastitis within a lactation; 2) more than 2 person-years assigned to dairy herd management; 3) balanced concentrate in the cow basal diet. Moreover, herds with the following characteristics had higher incidence rates of clinical mastitis: 1) milking cows loose-housed in a straw yard; 2) no mastitis therapy performed when a single clot was observed in the milk; 3) clusters rinsed using water or soapy water after milking a cow with high somatic cell count; 4) 305-d milk yield >7435 kg; 5) herd located in the South region; 6) herd located in the North region; 7) cows with at least 1 nonfunctional quarter; and 8) premilking holding area with a slippery surface. The underlying mechanisms of some highlighted risk factors, such as milk production level and dietary management practices, should be investigated more thoroughly through international collaboration.

There is increasing concern that the intensification of dairy production reduces the concentrations of nutritionallydesirable compounds in milk. This study therefore compared important quality parameters (protein and fatty acid profiles; α-tocopherol and carotenoid concentrations) in milk from four dairy systems with contrasting production intensities (in terms offeeding regimens and milking systems). The concentrations of several nutritionally desirable compounds (β-lactoglobulin, omega-3 fatty acids, omega-3/omega-6 ratio, conjugated linoleic acid c9t11, and/or carotenoids) decreased with increasing feeding intensity (organic outdoor ≥ conventional outdoor ≥ conventional indoors). Milking system intensification (use of robotic milking parlors) had a more limited effect on milk composition, but increased mastitis incidence. Multivariate analyses indicated that differences in milk quality were mainly linked to contrasting feeding regimens and that milking system and breedchoice also contributed to differences in milk composition between production systems.

Studies within the QLIF project reviewed in this article suggest that organic or low-input management is more likely to result in milk with fatty acid profiles that are higher in α-linolenic acid and/or beneficial isomers of conjugated linoleic acid and antioxidants with up to a 2.5-fold increase in some cases, relative to milk from conventional production. These advantages are preserved during processing, resulting in elevated contents or concentrations of these constituents in processed dairy products of organic or low input origin. Much of the literature suggests that these benefits are very likely to be a result of a greater reliance on forages in the dairy diets (especially grazed grass). Since the adoption of alternative breeds or crosses is often an integral part sustaining these low-input systems, it is not possible to rule out an interaction with genotype in these monitored herds. The results suggest that milk fat composition with respect to human health can be optimized by exploiting grazing in the diet of dairy cows. However, in many European regions this may not be possible due to extremes in temperature, soil moisture levels or both. In such cases milk quality can be maintained by the inclusion of oil seeds in the dairy diets.

Business and financial records for 2009 from 204 New York dairy farm businesses are summarized and analyzed. This analysis uses cash accounting with accrual adjustments to measure farm profitability, financial performance, and costs of producing milk. Traditional methods of analyzing dairy farm businesses are combined with evaluation techniques that show the relationship between good management performance and financial success. The farms in the project averaged 469 cows per farm and 24,208 pounds of milk sold per cow, which represent above average size and management level for New York dairy farms. Net farm income excluding appreciation, which is the return to the operator's labor, management, capital, and other unpaid family labor, averaged $-126,820 per farm. The rate of return to all capital invested in the farm business including appreciation averaged -3.5 percent. Differences in profitability between farms continue to widen. Average net farm income excluding appreciation of the top 10 percent of farms was $189,108, while the lowest 10 percent was $-861,956. Rates of return on equity with appreciation ranged from positive 4 percent to negative 46 percent for the highest decile and the lowest decile of farms, respectively. Large freestall farms averaged the highest milk output per cow and per worker, the lowest total cost of production and investment per cow. However, in 2009, they averaged the lowest returns to labor, management and capital. Farms milking three times a day (3X) were larger, produced more milk per cow but had lower net farm incomes in 2009 than herds milking two times per day (2X). Operating costs per hundredweight of milk were $0.08 per hundredweight lower for 3X than 2X milking herds, while output per cow was 5,222 pounds higher. Farms adopting intensive grazing generally produced less milk per cow than non-grazing farms but averaged higher labor and management incomes per operator. One should not conclude that adoption of these technologies alone were responsible for differences in performance.

Business and financial records for 2008 from 224 New York dairy farm businesses are summarized and analyzed. This analysis demonstrates the use of cash accounting with accrual adjustments to measure farm profitability, financial performance, and costs of producing milk. Traditional methods of analyzing dairy farm businesses are combined with evaluation techniques that show the relationship between good management performance and financial success. The farms in the project averaged 414 cows per farm and 24,115 pounds of milk sold per cow, which represent above average size and management level for New York dairy farms. Net farm income excluding appreciation, which is the return to the operator's labor, management, capital, and other unpaid family labor, averaged $263,984 per farm. The rate of return to all capital invested in the farm business including appreciation averaged 7.2 percent. Differences in profitability between farms continue to widen. Average net farm income excluding appreciation of the top 10 percent of farms was $1,346,592, while the lowest 10 percent was $-77,207. Rates of return on equity with appreciation ranged from positive 23 percent to negative 16 percent for the highest decile and the lowest decile of farms, respectively. Large freestall farms averaged the highest milk output per cow and per worker, the lowest total cost of production and investment per cow, and the greatest returns to labor, management and capital. Farms milking three times a day (3X) were larger, produced more milk per cow and had higher net farm incomes in 2008 than herds milking two times per day (2X). Operating costs per hundredweight of milk were $0.21 per hundredweight lower for 3X than 2X milking herds, while output per cow was 4,537 pounds higher. Farms adopting intensive grazing generally produced less milk per cow than non-grazing farms but averaged higher labor and management incomes per operator. One should not conclude that adoption of these technologies alone were responsible for differences in performance.

Business and financial records for 2007 from 250 New York dairy farm businesses are summarized and analyzed. This analysis demonstrates the use of cash accounting with accrual adjustments to measure farm profitability, financial performance, and costs of producing milk. Traditional methods of analyzing dairy farm businesses are combined with evaluation techniques that show the relationship between good management performance and financial success. The farms in the project averaged 358 cows per farm and 22,983 pounds of milk sold per cow, which represent above average size and management level for New York dairy farms. Net farm income excluding appreciation, which is the return to the operator's labor, management, capital, and other unpaid family labor, averaged $410,358 per farm. The rate of return to all capital invested in the farm business including appreciation averaged 18.2 percent. Differences in profitability between farms continue to widen. Average net farm income excluding appreciation of the top 10 percent of farms was $1,658,164, while the lowest 10 percent was $3,007. Rates of return on equity with appreciation ranged from positive 55 percent to negative 7 percent for the highest decile and the lowest decile of farms, respectively. Large freestall farms averaged the highest milk output per cow and per worker, the lowest total cost of production and investment per cow, and the greatest returns to labor, management and capital. Farms milking three times a day (3X) were larger, produced more milk per cow and had higher net farm incomes in 2007 than herds milking two times per day (2X). Operating costs per hundredweight of milk were $0.47 per hundredweight greater for 3X than 2X milking herds, while output per cow was 4,306 pounds higher. In 2007, farms supplementing the herd with bovine somatotropin (bST) attained higher rates of milk production per cow, had larger herds and were more profitable than farms not supplementing with bST for all measures of profitability. Farms adopting intensive grazing generally produced less milk per cow than non-grazing farms but averaged higher labor and management incomes per operator. One should not conclude that adoption of these technologies alone were responsible for differences in performance.

Refereed/Peer-reviewed

Business and financial records for 2006 from 240 New York dairy farm businesses are summarized and analyzed. This analysis demonstrates the use of cash accounting with accrual adjustments to measure farm profitability, financial performance, and costs of producing milk. Traditional methods of analyzing dairy farm businesses are combined with evaluation techniques that show the relationship between good management performance and financial success. The farms in the project averaged 350 cows per farm and 23,083 pounds of milk sold per cow, which represent above average size and management level for New York dairy farms. Net farm income excluding appreciation, which is the return to the operator's labor, management, capital, and other unpaid family labor, averaged $41,144 per farm. The rate of return to all capital invested in the farm business including appreciation averaged 4.0 percent. Differences in profitability between farms continue to widen. Average net farm income excluding appreciation of the top 10 percent of farms was $322,100, while the lowest 10 percent was a negative $183,853. Rates of return on equity with appreciation ranged from positive 16 percent to negative 27 percent for the highest decile and the lowest decile of farms, respectively. Large freestall farms averaged the highest milk output per cow and per worker, the lowest total cost of production and investment per cow, and the greatest returns to labor, management and capital. Farms milking three times a day (3X) were larger, produced more milk per cow and had higher net farm incomes than herds milking two times per day (2X). Operating costs per hundredweight of milk were $0.54 per hundredweight higher for 3X than 2X milking herds, while output per cow was 4,153 pounds higher. In 2006, farms supplementing the herd with bovine somatotropin (bST) attained higher rates of milk production per cow, had larger herds and were more profitable than farms not supplementing with bST for most measures of profitability. Farms adopting intensive grazing generally produced less milk per cow than nongrazing farms but had lower costs of production and higher profitability. One should not conclude that adoption of these technologies alone were responsible for differences in performance.

Business and financial records for 2005 from 225 New York dairy farm businesses are summarized and analyzed. This analysis demonstrates the use of cash accounting with accrual adjustments to measure farm profitability, financial performance, and costs of producing milk. Traditional methods of analyzing dairy farm businesses are combined with evaluation techniques that show the relationship between good management performance and financial success. The farms in the project averaged 340 cows per farm and 22,998 pounds of milk sold per cow, which represent above average size and management level for New York dairy farms. Net farm income excluding appreciation, which is the return to the operator's labor, management, capital, and other unpaid family labor, averaged $187,446 per farm. The rate of return to all capital invested in the farm business including appreciation averaged 10.7 percent. Differences in profitability between farms continue to widen. Average net farm income excluding appreciation of the top 10 percent of farms was $838,892, while the lowest 10 percent was a negative $23,283. Rates of return on equity with appreciation ranged from 35 percent to negative 10 percent for the highest decile and the lowest decile of farms, respectively. Large freestall farms averaged the highest milk output per cow and per worker, the lowest total cost of production and investment per cow, and the greatest returns to labor, management and capital. Farms milking three times a day (3X) were larger, produced more milk per cow and had higher net farm incomes than herds milking two times per day (2X). Operating costs per hundredweight of milk were $0.28 per hundredweight higher for 3X than 2X milking herds, while output per cow was 3,787 pounds higher. In 2005, farms supplementing the herd with bovine somatotropin (bST) attained higher rates of milk production per cow, had larger herds and were more profitable than farms not supplementing with bST for all measures of profitability. Farms adopting rotational grazing generally produced less milk per cow than non-grazing farms but had lower costs of production and higher profitability. One should not conclude that adoption of these technologies alone were responsible for differences in performance.

Business and financial records for 2004 from 200 New York dairy farm businesses are summarized and analyzed. This analysis demonstrates the use of cash accounting with accrual adjustments to measure farm profitability, financial performance, and costs of producing milk. Traditional methods of analyzing dairy farm businesses are combined with evaluation techniques that show the relationship between good management performance and financial success. The farms in the project averaged 334 cows per farm and 22,070 pounds of milk sold per cow, which represent above average size and management level for New York dairy farms. Net farm income excluding appreciation, which is the return to the operator's labor, management, capital, and other unpaid family labor, averaged $200,863 per farm. The rate of return to all capital invested in the farm business including appreciation averaged 11.3 percent. Differences in profitability between farms continue to widen. Average net farm income excluding appreciation of the top 10 percent of farms was $838,746, while the lowest 10 percent was a negative $11,854. Rates of return on equity with appreciation ranged from 46 percent to negative 11 percent for the highest 10 percent and the lowest 10 percent of farms, respectively. Large freestall farms averaged the highest milk output per cow and per worker, the lowest total cost of production and investment per cow, and the greatest returns to labor, management and capital. Farms milking three times a day (3X) were larger, produced more milk per cow and had higher net incomes than herds milking two times per day (2X). Operating costs per hundredweight of milk were $0.08 per hundredweight higher for 3X than 2X milking herds, while output per cow was 3,950 pounds higher. In 2004, farms supplementing the herd with bovine somatotropin (bST) attained higher rates of milk production per cow, had larger herds and were more profitable than farms not supplementing with bST for all measures of profitability. Farms adopting rotational grazing generally produced less milk per cow than non-grazing farms but had lower costs of production and higher profitability. One should not conclude that adoption of these technologies alone were responsible for differences in performance.

The objective of this study was to determine whether measurable differences existed between farms with and without cooling ponds. Data from Dairy Herd Improvement records for 1999 through 2002 were obtained on 42 herds located in North Central Texas. Nineteen herds had installed cooling ponds, whereas 23 herds had not. Monthly somatic cell counts for each herd were obtained from the Federal Milk Market Administrator. Data were analyzed using the PROC MIXED regression model of SAS. Within and across herd groups, milk production from June to October was significantly lower compared with milk production for the rest of the year. Although there was numerically higher average milk production per cow per day throughout the year for herds that used cooling ponds, differences between herd groups that used or did not use cooling ponds were significant only for August production. Herds without a cooling pond had 4.8 kg/d per cow lower production in August than in the cool-season months of November to May (26.4 +/- 0.6 vs. 31.2 +/- 0.5 kg/d), whereas the difference in August production was only 2.9 kg/d per cow in herds that used cooling ponds (29.0 +/- 0.7 vs. 31.9 +/- 0.6 kg/d). Differences caused by seasonal use of a cooling pond in culling, days to first service, days open, percentage of estruses observed, and somatic cell counts were not significant. Bulk tank milk samples cultured for 10 different bacteria showed no difference between cooling pond and noncooling pond herds in 2002. Also, there was no difference in incidence of violations from the Texas Department of Health for herds that used or did not use cooling ponds. However, herds with cooling ponds did have a lower percentage of successful breedings, fewer days dry, and a higher percentage of cows in milk compared with dairy herds that used other forms of cooling. Such differences may or may not be attributed to seasonal use of a cooling pond. Therefore, cooling ponds may provide relief from heat stress without adversely affecting most important measures of herd performance.

Business and financial records for 2003 from 201 New York dairy farm businesses are summarized and analyzed. This analysis demonstrates the use of cash accounting with accrual adjustments to measure farm profitability, financial performance, and costs of producing milk. Traditional methods of analyzing dairy farm businesses are combined with evaluation techniques that show the relationship between good management performance and financial success. The farms in the project averaged 314 cows per farm and 22,302 pounds of milk sold per cow, which represent above average size and management level for New York dairy farms. Net farm income excluding appreciation, which is the return to the operator's labor, management, capital, and other unpaid family labor, averaged $37,978 per farm. The rate of return to all capital invested in the farm business including appreciation averaged 3.3 percent. Differences in profitability between farms continue to widen. Average net farm income excluding appreciation of the top 10 percent of farms was $250,155, while the lowest 10 percent was a negative $145,107. Rates of return on equity with appreciation ranged from 36 percent to negative 25 percent for the highest 10 percent and the lowest 10 percent of farms, respectively. Large freestall farms averaged the highest milk output per cow and per worker, the lowest total cost of production and investment per cow, and the greatest returns to labor, management and capital. Farms milking three times a day (3X) were larger, produced more milk per cow and had higher net incomes than herds milking two times per day (2X). Operating costs per hundredweight of milk were $0.82 per hundredweight higher for 3X than 2X milking herds, while output per cow was 4,484 pounds higher. In 2003, farms supplementing the herd with bovine somatotropin (bST) attained higher rates of milk production per cow, had larger herds and were more profitable than farms not supplementing with bST for all measures other than labor and management income per operator. Farms adopting rotational grazing generally produced less milk per cow than non-grazing farms but had lower costs of production and higher profitability. One should not conclude that adoption of these technologies alone were responsible for differences in performance.

Business and financial records for 2002 from 219 New York dairy farm businesses are summarized and analyzed. This analysis demonstrates the use of cash accounting with accrual adjustments to measure farm profitability, financial performance, and costs of producing milk. Traditional methods of analyzing dairy farm businesses are combined with evaluation techniques that show the relationship between good management performance and financial success. The farms in the project averaged 297 cows per farm and 22,312 pounds of milk sold per cow, which represent above average size and management level for New York dairy farms. Net farm income excluding appreciation, which is the return to the operator's labor, management, capital, and other unpaid family labor, averaged $38,185 per farm. The rate of return to all capital invested in the farm business including appreciation averaged 2.9 percent. Differences in profitability between farms continue to widen. Average net farm income excluding appreciation of the top 10 percent of farms was $311,300, while the lowest 10 percent was a negative $173,275. Rates of return on equity with appreciation ranged from 64 percent to negative 37 percent for the highest 10 percent and the lowest 10 percent of farms, respectively. In 2002, farms supplementing the herd with bovine somatotropin (bST) attained higher rates of milk production per cow, had larger herds and were more profitable than farms not supplementing with bST for all measures other than labor and management income per operator. Farms adopting rotational grazing generally produced less milk per cow than non-grazing farms but had somewhat lower costs of production and higher profitability. Large freestall farms averaged the highest milk output per cow and per worker, the lowest total cost of production and investment per cow, and the greatest returns to labor, management and capital. Farms milking three times a day (3X) were larger, produced more milk per cow and had higher net incomes than herds milking two times per day (2X). Operating costs per hundredweight of milk were $0.22 per hundredweight higher for 3X than 2X milking herds, while output per cow was 3,768 pounds higher. One should not conclude that adoption of these technologies alone were responsible for differences in performance.

The introduction of automatic milking technology, including on-line individual data acquisition and processing, requires adaptation of dairy management methods. Automatic milking systems allow the individual cow to be milked and fed according to her production performance and potential to achieve maximal profits with minimal resources. Because the farmer is not actually present each time a milking or feeding decision is needed, a new generation of control and management systems has been designed to assume the short-term dairy management and operational control. The overall management control still remains with the farmer or herdsperson, who is supported by the dairy control and management system. The paper discusses the influence on dairy management of the integration of the individual automatic milking and feeding systems. Then, the concept of a dairy control and management system, which includes a decision support and expert system, is described. A prototype, which enables automatic milking and feeding routines, was developed and tested.