Dairy feeding survey highlights key issues and trends

In an independent survey commissioned by Trident, more than 500 farmers were asked about feeding and feed choice. These are the results from the dairy farmers in the group.

Feed choice, cost and availability have been hot topics this winter, but how the average farmer views these issues is often hard to gauge from talking to just two or three individuals. It makes the results of a recent Trident survey particularly interesting and relevant, offering a snapshot of the industry at a broader level than can usually be achieved.

More than anything, the results are sure to stimulate debate, particularly as individual farmers consider how their own situation and views compare to these results.

Of the total number surveyed, 144 were involved in dairy farming, with 139 answering the questions fully. Farm size ranged from less than 20ha to more than 500ha, and the split in herd size can be seen in figure 1. Of those dairy farmers surveyed, 46% also had beef cattle of some kind on their unit.

Figure 1 – Distribution of cow numbers by herd size

When asked about the types of feeds used, it’s not surprising the vast majority fed rations that included silage, though it’s worth noting that 2% (three farms) didn’t (figure 2). The results don’t show what these farms did feed, though it’s known that there are some dairy farms within the UK now feeding rations based on moist feeds, rather than forage.

Figure 2 – Feeds used by surveyed farmers

“Three quarters also included straw in the diet, which demonstrates how far the message about the importance of structural fibre and straw in beef and, especially, dairy cow rations has reached over the last 10 years or so,” states Trident nutrition manager Dr Michael Marsden. “Others may well have been feeding longer-chopped forages and didn’t need straw added in the ration, so the majority do appear to be taking steps to support good rumen function.

“A total of 76% used compounds or blends, with a little over half (55%) feeding dry straights, 32% using moist feeds and just 25% including liquid feeds in rations. With the benefits and value of moist and liquid feeds well known, it’s perhaps surprising that usage isn’t more widespread.

“It certainly highlights a potential opportunity for many dairy producers, with the top three benefits cited by those feeding moist and liquid feeds being palatability, ability to improve ration quality and cost-effectiveness.”

However, it’s soyabean meal that is perhaps receiving the greatest attention amongst the feed materials at present, with high prices for what is perceived as an essential component in dairy rations putting considerable pressure on margins. According to the survey, a total of 42% of the farmers questioned (three quarters of those feeding straights) stated that they used soyabean meal in rations.

“Amongst the most commonly discussed issues is the future of soyabean production,” adds Dr Marsden. “Nearly half of all respondents to the survey expressed at least some concern over the environmental impact of soyabean production (43%) and the sustainability and long term availability of soyabean meal as a feed (46%).

“Yet while 59% have considered an alternative – and 45% state they would actually prefer to use one – the level of awareness around the options currently available to replace soyabean meal is as low as 27%.”

With genuine alternative feeding strategies both available and more cost-effective, the figures suggest a substantial information ‘gap’ is clearly preventing large numbers of dairy producers from reducing their reliance on soyabean meal, addressing concerns about soyabean meal production and sustainability, and reducing feed costs in the process.

“This is confirmed by the 70% who stated they would probably buy a cost-effective alternative to soyabean meal if it was suggested by their advisor,” continues Dr Marsden. “The importance of farm advisors in influencing feed purchasing decisions was also highlighted by the survey, with nutritionists, feed suppliers and other advisors, including vets, having a role in 70-80% of feed purchasing decisions (figure 3).”

Figure 3 – Feed purchasing influencers

The farming media has always also played a significant role in providing information on feed choice, availability and prices, but the data in figure 3 shows just how quickly the internet is now catching up as an influence. Just as with most aspects of life, the internet is clearly becoming more and more important as a source of information, particularly when it comes to buying decisions.

Internet speed has always been a major limitation in rural areas in the past, but with speeds increasing and the uptake of smartphones we can expect to see significant growth in internet use in the next five years.

“Of the factors influencing feed choice itself, top spot is taken by feed quality and nutritional value, which affects 99% of decisions (figure 4),” Dr Marsden explains. “As expected, price and availability are also hugely important, influencing 96% and 88% of choices, respectively, and it should come as no surprise that the weather (home-grown feed choice) and storage facilities also play a significant role.

Figure 4 – Factors influencing feed choice

“The importance of convenience and ease-of-use (91%) and environmental impact (60%), however, are perhaps less expected. These results hint at a change in focus within the industry, as environmental factors become more important to both end consumers and producers, and staff managing ever greater numbers of cows per person require feeding systems to be simplified.

“It’s one of the reasons why we’re seeing a growing number of producers switching from straights to custom blends, taking delivery of all their concentrate and supplement requirements in a single feed. Not only is it easier to store and handle, plus quicker to feed, but it also ties up less capital than a shed full of straights and reduces the potential for error during ration mixing,” he adds.

Respondents were also asked whether bought-in feed use had changed during the last five years, with half (49%) stating that volumes had increased, versus 29% where amounts had fallen. The biggest reason by far for any increase was expanding stock numbers, a factor in two thirds of the decisions to buy more feed (figure 5), whilst other significant factors were the need for higher quality and feed value, plus greater convenience and choice.

Figure 5 – Reasons for increasing the amount of bought-in feed used

And when it came to predicting future feed usage, the majority expected little change, with the 27% anticipating a reduction in the amount of bought-in feed used in the next five years similar to the 29% that have already cut back in the last five years.

“Whether this turns out to be an accurate prediction remains to be seen, and will be heavily influenced by the type and value of bought-in feeds available in the future,” concludes Dr Marsden. “An improved supply of good value alternative feeds is likely to stimulate usage, for example, particularly if difficult weather patterns continue to result in highly variable home-grown feed crops.

“For most milk producers, the focus is still on reducing production costs per litre of milk, whether by increasing yields, seeking out the better value feeding options, or both. And to have the greatest choice of these feeds in the future, the key is to create a feeding infrastructure able to deal with a wide range of feed types, including dry, moist and liquid feeds.”

Ends

Find where to buy

Click on the map to go through to find your local merchant.