Are Your Enterprises Profitable? DR. STEVE FORD Associate Professor of Agricultural Economics, PSU UNIVERSITY PARK—Most Pennsylvania dairy farms have multiple enterprises. The primary enterprise on these farms is the production of milk. However, each of the forages or grains pro duced on the farm is also a sepa rate enterprise, as is the produc tion of replacement heifers. It is important that each of the enter prises on the farm contributes pro fit to the whole-farm business. Pennsylvania dairy farms gen erally produce feed for the live- Milk Urea Nitrogen; Why What Does It Mean To VIRGINIA ISHLER Department of Dairy and Animal Science UNIVERSITY PARK— Pennsylvania DHIA is offering an additional management tool, milk PaDi Herd-Id |lSgBHWWiMMEsojp^fccQW3^^^ D *cL««orT Ut Cawtory Mman | i>» p«. «mp see tee mun mun mun g 0-40 Day. Jjj; ljsBSa-3&»U, ........ ( 41-99 Days 2 2 70.5 3.9 3.5 7.1 3.5 152 16.4 19.9 11.2 » ”T~ r&~JS 6.6 ~4.7"' 14.0 , 14.0 14.qT j 200 - 299 Days s Bg aapaMibaß es 3%? w~. wm «■*: «»? i A>t/Total 4 4 I 66.0 { 4.0 3.6 7.7 4.1 235 14.0 19.9 17.4 1 o- 40 5i55 mSx £SS iii Hi SH ( 41-99 Day* | t 200 ■ 299 Paya 1 1 602) 3.3 ■ 2.9 10.3 4.7 340 10.0 10.0 10.0 2 Avg/Total 2 2 59.5 3.4 3.0 11.0 4.3 249 10J IS.O 14.4 a -°.-4° diiS. &M 104.5.-- '-I*SoSai .‘.jjlaa uwo.a ooiir i .ioa- .15.2.4 T 41-99 Day. 7 7 90.3 4.1 3J 11.2 3.1 113 10.9 17.6 15.2 r «•*■■*'« wih. r - -nr* 9*~*uw - rt -v v * t 100 ' :«4.0 * jliM i*-$M Mil jsc&& i*-t_ u.2 t I 200- 299 Days n jg2 y * 2g| ffitS J2J 1 02. . j A»t/Total 12 12 00.0 4.0 3.7 10.3 3.6 153 10.9 10.2 14.0 1 0- 40 Day* JgJgg £Sj2f *04,5a! -3.9— -190- lit'— 10.2 - 15,2- I, -^- P ‘ y 4 ,S 4 - » 4 - 1 - r 3 -*- -, ,0 - S -- I 3 " - 121 ~ 10 -C J»-»- e -.2. - il .70.5 -4.5 .4.0. J7.6_ .4.3 - 252. .142) 16.7. 15.4 D 200 - 299 Days | 1 60.0 3.3 2.9 _10.3_ 4.7_ 340 10.8 _ 10.8 10.0 i DaysTlS* lii j£2 Silt 3.9 . . J.*!! MW _ 1262.. _ 1 As|/Tolal 10 IQ 74.0 4.0 3.6 9.0 3.0 179 10J 19.9 15.3 ProUto of Cows by Group Number " * ~ I r i £o<ro i l oiumv Viiuoo' yT ’ m VUbm. I MUN % I % I % CmS WH | U Hi I AV| Number I MU «»I SMMfco Lbo c«, »» «san see SCC MUN MUN i MUN °rt*. Wo [im h» Croup 2 HUpnL «!• 7U!73> »W* M*W '“•S"' 1 " —^rvm _ . _ Croup 4 Croup 5 A>|Toul 18 A 74.0‘ 4.0 ‘ 3,6 * 9,8' 3.0 “179 ' 10.8“ 19.9 ' 15.3 The analym of umple day milk for urea nitrogen (MUN) it new to DHIA. MUN valuer are expressed ai milhgranu per deciliter (mg/dl) For a group of 10 or more cows with 40 or more dayr in milk, a target group average MUN it 10 to 14 mg/dl. Within a group, mart animalt will be withm +/■ tut unite of the group average MUN (Ex: If the group't average it 12, mort corn will fall within a range of 6 to IS). MUN levelt are affected by the total intake of crude protein, degradable and roluble protein, and the amount and type of nonrtructural carbohydrate! tupphed in the rauon. While low levelr of MUN might indicate low protein intake and high levelr of MUN might indicate high level! of protein intake, it u quite potrible the problem ir the remit of a combination of reverat different nutrient intake levelr. Therefore, a trained herd contultant should work with you in interpreting there result! To assist you in the analysis of your herd'i milk urea nitrogen values, PaDHIA has prepared this report. It summarizes test day data Tor your milking herd by days in milk and by group number. pie ’PROFILE OF COWS BY DAYS IN MILK' summarizes data by days in milk categonei lor Ist, 2nd, 3rd and greater lactations. Cows are summarized across lactations within days m milk categories to provide herd averages. The ’PROFILE OF COWS BY GROUP NUMBER' summarizes data by group number Cows are summarized across groups to provide additional herd averages. The inTormaban that appears within each profile is described below Cows: Milking MUN Samples Testday Values: Milk Lbs % Fat.. %Pro %SNF Lmear SCC Wtd SCC Lo MUN Hi MUN Avg MUN Days in MUk stock on the farm. One way to look at this activity is that fanners are able to “add value” to the grain and forage grown on the farm by “marketing” it through the animal. This strategy makes sense, parti cularly if the farmer is primarily interested in producing crops. The modern dairy, however, must focus on the profitability of the milk enterprise. Consequently, it is important to acquire quality feed inputs at as low a cost as possible. Increasing costs of farm machinery and storage structures force many dairy farmers to urea nitrogen analysis, which can monitor the urea concentration in milk. This is another method to monitor your herd’s performance feedstuffs. The rumen microbes use fermentable carbohydrates to HA MU N Analysis Report Number of milking animals Number of milk samples analyzed Tor milk urea nitrogen The average daily milk production on test day. The average percent butterfat of the milk produced on test day. The average percent protein of the milk produced on test dr.y. The average percent sokds-not-fat of the milk produced on test day. The average weighted somatic cell count of the milk produced on test day expressed as a lmear score. The average weighted somatic cell count of the milk produced on test day. Of the test day samples analyzed, this is the lowest milk urea nitrogen value. Of the test day samples analyzed, this is the hig'sest milk urea nitrogen value. The average milt nitrogen value of the milk on lest day. The average days in milk through current test day for milking cows. This only appears for the Profile or Cows By Croup Number. rethink their current crop pro grams. Too often, costs of produc tion for crops reach levels that are far higher than the price at which feed can be purchased. Continued on-farm production oi iced crops under these conditions result in lost profits. Alternatives available to dairy farmers who find them selves producing crops at a cost that is higher than market-*value include: the use of custom opera tors for certain field operations, leasing equipment instead of buy ing it, and outright purchase of feeds instead of on-farm produc tion. There are many farms that no Is This Important, Your Herd? provide energy and organic acids in combination with ammonia to form amino acids and subsequent ly microbial protein. When rumen ammonia concentrations exceed the ability of rumen microbes to along with other records and perti nent information. Milk urea nitrogen or MUN measures the efficiency by which nitrogen is utilized by the animal. Nitrogen is an essential compo nent for rumen microorganisms and the production of microbial protein. Ammonia (NH3) results from the microbial degradation of incorporate ammonia into micro bial protein, ammonia is absorbed through the rumen wall, converted to urea by the liver, and high levels are found in blood, serum, or milk. If ruminal ammonia con centrations are low, this can also be reflected as low MUN’s. Bedford Ron & Diane May Simplicity Farms Elvin & Esther Carman Berks L and L Farms #3 Blair Luke Zimmerman Bradford Jack-Waiters Heather & Steve Sharer Bucks Penn View Farm Bryce & Blaine Keller Centre Claude Nyman Steve L. Swarey Chester Gideon F. Miiler William Duncan T and T Grossman Nolan King Clinton Steven F. Stoltzfus Paul Dotterer & Son, Inc. Crawford Renee Kehn Lost Acres Farm Cumberland Floral Rose Holstein Paul J. Basehore Chester & Katht Deitch Lavem Brubacker Erie Arthur Novel Tim Church Fayette God’s Country Ranch Lancaster Farming, Saturday, December 23. 1995-C9 longer milk cows but are still in The allocation of expenses such as crops. Frequently, contractual seed and fertilizer to individual arrangements can be reached to crops is fairly straightforward, have those farms produce feed for Care must be taken to also allocate dairies that are still in operation. the farm’s fixed costs associated Results from an analysis of with machinery ownership and farm records provided by the both paid and unpaid labor to each Pennsylvania Farm Bureau for the enterprise. For example, if unpaid 1994 Pennsylvania Dairy Farm family labor was no longer used to Business Analysis indicate that bale hay if all hay was to be pur almost one-quarter of the 850 chased, that labor could be used farms in the sample would have elsewhere to improve farm been better off renting out their profitability, land and buying all feed than con- Although the previous discus tinuing their current crop pro- sion has focused on crop enter grams. This large number of farms prise profitability, the same argu indicates the impact that a close ments can be used for replacement examination of enterprises profi- heifers. Again, good records are lability can have on the dairy essential for enterprise evaluation, farm. Of course, such an analysis The bottom line, though, is the takes time and fairly good records, bottom line. Remember, each enterprise should contribute to profitability on the farm. When MUN values are too low or too high, then problems may exist in the ration which can impair animal performance, reduce economic efficiency, and affect environmental pollution. The primary areas in nutrition that affect MUN levels are total crude protein intake, degradable and sol uble protein intake, and the amount and type of nonstructural carbohydrates supplied in the ration. The following areas should be examined closely in a ration pro gram if MUN levels are higher than what is considered normal: •Excess crude protein in the ration •Excess levels of degradable intake protein •Excess levels of soluble intake protein New Herds On Test Franklin Edward Martin Mervin, Lois Peckman Fulton Scott & Darla Mellott Huntingdon Dana Wallace Kevin Fluke Jefferson Longview Farm Brian Hindman Juniata Glenn D. Lauver Lackawanna John Howanitz Lancaster Kenneth Findley John David Zimmerman Kore M. Stoltzfus Elam Z. Simmerman Lebanon Nelson Martin Ken-Joda Farm John H. Lehman Spring Valley Farm Dennis R. Burkholder Clyde-Marlene Martin Lycoming Benjamin McCarty Dane Shrawder Luzerne Paul Zagata Charter Land Farm Mercer Don & Kathy Cornelius Spring Run Farm Mifflin Ivan T. Peachey Steve Hesser •A combination of any of the first three items •Inadequate nonstructural car bohydrates and excess protein Lower than normal levels of MUN’s may indicate: •Excess nonstructural carbohy drates and inadequate protein •Deficiency cf soluble intake protein •Deficiency of degradable intake protein •Excess levels of undegradable intake protein These are some areas in nutri tion that would need to be eva luated. However, MUN values are not meant to be used as the sole indicator of a possible problem. MUN’s are an additional TOOL. You need to use other information in conjunction with MUN’s to evaluate the herd such as records on reproduction and health perfor mance, milk fat and protein levels, and diet composition through analysis of forage, feed, and TMRs. Montgomery Johns Bros Dairy Christine Michalik Northumberland Oscar Baumert Ephraim S. King Potter Gay Torrey Snyder Pasture Green Farm Chester & Lizie Martin Somerset Joe Walker L.B.J. Farm Paul Rae Val Farm Susquehanna Dennis Lewis Laura Grosvenor Tioga Fuller Farms Polar Brook Jerseys Windswept Dairy Venango Mitch-Hill Dairyfarm Wayne Ait Rutledge Jr. James & Cinde Grossman Westmoreland John Mormack David & Barbara Miller Wyoming Bryan Kostick York David E. Myers Thomas A. Boyer Geor-Bren Farms New York Jim Gauss Clifford & Mary Good
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers