DAIRY DAY 2017 - GTP Welcome message – Western Dairy’s master poet and dairy trainer Rob La Grange applies verse to dairy innovation day. 10.05am Official Opening – Western Dairy

Western

DAIRY

Your Levy at Work

Followed byTHAT EVENING: The WA Dairy Industry Dinner sponsored by WAFarmers at Lighthouse Beach Resort, Bunbury (6.30pm)

Next Day (May 5): Recovery Breakfast and WA launch of the Herd Test Dashboard at Farmwest

THURS MAY 4 9.00am to 4.00pm(PROCEEDINGS START 10.00AM)

Dairy Innovation Day is an example of your Dairy Service Levy “in action”Brought to you by the partnership of Western Dairy and Dairy Australia, together with industry sponsors

DAY 2017

DAIRY

Hosted by Wes and Sarah & Robin and Betty Lammie.82 Lyle Road, Abba River, Busselton.

PROGRAM & PROCEEDINGS

Western

DAIRY

Your Levy at Work DAY 2017

DAIRY

3

Dairy Innovation Day 2017 Program

9.00am Registrations, together with trade exhibition and the Milne Feeds morning tea.

10.00am Welcome message – Western Dairy’s master poet and dairy trainer Rob La Grange applies verse to dairy innovation day.

10.05am Official Opening – Western Dairy chairman Grant Evans

10.10am Meet the Lammies - Western Dairy’s agribusiness team leader, Kirk Reynolds steps us through the Lammie business model, interviewing first the Lammies and then various key people who they interact with and whose relationships are critical to their business success.

• Business Owners - Wes and Robin Lammie • Processor – Malcolm Fechney, Harvey Fresh• Land owner - Ross Denny • Feed supplier - Dean Maughan

10.55 What sets a farm business apart in the eyes of a Banker? Rabobank Regional Manager Crawford Taylor discusses the features in common that set businesses up for a strong future.

11.10 Women in the business: Betty Lammie is the chief financial officer (CFO) of a serious business and her understudy, soon-to-be daughter-in-law, former city girl Sarah is gearing up to take on what is regarded as a critical business role. Western Dairy regional manager Esther Jones introduces you to this dynamic pair in a wide-ranging discussion that explores business transition, family relationships, trust and communication.

11.25 Dairy Innovation – what’s new

• Have you heard about the new Herdtest Dashboard? Datagene is in WA to launch this great new reporting function that turns herd test reports on their ear and makes them user-friendly.

• Dairy Farm Safety: Narrikup dairy farmer Bonnie Ravenhill is currently helping Dairy Australia customise its Dairy Safety Manual to ensure it’s practical, farmer ready and a tool that has applications in the business way beyond safety. Bonnie’s perspective on farm safety is worth a listen.

• PGG Wrightson launches its new silage bred maize variety - Corson, at DID 2017: Nathan Tognela introduces the variety.

11.40 Plenary session concludes and the crowd move into ‘self-select mode’! Three great workshops are on offer. Each workshop has 3 x 30 min segments, delegates will be able to participate in 2 of the 3 workshops on offer. Workshop allowance time is 1 hr 45 mins.

Be sure to check into the Brunswick Agency tent during the day and scan your EID tag to see if you’re in the running to win a Weather Station.

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

4

WS 1: THE PGG WRIGHTSONS SEEDS FEEDBASE WORKSHOPIn the registration marquee.

• Shredding cost of production through a focus on pastures: David March from Wairarapa Moana Incorporation - Taupo, New Zealand, was discovered by the WA Young Dairy Network touring party last year and identified by the team as ‘the most informative speaker on their tour’! David led Wairarapa Moana through a feedbase system transition aimed at driving efficiency under severe milk price pressure. He shares his learnings in this presentation.

• The Lammie feeding system: Dean Maughan leads Wes Lammie through a discussion that explores the Lammie approach to optimal feeding systems and the science behind it. The conversation includes an exploration of their approach to pasture utilisation, silage, feed testing and pellets and the cost benefit of their system. This philosophy ensures they have the ability to manage feed costs through a focus on margins, so that the system is robust to milk price. The session will also explore the outcomes of the recent Western Dairy research trial on different forms of starch and what it means to this herd.

• Transitioning to Silage – what we now know: Western Dairy’s consulting scientist Dr Martin Staines discusses the findings of the Silage Transition trial conducted at Vasse this last summer, with some key messages for us all to apply this coming year.

• Smarter Irrigation: Sam Taylor is leading a Western Dairy Smarter Irrigation project at the Giumelli property in Benger. Sam discusses the project’s findings so far in what is a handy reminder to irrigators that there are always opportunities to optimise irrigation costs.

WS 2: THE DELAVAL DOWN AND DIRTY WORKSHOPIn the dairy.

• Downer cows made good: Phil Poulton from the Tarwin Veterinary Group has developed the highly practical workshop to deal with the downer cow problem – which inevitably occurs with roadside views! This segment condenses a 2-hour workshop into a sharp 30 minutes full of practical advice and management tips on Downer Cows.

• Innovation in Effluent: The Lammie family has taken advantage of the Royalties for Regions funded DairyCare project, accessing the technical design services and subsidies on offer for infrastructure that will enable the farm to meet what is considered industry best-practice effluent management. This is one for the farm engineers! Pipes, pumps, and machinery. DairyCare Project officer Dan Parnell gives us the run down.

• Making compost on farm - is it really worth it? Western Dairy has completed its trial exploring the cost benefit of making and applying compost on farm. Rob La Grange explores the results.

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

5

WS 3 THE RABOBANK BUSINESS WORKSHOPIn the main marquee.

• The Lammie business model: The Lammie business has been run through the Dairybase program to benchmark its performance, now that there has been 12 months clocked up on the Busselton lease farm. The Lammies have generously opened up their performance data to share and interrogate. Kirk Reynolds takes us through the story so far.

• A case study of profitable farm business strategies: Bruce and Andrea Vallance milk 650 cows at Nirranda in south west Victoria and are partners in a satellite equity partnership in Cobram in Victoria’s north, the latter which has delivered a farm entry opportunity for a young farm manager and his family. The Vallance’s business growth is based on a low-cost production system that maximises the use of inputs and a sound understanding of the levers to pull that will optimise returns in tough years.

• So how profitable are WA dairy farmers? This is a snapshot of the performance of 28 WA dairy farms, ranging in size and system, over the last three years.

1.15 The Landmark lunch – and an opportunity to make sure you all have your names in the many super draws that are on at each exhibition stand – where each winner will be announced at dinner that night.

2.00pm Rotation 2: Delegates choose which of the remaining 2 workshops they would like to attend.

3.45pm Day closing comments

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

6

About Western DairyWestern Dairy is one of eight Regional Development Programs that are spread throughout the nation’s key dairy areas and operates under the auspices of Dairy Australia. Western Dairy has been operating since 1997 to direct dairy research and extension programs.

Western Dairy has a team of three full time on-ground staff (based in Bunbury) working with regional manager Esther Jones all with a 100% focus on delivering support and services that add value to WA dairy businesses.

The most isolated dairy state in Australia, WA must work hard to ensure its policies are linked and fully integrated with national policies and that the research and extension work that is carried out in the West is complimentary to that in other states and regions. Part of the way Western Dairy does this is through the prioritising and facilitation of major research and extension projects that will help enhance the sustainability and profitability of this industry. Dairy Innovation Day is just one example of that. However, virtually every ‘dairy related’ activity you see in this state, has some connection to Western Dairy and your levy.

WA dairy farmers have all had opportunity to take part in our many complimentary events and activities.

Our suite of field days, farm discussion groups and seminars span topics from business and people management, to feed systems and nutrition; effluent designs, compost production, soil health and much more. We are particularly proud of the development of the nutrition software package Rumen8 (which is available for free via the Western Dairy website); and also the recent release of a suite of farm business tools linked around the ESKi (or the Employment Starter Kit initiative). There are now great tools supporting farmers wanting to explore new business models, especially around share farming.

Meanwhile, keep an eye out for FeedTrough – a great little publication edited by agronomist Tammy Negus – who heads up our feedbase interest group. Tammy is taking on a number of projects for Western Dairy. Her roles includes rolling out the ESKi’s with one-on-one consultations for those seeking assistance in the employment and contractor space.

Western

DAIRY

Your Levy at Work

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

7

Support and SponsorshipThe remarkable Dairy Innovation Day – which is offered free to dairy farmers – would not be possible without the support of sponsors and exhibitors. Western Dairy asks that delegates acknowledge the sponsors of today’s event and spend time with each of them to show just how much we appreciate their support.

The LammiesNo Dairy Innovation Day would be possible without the generosity of the host family. This year’s hosts are no exception. Robin, Betty and Wes Lammie and Wes’s partner Sarah Kenny, their family and staff have thrown open their farm business and allowed us to put it under the spot light. The Western Dairy team has interrogated the business performance, the feedbase system, the effluent system and put it all on show. Being prepared to be so open about a business structure is a very generous thing and on behalf of Industry, Western Dairy extends the most sincere of thankyous to this family for their hospitality.

The Western Dairy Board 2017Grant Evans Chair

Mat Daubney Vice Chair

Vicki Fitzpatrick Director

Brian Piesse Director

Ruben Zandman Director

ManagementEsther Jones Executive OfficerMobile 0418 931 938Email [email protected]

Dairy Agribusiness ManagerKirk ReynoldsPh 0429 110 485Email [email protected]

Young Dairy Network and Extension CoordinatorJessica Andony Mobile 0435 174 719Email [email protected]

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

8

Acknowledging the Sponsors and ExhibitorsWestern Dairy would like to acknowledge the following sponsors and exhibitors, without whose support the event would not be possible.

Dairy Australia

South West Development Commission

Harvey Fresh

Lion

WAFarmers

Rabobank

De Laval

PGG Wrightson Seeds

Brunswick Agencies

Philmac

DataGene

Landmark

CSBP

Summit Fertilizers

Zoetis

Coopers

Elders Bunbury

GeoCatch

Machinery West

Farmwest

Unifarm

Heritage Seeds

Harvey Farm Service

Department of Agriculture and Food WA

The Dairy Industry Dinner – sponsored by WAFarmersThe Lion drinks followed by the Industry Dinner sponsored by WAFarmers, takes place at the Lighthouse Beach Resort tonight, with pre dinner drinks commencing at 6.30pm. Minister for Agriculture and Regional Development, Alannah MacTiernan will deliver the keynote address at dinner.

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

9

The WA Dairy Industry DinnerA wonderful night of fellowship and celebration of all things dairy.

Proudly sponsored by

Lighthouse Beach Resort BunburyCommencing with Lion Drinks at 6.30pm

Incorporating:

• Keynote presentation from Minister for Agriculture, Alannah MacTiernan.

• Presentation of the WAFarmers Milk Bottle Award.

Western

DAIRY

Your Levy at Work

www.farmwest.com.au | 08 97262626

FRIDAY 5th MAY - 8.30am startFARMWEST

28 Clifford Street, BUNBURY - HALIFAX INDUSTRIAL AREA

You are invited to attend the FARMWEST Breakfast, with a tour of the Herd Test Lab and the facilites, Detailed information on the Herd Test dashboard and all the information you can get on the new

DataGene HerdData App topped of with a Cooked Breakfast.

COOKED BREAKFAST PROVIDED

RSVP is essential for catering purposes please contact Monique on 97262626 or email [email protected] or go online to

www.farmwest.com.au

DID RECOVERY BREAKFASTF R I D A Y 5 t h M A Y

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

Papers and Information for Reference

The documents in this next section of the proceedings are designed to support the information you have been presented with today.

The papers that follow relate to each of the concurrent workshops and have been prepared by our presenting team and/or Dairy Australia.

We consider the information in this booklet to be of great reference material that can be used for staff training and discussion opportunities on-farm.

The booklet in its entirety will also be available for download from www.westerndairy.com.au

Contents12 Stockdale's Feeding System

14 Wairarapa Moana Incorporation – A Long and Winding Road

16 The effect of a slow versus rapid change-over from grazed pasture to grass silage on milk yield, feed intake and rumen pH in lactating cows

20 Rumen8 – for easy formulation of dairy cow diets

22 Smarter Irrigation for Profit WA Demonstration Activity Summary, Summer 2017

24 Introducing Corson Maize

25 Dairy Farm Monitor Project Results

28 Case Study – Bruce and Andrea Vallance

30 Western Dairy Compost Project – Final Report April 2017

35 Dairycare Project – Best Practice Dairy Effluent Systems

37 Safety and workforce development in the dairy industry

39 Management of the downer cow

44 How to manage a down cow

51 Down cow decision tree

52 Gold Standard Nursing

11

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

12

Stockdale's Feeding SystemBy Tammy Negus, Agronomist and Dean Maughan, Milne Agri Food Group

At Stockdale Pastoral both Wes and Robin Lammie take responsibility for feeding the herd. They comment that they apply the KIS approach (Keeping it Simple) to feeding and managing the herd for production. The main goal is to grow lots of grass and produce lots of milk. Their good approach to business, fully feeding the herd, pasture management and decision making skills contribute to a good farming system. With a high producing herd of 550 Holstein Friesian cows that calve all year round and a good summer price the Lammie's want to hit the mark.

The drivers of their feeding system include milk price, milk quality and production and animal health. They monitor the production and the herd carefully focussing on cow nutrition and taking advantage of the higher milk price that Parmalat gives them for the summer milk. The added benefits of fully feeding the herd in terms of animal health is valuable above and beyond the value of the milk. Planning, feed budgeting and risk management is an essential on-

going process at Stockdale Pastoral and should be industry 'best practice' on all dairy farms. Focusing on pastures, producing quality and quantity of home grown fodder and strategies for feeding concentrates are essential to meet their targets.

Focus on pasturesWith a minimum of 10-year lease they are comfortable with investing in the land and realise that inputs are essential for optimum pasture production. Soil testing has been particularly important moving onto a new property. There was a high focus on improving pH with 5T/Ha of lime applied to all paddocks. The farm uses contractors especially for spreading and seeding and this has proven an efficient way of getting the job done whilst freeing up Rob and Wes to concentrate on other areas of the business.

In 2016, 200Ha received a complete herbicide knockdown and was re-established with ryegrass at 35kg/ha and clover in some areas. The Lammie's prioritise knocking down and re-seeding pastures with a focus on acting early and planning well to get the feed at the right time. In 2017 they will be completely reseeding a percentage of the farm and 'topping up' others as they realise the benefits of reseeding and see the cost recovery on the seed price.

An investment in the farm layout of fencing has helped to make it more user friendly, efficient and workable on a daily basis. With a high stocking rate the system is driven by nitrogen during the growing season and applied approximately every 30 days or in relation to the rotation. Paddocks are grazed on the basis of ryegrass leaf stage and biomass present and the rotation is set accordingly. The dry cows follow the herd and this achieves a target residual and good pasture utilisation in each paddock. Feeding cows and grazing management is a 'balancing act'. Even with a high stocking rate Wes mentions that the system ends up with too much grass in winter and a little too short in spring as they lock up silage paddocks. As with the herd they fully 'feed' the pastures for productivity and had to commit to the investment in feed early in the business development. They have a focus on making money out of grass and are continually evolving.

STOCKDALE'S FEEDING TIPS

• Fully feed your cows - the benefits are beyond the milk production

• Don't skimp on pasture inputs and management

• Manage the feeding in the change of the season to prevent a milk drop

• Cut forage early to produce good quality silage

• Plan, feed budget and feed test

• Regularly check the budget - assess costs versus production.

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

13

Fodder conservationIn previous years at Stockdale they have bought fodder in 2016 at the new property they valued the ability to grow, control and produce their own. The focus on silage production is on quality as well as quantity which is often difficult to achieve in a good balance. Feed testing results show an increase in quality for silage results from 2015 to 2016 particularly for protein and energy. They aim to cut surplus pastures early to get a quality product chopped and into the pit.

Robin mentions that every exercise during the season needs to be justified and produce a return and this is an example of the planning and risk management for the farm. In spring the process of applying another application of urea must allow another grazing. You can't quantify if you don't measure in a feeding system. Regular measurements of the silage stack help with the feed budget and they value a feed testing service to assess the quality of the forage produced and assist in balancing the ration. Observations of the herd are particularly important in assessing whether the feed is meeting the cows requirements. For example if the cows are hungry they will run out to meet the mixer.

Concentrates and feeding in the dairyStockdale's feeding strategy has a strong focus the seasonal change and managing the cows transition from summer feed to grass and vice versa. On the onset of autumn grass they don't drop the concentrate too quickly and feed no less than 4kg Maximise pellets per milking. The herd is always fed well. Pellets are fed in the dairy in the morning and afternoon as well as in the paddock with silage. Maximise plus pellets 11kg/cow/day in summer and 6-8kg of Maximise in winter. Up to 2 kg of milled wheat in the TMR is fed during the day to further increase production. Wes comments that they are paid on milk quality but the wheat really drives litres. A large amount of wheat is fed, however the safety is higher due to the technology in the Maximize pellets. The starch in the pellets is a slower release and not a big 'hit' and acidosis risk. The Lammie's comment that Maximise pellets fits their feeding system with a safe quality product and in a package that provides feed testing, good logistics, communication and service.

Almost daily assessment of production and the budget (costs versus production). Effective and quick milking 12 hour gap- cows in and out of milking quickly has a big effect on milk production. Feeding is across the board due to the facilities, not on individual production. This means it's likely the late lactation cows are being over fed. However, the Lammie's are comfortable with this strategy to focus on milk production when the price is good, a better price for culls, cows do better after dry off and for general animal health. They are not afraid to use concentrates to extend the fodder on hand (feed budgeting allows understanding of the limits)

Every day or so Robin checks the milk level in the tank and based on the “base” monthly milk price, with no growth milk incentive, he calculates the return he is getting over and above his feed costs. They are not afraid to increase the pellets or to add 2 kg of wheat to the TMR, if the return over the base milk price is reflected by what is in the tank. Robin said that he has never used the growth milk price in this daily calculations and decisions as he knows that it has a finite life.

What's new for 2017A slurry tank has been purchased to apply liquid effluent from the dairy onto the pasture paddocks in an innovative way to recycling nutrients. An auger is being sourced to aid the delivery of the pellets onto the farm. This year the Lammie's want to push harder for grass production, cut earlier for better forage quality and develop wealth creation. Wes comments that he wants to continue and develop feeding and farming skills.

Discussions with the Lammie's show that adopting some of the industry best practice in growing grass, producing quality fodder, milk and cattle does pay off. There is importance in developing trusting relationships with service providers and business partners to make the most of opportunities and progress the business. The monitoring of activities, production and input costs is essential to making the business work and to make profit.

For more information attend the question and answer session with Dean Maughan, Wes and Robin

Lammie at the Dairy Innovation Day on the 4th May. Visit www.milnesagrigroup.com.au for information on Milne pellets and technology.

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

14

Wairarapa Moana Incorporation – A Long and Winding RoadDavid March, Wairarapa Moana

Wairarapa Moana Incorporation (WMI) is an entity that is relatively unique to dairy farming in New Zealand. The entity itself is the product of a historic Crown Land Settlement which saw an 11,000 hectare block of land given to a subset of an indigenous tribe as compensation for the taking of historic tribal land in the late 19th Century. The settlement took 20 years to negotiate and culminated in the block of land being gazetted to the affected parties that was located approximately 450 kilometres away. The first road access to the area would not be created until 30 years later when the Government of the day started one of the largest hydro-electric schemes in the Southern Hemisphere and dammed the Waikato River (the longest river in New Zealand) which runs alongside part of the property.

The first farms were created from cleared bush-land in the early 1950’s and were run as training farms for Maori. From there, additional farms were developed and typically run as leasehold (42 years). By 1972, 18 dairy farms had been developed along with two large-scale sheep and beef farms, all of which were run by a Government department – The Department of Maori Affairs. At the same time, around 6,500 hectares of land was leased to NZ Forest Products Ltd, growing pinus radiata for both domestic and export markets. In 1983, the first sharemilkers were introduced into the model and with the retirement of leases saw sharemilker numbers increase. The first managed farm was run in the 2002/03 season and the last of the leases returned to WMI management on 1st June 2014.

Fast forward to the present day and the block now has nine fully managed farms and three sharemilkers milking 10,500 cows across 4,000 effective hectares. There are around 60 people employed to run the farming side of the operation with further corporate and administration roles covering a further 10 people (including management of 3,000 plus registered shareholders). There are a further three support blocks totalling 1,500 hectares, two of which are on the original settlement block with a further 350 hectares purchased in June 2014 about 70km away near Rotorua. These support blocks rear replacement dairy cows (approximately 2,000 yearlings and 2,000 in-calf heifers). The forestry leases are still in place. The business has also expanded into milk processing and sales being a cornerstone shareholder (34%) of Miraka Ltd. The Miraka processing site is situated approximately 35km from Taupo in the centre of New Zealand’s North Island.

The changes and growth of the landholding and its associated farming practices over the last 70 years is a story in itself however the period that is of most interest to the attendees of the Dairy Innovation Day is the journey over the last 5 years. All of the WMI dairy farms are seasonal calving with all cows calving between 20th July and 1st October and then being dried off in mid to late May, achieving 260 to 275 days in milk.

Up to the 2012/13 season (a season is defined as the period between 1st June and the following 31st May), the business had a fundamental belief that its biggest risk was the summer ‘dry’ period. In response, the business had adopted a high-input strategy to protect overall production with a particular focus on per cow production. The strategy to a certain degree stacked up with another belief that the milk price would remain well in excess of $6.00/kgMS. Unfortunately, what seemed to be an appropriate strategy on paper would translate into significant risk to the business as not only feed costs put pressure on overall margins, but other costs such as repairs and maintenance (as more feed was delivered to the cows) and staff capability (a different set of skills required compared to a classical pastoral system) saw the business having to make some difficult decisions as it considered the future. Costs peaked at around $5.71/kgMS with the resultant operating margin insufficient to cover its interest costs, dividends to shareholders, capital maintenance requirements and ultimately its growth strategy. This situation is all too recognisable in the dairy farming industry the whole world over.

The Board, faced with a deficit budget for the coming season using $6.00/kgMS as its budget price, decided to take action with a series of reviews. Over the next three years, a series of reviews were undertaken. These reviews ranged from a Farm Systems Review, to an Irrigation Review, to a Reproduction and Genetics Review and everything in between. A total of 10 formal reviews were undertaken with reviews led both internally and externally with a number of experts contracted to run these reviews. These processes not only involved pulling

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

15

together a huge amount of data and information but also asked the current management and governance of the business to accept that they would have to change the way in which they worked if they wanted to future to look brighter.

I joined the business in May 2013, approximately half way through these reviews. My original role of Technical Manager was a role created as part of the review of people and roles within the business. Given we are a people business, having a series of recommendations that have been written by people outside of the business was only ever going to be half of the transformation story. The biggest challenge of all lay in getting all staff to lay aside their farming prejudices and place trust in a new way of doing things. This was a huge leap of faith for our staff but between myself and the Operations Manager at the time, we made sure all staff understood that having a business that was financially resilient and sustainable was in their best interest – this was an opportunity in which everybody could share in the future success of the business.

I took over as Operations Manager three-quarters of the way through the 2014/15 season and was the third Operations Manager in that season. Although we had made good headway in terms of our cost structure (Costs had reduced from $5.71/kgMS to $4.79/kgMS), the milk price had reduced to $4.40/kgMS and we were faced with a negative operating margin. I identified that one of our biggest challenges as a business was that we had great plans, but our execution was inconsistent and, at times, very poor indeed. At the beginning of the 2015/16 season, the mantra that we still use to this day was born – “efficient use of resources”. This mantra resonated well with our staff as it applied to so many areas of the business. One example was our calf rearing costs – our plans on paper said it should be costing us $95 per calf (excluding labour costs) to rear to 100kg. Analysis of the previous season’s calf rearing costs showed it cost us $185 per calf. When reviewed our plans and processes, we delivered 1,500 calves to our support blocks earlier than ever for $85 per calf – an improvement on the previous year of $150,000!

As payout continued to drop further in the 2015/16 season to $3.90/kgMS (which is the lowest milk price in real terms for 25 years) the need to be efficient remained as high as ever. More importantly, given we knew we were facing a loss, it was important to reassure staff that we would not be changing what was important to them – our plans to remained focussing on efficiencies and not on unsustainable cost cutting exercises in terms of our spending on housing, remuneration and machinery. We continued to involve the staff in coming up with the ways in which we could be even more efficient and it is amazing to reflect on the areas in which they suggested the business could improve. Our staff proved to be a very good source of ideas and ultimately efficiency and cost reductions. At the end of that season we went through a series of mini reviews to work out how we were going to continue to improve in the coming season. We like to call this process ‘Plan > Do > Review’ – come up with the best plans, execute the plans to the best of our collective ability, capture the relevant data and review the plans with all stakeholders. Then start the cycle again.

Things in the 2016/17 season are looking much brighter with milk price forecast to be $6.00/kgMS and our cost of production forecast to be between $4.00 and $4.10/kgMS. In five years, we have reduced our break-even milk price (including stock sales revenue, interest etc.) from $6.50 to around $4.50. There is still a lot of work to be done and the Board continues to challenge what the business looks like in terms of its cost of production when we have optimised our business. Like everything in a ‘unit of production’ business, we will succumb to the laws of diminishing returns and there will be a point that we cannot reduce our cost of production further. Until we reach this point, we will continue to challenge ourselves and recognise that ultimately, the difference between success and failure, more often than not, is ourselves.

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

16

The effect of a slow versus rapid change-over from grazed pasture to grass silage on milk yield, feed intake and rumen pH in lactating cowsMartin Staines and Ruairi McDonnell – Western Dairy RD&E Hub

As lactating cows transition from a grazed pasture diet to a silage diet in late spring/early summer, there is a marked reduction in milk yield per cow, typically about 4 L per cow per day. The lower metabolisable energy (ME) content of pasture silage relative to fresh pasture accounts for a significant portion of this decline. It is generally accepted that a slow change in diets is best for dairy cows. However the size of any yield benefit of a slow vs rapid dietary change has not been quantified to assess if this has any economic benefits. Therefore we conducted an experiment comparing milk production responses of cows with a gradual change-over from grazed pasture to silage over a 10 day period versus an abrupt change grazed pasture to silage.

MethodsEighty lactating cows from the Vasse dairy herd were assigned to four groups of 20 cows. The four groups were managed as separate individual mini herds. Cows were balanced evenly between groups for days in milk (mean 195), age, lactation number and historical milk, fat and protein yields. Two groups of cows were assigned to treatment SLOW (Slow1 and Slow2) and two groups were assigned to treatment RAPID (Rapid1 and Rapid2). The experiment was conducted between 11 November and 21 December 2016 (40 days).

All cows received a concentrate mix in the dairy (7-8 kg/cow/day) made up of barley, lupins and canola meal.

The two SLOW groups grazed pasture as the sole forage for the first 12 days (period 1). From days 13-22 (Period 2), these cows were slowly introduced to grass silage and slowly withdrawn from grazed pasture by increasing the amount of silage fed by 1.5 kg of DM per day. Silage was provided after the morning milking in feedlots without access to pasture, and only when cows had eaten the full amount of pasture silage for that given day were they moved to grazed pasture for the rest of the day. From day 23-40 (Period 3), the SLOW cows received ad libitum pasture silage as the only forage.

In contrast, the two RAPID groups received grazed pasture for the first 12 days (period 1) and then continued with grazed pasture as the sole forage until day 17. These cows were abruptly removed from grazed pasture after the morning milking on day 18 and fed silage as the only forage from then on till the end of the experiment.

Individual milk yield was measured daily. Individual milk composition was measured once a week. Feed intake for each of the four group was estimated daily. Live weight and body condition score (BCS) of all cows were also measured three times during the study.

An electronic rumen pH bolus was given to four cows in each group to measure pH every 15 minutes for the duration of the experiment.

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

17

Results and discussion

Feed qualityFeed quality is summarised in the table below.

Feed Samples NDF% CP% Ash% ME MJ/kg DM Fat % Starch % Sugar %

Barley 2 22.0 10.4 2.1 13.2 2.0 59.0 -

Canola meal 2 30.0 31.2 6.0 15.1 14.0 2.0 -

Lupins 2 28.0 34.2 3.6 13.9 4.9 2.0 -

Dairy mix 9 22.7 18.6 4.5 13.4 3.9 39.0 -

Grazed pasture 22 52.3 19.8 9.7 10.9 2.3 - 12.1

Grass silage 13 56.0 7.5 5.5 10.0 1.6 - 23.1

Silage intakeMean daily grass silage intake per cow for the four groups is shown below.

Milk yield and compositionMean daily milk yield (L), milk solids yield (kg) per cow and weekly milk composition are presented in the graphs below.

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

18

In period 1 (days 1-12), all cows were treated the same and there was no difference in milk yield. However, in period 2 (days 13-22), SLOW cows sustained a greater milk yield for longer than the RAPID treatment, despite both groups getting access to equal amounts (but provided in a different manner) of grazed pasture and grass silage. Over the first several days of period 3 (days 23-40) the yield gap between the two treatments reduced and milk yield differences disappeared. There is no difference in milk yield between cows in period 1 when all were consuming pasture as the only forage source. Milk yield in the two RAPID groups declined significantly in period 2 once grazed pasture was replaced with grass silage (day 18; 27th November), from approx. 28-24 L/cow, before stabilising at around 22 L/cow. In contrast, the SLOW cows had a much more gradual decline in milk yield. By the end of the experiment, all herds were producing the same amount of milk (no statistical difference), but throughout period 2 (grey area in graph), SLOW cows were able to sustain milk yield at a much higher level than RAPID cows.

Fat and protein content in milk were unaffected by the SLOW vs RAPID treatment (P> 0.05) but were affected significantly by the time of sampling. Mean milk fat concentration increased throughout the experiment, while milk protein content declined once grazed pasture was withdrawn from the diet but then increased slowly afterwards. These results are typical for the time of year for this region.

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

19

Average milk solid yield was actually quite high for late lactation cows at >2 kg MS/day when they were still grazing pasture. This obviously declined as the cows transitioned onto silage, despite the big increase in milk fat concentration. The change from grazed pasture to grass silage resulted in an increase in dietary NDF content which increased milk fat content.

It is noteworthy that SLOW cows were able to sustain relatively high milk yields in the final days of the transition period when 90% of forage consumed was grass silage. This finding needs further investigation, but it appears that even a couple of kg of grazed pasture in the diet enables cows fed high levels of grass silage to produce similar amounts of milk compared to cows fed grazed pasture as the sole forage.

Live weight, body condition and rumen pHAverage cow live weight increased from 629 kg to 668 kg between day 1 and day 40, but was unaffected by treatment. Mean body condition score increased from 4.55 to 4.86 from day 1-40 but was also not affected by treatment.

Rumen pH data are still under analysis. We include a daily graph of one of the cows on day 30 of the experiment, when consuming silage as the only forage. Rumen pH is at its lowest a few hours after the main feed intake following morning milking. Rumen pH is strongly related to feed intake patterns, and can be an indicator of subclinical acidosis when under 5.8 for prolonged periods of a few hours or more. This particular cow has a healthy average daily rumen pH of 6.1, with minimal time below 5.8. In our analysis of this data, we are particularly interested in the few days after changeover to silage, to see if any differences in pH patterns can be detected between treatments. Full results will be reported once data analysis is complete.

ConclusionFrom days 18 onwards, when a significant difference in milk yield was first detected, SLOW cows produced 45.3 L more milk than RAPID cows over 22 days. With the typical WA milk price at the time of the experiment of 52.5 c/L, adopting the SLOW versus the RAPID treatments used here for a 500 cow herd would generate an extra $11,896 in milk income.

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

20

Rumen8 – for easy formulation of dairy cow dietsRichard Morris, Martin Staines and Steve Little

Rumen8 is a free nutrition software package owned by Western Dairy and Dairy Australia which has been designed for easy formulation of dairy diets, to ensure the correct balance of energy, protein, fibre, minerals and other nutritional components for Australian dairy cows at different stages of production.

Version 3 of Rumen8 has been released in April 2017 and is now better than ever. Rumen8 is now being used by over 500 users world-wide to manage dairy cow diets including the pasture based diets common in the Australian dairy industry.

A main feature of Rumen8 is its user friendliness, so that it can be used regularly by dairy farmers to adjust their dairy cow diets with periodic help from a nutritionist. The easy interface allows the user to create and adjust diets to meet production targets and explore impact on financial margins. More sophisticated nutrition models are available but these require more feed information and considerably more time and knowledge to determine suitable diets, restricting their usefulness on farm.

Rumen8 version 3 features a large number of additional functions and is compatible with Windows 10. Here’s an overview of what's new in Rumen8 version 3.

• The window layout has been improved with important financial information always visible. An expanded range of cost, margin and feed efficiency parameters allow better comparisons between diets.

• We have greatly expanded the Help function and the use of tool tips to explain nutrition information.

• The feed library has been updated and expanded to over 250 feeds, including 100+ pastures specific for different dairy regions, seasons and qualities.

• Animal demand and supply of the minerals calcium, phosphorous, magnesium have been expanded and diet DCAD is now included.

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

21

• The number of possible diet ingredients has been increased to 15.

• Multiple feed libraries are now supported.

• Diet ingredient amounts are more easily entered ‘as fed’ or as dry matter.

• Feed mixes can be created and used in multiple diets as a single ingredient.

• Four sets of recommended levels for various nutritional components can be set and feedback is provided on their adequacy via traffic lights.

• The Fat: Protein ratio and energy corrected milk have been added to the Animal tab.

• The Forage: Concentrate ratio is now calculated for the diet.

• Concentration and proportion units can be changed to percent by the user in the Preferences.

• The standard cows have been expanded to include 9,000 and 10,000 litre lactations.

• Changing animal values has been made faster and easier with sliders instead of input boxes.

• Days in milk and days pregnant can now be set on a calendar.

• Diets being compared can now have a description.

• The dry cow period has been split into early and springer mobs.

• Energy, protein and ingredient details are now accessible from the menu.

• Feed and mix details are available by hovering the mouse over the ingredient name.

• The traffic lights are now suitable for colour blind users.

• The total diet weight is now displayed as fed and on a dry matter basis.

• The Preferences can be reset to the default values.

• The Preferences have been split into General and Advanced options.

• ME and MP Detail windows can remain open allowing easier monitoring of supply and demand calculations.

• Animal activity has been simplified.

• A saved diet file (.rm8) have been associated with Rumen8 so can be opened from Windows Explorer.

• The User Guide and Training Manual for Rumen8 have been updated.

• Video tutorials on how to use Rumen8 are now available on YouTube. Simply type Rumen8 in the YouTube search box.

Dairy Australia commissioned and independent evaluation of 11 nutrition models used around the world. Rumen8 (then version 1) performed admirably. You can read the report yourself as it is available from on the Dairy Australia web site (A review of 11 applied dairy nutrition models used in Australia, 2009). Rumen8 version 3 is even better, so why not try it yourself. Find us online www.Rumen8.com.au

Richard Morris, Martin Staines and Steve Little Your Rumen8 v3 team

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

22

Smarter Irrigation for Profit WA Demonstration Activity Summary, Summer 2017Sam Taylor Consultant to Western Dairy

Project OverviewThe Smarter Irrigation for Profit project is a partnership between the major irrigation industries of cotton, dairy, rice and sugar. It will target 3000 irrigators to improve their individual enterprise profit by $20,000-40,000 per annum. The project has 10 key activities, four industries, 16 R&D partners, and 19 farmer managed learning sites across five states.

The expected outcomes are:

• 10-20 percent improvement in water productivity, efficiency and farmer profitability

• Adoption of new irrigation technologies and science application by farmers and irrigation professionals to improve farm profits.

• Improved cross sector industry research collaboration with public and private sectors in four major irrigation industries providing a legacy platform for other sectors to also benefit.

WA Demonstration Site ActivitiesEM 38 & Gamma Radio-metrics Survey

This purpose of this survey is to gain a greater understanding of soil characteristics, particularly plant available water content, and saturated hydraulic conductivity. These characteristics help to inform irrigation scheduling and application rates. A greater plant available water content indicates a potential to extend the interval between irrigation events without risk of stressing the crop, while the hydraulic conductivity informs us how much water can be applied without risk of causing runoff, which may result in surface water loss and/or erosion. Where significant differences in plant available water content are apparent, variable rate irrigation may be worth considering if the irrigation infrastructure allows.

The blue/green areas above represent areas of higher EC (up to 0.5 dS/m) while the orange / red areas indicate lower EC values (~0.1 dS/m). Soil type varies from Sandy Clay Loam at the red in the bottom of the picture, to clay loam in the blue in the top right corner.

Moisture SensorsThere are many types of soil moisture sensors available on the market these days. “Wildeye” dual depth sensors, with telemetry so that data could be viewed online have been installed at this site. More sophisticated soil moisture sensors are available (eg capacitance probes) that can measure moisture at depths to over 1m in 10cm increments and also collect other data such as soil temperature and EC. We chose to use the Wildeye sensors as they are simple to install, lower cost to set up, are replaced with new units at the end of the battery life and offered good after sales service.

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

23

The graph below shows the soil moisture content at one of the monitoring sites. This site shows that the soil moisture content on this soil type is near field capacity (top of white shaded area) and soil moisture remains above the refill point (blue line). By utilising this information we can inform irrigation decisions, changing the irrigation interval based on soil relative soil moisture supply.

SchedulingIrrigation scheduling should take into account many soil, crop and environmental factors. At Giumellis’ this season, irrigation applications have been adjusted to meet the Maize crops requirement, which changes throughout the season based on crop growth stage.

The graph below demonstrates the difference in irrigation required to meet the demands of the Maize crop based on age / crop stage (red line), displayed as a % of total water requirements. The green line simply shows the total crop water requirement applied as an even amount daily over the life of the crop.

Where a strategy of flat rate irrigation was a adopted, over watering of the crop would occur in weeks 1-5, and again in weeks 14-18, while the crop may be limited for moisture in weeks 6-13 which are critical in setting the crop yield potential.

For further information or project progress updates, contact:Sam Taylor, Western Dairy Consultant, 0429 332 593, [email protected]

Full maturity TENDERLEAFYTM silage hybrid developed in New Zealand by Corson Maize seed

Very large plan with high grain yield and a sound agronomic package

Excellent yield performance in this maturity

Z71-F1 offers above average early growth developing into a tall, bulky plant with large ears as well as excellent staygreen which contributes to a wide harvest window. CORSON F1 has a high grain content and above average whole plan digestibility.

CORSON F1 is suitable for warmer regions where early planting is possible. It is ideally suited to contract silage production, targeting high yields and quality silage. Dairy farmers can take advantage of its performance by planting early on a run-off

A detailed understanding of the growing environment is required for a specific planting rate recommendation. This should be assessed by the grower and their advisors.

Z71-F1

CORSON F1

Z71-F1 Maize Silage CRM 111

Hybrid Traits

Early Growth . . . . 5 . .

Drought Tolerance . . . . 5 . .

Staygreen . . . . . 6 .

Whole Plant Digestibility . . . . 5 . .

Total Energy . . . . . . 7

Stalk Strength . . . . 5 . .

Root Strength . . . . 5 . .

Rust . . . . . 6 .

Northern Leaf Blight . . . . 5 . .

Poor Outstanding

(Traits are rated on a scale of 1-7)Information, including CRM, is from New Zealand and is sourced from Corson Maize Seed New Zealand’s Maize Hybrid Guide 2015.

Over the last decade farmers have increasingly sought new feeds to supplement their pasture-based systems. Farmers now recognise that supplementing a dairy cow’s diet with maize silage offers them a way to stabilise animal feed (by buffering pasture growth), increase milksolids (MS) yields, increase body condition scores (BCS) and manage a higher stocking rate per hectare

Corson Maize Seed source and produce some of the world’s finest maize seed for Australian growers. Below are the details of Z71-F1 and G49-T9 maize hybrids

G49-T9 produces a tall crop with large ears which combine to provide its high dry matter yield potential and dependable silage quality. Along with excellent whole plant digestibilty, it has an outstanding total energy rating which will favour both the silage grower and the silage user.

Corson T9 is widely adapted and suitable for maize silage growers on all soil types targeting high silage yields. Moderate populations are recommended to get the best balance of cob to stover.

A detailed understanding of the growing environment is required for a specific planting rate recommendation. This should be assessed by the grower and their advisors.

G49-T9

CORSON T9

G49-T9 Maize Silage CRM 104

Hybrid Traits

Early Growth . . . . 5 . .

Drought Tolerance . . . . 5 . .

Staygreen . . . . 5 . .

Whole Plant Digestibility . . . . . 6 .

Total Energy . . . . . . 7

Stalk Strength . . . . 5 . .

Root Strength . . . . 5 . .

Rust . . . . 5 . .

Northern Leaf Blight . . . 4 . . .

Poor Outstanding

(Traits are rated on a scale of 1-7)Information, including CRM, is from New Zealand and is sourced from Corson Maize Seed New Zealand’s Maize Hybrid Guide 2015.

Exciting silage hybrid that delivers excellent yield potential

Tall dark green plan with flexible stalks and large ears

Reliable agronomic traits assist in maintaining maximum yield potential

INTRODUCING CORSON MAIZE

24

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

25

Dairy Farm Monitor Project resultsKirk Reynolds – Agribusiness Team Leader

Firstly a big thank you to those participants who have essentially "opened up" their businesses to review for the industries benefit. This is the third year the data has been collected and now every state is part of the national approach of Dairy Australia to improve business understanding. In 2015/16, 28 farms from Waroona through to Denmark took part, with an even spread of farming systems and herd size among participants.

A pleasing aspect for the industry was that all participants achieved a positive return on assets (RoA) which is the key measure for the farmer’s business profitability. Whilst earnings before interest and tax (EBIT) was 3.7% down on last year to $617,059, the average RoA was still an enviable 6.6%, with the top 25% recording a healthy 11.4% RoA.

Whilst milk price was up 1.1 c/L, to 52.2 c/L, the cost of production was up by 1.4 c/L to 45.3 c/L. When additional income is outweighed by a higher cost of production the EBIT is diminished. Despite there being annual variations in each of the cost categories, the main difference for the higher cost of production was in feed costs, which creeped 1.5 c/L. Digging deeper into the feed costs highlights that while the concentrate and hay price increased a very minor amount, on average an extra 0.3 t of purchased feed was consumed per milker. The additional cost of that extra quantity of feed was not countered by the higher milk price. The increased use of concentrate is likely to be a factor of the drier spring in 2015, however good managers will have calculated margins and reassessed. It is a reminder to constantly check whether the extra milk and subsequent milk income is in fact leading to greater margins. Farming for profitability not production.

An increase in both stocking rate and production per cow led to an 11% increase in milk production per ha (14,637 L/milking ha). There was 6% increase in average milk volume among the participants. The extra production increase was in response to strong market signals from milk processors. It’s a timely reminder that some businesses respond to milk price by cranking up production, great managers respond by assessing the situation and ensuring there is additional margin. Otherwise you are milking for love. A summary of the financial and physical performance of the farms involved are outlined in Tables 1 and 2.

What separates the top 25%It should be made clear that without understanding the story behind the performance there can be potential for error. Having said that the top 25% for the past 3 years have largely been the same businesses with 4 of the 7 businesses being in the top 25% every year. So what can we extrapolate about these businesses.

Firstly it must be stated that the key to success is the management of the resources not the system that is chosen. There is no relationship between business size and its RoA and there is also no difference in performance whether the farming system is dryland or irrigated. Figure 1 highlights that both dryland and irrigated are largely the same in terms of business performance, albeit irrigated farms having a higher cost of production (2.4 c/L) that is matched by a very similar higher income (2.8 c/L),

Figure 1. Irrigated farms have a slightly higher cost of production, with an increased milk price which reflects similar business performance to dryland farms.

RoA EBIT (c/L) CoP (c/L) Milk Price (c/L)

Irrigation (n=11) 6.6% 14.4 46.8 53.9

Dryland (n=17) 6.6% 14.8 44.4 51.1

The key that differentiates the top 25% is that they manage all things pretty well. They produce 23% more milk per usable hectare even though they only produce 4% more on the milking platform. This means that they don’t ignore their support area and they manage it as well as the milking platform. They also have a larger percentage of their available area devoted to the milking platform.

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

26

The second key is they manage their pastures better and get more directly grazed feed into the diet of the cow. This is seen with the top 25% having more than 1 t DM/ha extra pasture production. This flows into the cows’ diet with the top 25% consuming 38% of its diet from direct grazing versus 33%.

The third factor differentiating the top 25% is their efficient use of labour. Whether looking at the numbers of cows milked per full time equivalent (FTE) or the production per FTE (kg MS/FTE) the top businesses are more than 20% more labour efficient, with less costs (9.8 c/L vs 7.9 c/L).

Overarching these productivity measures is the top performers to have real control over their costs, particularly overhead costs. They have 18% lower overhead costs than the average, which is largely in the area of labour, both employed and imputed. They also spend 3% less of their income on feed with a further 2% saving of finance costs as a result of lower liabilities per cow ($2138 vs $3138).

"Do you know how your farm is performing both physically and financially?" If not, and you’re keen to understand then look to the Dairybase tool (www.dairybase.com.au) or engage someone to assist you in this process. If you don't measure, then it’s difficult to manage, or getting others to assist in management.

"You do understand my farming performance, and now you can see the areas you need to focus on". This is a good position to be in as long as you use the information to tackle the area of focus. This can be an area where the intent breaks down due to a lack of support or discipline. This may be a simple conversation with a neighbour or another dairy farmer you know is good in that area, but action should take place. Alternatively it may be tapping into your industry networks like your bank manager, a consultant, an agronomist or feed nutritionist to help you improve on the area of focus. Small discussion groups can also provide a great area for peer support and understanding of different farm issues. If you are keen on forming a group and have other farming members in mind then please let us know as we would love to assist.

"You do understand my performance, and must be doing quite well as you’re performing in line with the top 25% of the industry measures". This is a great position to be in as long as you were not a victim of circumstance. Sometimes all the stars align so your annual performance for one year is rock solid. You may have received a good price for milk or livestock, you may have had purchased concentrates at a really low level or seasonal conditions allowed for fantastic silage yields. There will be an element of some management, in these tasks however the consistent best farmers will repeat their performance year in, year out because of their management.

Benchmarking allows the reflection to assess how your managing your resources (cows, soils, people, finances etc) and how well you have done compared to peers or in previous seasons. Budgeting allows for the planning and management of resources into the future given a predicted set of circumstances. Good businesses will constantly measure (benchmark) and plan (budget) in order to stay ahead of the inevitable cost-price squeeze.

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

27

Table 1. Financial summary of 28 DFMP participants in 2015/16

WA Average Top 25%

cpl % of income cpl % of income

Income 60.0 100% 63.8 100%

Milk 52.2 87% 55.7 87%

Other 7.8 13% 8.1 13%

Variable 28.5 48% 28.4 45%

Herd 1.8 3% 1.9 3%

Shed 1.8 3% 1.6 3%

Purchased feed 16.8 28% 16.4 26%

Homegrown feed 8.2 14% 8.6 13%

Overheads 16.8 28% 13.8 22%

Employed labour 5.7 10% 5.0 8%

R & M 3.3 6% 2.8 4%

Other Cash 1.9 3% 1.7 3%

Depreciation 1.8 3% 1.4 2%

Imputed labour 4.1 7% 2.9 5%

Farm Working Expenses 39.4 66% 38.0 60%

Total Cost of Production 45.3 76% 42.2 66%

EBIT 14.6 24% 21.6 34%

Interest & lease 3.8 6% 2.5 4%

Net farm income 10.8 18% 19.1 30%

Return on Assets 6.6% 11.4%

Return on Equity 9.4% 14.7%

Table 2. Physical summary of 28 DFMP participants in 2015/16

WA Average Top 25%

Cows 545 504

Milking Area 283 266

Support Area 292 238

Stocking rate cows/milk ha 1.93 1.89

L/cow 7,600 8,070

L/milking ha 14,637 15,291

L/usable ha 7,485 9,200

Grazed t DM/ha 4.1 4.8

Conserved t DM/ha 1.7 2.0

Pasture (t DM/cow) 2.1 (33%)* 2.5 (38%)*

Fodder (t DM/cow) 1.9 (30%) 1.6 (25%)

Concentrate (t DM/cow) 2.4 (37%) 2.4 (37%)

Employed FTE 4.4 (71%)** 2.8 (64%)

Imputed FTE 1.8 1.6

Cows/FTE 84 106

kg MS/FTE 49,995 59,400

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

28

Case Study – Bruce and Andrea VallanceGuest presenters – Business Workshop

Bruce & Andrea Vallance milk 650 cows at Nirranda in SouthWest Victoria and are partners in a satellite equity partnership in Cobram Northern Victoria that has delivered a farm entry opportunity for a young farm manager and his family. Vallance's business growth is based on a low-cost production system that maximises the use of inputs and a sound understanding of the levers to pull that will optimise returns in tough years.

In this case study however, we explore the business workings of their Joint venture farm in Northern Victoria. Western Dairy would like to acknowledge the support of David Heinjus in making this case study available for the proceedings.

Farm Details:

Location: Cobram, VictoriaFarm Size: 177 effective hectares plus 121 ha out paddock leasedNumber of cows: 600 cows Total Milk Solids Production: 342,000 kg MSBusiness model: Joint Venture / Equity Partner

IntroductionBruce and Andrea Vallance and Mark and Tania Nevill live in close proximity in South West Victoria on the Great Ocean Road. Both businesses are operating successful dairy farms and were looking to leverage existing capability to joint venture into another dairy farm. The scale of the proposal was outside of their individual reach, but collectively they were able to purchase a 600 cow property as a joint venture.

The strategy was to purchase a farm and provide a suitable manager with the opportunity to become an equity partner. The manager would then steadily buy out the Nevill and Vallance families creating a capital gain from the original investment.

The original preference was to purchase a property close to their existing operations but when better value land was found, they decided to adopt that plan. An irrigated dairy farm was purchased at Cobram in 2013. Cobram was selected because it was close to a regional centre for labour and it was an existing dairy area for backup and support services. Initially, to gain an understanding of NW Victorian dairy production systems, the business engaged a local dairy consultant monthly for 2 years and undertook a workshop with a water brokerage firm.

The cultural fit between the owners and the first manager was not perfect so after the original manager resigned, a renewed effort was made to locate a new manager and potential equity partner. It was quickly determined that the new manager, Joe Edwards, had “it” and was invited into the equity partnership. An agribusiness management consultant was the facilitator of rigorous meetings to ensure that Joe, his wife Natasha, and the current partners had a thorough understanding of the business structure and that correct governance procedures were in place. The financial status of the business was outlined and budgets were developed to assess profitability moving forward.

This is in place and the business venture is now achieving the original objectives with Joe paid a wage and a profit share. Land values will be fixed for 3 years. This provides Joe and Natasha an opportunity to purchase another 10% of the property and business.

The goal is to achieve a 10% operational return from the venture.

Business StructureNirrunga is a unit trust with the trust owning all land, livestock, plant and equipment and water. The current unit holding is 45% Nevill family, 45% Vallance family and 10% Edwards family. The founding unit holders are also guarantors for a bank loan taken out by the Farm Manager.

This business structure is a good example of where a clear strategy defines the preferred structure. Changing a business structure can be expensive, so having a business structure that is fit for purpose is critically important right from the start.

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

29

Dairy OperationsThe business milks 600 cows on 50 unit rotary on 177 effective ha. An additional 16 ha was recently purchased which adjoins the original 161 ha. The 121 ha fully irrigable out paddock is 15 minutes away from the main property with water attached to the Nirrunga business.

The main farm is 100% laid out for flood irrigation and has a water right of 310 ML High Reliability, 960ML Low Reliability and has a ground water aquifer right of 922 ML. Thirty five percent of the property is sown to Lucerne, the rest is annuals and 20 ha summer crop (millet). Cows were fed 2 tonne grain in 2015/2016.

There is a split calving system with cows calving 50/50 1st March/ 1st August. The herd is moving towards a 3 way cross of Aussie Red/ Montbeliarde/ Friesian. There are 4 full time labour units employed, including the Farm Manager. Book keeping is undertaken by Tania Nevill at Mepunga East.

ReportingThe Farm Manager provides weekly reports to the other joint venture partners. These weekly reports include:

• Actual production for the week

• Livestock numbers

• Feed on hand

• Approval of accounts which are then paid by Tania

Board MeetingsMonthly meetings are undertaken on property between the joint venture partners. These meetings involve a farm walk and discussions about:

• Pasture and feed management

• Budgets

• Property development

• Capital expenditure plans

• Work plan for the next month.

PolicyThere are many written policies contained with the joint venture agreement. This agreement has been developed with their agribusiness facilitator and used to educate the current Farm Manager about the business opportunity. The trust deeds also outline exit rules. The exit rules are very clear and remove all emotion should this situation occur.

Operational policy is generally intuitive, but there are formal policies for:

• Induction for new staff

• Roles and responsibilities

• Production system

• Capital expenditure planning

• Breeding

Governance Insights • Ensure the right people are in place to manage a property if the owners live remotely from the property. It is

preferred if the manager has “skin in the game”.

• Outline decision making criteria within the joint venture agreement

• Joint venture / equity partnerships require complete alignment of culture between the different parties.

• When managing big projects, you need your feet on the ground, be hungry for profit but patient for growth

• Measure performance

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

30

Western Dairy Compost Project – Final Report April 2017Rob La Grange Western Dairy

Compost is recognised as a good soil amendment agent. It contributes organic matter (OM) to soils and the organic matter fraction has a good cation exchange capacity (CEC) and in addition contributes to the water holding capacity (WHC) of the soil. There are claims from a Victorian property that applications of compost resulted in a more palatable sward. It is important to note that most soils on intensive dairy farms have OM levels that are regarded as in the range for intensive pasture production. The lighter soils in WA are inherently low in OM but even most of these on dairy farms have OM contents that adequately support pasture and crop production because of intensive pasture production over time. Compost has varying levels of nutrients but at very low levels compared to inorganic fertilisers. Applying compost at light rates (<2t/ha) annually to the soil surface is unlikely have a benefit for the soil even where soil OM contents are on the low side. Applying high rates of compost (>20 t/ha) will contribute to soil health especially on low OM soils. As a nutrient source compost would be very expensive if used to supply nutrients at rates comparable to inorganic fertilisers because of the very high application rates required to supply the nutrients.

Dairy farms have large amounts of effluent by-product to manage but applying high rates of effluent solids to soils can have negative impacts on the environment through leaching of nutrients into waterways and ground water on susceptible soils. Turning the effluent into compost using high carbon sources commonly found on farm (shed bedding, laneway scrapings, old hay and straw etc.) would result in a more stable by-product where nutrients in the sources are bound more effectively in the compost form for slow release when added to soil.

There has been an interest in using compost on dairy farms in WA and the issues that need addressing include:

• The viability of making compost on farm – this must factor in cost of machinery and time in making compost over and above costs associated with managing raw effluent.

• Environmental benefits.

• The cost benefit of using compost either made on farm or purchased commercially.

In 2012, Western Dairy embarked on a compost project looking at the feasibility and practicality of making compost on farm. The project demonstrated that dairy farmers can make compost from natural carbon and nitrogen sources commonly found on farms.

The Phase 2 Project Design and MeasurementsIn May 2014 Western Dairy was successful in negotiating an agreement with the South West Catchments Council to measure the soil health and financial benefits of applying compost on farm This project is funded through in-kind contributions from Western Dairy and the South West Catchments Council, and through funding from the Australia Government’s National Landcare Programme.

Three farms were selected and on each of these a paddock was split into 4 demonstration strips randomly assigned to a control and three treatment strips. The farms were situated in the Harvey, Dardanup and Gelorup districts. The treatments consisted of applications of effluent solids; compost at a light rate and compost at a heavier rate. One paddock did not receive an effluent application. These treatments were a once-off application at the start of the program. The program did not interfere with normal farm operations and so the paddocks would have received annual inorganic fertilisers as well as seasonal applications of potassium nitrogen and sulphur where required. The dairy herd had normal access to the paddocks in the grazing period. One paddock site was under overhead irrigation through summer and autumn; one under flood irrigation and one was a rain-fed paddock.

Soil testing of each strip was done before treatments and analysed for soil microbial activity and for the normal physical and chemical parameters. Soil tests were repeated a year later and underwent the same analysis. Pasture

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

31

accumulation was measured using a rising plate meter and using formulae developed for WA conditions. Two of the sites were purely ryegrass swards and one irrigated site had significant amounts of kikuyu in the warmer months and formulae were used taking the kikuyu into account. Cow grazing behaviour was observed to see if animals had any significant preference for any particular treatment strip.

It is important to stress that the project was more of a demonstration than a scientific trial and so statistical significance has not been established for the data collected. However, the data collected did not result in any observable differences across the treatments. It would have begged the question of further scientific study where a treatment appeared to have a difference effect to establish if any of the observed differences were statistically significant.

Results

Soil Health Benefits Data from all three sites presented the same conclusion that there were no observable responses with respect to pasture accumulation, soil test parameters and grazing behaviour to any of the treatments versus each other and the control. One strip received an effluent application at a much higher rate than planned and the first measure of pasture accumulation following treatment indicated that this strip grew considerably more pasture than the others most likely due to the high level of nitrogen that was applied through the effluent.

For this report one farm will be focused on. More information can be found in the full report available from Western Dairy or SWCC.

The farm in this report is located in the Dardanup area and had the lowest soil OM content of all three paddock sites. Treatments were applied on the 5th June 2015.

The paddock layout and treatments are shown in figure 1.

Figure 1. Dardanup paddock layout

Soil Test Analyses1. Soil microbial activity

Soil microbial activity was analysed in the Microbiology Laboratories and the overall data presented as an image indicator derived from the data.

Table 1 has the details of the pre-treatment analysis and table 2 has the post-treatment analysis 13 months later

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

32

Table 1. Pre-treatment soil microbial activity

MAWS Apr-15

Paddock Strip Compost 3 Effluent Compost 6 Control Guide

Microbial Activity Indicator 108 97 82 94 80

Soil Basal Respiration (mg C/kg soil) 2413 2136 1732 2043 1690

Soil Basal Respiration (mg CO2/kg soil) 8830 7816 6338 7478 6185

Soil Microbial Biomass (mg C/kg soil) 661 586 475 560 464

Comments: The guide figures are what would be expected for a healthy soil. The findings report microbial activity well above the guide for all strips.

Table 2. Post-treatment soil microbial activity

MAWS May-16

Paddock Strip Compost 3 Effluent Compost 6 Control Guide

Microbial Activity Indicator 26 19 21 22 80

Soil Basal Respiration (mg C/kg soil) 277 81 127 162 1690

Soil Basal Respiration (mg CO2/kg soil) 1014 296 465 592 6185

Soil Microbial Biomass (mg C/kg soil) 79 26 38 48 464

Comments: Microbial activity was considerably lower but this is not to be interpreted as the result of treatments. The findings are a snap shot of the day. It is highly likely that the soil samples were a lot drier than those taken a year previously. It is unlikely that any differences observed between treatments could be statistically proven to be due to the treatments applied.

Conclusion

Soil microbial activity results in the demonstration strips did not establish that adding effluent or compost had contributed to soil microbial activity.

2. Relevant soil test chemical parameters

Table 3 has the three parameters that could indicate the effects of adding compost and effluent. The April 2015 results are pre-treatment.

Table 3. Soil organic carbon, organic matter and CEC pre and post-treatment

Compost 3 Effluent Compost 6 Control

Soil Test Results Apr-15 May-16 Apr-15 May-16 Apr-15 May-16 Apr-15 May-16

Organic Carbon % 2.12 1.42 2.36 1.65 1.98 1.69 1.92 1.32

Organic Matter % 3.65 2.44 4.06 2.84 3.41 2.91 3.30 2.27

Cation Exchange Capacity meq/100g

5.88 5.18 4.54 4.56 4.51 4.60 5.59 4.80

Comments: It would be difficult to demonstrate from these results that there were any significant effects of adding compost or effluent.

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

33

Pasture Accumulation Results Table 4 records the pasture accumulation over two growing seasons.

Table 4. Pasture accumulation rates over two seasons

2015 (kg DM/ha/day) 2016 (kg DM/ha/day)

3/07/2015 19/08/2015 18/09/2015 1/07/2016 9/08/2016 27/09/2016

Control 58 63 89 35 34 66

Compost Light Rate 53 63 120 41 34 63

Compost Heavy Rate 57 63 92 32 30 60

Effluent 56 59 102 34 36 64

Comments: Whilst pasture accumulation rates were higher for a couple of strips measured on the 18th September 2015, it would be impossible to claim these as significant treatment effects when all the data is considered over time and all treatments. It is important to remember that compost and effluent applied at the rates in the trial would not have contributed nutrients in high amounts and the normal fertiliser programs on all three farms would have supplied sufficient nutrients for the pasture growth measured.

Cow Grazing BehaviourThe comment of enhanced palatability in a Victorian case study was explored in observing cow grazing behaviour. Cows were observed on their initial entrance into the paddock to see if they would choose any of the treated strips over the rest at the break fence. There was no pressure on the cows at the beginning so they had the whole break at their disposal. It was apparent within a few occasions of observing cow behaviour that there was no selective behaviour indicating a preference for a particular strip.

Financial BenefitsDairy farmers are keen to see a financial reward for inputs made to the business. Farmers will also make decisions for environmental and soil health reasons. Environmental impacts are seen as detrimental to sustainable agriculture and should be an important consideration in any business. The same could be argued for improving soil health on farm. It would be difficult to determine the financial benefits of practices aimed at addressing environmental issues but it is obvious that poor sustainability would be costly to the business over time. When it comes to soil health then it becomes more difficult. If soil tests indicate that the soils are healthy then further inputs are not likely to see financial returns for the investment. If soils are not healthy then inputs addressing these health issues could well be financially sound.

In the demonstration trial the farms applied compost either as made on farm or as a purchased product. When assessing the costs of applying compost made on farm the cost of machinery and time were calculated for both the manufacture of the compost and its spreading. For the Gelorup farm using purchased product, the purchase and transport cost of the product was added to the cost of spreading. Contractors were hired for spreading on all three farms. A contractor was hired to make compost on the Harvey farm and on the Dardanup farm compost was made by the farmer. Table 5 has the summary.

Table 5. Costs associated with compost applications on three farms - $/cubic metre of compost

Harvey Dardanup Gelorup

$20 $44 $86

Comments: The lower cost for the Harvey farm was achieved because of the large amount of compost made on farm. This was well in excess of what was required for the demonstration because the farmer had large amounts of carbon and nitrogen sources to manage and was keen to apply heavy rates to selected paddocks. The costs were calculated per cubic metre for all the compost made.

The obvious measure of financial benefit would be any extra pasture grown as a result of applying compost and what extra income the extra pasture would have achieved in increased milk production.

As discussed above there was no measurable additional pasture accumulation that could be suggested to be the result of applications of compost at either 3 t/ha or 6 t/ha.

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

34

ConclusionThere is no doubt that compost is a good soil amendment agent. Poor soils that are low in OM, CEC and WHC would benefit from the addition of compost. Soil tests are important in any decision to apply compost. Soils on most dairy farms have adequate levels of OM. There could be individual paddocks that are low in OM content and selecting these to receive compost could be of benefit.

Compost is a more stable nutrient reserve than raw effluent and so could be one way of reducing the environmental impact on susceptible soils and in sensitive regions.

Purchasing compost is an expense but there is also a cost when making compost on farm . The time involved in making compost on farm is also a big factor on dairy farms. Another option is to accumulate large sources of carbon and effluent and hire a contractor to make and spread the compost which also comes as a cost.

Compost applied to healthy soils will not result in short and long term pasture responses that are cost effective even when applied at higher rates (say 20 t/ha). At the higher rates there could be an immediate pasture response to the nitrogen in the compost but the cost of the nitrogen would be prohibitive compared to inorganic sources.

Compost should not be considered for its nutrient content as the unit cost of these nutrients will be very high compared to inorganic sources. However, where applications of raw effluent are likely to impact negatively on the environment then turning this into compost is sound practice.

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

35

Dairycare Project – Best Practice Dairy Effluent SystemsDan Parnell, Western Dairy

Dairy shed effluent is a highly visible source of nutrients that can impact waterways and at the same time be a valuable source of nutrients for farmers if recycled on farm.

The Regional Estuaries Initiative (REI) is a four-year, Royalties for Regions funded program to improve the health of six Western Australian estuaries. One part of the REI sustainable agriculture program is to promote best practice in relation to dairy effluent management through self-regulation. Western Dairy will be the lead partner in the project with support from the Department of Water, Geocatch and Dairy Australia.

DairyCareThe Dairycare program is now up and running with effluent reviews being conducted across the state. These reviews give farmers feedback on their current effluent system in relation to the WA Dairy Shed Effluent code of practice and possible suggestions for improvement.

From the reviews interested farmers from the Hardy and Leschenault Catcments can apply for the effluent upgrade funding.

We encourage any interested farmers to contact Dan, Sam or Bree at DID day to express interest in the Dairycare project or to discuss all things effluent.

Stockdale Pastoral- Effluent ManagementWith the assistance of Western Dairy and Geocatch the Lammie family have sought funding from Geocatch to implement an effluent plan and upgrade their effluent system. An effluent review and plan has been conducted. The effluent planning process is vital when making changes or developing a new effluent system. An effluent plan predicts the amount of effluent produced on a daily basis and helps design effluent storage and application systems of an appropriate size.

No two effluent systems are the same and will vary widely according to the number of cows, the design of the dairy shed and environmental factors. Every system- no matter how good the design- requires regular management and maintenance.

Managing effluent in this dairy is challenging as it is in a high winter rainfall environment, has generally flat terrain and the water table is relatively close to the surface. At present there is an existing effluent pond which is a little undersized for a herd of this size and has the dual role of storing both solids and liquid effluent. This is not ideal as the pond will quickly fill up with sludge which will reduce the amount of liquid effluent which can be stored. There is also no current application system to re-apply nutrients in a controlled way to paddocks to produce more pasture.

The current effluent plan provides the Lammie family with some solid numbers and factors to consider with which design they pursue. The current plan suggests the current pond be divided with an internal wall so that the front section can have a solids separation function. This is often called a solids separation ditch and designed to be cleaned regularly by excavator. The solids are dried and then spread back on to paddocks. The overflow from the ditch will collect in the second pond and will be of a higher quality which can then be re-applied back on to paddocks by an irrigation system or tanker. The storage here will still be a little undersized with the current dimensions so management will be more important in this system with regular re-application so that the pond is contained over the winter storage period.

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

36

SummaryIn summary the current effluent plan addresses the key components of a functioning effluent system;

• Water minimisation Reducing the water used in the dairy means less effluent if produced thus reducing the size of ponds and the

application area required. This will be critical at this site where the pond size is limited.

• Solids separation Separating solids makes the liquid effluent easier to handle. The existing pond was doing a dual the dual role

of solids separation and storage which put pressure on the pond.

• Storage With the wet winters in WA applying effluent on paddocks during the winter months where there is surface

water run-off present a risk to waterways so storage is recommended

• Application Applying effluent back to paddocks in a controlled means nutrients do not concentrate over a small area

and also provides the best return from the capture nutrients. A mobile effluent irrigation system has been suggested for this system

• Management The pond at this site will need to be emptied regularly so the storage is not breached over the winter period.

The solids separation ditch is small and has been designed to be emptied every 6 months. Incorporating this in the ongoing running of the farm is critical.

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

37

Safety and workforce development in the dairy industryTammy Negus Western Dairy’s Workforce Development coordinator

It's challenging times as dairy businesses need to remain productive and profitable, whilst keeping our people on the farm safe as a number 1 priority. The dairy industry has developed and distributes: The Employment Starter Kit Initiative (ESKi), Farm Safety for Tight Times Fact Sheet, Farm Safety Starter Kit and is developing a Farm Safety Manual for use by dairy farmers on farm. These resources help farmers with the mandatory requirements for employing someone, keeping safety a priority and includes some good examples of processes that can improve the employment on farm. Employing people on dairy farms and people issues will always be challenging, but by using tools, templates and procedures and support this is available from Dairy Australia and Western Dairy it can become easier.

Dairy workforce reminders1. Get the resources - Dairy Australia , Western Dairy and The People in Dairy (TPID) websites provide a huge

amount of information on employment in the industry. The ESKI, Tactics for Tight Times and Farm Safety Starter Kit are essential to read and have on hand for reference. See the links below.

2. Updates - It's important to keep up to date with changes in laws, new and improved ways of doing things on farm. Minimum pay rates for the dairy industry are reviewed every year and changes have been made as of July 2016. See www.thepeopleindairy.org.au for updates. Everyone registered with an ESKI should receive email updates periodically and let Western Dairy know if you are not receiving emails and updates such as the Dairy Digest .

3. Farm safety - Keeping children, farm staff and yourselves safe on the farm is the number one priority. The ESKi provides a safety checklist and templates . Make sure you are familiar with these two new Dairy Australia resources;

a) Farm safety in tight times fact sheet During busy and difficult times a number of things can happen to increase the risk of accidents. Here are

5 things to make sure everyone is safe; • Fatigue - remember this is just as dangerous as having a blood alcohol level that is above the limit. Small,

regular breaks make a big difference and try and get a good night sleep. • Cutting corners - don't let others or yourself take short cuts that compromise safety because an accident

is the last thing you need. Taking it steady can get you there just as fast with lower risk. • Working solo - when you or one of your staff are working alone, the most important thing is to have

good communication and make sure safety procedures are in place. • Inexperienced employees - its often tempting or the only option to employ cheaper, inexperienced

people to reduce labour costs. Ensure they are given adequate training, encourage them to ask questions, communicate and stop if they are unsure.

• Where are the kids and what are they doing? It's important to make sure kids are being watched by someone and that the environment is safe.

Visit www.tftt.dairyaustralia.com.au

b) Farm Safety Starter Kit - Developed by farmers this kit provides practical, easy to use resources to help you get your farm safety system started or improve the existing system. There is 3 parts to it - a system snapshot, past improvements and quick safety scans. To order a copy or download the document visit TPID website. Remember you are legally responsible for safety of everyone on the farm. Also check that you are compliant with WorkSafe WA visit www.commerce.wa.gov.au/worksafe to know the laws.

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

38

4. Health and Wellbeing - it's just as important to be aware of your own, your family and employees mental health as well as physical. Mental illness is very common amongst the population and is hard to recognise and usually harder to talk about than physical illness. There are many places to get help and support for things like depression and anxiety. Western Dairy have put a contractor and staff member through Mental Health First Aid Training to enable better support and awareness of mental health in the dairy industry. For more visit www.mhfa.com.au or www.lifeline.org.au or call lifeline on 131114

5. Employment Awards - It is important to know which employment award your business comes under so that you can adhere to its law. WA is different than other states in that not all dairy businesses are on the Pastoral Award 2010. Your award depends on how you run your business so you will need to seek specific advice for your situation. In general most of WA businesses come under the WA State industrial laws unless your business is run as a company or a trust with a company as a trustee as at 1st Jan 2010, then the Pastoral Award 2010 applies. Visit TPID website and links to WA state laws.

6. Documentation - There are many important documents you need when employing people. Never under estimate the value of paperwork and record keeping especially regarding employment data and history. If you are unsure where to start look through the ESKi and start with these 3 essential documents;

• Farm Inductions are one of the easiest ways to introduce new employees and contractors to the farm and particularly cover safety issues.

• Employment contracts provide clarity of employee benefits, remuneration and conditions and are a good idea for all staff. It is also important to understand and categorise the employment into the correct category and keep up to date with the minimum pay rates.

• Position descriptions help to clarify the tasks and responsibilities that a employee is responsible for. Many disputes in a dairy business arise because of a lack of understanding of what the job and the person is responsible for.

7. Communication - Successful businesses and teams rely on effective communication. Regular informal chats and then regular formal discussions like employee performance reviews ensures on-going feedback between employee and employer regarding the job. The learning process is always more effective if information is communicated in multiple ways. Utilise methods of one on one training, group sessions and written instructions in the form of standard operating procedures which can be referred to.

8. Look outside the square - consider employing people from different regions, other industries and from overseas. The government has recently approved a Dairy Industry Labour Agreement. Some of the conditions of this will make it easier for farmers to employ overseas Labour, particularly 457 VISA's.

For more information, templates and copies of the resources above plus much more visit: www.thepeopleindairy.org.au/eski or contact Tammy Negus - Western Dairy Workforce coordinator 0448 532 028 [email protected].

Check that you are compliant with WorkSafeWA visit www.commerce.wa.gov.au/worksafe to know the laws.

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

39

Management of the downer cowP. Poulton BVSc (Hons) PhD Tarwin Veterinary Group 32 Anderson Street, Leongatha, 3953, Australia

IntroductionDairy Australia recently funded research by the author into the nursing of downer cows, which are cows still down one or more days after they became recumbent. The study was conducted under field conditions typically seen in southern Australian dairying areas in the winter.

The results are currently unpublished and form part of my PhD but they showed that the secondary damage that occurred after the cows became recumbent was more important in determining their eventual fate than the original cause of their recumbency. There was a high occurrence of secondary damage and it was strongly associated with the quality of the nursing given to the downer cows. Nursing quality was a key factor in their survival chances.

This paper will discuss the best way to respond to down cows, common types of secondary damage, the role of nursing and an overview of the author’s current research.

PreventionThe best practice for managing downer cows is to not have any. Preventative measures to reduce the risks of down cows should be a high priority for farmers and always be part of any herd health advice given by veterinarians. Discussion of this aspect is outside the scope of this paper but it always needs to be a consideration when dealing with clients generally and specifically when attending down cows.

Initial responseWhen down cows are first seen by farmers, it is important that the cause of the recumbency is determined to ensure they are managed properly. Most farmers are able to recognize common conditions that cause recumbency and would seek veterinary assistance when they suspect conditions outside of their expertise to treat or when they are unsure. The attending veterinarians must conduct a full clinical examination, from both a medical and musculo-skeletal perspective, to accurately assess the animals fully. The primary cause of the recumbency needs to be determined as well as any secondary damage occurring from the recumbency.

When this is known a management plan can be devised to best deal with situation. This management plan involves treatment and nursing options and may involve euthanasia. Nursing care is often overlooked by veterinarians and will be emphasized in this paper.

Farmers need to be advised that the urgency of their initial response to recumbent cows depends on whether they are “alert” or “non-alert”, as “non-alert” down cows, as defined as “dull, depressed and non-responsive” are an emergency. “Alert” down cows, as defined as “bright, alert and responsive”, are not so, unless they are in an “unsafe’ environment. They can be dealt with “as soon as possible”. If the animals are in a position that could cause harm to themselves or to other animals they need to be moved immediately. Examples of this would be if they are lying in lateral recumbency or with their head downhill, lying on hard surfaces, especially concrete, subjected to harsh weather conditions, such as very wet and cold, found close to creeks or dams or under electric fences. Such situations can cause serious secondary damage in a short time, some of which can be fatal.

EuthanasiaThe management of down cows is a potential animal welfare issue for both the individual animal and the cattle industry’s perspective. Euthanasia may be the best treatment option for some presenting conditions, which are judged to be too severe to treat or are unable to be treated, for example; a broken leg. If euthanasia is the selected course of action, it needs to be done as quickly and humanely as possible to ensure the animals do not suffer for any longer as necessary.

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

40

Euthanasia may also need to be considered for conditions that are treatable but which involve a period of nursing to allow recovery. If the farmers are unable or unwilling to provide the downer cows with a high level of nursing care then euthanasia should be opted. Cows that are poorly nursed have a high risk of developing secondary damage, which strongly influences the outcome in a negative way. Cows seen by the general public left lying around being “nursed” in a sub-standard way can attract negative publicity to the industry. All stakeholders in the industry, including veterinarians, have a “duty of care” to ensure this does not happen.

A suggested list of “trigger points” for euthanasia includes: 1; 2; 3; 4.

• Conditions with poor or hopeless prognosis

• Non responsive pain and suffering

• “Non-alert” cow not responding within a suitable time period

• Not eating for an unreasonable time

• Persistent lateral recumbency

• Farmer unable or unwilling to nurse adequately

• Pressure sores

• Other complications, which can’t be dealt with adequately

• Deterioration despite adequate treatment

TreatmentThe appropriate treatment will depend on the condition so an accurate diagnosis must be made. The relevant drugs, if needed, must be given and be given in the appropriate time to maximize the chances of a quick recovery from the primary condition. If the cows are not responding as expected, a re-assessment is required to ensure the primary diagnosis was correct and to look for any secondary complications. Treatment strategies may need to be changed in lieu of these findings.

Specific treatment protocols will not be dealt with in this paper due to the vast number of possible conditions that could cause the primary recumbency. However, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID’s) should be used for most downer cows. They are indicated for many primary recumbency conditions but they also have an important role in the prevention and treatment of many of the secondary conditions that recumbent cows are prone to, such as secondary myopathies and neuropathies.

There are a variety of NSIAD’s available for cattle. The advantages and disadvantages of the different formulations will not be dealt with in this paper.

The response to the treatment plan needs to be re-assessed by the farmers. The timing of this re-assessment will vary depending on if the cows were initially “non-alert” or “alert”: “Non- alert” ones should be re-checked within 2 – 4 hours for signs of improvement. The amount of expected improvement will depend on the primary condition because cows with a severe systemic condition, such as Salmonella may not have changed much in this time, whereas milk fevers should have. They should also be monitored over the following 6 – 8 hours, as most cases should show some improvement in this time. If they have not improved within an 8 –12 hour period, as would normally be expected, the diagnosis needs to be re-assessed and the treatment may need to be changed. If this re-assessment is delayed for too long and the original diagnosis/treatment was incorrect then a negative outcome is more likely. For “alert” down cows, the period of time before re-assessment is not as critical but it should not be longer than 8 – 12 hours from the initial treatment.

If the cows are “alert” when re-checked but still unable to stand, then lifting should be tried, if appropriate. Some cows will be able to stand and walk away after being lifted even though they cannot stand by themselves. If they cannot stand, or if they are not considered strong enough to lift at this point then they need to be moved to a suitable nursing environment to reduce the chances of secondary damage occurring.

Secondary damageWhen veterinarians examine down cows they should always try to determine the primary condition so as to treat it appropriately. They must also look carefully for any secondary damage that has occurred following the initial recumbency. This is true whether the cows have been down for only a short time or for a number of days, as some

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

41

types of secondary damage can occur within hours of first going down. If the secondary complications are not diagnosed and they are only treated for the primary condition, the treatment protocol may be wrong.

The recent study into downer cows 5 showed a number of common types of secondary damage. These types of damage should always be considered when down cows are examined:

• Compartment syndrome, which is pressure damage mainly affecting the hamstring group of muscles, is a likely complication. This can be assessed by measuring Creatinine Phosphokinase (CK) and if the levels are above a critical threshold, which is time dependent, there is less than a 5% chance of survival 6.

• Secondary neuropathies, especially to the sciatic nerve and its branches can also occur if down cows are nursed on hard surfaces.

• Femoral nerve damage can occur by crawling whilst recumbent. If the hind legs go caudally into the “frog-leg” position the back hyper-extends and this can strain the lumbar plexus causing damage to the femoral nerve roots.

• Ventral dislocated hips are a risk to recumbent cows, especially if they have other damage to the hind limbs, such as calving paralysis. Hips should always be assessed when examining down cows.

• Forelimb neuropathies, either brachial plexus paralysis or radial nerve damage are a risk if down cows lie in lateral recumbency for any period of time especially on hard surfaces. This can cause pressure damage to the nerves 7.

• Cows lying in lateral recumbency are at risk of aspirating, which can cause pneumonia or death.

• Cows nursed in paddocks in cold climates are susceptible to adverse weather conditions, which can be severe enough to cause exposure in some cases.

• Bed sores and lifting damage can be found in cows nursed for extended periods, particularly if their management has not been ideal.

NursingEvery farm should have a dedicated area set aside for the nursing of down cows, which is available prior to being needed. Down cows usually occur at the busy times of the year so waiting to set one up only if it is needed usually coincides with when there is limited time available to establish it. This often leads to it not being done properly or quickly enough. Secondary damage can occur within as short a time as only a few hours so being able to move a down cow to an established, suitable area quickly can improve the chances of recovery.

The area must provide the following features:

• Shelter from adverse weather conditions, both excess heat and cold. This may seem to be too obvious to mention, but in the study 5 there were a surprising number of cows adversely affected by cold conditions. Recumbent cows that are sitting in cold conditions will have poor blood circulation to the limbs, which affects their chances of recovering. They are also less likely to eat properly and more likely to develop complications like pneumonia. A suitable shed will usually provide the best shelter.

• Suitable bedding is essential as down cows are very susceptible to damage from sitting on hard surfaces. Damage to the main muscles of the hind limbs occurs readily if they are sitting on a hard surface, sometimes within only a few hours 8. Secondary neuropathy to the branches of the sciatic nerve can also occur following recumbency 9. The brachial plexus and radial nerve are also susceptible to damage from lying in lateral recumbency on a hard surface 7. Concrete and gravel are unsuitable surfaces. There must be a deep layer of a suitable substrate, such as hay, saw dust, rice hulls or sand. The depth of the substrate will depend on the type of material but it must be deep enough so that they cannot dig through it and end up on the underlying hard surface. As a general rule 30 – 40 cm of substrate is required. Hard substrates also pre-dispose to bed sores and joint damage.

• Barriers are needed to restrict the down cows within the nursing area so they remain on the bedding and cannot crawl excessively. Crawling risks damage to the nerves of the back, which was a common finding in milk fever cows that had not recovered by the day following their initial recumbency 5. Barriers will also prevent them ending up in an “unsafe” environment, such as drains or slopes outside of the nursing area.

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

42

• The nursing area should be located in a convenient position to allow constant monitoring. Down cows that are unable to swap sides by themselves need to be rolled regularly each day. This should be done every 4 -6 hours and ideally, every three hours 3. Down cows are prone to becoming cast on their side and they must be sat up quickly to avoid the risk of aspiration and choking, and from nerve damage to the front leg. If they are being lifted, they must be in a convenient location to ensure they are supervised and are lowered when they no longer stand effectively.

• Supplies of suitable feed and water must be readily available near the nursing area.

• There must be an adequate supply of labour capable of providing for the down cows’ needs in a caring fashion.

In some cases, such as some types of back injuries, the cows are able to stand when lifted but fall over when trying to walk. For these cases the nursing area should be a small pen, ideally 3x3 metres, with suitable bedding. It can be constructed using the sides of the shed, large hay bales and/or gates. The cows can be lifted within this area where they can stand but cannot walk. This will decrease the chances of repeatedly falling over and further injuring themselves. Calves can be placed inside this area after they have been lifted to suckle them, if required. The length of time they stand needs to be monitored to gauge improvement. When they are able to stand for most of the day, they can be released from the pen and allowed to walk around, providing it is on a suitable surface.

Moving down cowsRecumbent cows need to be moved in a way that avoids causing further damage to them. This can be done by rolling them onto a “carry-all” and tying securely, rolling them into a front-end loader bucket whilst ensuring their head is in a safe position, or carrying them in a sling or hip clamp with a strap under their chest. They must not be carried by a hip clamp without a chest strap unless it is only for a short distance.

Occasionally down cows need to be dragged, if there are no other alternatives. This is satisfactory providing they are dragged slowly and steadily and only over a very short distance. Avoid any jerking movements. It is best to drag them by a halter around their head, providing they cannot choke. They must not be dragged by the limbs.

Daily nursing cycleCows that are still down on the second and subsequent days can be thought of as having entered a “daily cycle of nursing”: they need to be checked several times each day to ensure their basic needs are being met. These include: adequate feed with sufficient energy and fibre; adequate access to water; ensuring the environment is kept hygienic by removing manure and keeping the bedding dry; ensuring adequate protection from the weather; ensuring they remain on the suitable bedding; rolling them from side-to-side multiple times per day, if they are unable to do so themselves; lifting, if appropriate; and assessing them.

Lifting should only be done if it is “effective” and “supervised”. Effective lifting means that the cows are able to stand in a natural position and take some of their own weight. If they are hanging from a hip clamp or slouching in a sling, without taking any weight on their legs, more damage will be done to them than if they were left on the ground. Cow “lifters” shouldn’t be confused with cow “hangers”! Supervision is important because downer cows tire easily and an effective lift will then become ineffective if they are not lowered at this time. Many farmers will lift cows and then go away for several hours to do other jobs before returning. When they left, the cows were being lifted effectively but when they returned they were found to be hanging. If cows are lifted ineffectively or unsupervised they have a poorer chance of recovery than if they were not lifted at all. Some cows will not cooperate when being lifted, in which case it is contra-productive. Over-lifting can do more harm than good as it can cause damage to the cow resulting in swellings and pain.

There are several methods used to lift cows: Hip clamps are the easiest to use and the most common. They are ideal for a quick lift, but are not suitable for extended periods. They should be well padded; there are a variety of designs of slings in the market but cows tend to hang in them rather than stand in them, as the straps tend to cut into them and compromise limb circulation and mobility. They are also difficult to apply; the “Pelvic Lift” is a hip clamp with a seat that fits under the pelvis and provides extra support: the “Moo Mobile” is a stretcher on wheels, which seem to be better than slings. They can be raised up and down in it allowing the cows to stand for periods and to rest when they tire; floatation tanks use warm water to support the cows.

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

43

Continual assessment needs to be done, which involves making a number of judgments: is the response to the treatment of the primary condition satisfactory and if not, whether it needs to be changed or whether euthanasia should be considered; is there secondary damage from the recumbency occurring and if so, is treatment for it needed; is lifting appropriate and if so, can it be done effectively and under supervision; are the cows’ basic needs and welfare being met? Farmers need to do this assessment each day and veterinary expertise may also be needed

Results from the recent study 5 showed that downer cows that were nursed “unsatisfactorily” had very poor chances of recovering so if farmers are unable or unwilling to prove them a high level of care, for any reason, then euthanasia should be elected early in the course of the recumbency. There is no point doing it half-heartedly.

There is no time limit on nursing a downer cow, providing the welfare of the animal is not compromised. Some cows can take three to four weeks to recover and in some exceptional cases even longer. However, the longer the time of the recumbency the more likely secondary problems are to develop, especially if the nursing quality is sub-standard.

After downer cows have recovered from their recumbency, it is important to be judicious when deciding when to return them to the milking herd to reduce the chances of them falling and re-injuring themselves.

ConclusionsDown cows can be difficult to deal with and are often unrewarding to treat. There is a wide variety of primary reasons for the initial recumbency and once down, the risk of secondary damage is high. Veterinarians must examine down cows thoroughly looking for both the primary and secondary problems. Their management involves both drug therapy and nursing. Veterinarians must be pro-active in advising clients on best practice nursing to maximise results and to deal with potential animal welfare issues.

Bibliography1. Andrews AH. The downer cow. The Veterinary annual 1992;32:242-249.

2. Harwood JPP. Tackling the problem of the downer cow: cause, diagnosis and prognosis. Cattle Practice 2003;11:89-92.

3. Huxley JN. Assesment and management of the recumbent cow. In Practice 2006;28:176-184.

4. Huxley JN, Archer, S.C., Biggs, A.M., Bradley, A.J., Breen, J.E., Green, M.J.,, Higgins HM, Hudson, C.D., Husband, J.A., May, W., Reader, J.D., Statham, J.M.E.,, Thorne MH, Wapenaar, W. An Expert Review of the Diagnosis, Prognosis and Treatment of Recumbency in Adult Cattle. CATTLE PRACTICE 2010;18:53 - 60.

5. Poulton PJ. Management of downer cows. PhD thesis, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Melbourne Unpublished.

6. Clark RG, Henderson HV, Hoggard GK, Ellison RS, Young BJ. The ability of biochemical and haematological tests to predict recovery in periparturient recumbent cows. N Z Vet J 1987;35:126-133.

7. Parkinson TJ, Vermunt JJ, Malmo J, editors. Diseases of cattle in Australasia. VetLearn, Wellington, 2010.

8. Cox VS. Pathogenesis of the downer cow syndrome. Vet Rec 1982;111:76-79.

9. Van Metre DC. Downer cows – diagnosis and assessment ACV Conference Proceedings 2001:14-21.

Fact sheetHow to manage a down cow

44

45

Fact sheetHow to manage a down cow

1

A ‘down’ cow is any cow that is recumbent (lying down on her chest or side) and unable to stand unassisted. Cows may become recumbent for many reasons, and at any stage of their lactation cycle, although it most commonly occurs around calving time.

Down cows need to be treated appropriately and nursed at a high standard to maximise their chance of recovery. Poor nursing makes them very susceptible to secondary damage, which will delay or prevent their recovery.

This information is designed to guide your decisions when you find a down cow, and should be used in conjunction with the Dairy Australia ‘Down cow decision tree’ wall chart. Additional information can be found in the series of short videos on the Dairy Australia website: dairyaustralia.com.au/down-cows.

The following principles apply to the management of all down cows, whatever the cause:

› check the cow’s environment

› determine the cause (get a diagnosis) immediately

› treat the problem appropriately and promptly – early treatment promotes early recovery

› if possible, get her back on her feet quickly to avoid secondary damage

› if her chances of recovery are low, arrange for the cow to be humanely destroyed on site without delay.

What to do when a cow goes down

Alert or Non-Alert?

When you first discover a down cow, it is important to assess her demeanour. If the cow is non-alert (drowsy, depressed and non-responsive) she is gravely ill and needs immediate assistance. If she is still alert (bright, aware of her surroundings and responsive), treatment is not as urgent, but should commence as soon as possible.

A Safe Environment

Things to check:

› physical danger – move the cow immediately if her environment poses risks to her or to others e.g. lying on the edge of a dam or creek, under an electric fence, or in a situation that may cause danger to other cattle, such as in a walkway

› posture – if she is lying on her side put her up onto her chest and support her if necessary. If left on her side, especially if her head is facing downhill, there is a danger of regurgitation and aspiration of her rumen contents, which can be fatal

› surfaces – lying on hard surfaces, such as concrete and gravel, can cause damage to the skin, muscles and nerves of the legs, even within an hour or two, so the cow must be moved off such a surface immediately

› weather – the cow will require shelter if the weather conditions are wet or extremely cold or hot.

Why is she down?

An accurate diagnosis must be made immediately to ensure she is managed correctly. Seek veterinary advice if you are unsure. The diagnosis will determine the cow’s management plan, which consists of either treatment and nursing, or euthanasia. Euthanasia should be considered if treatment is not a viable option (e.g. if the cow has a broken leg) and should be performed as soon as possible to minimise suffering. Cows with serious illness or injuries, and hence low chances of recovery, must not be left to suffer and must be destroyed on site. You will also need to consider how to dispose of the carcass afterwards.

Treatment

Begin treatment of the primary condition with the appropriate medications promptly to maximise the cow’s chances of a quick recovery. If the cow is recumbent with a condition where she is unlikely to recover on the same day, she should be moved to a suitable nursing area.

Nursing the down cow

Nursing of a down cow should only be undertaken if the cow has a reasonable chance of recovery and a competent stockperson is on hand, who is prepared to invest the time and energy required to provide adequate nursing care of the cow.

Good nursing of the down cow will maximise her chances of making a full recovery, but it can be labour intensive and time consuming. If you are not able to provide good nursing care then consider euthanasia of the cow without delay. If you require any professional advice on the management of a down cow contact your veterinarian.

How to manage a down cow

46 How to manage a down cow 2

Why good nursing is important

Regardless of the initial cause, all down cows are at risk of nerve damage and other complications if they remain down for 24 hours or so. A cow needs to be got back on her feet quickly or managed appropriately to prevent this secondary damage.

Research conducted on dairy farms in Gippsland found that the quality of the nursing care had a profound effect on the cow’s chances of recovery. The graph below shows that there is very little benefit in nursing a down cow unless you can provide high quality care.

The complications that arise from prolonged lying include:

› nerve damage in the lower areas of the back, hind limb or forelimb

› muscle damage from compression of the major muscle groups

› ‘bed sores’

› mastitis

› pneumonia

› hip dislocations.

Cow comfort

Nursing the down cow in the paddock may be more convenient for the farmer, however the ground is often too hard or too cold and the environment may also be cold, windy and wet. Lying out in cold and wet paddocks affects the circulation to the limbs, making it less likely that the cow will be able to rise. It can also depress the cow’s appetite. Leaving a down cow sitting in a paddock exposed to hot conditions will also affect her recovery.

The down cow should be nursed in a shed and with an adequate amount of dry, soft bedding e.g. 300–400mm of heaped straw or hay, or the same depth of loose rice hulls, sawdust or equivalent substrate. Ensure that the environment is keep hygienic by removing manure and keeping the bedding dry.

Providing the cow with feed with sufficient energy and fibre is important, along with free access to water. Regularly hand strip the cow’s udder to relieve pressure and apply teat disinfectant to reduce the risk of mastitis.

Rules for nursing a down cow

› provide clean, dry and soft bedding, that will provide a non-slip surface when the cow tries to stand

› provide a continuous supply of clean water and good feed

› move the cow from side to side every 3 hours to ensure her weight is not always to one side if she is unable to swap sides by herself, and flex and extend the hind limbs each time the cow is moved

› regularly hand strip milk from the udder

› regularly encourage the cow to rise

› use lifting devices to get her to her feet only, never leave cows hanging in lifting devices.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Satisfactory nursing (n=151) Unsatisfactory nursing (n=67)

Days

Cum

ulat

ive

reco

very

%

Figure 1 Daily cumulative recovery percentage by nursing quality for 218 downer cows

Source: Poulton PJ, Vizard AV, Anderson GA et al. High quality care improves outcome in recumbent dairy cattle. Aust Vet J 2016; 94:173-180

Every farm needs a dedicated area for nursing down cows

47How to manage a down cow 2

Why good nursing is important

Regardless of the initial cause, all down cows are at risk of nerve damage and other complications if they remain down for 24 hours or so. A cow needs to be got back on her feet quickly or managed appropriately to prevent this secondary damage.

Research conducted on dairy farms in Gippsland found that the quality of the nursing care had a profound effect on the cow’s chances of recovery. The graph below shows that there is very little benefit in nursing a down cow unless you can provide high quality care.

The complications that arise from prolonged lying include:

› nerve damage in the lower areas of the back, hind limb or forelimb

› muscle damage from compression of the major muscle groups

› ‘bed sores’

› mastitis

› pneumonia

› hip dislocations.

Cow comfort

Nursing the down cow in the paddock may be more convenient for the farmer, however the ground is often too hard or too cold and the environment may also be cold, windy and wet. Lying out in cold and wet paddocks affects the circulation to the limbs, making it less likely that the cow will be able to rise. It can also depress the cow’s appetite. Leaving a down cow sitting in a paddock exposed to hot conditions will also affect her recovery.

The down cow should be nursed in a shed and with an adequate amount of dry, soft bedding e.g. 300–400mm of heaped straw or hay, or the same depth of loose rice hulls, sawdust or equivalent substrate. Ensure that the environment is keep hygienic by removing manure and keeping the bedding dry.

Providing the cow with feed with sufficient energy and fibre is important, along with free access to water. Regularly hand strip the cow’s udder to relieve pressure and apply teat disinfectant to reduce the risk of mastitis.

Rules for nursing a down cow

› provide clean, dry and soft bedding, that will provide a non-slip surface when the cow tries to stand

› provide a continuous supply of clean water and good feed

› move the cow from side to side every 3 hours to ensure her weight is not always to one side if she is unable to swap sides by herself, and flex and extend the hind limbs each time the cow is moved

› regularly hand strip milk from the udder

› regularly encourage the cow to rise

› use lifting devices to get her to her feet only, never leave cows hanging in lifting devices.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Satisfactory nursing (n=151) Unsatisfactory nursing (n=67)

Days

Cum

ulat

ive

reco

very

%

Figure 1 Daily cumulative recovery percentage by nursing quality for 218 downer cows

Source: Poulton PJ, Vizard AV, Anderson GA et al. High quality care improves outcome in recumbent dairy cattle. Aust Vet J 2016; 94:173-180

Every farm needs a dedicated area for nursing down cows

3

Rolling

It is vital to note which leg the cow is sitting on each time she is checked. If the cow is unable to swap sides, one hind leg will take all of the pressure from her body weight. This compromises the circulation in that leg and can lead to nerve and muscle damage. If the cow tries to stand, the stronger leg will tend to push the cow onto her weaker leg, which will be the leg she always sits on, causing further damage to this weaker leg.

If the cow cannot swap sides by herself, she needs to be rolled frequently onto her other side, especially if she is trying to stand up.

Barriers

The cow should be nursed on a small area of bedding of suitable depth, with barriers used to restrict her on this soft surface. The barriers will also prevent her from crawling, which often causes damage to the nerves of the low back. The barriers need to be high enough to discourage her from trying to jump over them.

If the down cow is able to stand when lifted but falls over when trying to walk, she may need to be nursed in a small pen. This will allow her to stand but prevent her from walking. A pen can be built from large hay bales or gates etc., leaving a space that is small enough to stand in without walking or turning around in but large enough to be comfortable. The cow can be lifted within this pen by reaching over the top of the bales with the front-end loader. Two calves may be placed inside the pen after she has been lifted to milk her out, if required.

Once she recovers to the point of being able to stand for most of the day she can be released from the pen and allowed to walk around, providing it is on a suitable non-slip surface.

It is important to be patient with down cows – before bringing a recovered down cow back into the milking herd, you will need to assess the likelihood of the cow slipping over and re-damaging herself.

Lifting

Lifting should only be done if it is effective and supervised. Cows that are lifted ineffectively or unsupervised and have a poorer chance of recovery than those who are not lifted. Cows that are unable to stand ‘effectively’ or

are unwilling to try to stand ‘effectively’ are best nursed without lifting, providing the bedding is suitable and they are rolled regularly, if needed.

Cow ‘lifters’ are not cow ‘hangers’! Effective lifting means that the cow is able to stand in a natural position and take some of her own weight. If the cow is hanging from a hip clamp or slouching in a sling, without taking any weight on their legs, it can cause her more damage. Supervision by a competent stockperson is important because down cows tire easily and should then be immediately placed down. Over-lifting can also be a problem as the pressure from lifting devices can cause swellings and pain.

Watch the video on ‘Rolling the down cow’

To see how this is best done view the online video ‘Rolling the down cow’ on the Dairy Australia webpage: dairyaustralia.com.au/down-cows.


Several methods may be used to lift cows:

Hip Clamps

The easiest method to use and the most common. They are ideal for a quick lift, but are not suitable for extended support due to the trauma they may cause to the hip bones and muscles. They are most useful if the cow can stand when lifted, such as simple milk fever cases.

Slings

There are a variety of designs of slings in the market. Cows tend to hang in them rather than stand in them, so the straps may cut into them and compromise limb circulation and mobility. Slings can also be difficult to apply.

‘Pelvic Lift’

This is a hip clamp with the seat. It has the ease of use of the hip clamp with the superior support of the seat, which supports about 40% of the cow’s weight. When the lift is engaged, the seat swings under the pelvis of the cow. It is effective and easy to use.

‘Upsi Daisy’ cow lifter

A metal frame that supports the cow under the pelvic area used together with a chest strap. The weight of the cow is distributed over different parts of the skeletal frame so it is suitable to both lift and transport cows safely and humanely.

Flotation tanks /water baths

Used overseas and claim to have good success rates. They are available in Australia. The cow’s natural buoyancy enables many cows to stand in the warm water, which improves blood circulation. This prevents many types of secondary damage to the limbs and speeds up her recovery. Cows are left in the water for 8–12 hours at a time and the treatment can be repeated over several days, if necessary.

Hobbles

Hobbles can be useful to reduce the risk of secondary damage, such as a dislocated hip, in cases where the hind leg(s) deviate greatly from their normal position. Hobbles can be purchased from saddlery stores or some rural retailers. They are applied either above the hocks or on the lower leg above the fetlock, and should be padded to avoid pressure sores. The rope or chain needs to be long enough to allow the cow to try to stand but short enough to stop over-reaching.


Several methods may be used to lift cows:

Hip Clamps

The easiest method to use and the most common. They are ideal for a quick lift, but are not suitable for extended support due to the trauma they may cause to the hip bones and muscles. They are most useful if the cow can stand when lifted, such as simple milk fever cases.

Slings

There are a variety of designs of slings in the market. Cows tend to hang in them rather than stand in them, so the straps may cut into them and compromise limb circulation and mobility. Slings can also be difficult to apply.

‘Pelvic Lift’

This is a hip clamp with the seat. It has the ease of use of the hip clamp with the superior support of the seat, which supports about 40% of the cow’s weight. When the lift is engaged, the seat swings under the pelvis of the cow. It is effective and easy to use.

‘Upsi Daisy’ cow lifter

A metal frame that supports the cow under the pelvic area used together with a chest strap. The weight of the cow is distributed over different parts of the skeletal frame so it is suitable to both lift and transport cows safely and humanely.

Flotation tanks /water baths

Used overseas and claim to have good success rates. They are available in Australia. The cow’s natural buoyancy enables many cows to stand in the warm water, which improves blood circulation. This prevents many types of secondary damage to the limbs and speeds up her recovery. Cows are left in the water for 8–12 hours at a time and the treatment can be repeated over several days, if necessary.

Hobbles

Hobbles can be useful to reduce the risk of secondary damage, such as a dislocated hip, in cases where the hind leg(s) deviate greatly from their normal position. Hobbles can be purchased from saddlery stores or some rural retailers. They are applied either above the hocks or on the lower leg above the fetlock, and should be padded to avoid pressure sores. The rope or chain needs to be long enough to allow the cow to try to stand but short enough to stop over-reaching.

5

Moving a Down Cow

It is important to not cause further damage to a down cow when she is moved to a safer environment. There are several ways to safely move a down cow:

› load her onto a carry-all on the back of a tractor and secure her effectively

› load her into a front-end loader bucket on the front of a tractor. To see how to do this safely view the online video ‘Moving the down cow’ at dairyaustralia.com.au/down-cows

› carry her in a sling

› hip Clamps can only be used to move a cow over short distance and the cow must be supported with a belt or strap under her chest.

Methods to avoid are:

› hip clamp alone

› dragging – only use if there are no alternatives and the cow needs to be urgently moved over a short distance. Use slow steady pressure and avoid jerking movement. Dragging slowly by a halter or chain around the head is safe, if done correctly. Never drag a cow by her legs.

Monitoring the Down Cow

The down cow’s response to treatment needs to be assessed at regular intervals, which will depend on the severity and cause of the condition. A non-alert cow should be rechecked within 2–4 hours for signs of improvement and again in 6– 8 hours’ time. A cow with milk fever should be alert within a few hours of treatment. If not, she may have a different condition, e.g. an acute infection, so the diagnosis may need to be re-assessed and the treatment changed. Seek veterinary advice if you are unsure.

For alert down cows the period of time before re-assessment should be no longer than 8–12 hours from the initial treatment. If the cow is alert but unable to stand on her own after 8 –12 hours, or perhaps sooner, then lifting should be tried. For detailed instructions on lifting, please refer to the online video ‘Lifting the down cow’. Many cows will be able to walk away when lifted. If not, the cow should be moved to a suitable nursing environment.

Cows that are still down on the second and subsequent days need to be re-assessed at least once each day as part of the daily nursing cycle.

This involves making judgements about:

› the response to the treatment of the primary condition – if the results are not satisfactory the treatment may need to be changed

› the original diagnosis – this may also need to be re-assessed if the response to treatment is not satisfactory

› the need to treat secondary damage

› any further complications e.g. a dislocated hip, mastitis or pneumonia

› the nursing protocols

› lifting – providing it can be done effectively and competently supervised

› euthanasia – consider if the response is not satisfactory, if the cow’s welfare has been compromised or if a competent stockperson is not available to nurse the cow adequately.

There is no time limit on nursing a down cow, providing her welfare is not compromised. Some cows can take 3 – 4 weeks to recover or even longer. However, the longer time the cow is down, the more likely it is that secondary problems will prevent her recovery and so the quality of the nursing care becomes more important.

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY


Preventative measures

Many of the factors that cause cows to go down are preventable. After you have nursed or euthanised a down cow it is important to review your transition cow management, calving management and sire selection to see if improvements can be made. Seek professional advice if you are unsure.

When to consider euthanasia

Cows with a low chance of recovery must not be left to suffer and must be destroyed humanely on site.

The trigger points for euthanasia of a down cow are:

› incurable conditions e.g. fractures, tendon ruptures

› lack of response to treatment of the primary condition within a reasonable time period

› an alert down cow becoming non-alert, indicating further complications

› pain and suffering

› cow is lying on her side despite adequate treatment (unable or unwilling to maintain sternal recumbency)

› not willing to eat or drink despite adequate treatment

› obvious “bed sores” or swollen joints/limbs

› insufficient facilities, labour or expertise available to provide adequate nursing care for the cow

› If a down cow cannot be nursed at a high standard of care it is better for the cow’s welfare that she is euthanased within a short period of time as her chances of recovery are low. Correct nursing of down cows is important for the welfare of the affected animals and the reputation of the dairy industry. Dairy farmers, veterinarians and farm advisers all have responsibilities in this area.

Further resources

The information in this fact sheet should be used in conjunction with the Dairy Australia wall chart ‘Down cow decision tree’, a guide to decision making over the first few days when you are presented with a down cow.

Dairy Australia also has series of 6 online videos available for viewing at: dairyaustralia.com.au/down-cows.

Published by Dairy Australia Limited.

Whilst all reasonable efforts have been taken to ensure the accuracy of the ‘How to manage a down cow fact sheet’, use of the information contained herein is at one’s own risk. To the fullest extent permitted by Australian law, Dairy Australia disclaims all liability for any losses, costs, damages and the like sustained or incurred as a result of the use of or reliance upon the information contained herein, including, without limitation, liability stemming from reliance upon any part which may contain inadvertent errors, whether typographical or otherwise, or omissions of any kind.

This information is a guide only and professional advice should be sought regarding your specific circumstances.

© Dairy Australia Limited 2016. All rights reserved.


Preventative measures

Many of the factors that cause cows to go down are preventable. After you have nursed or euthanised a down cow it is important to review your transition cow management, calving management and sire selection to see if improvements can be made. Seek professional advice if you are unsure.

When to consider euthanasia

Cows with a low chance of recovery must not be left to suffer and must be destroyed humanely on site.

The trigger points for euthanasia of a down cow are:

› incurable conditions e.g. fractures, tendon ruptures

› lack of response to treatment of the primary condition within a reasonable time period

› an alert down cow becoming non-alert, indicating further complications

› pain and suffering

› cow is lying on her side despite adequate treatment (unable or unwilling to maintain sternal recumbency)

› not willing to eat or drink despite adequate treatment

› obvious “bed sores” or swollen joints/limbs

› insufficient facilities, labour or expertise available to provide adequate nursing care for the cow

› If a down cow cannot be nursed at a high standard of care it is better for the cow’s welfare that she is euthanased within a short period of time as her chances of recovery are low. Correct nursing of down cows is important for the welfare of the affected animals and the reputation of the dairy industry. Dairy farmers, veterinarians and farm advisers all have responsibilities in this area.

Further resources

The information in this fact sheet should be used in conjunction with the Dairy Australia wall chart ‘Down cow decision tree’, a guide to decision making over the first few days when you are presented with a down cow.

Dairy Australia also has series of 6 online videos available for viewing at: dairyaustralia.com.au/down-cows.

Published by Dairy Australia Limited.

Whilst all reasonable efforts have been taken to ensure the accuracy of the ‘How to manage a down cow fact sheet’, use of the information contained herein is at one’s own risk. To the fullest extent permitted by Australian law, Dairy Australia disclaims all liability for any losses, costs, damages and the like sustained or incurred as a result of the use of or reliance upon the information contained herein, including, without limitation, liability stemming from reliance upon any part which may contain inadvertent errors, whether typographical or otherwise, or omissions of any kind.

This information is a guide only and professional advice should be sought regarding your specific circumstances.

© Dairy Australia Limited 2016. All rights reserved.

NO

YE

S

YE

S

IMM

ED

IAT

ELY

AS

AP

• M

ove

if in

an

unsa

fe

envi

ronm

ent

(Bo

x 2)

• Es

tabl

ish

a di

agno

sis

(Bo

x 3)

. Con

sult

ve

terin

aria

n

if ne

eded

• S

tart

app

ropr

iate

tr

eatm

ent

• C

onsi

der

euth

anas

ia if

not

tr

eata

ble

(Bo

x 6)

2–4

hrs

• R

eass

ess

diag

nosi

s (B

ox

3, 9

)

• C

onsu

lt ve

terin

aria

n if

need

ed

• E

utha

nasi

a, if

app

ropr

iate

(B

ox

6)

• R

eass

ess

trea

tmen

t

8–1

2 h

rs

• R

eass

ess

diag

nosi

s (B

ox

3, 9

)

• C

onsu

lt ve

terin

aria

n if

need

ed

• C

ontin

ue/c

hang

e tr

eatm

ent

• Tr

y lif

ting,

if a

ppro

pria

te

(Bo

x 7,

8)

• M

ove

to a

sui

tabl

e pl

ace

to

nurs

e (B

ox

4, 5

)

• O

r eu

than

asia

(Bo

x 6)

• Es

tabl

ish

a di

agno

sis

(Bo

x 3)

Con

sult

ve

terin

aria

n if

need

ed

• S

tart

trea

tmen

t

• C

onsi

der

euth

anas

ia (B

ox

6)

• Tr

y to

sta

nd b

y lif

ting,

if a

ppro

pria

te

(Bo

x 7,

8)

• F

inis

h tr

eatm

ent,

if

need

ed

• C

ons

ider

pre

vent

ativ

e

mea

sure

s fo

r o

ther

co

ws

RE

SO

LVE

D

Co

ntin

ue

Nur

sing

(Bo

x 5)

Co

ntin

ue

trea

tmen

t if

need

ed

Co

nsid

er

pre

vent

ativ

e m

easu

res

for

oth

er c

ow

s

Co

nsid

er

pre

vent

ativ

e m

easu

res

for

oth

er c

ow

s

Put

do

wn

to

res

t

Rea

sses

s

wel

fare

Lift

whi

lst

ef

fect

ive

and

su

per

vise

d(B

ox

8)

Look

for

seco

ndar

y co

mp

licat

ions

(Box

es 9

and

10)

If a

no

n-al

ert

cow

is n

ot

pro

gre

ssin

g a

fter

24

ho

urs,

eut

hana

sia

sho

uld

be

seri

ous

ly

cons

ider

ed a

nd, i

f th

ere

is n

o

pro

gre

ss a

fter

48

hour

s, s

he s

houl

d

be

euth

anis

ed p

rom

ptly

(Bo

x 6)

Imm

edia

tely

dete

rmin

e

whic

h c

ate

gory

applie

s

Cow

U

p

▲

Dai

ly C

ycle

fo

r

as lo

ng a

s ne

eded

START HERE

Is t

he

cow

up

?

Is t

he

cow

now

ALE

RT

?

Is t

he

cow

now

IMP

RO

VIN

G?

Do y

ou

h

ave

th

e

eq

uip

men

t

to lif

t a c

ow

?(B

ox

7)

ALE

RT

(Bo

x 1)

NO

N A

LE

RT

(Bo

x 1)

Is t

he

cow

up

?

Is

the c

ow

p

rogre

ssin

g?

Dow

n co

w d

ecis

ion

tree

Non

Ale

rtb

ut

IM

PR

OV

ING

ALE

RT

bu

t

NO

T U

P

Pub

lishe

d by

Dai

ry A

ustr

alia

Lim

ited.

Whi

lst a

ll re

ason

able

effo

rts

have

bee

n ta

ken

to e

nsur

e th

e ac

cura

cy o

f the

Dow

n co

w d

ecis

ion

tree

fact

she

et, u

se o

f the

info

rmat

ion

cont

aine

d he

rein

is a

t one

’s o

wn

risk.

To

the

fulle

st e

xten

t p

erm

itted

by

Aus

tral

ian

law

, Dai

ry A

ustr

alia

dis

clai

ms

all l

iab

ility

for

any

loss

es, c

osts

, dam

ages

and

the

like

sust

aine

d or

incu

rred

as

a re

sult

of th

e us

e of

or

relia

nce

upon

the

info

rmat

ion

cont

aine

d he

rein

, inc

ludi

ng, w

ithou

t lim

itatio

n,

liab

ility

ste

mm

ing

from

rel

ianc

e up

on a

ny p

art w

hich

may

con

tain

inad

vert

ent e

rror

s, w

heth

er t

ypog

rap

hica

l or

othe

rwis

e, o

r om

issi

ons

of a

ny k

ind.

© D

airy

Aus

tral

ia L

imite

d 20

16. A

ll rig

hts

rese

rved

.

YE

S

Dow

n C

ow

• M

ove

if in

an

unsa

fe

envi

ronm

ent

(Bo

x 2)

NO

YE

S

YE

S

NO

NO

Non

Ale

rtN

ot

Imp

rovi

ng

Eu

than

ise

Fee

d

Wat

er

She

lter

Bed

din

g

Ro

lling

NO

Co

ntin

ue

trea

tmen

tC

hang

e

trea

tmen

t

Rea

sses

s

prim

ary

di

agno

sis

(Box

3)

NO

YE

S

FIR

ST

12 H

OU

RS

DA

ILY

CY

CLE

OF N

UR

SIN

G

0hrs

2hrs

4hrs

8hrs

12hr

1. D

ET

ER

MIN

E C

OW

’S

CO

ND

ITIO

N2.

UN

SA

FE L

OC

AT

ION

3. W

HY

IS T

HE

CO

W D

OW

N?

4. M

OV

ING

DO

WN

CO

WS

5. W

HAT

YO

U N

EED

TO

N

UR

SE A

DO

WN

CO

W6.

WH

EN

TO

EU

TH

AN

ISE

7. L

IFT

ING

OPT

ION

S8.

LIF

TIN

G G

UID

ELE

INE

S9.

CO

MPL

ICA

TIO

NS

10

. ALE

RT

TO

NO

N A

LER

T

ALE

RT

• B

right

, ale

rt a

nd re

spon

sive

NO

T A

LE

RT

• D

ull,

depr

esse

d an

d no

t res

pons

ive

• H

ard

surfa

ce, e

spec

ially

con

cret

e

or g

rave

l

• O

n sl

ope

with

hea

d do

wnh

ill

• Ly

ing

on s

ide,

par

ticul

arly

if b

loat

ed

• E

xces

s co

ld o

r he

at

• Lo

catio

n is

dan

gero

us e

.g. u

nder

an

ele

ctric

fenc

e, e

dge

of a

cre

ek

or d

am o

r in

a la

new

ay

ALE

RT

• P

regn

ancy

toxa

emia

.

• N

erve

dam

age

to th

e sp

ine

or

one

of th

e le

gs e

.g. b

ack

inju

ry o

r ca

lvin

g pa

raly

sis

• D

islo

cate

d hi

p

• In

suffi

cien

tly tr

eate

d m

ilk fe

ver

• Fr

actu

re o

f leg

s, p

elvi

s or

bac

k

• C

alvi

ng

• C

ast

NO

T A

LE

RT

• M

ilk fe

ver

• G

rass

teta

ny

• Ve

ry s

ever

e m

astit

is

• Ve

ry s

ever

e illn

ess

• S

ever

e bl

ood

loss

• N

itrat

e po

ison

ing

Dow

n co

ws

need

to b

e m

oved

in a

w

ay th

at a

void

s ca

usin

g fu

rthe

r da

mag

e to

them

.

They

can

be

mov

ed s

afel

y by

:

• R

ollin

g on

to a

car

ry-a

ll an

d ty

ing

th

em s

ecur

ely

• R

ollin

g th

em in

to a

fron

t-en

d lo

adin

g “b

ucke

t” e

nsur

ing

thei

r hea

d is

tied

in

a sa

fe p

ositi

on

• C

arry

ing

them

in a

slin

g or

in th

e

Ups

i-Dai

sy C

ow L

ifter

• Li

fting

them

by

a hi

p cl

amp

or

pelv

ic li

fter

but o

nly

with

a s

trap

un

der

thei

r ch

est

• If

ther

e is

no

alte

rnat

ive,

dow

n co

ws

can

be m

oved

ove

r a

very

sh

ort d

ista

nce

by p

ullin

g on

a

halte

r ar

ound

thei

r he

ad. A

void

an

y je

rkin

g m

ovem

ents

and

do

not

drag

by

pullin

g on

legs

• TL

C (t

ende

r, lo

ving

car

e)

• A

dequ

ate

labo

ur

• S

uita

ble

shel

ter

site

that

is

conv

enie

ntly

loca

ted

to a

llow

re

gula

r m

onito

ring

• D

eep

soft

bedd

ing

of h

ay/s

traw

/ sa

wdu

st/s

and

• Eq

uipm

ent t

o ke

ep th

e ar

ea c

lean

• B

arrie

rs to

con

fine

cow

s on

su

itabl

e be

ddin

g an

d to

pre

vent

cr

awlin

g

• A

bilit

y to

regu

larly

roll

the

cow

if

it do

es n

ot a

ltern

ate

the

leg

it is

si

ttin

g on

• In

cura

ble

cond

ition

e.

g. fr

actu

red

bone

s

• N

on a

lert

cow

not

resp

ondi

ng

with

in a

sui

tabl

e tim

e

• N

ot e

atin

g

• A

lway

s ly

ing

on h

er s

ide

• P

ain

that

is n

ot re

spon

ding

to

trea

tmen

t

• Fa

rmer

is u

nabl

e to

nur

se

adeq

uate

ly

• C

ompl

icat

ions

that

can

not b

e de

alt

with

ade

quat

ely

e.g.

pre

ssur

e so

res

• D

eter

iora

tion

desp

ite a

dequ

ate

tr

eatm

ent

Whe

n a

dec

isio

n is

mad

e to

eu

than

ise

an a

nim

al, i

t sh

oul

d

hap

pen

as

soo

n

as p

oss

ible

.

Hip

Cla

mp

s

• B

est i

f the

y ar

e pa

dded

to m

inim

ise

dam

age

to th

e hi

ps

• E

asy

to u

se b

ut o

nly

lifts

the

hind

qu

arte

rs a

nd c

an in

jure

cow

s if

used

inap

prop

riate

ly

Pelv

ic L

ifte

r•

Hip

cla

mp

com

bine

d w

ith a

sea

t th

at fi

ts u

nder

the

pelv

is

• E

asy

to u

se, l

ike

Hip

Cla

mps

but

w

ith e

xtra

sup

port

for

the

pelv

is

Slin

gs

• S

ling

with

str

aps

to s

uppo

rt th

e

who

le a

nim

al

• Th

ere

is a

ris

k of

pre

ssur

e so

res

if st

raps

cut

into

the

groi

n

Mob

ile S

tretc

her

• S

tret

cher

on

whe

els,

whi

ch

supp

orts

the

who

le a

nim

al

• C

an p

rodu

ce p

ress

ure

sore

s if

left

on fo

r to

o lo

ng

Flo

ata

tion

Tan

ks

• D

esig

ned

to a

llow

cow

to s

tand

un

rest

rain

ed in

war

m w

ater

• Le

ave

cow

in fo

r up

to 8

-12

hour

s at

a ti

me

Up

si-D

ais

y C

ow

Lif

ter

• A

met

al c

hair

to s

uppo

rt th

e re

ar

end

with

a c

hest

str

ap fo

r th

e fo

re

quar

ters

• G

ives

bet

ter

supp

ort t

han

hi

p lif

ters

Use

a s

uita

ble

liftin

g de

vice

(see

Box

7

– Li

fting

Opt

ions

)

Onl

y lif

t if i

t is

EF

FE

CT

IVE

and

S

UP

ER

VIS

ED

:

• E

ffec

tive

liftin

g m

eans

that

th

e co

w is

abl

e to

take

som

e of

he

r w

eigh

t and

sta

nd w

ith th

e as

sist

ance

of t

he d

evic

e. It

doe

s no

t mea

n “h

angi

ng”.

• S

uper

vise

d m

eans

that

the

cow

is

obs

erve

d re

gula

rly d

urin

g th

e pe

riod

of th

e lif

t and

as

soon

as

she

is u

nabl

e to

take

her

wei

ght

she

is lo

wer

ed.

A c

ow b

eing

abl

e to

sup

port

her

w

eigh

t for

an

incr

easi

ng ti

me

is a

goo

d in

dica

tor

of re

cove

ry.

CA

UT

ION

O

ver-

liftin

g a

co

w c

an b

e co

unte

r-p

rod

uctiv

e.

Lift

ing

a c

ow

tha

t is

una

ble

to

sta

nd

effe

ctiv

ely

and

/or

fight

s ag

ains

t th

e lif

ting

dev

ice

will

cau

se m

ore

har

m

than

go

od

. The

se c

ow

s w

ill h

ave

a b

ette

r ch

ance

of

reco

very

if t

hey

are

NO

T li

fted

, pro

vid

ing

the

y ha

ve

suita

ble

bed

din

g a

nd a

re

rolle

d r

egul

arly

.

• D

islo

cate

d hi

p

• M

uscl

e da

mag

e

• N

erve

dam

age

• P

ress

ure

sore

s

• M

astit

is

• S

wol

len

and

dam

aged

join

ts

• H

eat s

tres

s or

hyp

othe

rmia

• P

ain

• D

epre

ssio

n

If an

“A

lert

Dow

n” b

ecom

es a

“N

on A

lert

Dow

n” th

e pr

ospe

cts

for

surv

ival

are

poo

r an

d eu

than

asia

is

usua

lly re

quire

d.

0644 | Apr 2016

RE

SO

LVE

D

Cow

die

s

or

eu

than

ised

(Bo

x 6)

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

52

Gold Standard Nursing

Table 1. Optimum standard of nursing care for southern Victorian dairying areas

Component Description

Treatment Appropriately treated for the primary cause of the recumbency

Appropriately treated for any secondary conditions following the recumbency

Location For recumbent cows:• Cared for in a small, sheltered area within a shed

For cows that are unable to stand unassisted but can walk after being lifted:• kept away from slippery surfaces• isolated from other cattle• lifted once or twice daily• closely monitored

Bedding Cared for on deep, soft bedding of suitable material:• 40 - 50 cm of hay, straw• 20 - 30 cm of sawdust, rice hulls or sand• or equivalent substrate

Weather conditions Protected from adverse weather conditions including excessive cold and heat

Barriers For recumbent cows:• barriers to restrict cows crawling more than 2 - 3 m• barriers to prevent cows crawling off the suitable bedding

For cows that can stand after being lifted but unable to walk:• barriers to prevent walking when standing

Rolling For cows that are unable to swap sides by themselves:• rolled off dependent leg several times daily

Lifting Cow only lifted if:

• “effective”, which is the ability for the cow to take some of its own weight after being lifted and is not hanging from the lifting clamp or within the frame

• “supervised” by the carer so the cow can be lowered when observed to be no longer standing effectively

Hygiene Clean and dry conditions are provided

Area is regularly cleaned to prevent build-up of manure, urine and moisture

Level of care High levels of “tender love and care” provided at all times

Adequate levels of labour provided

Feed and water Access to good quality feed at all times

Adequate provision of suitable drinking water

Udder care Milking is optional unless leaking milk

Teat disinfection twice daily

Moving between location Moved in a way to avoid inflicting further damage, such as by:• front-end loading bucket• “carry-all”

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

53

Figure 2: Daily cumulativerecovery percentage by nursing quality for 218 downer cows

Figure 3: Daily cumulative death % by nursing quality for 218 downer cows

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

54

notes

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Western

DAIRY


DAIRY

55

notes

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Documents

DAIRY DAY 2017 - GTP Welcome message – Western Dairy’s master poet and dairy trainer Rob La Grange applies verse to dairy innovation day. 10.05am Official Opening – Western Dairy