February 15, 1998
Volume 1, Issue 4
Inside this Issue
Welcome
Tough Management Yields - Dairy Profits
15-Measures of Dairy Farm Competitiveness
Who's Who
Reproduction: How is Ohio Doing
Factors to Consider in a Program for Heat Detection
Using Ultrasonography in Reproductive Management
Most Frequent Reproductive Problems
Milk Price Outlook
Hay Auction Prices
Calendar of Events
Welcome,
to those of you new to this newsletter. Buckeye Dairy News is published on a monthly basis by OSU Extension and the OSU Dairy Team. As its name implies, it targets exclusively dairy issues in Ohio. Many different topics are covered, ranging from milk and feed prices, to labor management, nutrition, cow health issues, etc. We try to keep its content informative and to the point, helping you running a more profitable and successful operation.
This month, a copy of Buckeye Dairy News is being mailed to every dairy producer in the great State of Ohio. COBA/Select Sires, NOBA/CRI and the American Dairy Association and Dairy Council Mid-East have generously contributed dollars and time to make this mailing possible. In the months to come, we will solicit other Ohio ag-businesses for contributions so that we can improve the quality of this publication and make its distribution more efficient. Please thank the people working for these organizations for their wonderful support.
Some counties have made the decision to mail this newsletter free of charge to their dairy producers. If you want to keep receiving Buckeye Dairy News, you should first inquire to your county Agriculture and Natural Resources Agent about the availability of the newsletter in your county. Alternatively, you can have an original copy mailed directly to your home or business address by completing and mailing with a $10 check the coupon appearing on page 7 of this issue. At this rate, believe me, we are not getting rich!
I think that you will be pleased with the content of this month’s newsletter. We selected great articles on dairy farm finances, management and milk prices. Our four page, special pullout section is entirely dedicated to reproduction. Those articles will teach you how reproduction is supposed to work, why it doesn’t work sometimes, and what you can do about it. You will realize that we are throwing a bunch of good money out the window by not having reproduction under control in Ohio. So, it is time to sit down, relax, learn and enjoy!
Normand St-Pierre
Dairy Extension Specialist, Editor
Tough Management Yields - Dairy Profits
Donald J. Breece Ph.D., Southwest District Specialist, Farm Management
Ohio State University Extension
The last three years in the dairy business has required decisive action and tough management by dairy farmers. Yet, those Ohio dairy farms that controlled costs, especially feed, have shown good profits. Farmers that did not plan for feed purchases or that failed to take control of production efficiency saw profits deteriorate.
Results of the Ohio Farm Business Summary clearly demonstrates the potential for profits on well managed dairy farms. This report summarized over 90 Ohio farm businesses that used FINPACK for year-end analysis. The report represents farms from 31 Ohio counties. Participation is voluntary, through educational programs offered by The Ohio State University Extension and several FBPA programs.
The FINPACK computer program is a comprehensive financial planning and analysis system. The data in the Ohio report were not collected from a random sample. Therefore, caution should be exercised in generalizing results to the situation of Ohio farms. Rather, it is a useful example of differences between farms resulting from improved management. The dairy enterprise analysis is sorted by return to overhead and is separated by lower and upper third of farms participating in the summary.
The management function most required by dairy managers is controlling.
It is measuring performance in order to ensure that plans are achieving
enterprise objectives. There are four steps in the control process:
1. Establish performance objectives and standards,
2. Measuring actual performance,
3.Comparing performance to standards, and
4. Taking corrective action.
"Milk prices are what they are; a farmer must control his own efficiencies." Cost control, quantity and quality production, are within a farm managers own realm of influence. A farmer may choose $6.50 per hundred weight of milk as a performance objective for covering feed costs of the cows and replacements. Feed records, including feed inventory changes, are required to measure performance. Comparing results from records analysis and taking corrective action will follow. Corrective actions may include improving forage quality, changing rations, controlling waste or using a total mix ration system.
The table, representing the top third of dairy farms, demonstrates the results of tough management and cost control. Even with the higher than normal feed cost of 1996, net return per cow remains very good at $689 vs $358 for average farms.
"Our farmers, who get half their income from milk, are in economic trouble.
Add a penny to the price paid to farmers and you will add half a billion
to their income." No, this is not a modern quote, it comes from an
article in Readers Digest, September 1942. If we think about the
changes in dairy farming, since 1942 can we really expect less for the
future. Certainly, milk price is an important factor in dairy farm
profits, as it has always been. But, it will be the tough dairy farm
manager that will take control of their own efficiencies and make superior
profits in the competitive dairy business.
| Average Rsults of Top 33 % of Dairy Farms
-Ohio Farm Business Summary, 1996 - |
|
| Gross Return |
|
| Direct Expenses |
|
| Overhead Expenses |
|
| Net Return |
|
Who's Who
Normand St-Pierre
(614) 292-6507
Normand is a faculty member in the Department of Animal Sciences with
an 80% Extension and 20% research appointment. His primary area of responsibility
is dairy herd management. He is a new faculty member in the Department,
arriving July 1, 1997. Many of you may have already known Normand
prior to his arrival at OSU. He received the B.S. and M.S. degrees from
Universite Laval in Quebec, Canada and the Ph.D. in 1985 from OSU. He worked
in the feed and related industries before and after completion of his doctoral
degree. His immediate employment prior to becoming a faculty member at
OSU was serving as President of two agricultural firms. He brings a lot
of human and fiscal resource management skills to the position as well
immense knowledge of and experience with the dairy industry. His
schedule has been quite packed with speaking engagements since his arrival.
He has become a very active member of the Ohio Dairy Team and the OSU Dairy
Restructuring Team, and he is the editor of this outstanding newsletter
that you presently reading. He is a pleasure to work with, having a sense
of humor, high level of motivation, and an ability to get others excited.
We welcome him and encourage him to continue to keep the trail ablaze!
15- Measures of Competitiveness
Dianne Shoemaker, Agriculture Agent
This month: Debt per cow
Competitive Level: Less than $2000 per cow
Less than $3000 per cow during an expansion
Calculation: Total farm debt/(lactating cows + dry cows)
Example: $800,000 debt / 300 cows (249 lactating + 51 dry) = $2,667
debt per cow
Often farmers ask: how much debt can my dairy handle? While the debt to asset ratio looks at the overall debt position of the farm, debt per cow looks at how the farm will repay the debt. As the profit center of a dairy, cows generate the money needed to make principal payments.
If debt per cow is too high
The short answer to this question is “Not very good, Odie!”. This answer is based on the analysis that we did of the reproductive performance of all Ohio Holstein herds on test in 1997 with DHI Cooperative Inc. of Powell, Ohio. All types of tests (e.g., regular, official, etc.) were included but herds that did not report breedings were excluded from the analysis.
Reproductive performance as a function of Heat Detection Rate
Table 1 reports the average reproductive performance when herds were grouped in quartiles based on heat detection rate (HDR). The top quartile of herds had an HDR of 60%, more than twice that of the bottom quartile. Herds with high HDR had 40 less days at first breeding, but lower percent first service conception. As a result, high HDR herds were open for 38 less days.
Heat detection rate is a very important factor in the overall reproductive efficiency. HDR affects days to conception by its direct effect on days to first breeding, by its indirect effect on days to first estrus, and by its direct effect on estrous interval. A good expert benchmark for HDR is 70 to 75%. Even the top quartile of Ohio herds did not achieve this result.
Table 1. Reproduction performance by quartile of Heat Detection
Rate (Ohio, 1997).
|
|
Detection (%) |
1st Bred |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reproductive performance as a function of First Service Conception Rate
In table 2, we sorted and grouped herds into quartiles based on first service conception rate (FSCR). The top quartile herds had a FSCR exceeding 75%, far greater than the 32% of the last quartile herds. But the top “conception rate (CR)” herds were less able at detecting heats: 39% HDR, or eight percent units lower than the fourth quartile herds. Cows in the top CR herds were first bred an average of 20 days later than cows in the bottom quartile. Consequently, in spite of having a FSCR 2.4 times greater, the top 25% CR herds averaged only 10 less days open than the bottom CR herds.
Table 2. Reproduction performance by quartile of First Service
Conception Rate (Ohio, 1997).
|
|
(%) |
1st Bred |
|
|
Open |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The end result: days open
The average number of days open (DO) is the reproductive parameter with the largest economic impact on dairy farm profitability. In a final analysis, we ranked herds from best to worst for average number of days open (Table 3). The top ‘breeders’ had an average of 118 days open, nearly 60 days less than the bottom ‘breeders’. The 118 day average for the top quartile is somewhat higher than expected. This average translates to an expected 118 + 280 = 398 days between calvings (or a 13.1 months calving interval). An expert benchmark would be in the 110 to 115 day range.
Table 3. Reproduction performance by quartile of Days Open (Ohio,
1997).
|
|
|
1st Bred |
|
|
Open |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The cost of reproduction (or lack thereof)
It has been suggested that each additional days open over and above
100 days results in a lost income of $2.00 to $2.50 per cow for each additional
DO. With an average of 150 days open, Ohio herds would incur a loss
of $100 to $125 per cow per year due to sub-optional reproduction.
We verified these figures using a computer simulation of herd reproduction
and production. Our results showed an estimated loss of 3.07 lbs
of milk per day of production life from the sub-optimal reproduction.
At $13/cwt, this equates to $145 of lost gross income per cow per year.
Assuming variable costs of $5/cwt, Ohio’s sub-optimal production would
result in reduced net income estimated at $80/cow/year.
What can we do to improve reproduction?
The next three articles (1) provide you with ways to improve heat detection
efficiency in your herd, (2) explain how ultrasonography can be used, especially
with those cows that are giving you headaches, and (3) spell out the three
most frequently seen mistakes made by dairy producers in their reproduction
program.
Factors to Consider in a Program for Heat Detection
Dr. Joe Ottobre, Associate Professor
Department of Animal Sciences
Data from DHI summaries of Ohio dairy herds indicate that the average estrous (heat) detection rate in Ohio is approximately 45%. Thus, Ohio dairy producers are missing 55% of the opportunities to breed cows, or are breeding at the wrong time, resulting in delays in conception and substantial economic loss. It is estimated that the calving interval in Ohio herds could be reduced by at least 40 days if more heats (>70%) were accurately detected.
Detecting dairy cows in heat is challenging because the duration of estrus in cattle is short. Estrus normally lasts from 10 to 18 hours, but could be as short as two to six hours - especially under hot environmental conditions. Even with twice-a-day heat checking, you may not observe heat in the cows with the shortest estrous periods. There is an advantage of the short estrous period of cows that should be appreciated, though. Estimation of time of ovulation and determining the best time to breed can be done more accurately in cattle than in some of the other domestic species.
An important point to remember about estrous detection in cattle is that the only definitive sign that a cow is in heat is that she will stand to be mounted. Cows mounted “on the run” are not displaying true “standing estrus”. Cows that mount other cows may or may not be in heat. It is true that estrous cows tend to be more active than herdmates, but to verify that they are in heat, you must see them stand.
There are secondary signs that you might use as clues that a cow is in heat, but these signs do not tell you for sure. Sometimes clear mucous secretions can be seen coming from the vulva. At the time of estrus, mucous secretions from the cow’s reproductive tract are more voluminous and less viscous than at other stages of the estrous cycle. The vulva may be swollen and pink. As mentioned above, cows are more active at the time of estrus. They may display an increase in vocalizations, nudging, and sniffing, and may attempt to mount other cows. Pedometers have been used to get an objective measure of their activity. Other secondary signs are decreased milk production and depressed appetite.
Occasionally, a small amount of blood may appear in the mucous secretions or a patch of blood may be observed on the tail. This is called metestrous bleeding and occurs about 35 to 45 hours after the end of estrus. This is not an indication of conception or failure to conceive. Observation of this phenomenon indicates that estrus and ovulation have already occurred. Therefore, if heat was not observed in a cow with metestrous bleeding, she should not be bred until her next detected heat.
To increase the rate at which cows are observed in heat, it is best to have cows in a situation where they are most likely to attempt to mount one another. Naturally, cows will be more inclined to attempt to mount when they have secure footing. Potentially slippery surfaces, such as concrete, and sloppy conditions, tend to discourage cows from mounting.
Cows that are distracted by other things, such as eating, are not very likely to investigate each other for estrous cues. As such, there is not much value in checking heat while cows are eating. Obviously, cows that are laying down will not mount other cows, nor will they be mounted. Therefore, cows should be encouraged to move around and interact during the observation period.
To optimize heat checking conditions, observations should be made while cows are in a clean area with good footing. A well-drained, dirt exercise lot works well, or a pasture if the cows are not too distracted by grazing. The cows’ feet should be properly trimmed. Cows with sore feet are less likely to mount other cows, or stand to be mounted. The cows should be grouped in reasonably close proximity, to encourage them to investigate one another. If they are spread out in a wide open space, group them so that they are closer together; however, they should not be grouped so tightly that their movement is restricted.
Observe the behavior of the cows for at least 20-30 minutes two times per day. Additional periods of observation would further improve detection rate. Since cows often come into estrus in the middle of the night, it is best to check as early in the morning and as late in the evening as possible. Take note of the animals that stand still and allow other cows mount. If the cows do not seem to be investigating one another, move them around to improve the opportunity for a cow to pick up the scent of an estrous cow.
It is important to keep good records of the occurrences of estrus, secondary signs of estrus, and even metestrous bleeding. Such records can be used to predict when the cow is due to return to heat. The estrous cycle of a cow ranges from about 18-24 days and averages 21 days. If a cow is showing estrus more frequently than this, she may have a cystic follicle that is stimulating estrous behavior repeatedly. In this case, the cow should be examined by a veterinarian.
There are various aids to estrous detection that the dairy producer could consider using. Aids, such as heat check patches, can be very helpful, but do not substitute for a conscientious program of regular observation for estrus. The electronic recording of mounts is an emerging technology that may prove to be effective. Methods for estrous/ovulation synchronization should also be considered for optimization of reproductive success. (See accompanying article entitled: Emerging Technologies for Estrous Synchronization.)
In summary, detection of estrus is critical for a successful breeding program. As such, the dairy producer should take this responsibility seriously and consider assigning this duty to a well-trained staff person. Higher estrous detection rates translate into improved fertility in the herd and ultimately result in greater economic benefits.
Using Ultrasonography in Reproductive Management
Dr. Joy Pate, Professor,
Department of Animal Sciences
Using ultrasonography for reproductive research and as an on-farm reproductive management tool may result in significant enhancement of fertility in dairy cows. Ultrasonography represents a major breakthrough in technology that has allowed researchers to visualize ovarian or uterine changes during various reproductive states or following experimental treatments. This technology can be utilized on the farm as a tool to aid in reproductive management decisions and to accurately diagnose clinical problems.
Most people are familiar with ultrasound as the technique used to see the developing fetus during pregnancy in women, or even to assess the status of internal organs such as the heart. Ultrasonography is now used to evaluate various aspects of reproduction in domestic animals, especially horses and cattle. This is accomplished by inserting a small probe into the rectum of the animal. The probe emits sound waves that penetrate the tissues beneath the probe, and are reflected back to the detectors within the probe, based on the density of the tissues. The sound waves are then electronically converted into a black and white image. The more dense tissues, such as the skeletal system of an embryo, will reflect the most sound waves and will appear white on the imaging screen. The less dense tissues, such as a fluid-filled ovarian follicle, reflect very few sound waves, and therefore appear dark gray or black on the screen.
Ultrasonography can be used to detect the presence of an embryo in the uterus, or to determine what structures are present on the ovary. Although these are the same determinations that may be made by palpation, it is a more sensitive and accurate technique than palpation. Additionally, direct physical manipulation of the uterine horns and ovaries is not necessary, so the potential for disrupting a pregnancy or erupting a large follicle is avoided. The disadvantages of using ultrasound on the farm are the cost of the equipment and the amount of training required to perform the technique and interpret the images. However, some veterinarians have now invested in the equipment for on-farm diagnostic purposes, and universities are providing the training grounds for ultrasound technicians.
An experienced ultrasound technician can diagnose pregnancy with nearly 100% accuracy on day 21-22. Although the embryo itself may not be visible prior to day 21, some technicians may be able to predict pregnancy status prior to this time by detection of fluid accumulation in the uterine horn. However, it may be difficult to distinguish this fluid from normal fluids in the uterus at proestrus and estrus. The fetal heartbeat is detectable by ultrasonography around day 22, and the sex of the fetus can be determined after day 50. Thus, one of the most likely uses of ultrasonography on the dairy farm of the future is for early pregnancy diagnosis and perhaps sex determination of the fetus.
In addition to pregnancy diagnosis, significant advances have been made in our understanding of ovarian regulation and fertility using ultrasound. It is now understood that the reduced fertility observed after progestin-based estrous synchronization schemes is associated with ovulation of a persistent ovarian follicle. Therefore, methods are currently being developed to cause regression of the persistent follicle and ovulation of a new follicle following estrous synchronization. This should allow the farmer to manipulate the estrous cycle without compromising fertility. Although not practical on a routine basis, ultrasound may be used to monitor changes in ovarian structures to determine the time of ovulation, if it is not possible to detect heat by more traditional methods. This is probably most useful in research situations, since the cost and labor involved in ultrasonographic observations would prohibit daily use on the farm. However, this may be worthwhile if the herd has extremely low conception rates or a particular cow fails to show heat and the cause can not be determined by palpation or a single ultrasound.
One of the most significant benefits of ultrasonography is that it allows for direct visualization of ovarian structures. A fluid-filled follicle will appear black on the screen, and a solid corpus luteum (CL) will appear gray. Thus, there is no more guesswork based on the “feel” of the structure to be assured of the presence of either a follicle or CL. Further, it may be easily determined whether a persistent structure is a cystic follicle or a luteal cyst. This is an important distinction, because the hormonal treatment for these two types of cysts differs. Diagnosis of a cystic follicle would most likely lead to treatment with a GnRH analogue, such as Cystorelin?, whereas a luteal cyst might be treated with prostaglandin F2? (such as Lutalyse?). Finally, a well-trained technician with a good scientific background in ovarian physiology may be capable of distinguishing healthy from atretic, or regressing, follicles. A healthy follicle will have a well-defined follicular wall and a clear, black center. The wall of an atretic follicle is less distinct, and white “strands” of proteinaceous debris may be apparent in the follicular fluid.
In summary, ultrasonography is a powerful diagnostic tool and may be useful in making reproductive management decisions. Presently, it is used primarily when extreme reproductive inefficiencies exist. However, the technology is likely to become more available to dairy farmers in the near future, and may be used to assist in the timing of inseminations and to diagnose fertility problems.
Most Frequent Reproductive Problems
Douglas W. Shaw, DVM, Ph.D., Asst. Professor
Extension Veterinarian for Reproduction, Dept. of Veterinary Preventive
Medicine
Producers typically aim for a calving interval between 12 and 14 months with lesser intervals generally regarded as more favorable. Maintaining this level of reproductive efficiency is often difficult, but its importance ranks with the top management areas of a dairy enterprise.
We must always remember that reproduction is not a vital function for the body. Therefore, it is not surprising that any insult from the environment has the potential to disrupt reproductive function before, or sometimes without other problems being noticed. It follows that reproductive problems are often complex, resulting from multiple factors rather than a single source. In fact, reproductive failures caused by a single, easily defined source are the exception rather than the rule. The following scenarios represent the more commonly encountered problem areas for dairy producers in Ohio.
1) Reproductive failure related to metabolic problems
By far the most common causes of reproductive failure relate to disturbances of rumen function and all the metabolic consequences that occur subsequently. Even the best feed bunk manager with the best ration formulation is still subject to events that are difficult to completely control or eliminate. Some examples are poor or inconsistent forage quality, commodities that become unavailable or too expensive, labor and equipment problems, temperature extremes (especially heat) and the inevitable change of fermented feeds as silos are emptied. The bottom line here is that ration composition and dry matter intake will change, and that change can have consequences metabolically. The complicating factor is that, on a herd basis, the cows are also changing metabolically as they move through various stages of lactation and pregnancy. Cows in positive energy balance (mid to late lactation) tend to be more resistant to environmental insults than cows in negative energy balance. This is particularly obvious where reproductive failure is concerned.
For an excellent manager with ideal facilities and feedstuffs, transitioning cows from one ration to another can usually be done without consequence, reproductively or metabolically. However, when herd or farm conditions are marginal to begin with, rumen upset can cause anything from mild problems with a few individuals to a disastrous, herd-wide crash depending on the severity of the change. The typical short term problems are displaced abomasum, milk fever, ketosis and even down cows. Soon after, the more chronic problems begin to show up; cystic ovaries, anestrus, retained fetal membranes, inappropriate body condition (too thin or too fat) and lameness. No doubt many producers are all to familiar with this scenario. Metabolic disease almost always has consequences for the reproductive system, but the very nature of feeding high producing dairy cows makes it likely that metabolic problems will occur at some point. The producer who strives to maintain happy, stable rumens for cows in all stages of production is likely to enjoy the more happy, stable lifestyle.
2)Reproductive failure related to cow comfort/facilities
Another common problem on Ohio dairies is lack of appropriate facilities relative to the needs and goals of the particular dairy enterprise. This is becoming more apparent as many of our producers are pursuing expansion efforts. Typical problem areas are; cow numbers relative to freestall space, expansion into old, often marginal facilities and lack of skilled labor. The area most compromised here is poor expression of estrus (heats) by the cows and low heat detection efficiency by workers. Mounting activity of cows is affected by a number of factors, but one of the most important factors is footing surface. The preferred solution, dry lots for exercise and observing heats, works well for western dairies, but tends to fail miserably when they become mud lots in our climate. New materials for stabilizing soil based lots and alleys are becoming available, but field application has been slow to develop.
Resolving these types of problems requires a directed effort by the manager. Perhaps the most important element is assigning responsibility. Heat detection should be an assigned task with a defined time for one or a number of individuals on the farm. Heat detection aids should be considered, such as tail chalk, Kamars or androgenized heifers. If facilities are at the root of the problem, these will obviously have to be addressed at some point. The reality for most dairies is that a reasonable calving interval can be maintained in total confinement on concrete.
3) Reproductive failure related to infectious diseases
Less common than items 1 and 2 above, but still too frequently encountered are the bacterial and viral diseases that cause reproductive failure on dairy farms. Perhaps the most common of these is the viral disease bovine viral diarrhea (BVD). This is certainly not a newly discovered disease; however, new field strains of the virus have been isolated recently that demonstrate the dynamic nature of this virus. The consequence for the average producer is that vaccination alone may not confer the protection normally expected. No vaccine is 100% protective, but in cases where multiple field strains of the same virus circulate in nature, it is difficult for vaccine companies to provide products that are certain to be protective for all strains. This does not reduce the importance of vaccination. It does enhance the importance of taking other precautions when acquiring new animals for the herd. This is another area that is increasing in importance as more herds are expanding through external sources. When considering source animals, it is prudent to have those animals screened for the commonly encountered diseases prior to arrival (especially those that could be disastrous for your herd, such as BVD, Mycoplasma mastitis, Staph mastitis or Johne's disease). Your veterinarian should work together with the veterinarian for the source animals. Again, this is not 100% effective for eliminating disease introduction to your herd. It is a reasonable way to reduce your risk which, for the diseases mentioned above, could be very costly.
Herds which maintain a closed status, use artificial insemination and have sound vaccination strategies typically have a very low occurrence of infectious reproductive diseases. For this type of herd, the most commonly encountered infectious problems are post calving infections of the uterus (metritis). This is almost always caused by poor management of the calving area - too many animals calving in a common area that is not routinely cleaned and disinfected. If individual calving stalls are not an option, calving outside on grass is preferable to a confined, common space (weather permitting). When indoor calving in common use areas is the only option, thoroughly clean and disinfect the area as often as possible. Move close up cows out temporarily if needed. This is extremely important to break the cycle of contamination of the environment and reinfection of the uterus that occurs under these conditions. Most herd-based, post calving metritis problems can be resolved using this strategy.
Other problems related to reproductive failure of dairy cattle occur
sporadically and often in a farm specific way. Remember that most
cases of reproductive failure can be traced to multiple factors.
Attention to detail during that most vital period of the cows production
cycle, 30 days prior to calving through 30 days post calving, will help
prevent many of the problems discussed above. Manage feeds and feeding
routines to maximize rumen stability, and use every opportunity to reduce
your risk of introducing a new infectious disease into your herd.
Milk Price Outlook
Gary Schnitkey
The Basic Formula Price (BFP) for January was released on February 5th. For January, the BFP was $13.25 per cwt. This is the second month in a row that the BFP has been above $13.00.
Currently, BFP futures contracts for February are trading above $13.00. This trading, along with most analysts’ projections, places the February BFP above $13.00. It’s highly likely that we will have 3 months of BFPs above $13.00 per cwt.
BFPs above $13.00 per cwt. will place producer pay prices for milk in the mid to high $14.00 range for both January and February.
High milk prices are occurring because of below expected milk production increases. December milk production was up only .9 percent from year earlier levels. Moreover, cheese prices were strong and held steady in the $1.40 per pound range during January.
How long will high milk prices last? Most analysts now are projecting declines in milk prices from February to June. In June, the BFP will likely be around $12.00 per cwt., near its historical average. Then, the BFP is projected to rise into the fall and winter months. If this scenario occurs, we are looking at an average milk price for 1998 that is about $1.00 higher than the historical average.
Hay Auction Prices (January 29, 1998)
Location
First
Second
Third
Large Round/bale
Damascus (/bale) $1.50 - 2.75
$2.00 - 4.00 $2.00 - 4.00
$15.00 - 27.50
Ashland County (/ton) $60 - 130
$80 - 160
$72.50 - 155 $34.00 - 36.00
Farmerstown (/ton) $60 -115
$52.50 - 152.50 $52.50 - 152.50 $10.00 -
37.50
Mt. Hope (/ton) $65
- 130 $115 - 185
$110 - 180
$20.00 - 52.50
Calendar of Events
2/18, 3/3 & 3/18/98
St. Henry
Mgt. Excel Hiring Workshop
Featuring - Bernie Ervin
For more information call 419-586-2179
2/20, 2/27 & 3/6/98
Columbiana/Mahoning
1997 Financial Analysis
For more information call Dianne Shoemaker 330-424-7291
2/26, 3/5 & 3/12/98
Lisbon
Managing for Success
For more information call Dianne Shoemaker 330-424-7291
3/4/98
10A.M.-3P.M., Ashland County
Discovering Our Future In The Dairy Industry
For more information call Roger Amos 419-281-8242.
3/5/98
10A.M.-1P.M.,Morrow Co. Extension Office, Mt. Gilead
Designing Freestalls, & Feet & Leg Health
For more information call Steve Ruhl
419-947-1070.
3/5,12,19/98
10A.M.-3P.M., Shreve
Dairy Excel
For more information call Tom Noyes 330-264-8722.
3/6/98
10A.M.-3P.M., Portage County
Discovering Our Future In The Dairy Industry
For more information call Kevin O'Reilley 330-296-6432.
3/12/98
6 - 9P.M., Gateway Smorgasbord, Marion
Environmental Assurance Program For Livestock Producers
For more information call Steve Ruhl 419-947-1070.
3/18/98
10A.M.-1P.M., Morrow County Extension Office, Mt. Gilead
Bedding Materials, Environmental Mastitis, and Storing and Handling
Sand-Laden Dairy Manure
For more information call Steve Ruhl 419-947-1070.
3/18/98
10A.M.-3P.M., Lorain County
Discovering Our Future In The Dairy Industry
For more information call Jim Skeeles 216-322-0127.
3/19/98
10A.M.-3P.M., Columbiana/Mahoning
Discovering Our Future In The Dairy Industry
For more information call Dianne Shoemaker 330-424-7291.
3/24-26/98
ATI, Wooster
Dairy Farm Employee Short Course
For more information call Tom Noyes 330-264-8722.
4/15&16/98
Hyatt Regency, Columbus
Dairy and Food Industry Conference
For more information call Terry Sullivan 614-292-8897.
4/21&22/98
Fort Wayne, IN
Tri-State Dairy Nutrition Conference
For more information call 614-688-3143.
Mark your calendars!
A statewide dairy conference is being organized for December 8 and 9,
1998. It will be held in Columbus at a location yet to be determined.
There will be a variety of topics covered. Ohio producers who intend
to be in this business 10 years from now should definitely plan to attend.
Mark your calendar today!
All educational programs conducted by The Ohio State University Extension are available to clientele on a nondiscriminatory basis without regard to race, color, creed, religion, sexual orientation, national origin, gender, age, disability or Vietnam-era veteran status.
Issued in furtherance of Cooperative Extension work, Acts of May 8 and June 30, 1914, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Keith L. Smith, Director, The Ohio State University Extension