Hanneke (J.C.A.M.) Pompe, Peter Groot Koerkamp, Anton Stokman Labour requirement and mechanisation...
-
Upload
jayde-baynham -
Category
Documents
-
view
219 -
download
0
Transcript of Hanneke (J.C.A.M.) Pompe, Peter Groot Koerkamp, Anton Stokman Labour requirement and mechanisation...
Hanneke (J.C.A.M.) Pompe, Peter Groot Koerkamp, Anton Stokman
Labour requirement and mechanisation
costs of five strategies for zero-grazing
of dairy cows in the Netherlands
Overview of presentation
Introduction Zero-grazing and its drawbacks Objectives
Materials and methods Strategies for zero-grazing Labour requirement Costs
Results & discussion Labour and costs for zero-grazing strategies
Conclusions and concluding remarks
Grazed forage cheapest nutrient source To realize potential milk production:
Pasture-based diets need supplemental energy Feedstuffs like maize must be mixed with grass
Zero-grazing Feed mixture of fresh grass and other feedstuffs inside
barn
Introduction - Background for zero-grazing
Introduction - Drawbacks of zero-grazing
Fresh grass Spoils rapidlyIs voluminousNeeds to be collected and distributed twice a dayRigid time scheduleHigh labour requirement
Introduction - Objectives
To explore innovative solutions for systems that can feed grass based diets supplemented with other feedstuffsand to evaluate the labour requirement and costs of these feeding systems
M&M – Explore innovative feeding systems
3 farmers and coach Brainstorm sessions Alternative working methods to
mow/collect grass feed-out additional feedstuffs mix / distribute feedstuffs push feedstuffs towards the feeding fence
M&M – Current ration
Ingredient Amount,kg DM-cow-1-day-1
Fresh grass 14.0
Maize silage 3.0
Hay 1.5
Potatoes 2.0
M&M – Current working method
Activity
Mow/collect fresh grass
Feed-out other feedstuffs
Mix and distribute feedstuffs
Push feedstuff towards fence
2
2
2
4
Frequency of operation, #-day-1
Results – Innovative feeding systems
Feedstuff
shovel
Overhead
trolley
Cooperative
feeding
Summer
feeding
Base
situation
Mow/collect
fresh grass
Feed-out other
feedstuffs
Mix and distribute
feedstuffs
Push feedstuff
towards fence
Front mower+ loader wagon w/ side discharge
Tractor + front loader
Front mower+ loader wagon w/ side discharge
Tractor + front loader
Tractor + front loader
Loader wagon w/ side discharge
Tractor + front loader
Front mower+ loader wagon w/ side discharge
Tractor + front loader
Front mower+ loader wagon w/ side discharge
Feedstuff shovel
Front mower+ loader wagon
Tractor + front loader
Trolley on rails
Front mower+ loader wagon w/ side discharge
Tractor + front loader
Front mower+ loader wagon w/ side discharge
Tractor + front loader
Feedstuff
shovel
Overhead
trolley
Cooperative
feeding
Summer
feeding
Results – Innovative feeding systems
Activity
Mow/collect fresh grass
Feed-out other feedstuffs
Mix and distribute feedstuffs
Push feedstuff towards fence
2
2
2
4
Frequency of operation, #-day-1
Base
situation
2 2 (2) 0
2 1 (2) 1
2 Many (2) 1
6-8 - 4 2
Frequency of operation, #-day-1
Effect on flexibility in labour
+ +++ ++ +++
M&M - Assessment of labour requirement
Task times Standard software available
Only for existing working methods MS-Excel Data of an existing farm
120 dairy cows 12 ha fresh grass
M&M - Assessment of costs
Machinery costs incl. labour costs
Change in construction costs Change in contractor’s costs Change in costs for feedstuffs Difference in milk revenues
Per growing season
Results – Labour requirement, manmins-day-1
Task
Base
situation
Feedstuff
shovel
Overhead
trolley
Cooperative
feeding
Summer
feeding
Mow/collect fresh grass 29 29 29 27 0
Feed-out feedstuffs 14 14 11 14 31
Remove feed leftovers 2 2 2 2 2
Mix and distribute feedstuffs 12 12 3 12 7
Push feed towards fence 9 0 0 9 4
Transport between farms 0 0 0 17 0
Total 66 58 45 82 44
Results – Costs, €-growing season-1
Base
situation
Feedstuff
shovel
Overhead
trolley
Cooperative
feeding
Summer
feeding
Machinery costs, excl. labour 5,100 5,900 8,800 3,500 4,500
Additional costs contractor 0 0 0 0 8,000
Additional construction costs 0 0 50 0 0
Additional feeding costs 0 0 0 0 1,800
Reduction in milk revenues 0 0 0 0 3,000
Labour costs 4,000 3,500 2,800 5,000 2,700
Total costs 9,100 9,400 11,600 8,500 20,000
Conclusions – for the case farm
Low labour strategies Overhead trolley Summer feeding
Low cost strategies Base situation Feedstuff shovel Cooperative feeding
Best strategy per farm depends on arguments such as Available labour and interest in flexible working schedule Willingness to cooperate with other farmers Travel distances between farms Available capital Quotum policy, etc.
Concluding remarks
Changes in society and farmers attitudes Labour conditions Flexibility of labour Scale of farming New technology and working methods Sustainable farming, etc.
Need for labour and cost data for alternative strategies
Labour assessment requires lots of detailed data
Most agricultural labour and cost data were collected in the previous century
Let’s keep labour and cost databases up-to-date and share them
Acknowledgements
Jolmer de Vries – dairy farmer Wiebe Nauta – dairy farmer Bert Philipsen – WUR-Livestock Research
Questions?
Comments?
Suggestions?© Wageningen UR