Pasture and cropping renewal

Zero supplement dairy systems

By Cheyenne Nicholson

Improvements in technology, pasture species and crops could lead to farmers reducing their reliance on imported feed.

What would happen if New Zealand’s dairy industry stopped using internationally produced supplements? That’s the question one Rural Professionals Fund project is looking into.

The Rural Professionals Fund, launched in May 2020 by the Our Land and Water National Science Challenge, enables individuals and businesses to partner with scientists to test exciting and innovative ideas that could lead to improvements in farming systems.

This project, led by farm consultant Regan McCorquindale, is looking at how NZ can tackle the effects of internationally produced supplements on dairy farm businesses.

“With all the pressures on dairy farming in New Zealand and added supply chain pressures due to everything going on in the world, this project is really just the tip of the iceberg,” McCorquindale says.

Internationally produced supplements (IPS) have played a major role in the NZ dairy industry to support the growth in our national herd over the past few decades. But with big improvements in pasture species, crop diversity, growing methodology and genetics, the question is being raised by many as to whether these supplements still have a place in our farm systems.

“I don’t think IPS need to be excluded from the system altogether. They have their place, especially in navigating the severe weather events we’ve had a lot of in recent years, but reducing our reliance would make farming and the business of farming more sustainable in several ways – from environmental to economic. It would also bring back a level of control to maintain consistent availability and nutritional value in our feed.”

With palm kernel prices rising from about $280/t in March 2019 to $470480/t in March 2022, PKE and other IPS are becoming more costly, are often negatively viewed by the consumer, and often vary hugely in nutritional value.

“As an industry, we’ve hit this point of peak cow and are facing the need to make some big changes to our systems to keep the industry thriving and sustainable. It makes sense to look at options and changes we can make at home to reduce the cost on our wallets and our land.”

The study looks at what production has been gained in recent years from IPS and what suitable substitutes could be implemented here in NZ. It is also collating the current drivers for dairy farmers to continue importing supplements, considerations when purchasing, and how their operations would change if they could only use NZ produced supplements. Essentially, it asks: what would the net total production loss be from removing IPS with and without introducing New Zealand-produced supplements?

McCorquindale and team member Sean Nixon have been working alongside a handful of Waikato-based farmers for the research, to address their key questions and gain a more practical understanding of the implications of removing or reducing the imported supplements from a variety of farm systems.

“One of the farmers has been on a journey to fully change his system over a three-year window from a system that’s historically been quite reliant on IPS to one that relies more on home-grown feed. It’s a process, and you can’t just flip a switch. I’ve been working with farmers in this space for a while so when I heard about this research, I knew I wanted to be involved,” McCorquindale says.

Farm consultant Regan McCorquindale is looking at how New Zealand could tackle the effects of internationally produced supplements on dairy farm businesses.

The outcomes from the study will be conservatively scaled up at a national level to see where the opportunity is to create an industry that is reliant on locally produced feed alternatives.

Over the past decade, huge leaps have been made in what we are able to grow on our own land. With the ability to grow crops and grasses in places we previously couldn’t, to cultivars that hold up to the changing climate, McCorquindale says, we have huge potential to grow a lot more than we currently do.

A great example of the ongoing research in what we can grow is another Rural Professionals Fund Project, investigating summer-safe multi-species cattle pasture. The project is looking to improve the climate resilience of upper North Island hill country farms by identifying a high-performing fodder mix that combines crop, cereal and pasture species. The adoption of “summer safe” fodder could fill the increasingly challenging feed gap and provide farmers with the flexibility to reduce IPS inputs, particularly PKE.

An easy win, which many farmers are doing already, is maize silage and utilising a variety of summer and winter crops to fill feed deficits in key parts of the year. Some farmers also dabble in feeding food scraps from cafes and restaurants and other more out-of-thebox thinking. With a fledging agtech industry in NZ, there are sure to be other supplement options in the future as well.

McCorquindale says the biggest issue isn’t so much the what, it’s the where. “We only have so much farmland, and we’re not converting more, so it’s not as easy as saying just increase your cropping, for example. So then it becomes an issue of needing to retire land to grow this supplement and potentially reducing stock numbers to support it.

“We also need to look at the best areas to grow this supplement to maximise the investment.”

As part of the study, the team will be looking into the environmental impacts of switching to more New Zealandgrown supplement using OVERSEER and FARMAX models to monitor nitrate loss and greenhouse gas emissions. McCorquindale says that one particularly interesting part of the puzzle, which they won’t be able to investigate in this round of research, is comparing the environmental footprint of growing more feed at home to that of importing IPS.

“We know those ships aren’t the greenest pieces of machinery out there, so I’d be curious to look into that at some stage on a professional level.”

Perhaps the biggest challenge of all if NZ is to reduce its reliance on IPS would be around farmer buy-in. Many farmers are likely to be on board and support increasing the supplement produced here and trying out alternative supplement sources, but ultimately this

With palm kernel prices rising from around $280/t in March 2019 to $470-480/t in March 2022, PKE and other internationally produced supplements are becoming more costly. A study is under way looking at whether homegrown feed and pasture could replace internationally produced supplements.

means some land will have be retired or undergo land use change to support it.

“The biggest challenge here is what does the farmer want to do. A farmer might not want to retire good grazing for crops and reduce their stock numbers, so there’s that to factor into it as well.

“Ultimately, and what the study will undoubtedly show us, is that we don’t have enough land to substitute the amount of IPS we are bringing in now, so the net effect is less production either through less production per farm or from fewer dairy farms.”

While there are many challenges associated with the idea of reducing reliance on IPS, it could open some doors when it comes to adding value to our farm systems.

“There could be a niche market out there for exporting a dairy product that is solely made from 100% New Zealand inputs. It also feeds into the image of the New Zealand dairy industry. But that’s a bit of blue sky thinking for now.”

Farmer interest in the project has been high, with many acknowledging the need to keep ahead of the curve and reduce exposure to the volatile international feed markets while keeping their cows fed, happy, and healthy.

“Feeding highly nutritious feed that is able to be tweaked a bit when needed has been key for a lot of farmers of the years, which is why IPS has become so important for many, and lots of farmers do so profitably. So if this study led to something substantive, it would really be about balancing all the different needs; animal welfare, logistics, environmental, financial and so on for it work.” n

If cows are in good condition and receiving good nutrition during mating, supplementary feed may not be required as it is only one factor affecting reproduction.

If there’s enough pasture, pasture is enough

As mating approaches, it’s time to consider the cost of supplements and the time spent feeding them out – time that might be better spent on heat detection.

Can cows get in calf on a pasture-only diet?

Yes. If there’s adequate feed, such as pasture residuals of 1500kg-1600kg DM/ ha and good pasture allocation, there are no reproductive benefits from feeding additional supplements.

Also, if intakes are restricted during the mating period (due to a feed deficit, prolonged adverse weather or poor pasture utilisation) then reduced reproduction is likely to be less than expected.

Can I take out supplements during mating?

Yes, if energy supplied by pasture is adequate. Past research shows there’s no impact on submission, conception, six-week in-calf or final pregnancy rates when dietary supplements are removed just before mating.

KEY POINTS

1. Save your time and money: if there is enough pasture, pasture is enough. 2. In most cases, you’ll only need to feed supplements if there is a deficit in early lactation. 3. Choose supplements based on cents/

MJ ME – focus on feed energy, not type of feed.

Isn’t nutrition the main factor affecting reproduction?

No, it’s only one factor. Others are genetics, bull management, heat detection, cow health, calving pattern, heifer management, non-cyclers, and cow condition at calving and mating.

Does body condition score affect reproduction?

BCS at mating is a key driver of cow cycling and the six-week in-calf rate. This is largely set by BCS at calving (so aim for targets of 5.5 for two- and three-year-olds and 5.0 for older cows). Cows naturally lose body condition after calving, based on genetics and BCS at calving. Providing additional feed would have little effect on reducing this loss. Instead, focus on achieving target grazing residuals so there’s good quality pasture available during mating.

So, what’s the best decision?

It’s up to you to decide whether the cost (including time and labour) involved in feeding out supplements is justified by need and any benefits. If you do decide to use supplements, it doesn’t matter what kind; it’s the megajoules of metabolisable energy per kilogram of dry matter (MJME/kg DM), and the cost, that count. n

MORE:

See dairynz.co.nz/supplements

The information in this article was sourced from DairyNZ’s Feeding Cows in Spring booklet at dairynz.co.nz/publications/feed