Raising Fiscally Responsible Replacements! Winter Dairy Management ‘08 January 21 – Richfield...

Raising Fiscally Responsible Replacements!

January 21 – Richfield Springs

January 22 – Saratoga Springs

January 23 – Randolph Ctr., VT

January 24 – Chazy

January 25 – Carthage

January 28 – Geneva

January 29 – Batavia

January 30 – Pike

January 31 – Randolph, NY

February 1 -- Cortland

Winter Dairy Management ‘08

To:

For the “loan” of: Jenny Mills Dr. Bill Stone & Dr. Doug Waterman

This project could not have been pulled off without their help and all of the folks below:

Site ManagersDave BalbianCathy WickswatColleen Leonard, UVMBlake PutnamFrans VokeyRon KuckJerry BertoldoMaureen ZornRebecca Ireland-PerryLisa KempistyJoan PetzenJohn Conway

Development TeamDr. Mike Van AmburghJenny MillsDr. Julie Smith, UVMDr. Jerry BertoldoJason KarszesCathy WickswatCurt GoochFrans VokeyDave BalbianRon KuckJohn Conway

Special thanks to the folks at Midland BioProducts for upplying both the Colostrumand IgG (used on Case Farms, see back) Quick Test Kits!

Agenda Topics:Welcome, Introductions – Site Manager/Host

Improving Your Replacement Program, Where to Start, (Karszes, Wickswat)

Navigating the DQA Best Management Practices Guide, Heifer Target Graphs/Charts. and Calf Manager CD. Your numbers – Heifer Management Snapshot (Conway)

Replacement Program and its Importance to the Dairy (Karszes, Wickswat)

Managing Newborns Extremely Well, the Best Investment You’ll Make!(Van Amburgh, Mills with Stone and Waterman as presenters)

Harnessing the Biology of Growth for Your Mutual Well-being. Targets GuaranteeMomentum. (Van Amburgh, Mills with Stone and Waterman as presenters)

Housing Principles and Options that Work (Gooch, Vokey)

Heifer Health & Disease - tipping the scale in our favor (Bertoldo, Smith)

Heifer Reproduction - a challenge with a payback (Bertoldo, Smith)

Case Farm “Photo Tour” of Replacement Heifer Facilities (Case Farm)

10:00

10:10

10:25

11:15

11:45

1:00

Lunch (towards end – live demo of Calf Manager CD)12:15

1:50

2:30

2:50

Winter Dairy Management ’08 Agenda

10:55

(at end of each of these next presentations, finish with relevant Case Farm data and discussion)

Targeted Heifer Growth

Take advantage of what’s bred into them with:

An easy-to-use guide where you determine age at first freshening

To get PowerPoint File for printing additional graph pages go to: http://www.ansci.cornell.edu/prodairy/heiftarget

Practical Application of Targeted Heifer Growth for Optimal Financial Returns: Get mature weights or adjusted mature weights (see chart) for all cows in herd Based on dam’s mature weight, separate heifers into small, medium or large predicted mature weight; fewer categories if cow-to-cow variation is less Choose a target mature size for small, medium and large mature size heifers Choose an age in months at freshening target either for all sizes or per size based on your farm specific environment constraints Consult with Feed Rep and run diets taking into account size, average daily gain targets and accurate environmental description. Feeding a separate energy grain from protein grain allows maximum flexibility. Of course, all forages fed need to be accurately identified and analyzed. Winter environments present the greatest challenges! Use sentry heifers to measure scheduled bodyweight and body condition (or hip height) scores. Evaluate if out of compliance and make needed adjustments. A random 20% of a group such as the “Breeding Age” heifers may give you an accurate gauge on whether you’re hitting the “55% of Mature Weight” target for the age at calving you are shooting for.

Adjusting Mature Cow Weights for Body Condition

BCS

900 – 1200

Lb. Cows

1300 – 1500

Lb. Cows

1600 – 1900

Lb. Cows

2.5 +150 +200 +250

3.0 +75 +100 +125

3.5 - - -

4.0 -75 -100 -125

4.5 -150 -200 -250

Mature Weight Estimator

(use multiplication factors below)

1st Calf 1.18

2nd Calf 1.09

3rd Calf 1.04

Symbol Legend Decreasing Increasing+ Improving Reduces Replacement Costs Increases Replacement Costs-- is Neutral to Replacement Costs

but has a Positive Effect on

Symbol Legend Decreasing Increasing+ Improving Reduces Replacement Costs Increases Replacement Costs-- is Neutral to Replacement Costs

but has a Positive Effect on

Using Symbols to Make Sense of Replacement EconomicsSimply plug in words for symbols, such as:

Decreasing cow herd culling reduces replacement costsor

Increasing rate of gain increases replacement costs, but has a positive effect on age at first calving and hitting targets.

Replacement Economics -- an Interesting Web

Demographic EffectsCow Herd Culling Heifer Herd Culling Age at First Calving

Main Cost EffectsFeed Labor

Efficiency EffectsForage Quality --Rate of Gain Environment + (animal) Environment + (labor)

EffectivenessGain Composition* + Hitting Targets* --

Performance Payback1st Lactation Production Lifetime Production

*Hitting weight and height or body condition targets infers the proper kind of (tissue) growth

Monthly Target Weights for 23 Month FresheningMature Body Weights

900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900Birth 60 66 72 78 84 90 96 102 108 114 120

1 92 101 111 120 130 139 149 158 168 178 1872 123 136 149 162 176 189 202 215 228 241 2543 155 171 188 205 221 238 255 271 288 305 3214 186 206 227 247 267 287 307 328 348 368 3885 218 241 265 289 313 337 360 384 408 432 4556 249 277 304 331 359 386 413 441 468 495 5227 281 312 343 373 404 435 466 497 528 559 5908 312 347 381 416 450 485 519 553 588 622 6579 344 382 420 458 496 534 572 610 648 686 724

10 375 417 459 500 542 583 625 666 708 749 79111 407 452 497 542 587 632 678 723 768 813 85812 439 487 536 584 633 682 730 779 828 876 92513 470 522 574 627 679 731 783 835 888 940 99214 495 550 605 660 715 770 825 880 935 990 104515 525 583 642 700 758 817 875 933 992 1050 110816 555 617 678 740 802 863 925 987 1048 1110 117217 585 650 715 780 845 910 975 1040 1105 1170 123518 615 683 752 820 888 957 1025 1093 1162 1230 129819 645 717 788 860 932 1003 1075 1147 1218 1290 136220 719 794 869 944 1019 1094 1169 1244 1319 1394 146921 794 872 950 1029 1107 1185 1264 1342 1420 1499 157722 868 950 1031 1113 1195 1276 1358 1440 1521 1603 168523 765 850 935 1020 1105 1190 1275 1360 1445 1530 1615

23Month

Freshening

23Month

FresheningAverage Daily Gains by Mature Weights for 23 Month Freshening

Mature Bodyweight in Pounds900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 1900

Birth --> Pregnancy 1.02 1.14 1.25 1.37 1.48 1.6 1.71 1.83 1.94 2.06 2.17 Pregnancy --> Calving 0.99 1.1 1.21 1.32 1.43 1.54 1.64 1.75 1.86 1.97 2.08 Last Trimester Pregnancy 2.44 2.55 2.66 2.77 2.88 2.99 3.09 3.2 3.31 3.42 3.53

Body ConditionScore

3.0

Body ConditionScore

3.0

Body ConditionScore

3.5

Body ConditionScore

3.5

Body ConditionScore

4.0

Body ConditionScore

4.0

Body Weights Must Always be Taken in Conjunction with either Body Scores or Hip Heights

Courtesy of Elanco Animal Health Illustrations by Barb Spike.

2.5

Body ConditionScore

2.52.5

Body ConditionScore

Age in Months

Lb

s. B

od

ywei

gh

t

Heifer Growth Lines with Breeding, Post-Freshening & Mature Weight Targets

23Month

Freshening

23Month

Freshening0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

1200

1300

1400

1500

1600

1700

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 230

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

1200

1300

1400

1500

1600

1700

14 MonthBreeding

TargetWeight

1045 (1900)990 (1800)935 (1700)880 (1600)825 (1500)770 (1400)715 (1300)660 (1200)605 (1100)550 (1000)495 (900)

Post-FreshWeight

MatureWeight

1615 -------- 1900

1530 -------- 1800

1445 -------- 1700

1360 -------- 1600

1275 -------- 1500

1190 -------- 1400

1105 -------- 1300

1020 -------- 1200

935 -------- 1100

850 -------- 1000

765 -------- 900


Adam Chris

Koval Brothers Dairy, Stillwater, NY

Dykeman & Sons, Fultonville, NY

Dan and Sharon Rossiter, Belleville, NY

The Reynolds Family, Corfu, NY

Reyncrest Dairy

Factors Affecting Ability to Generate Profit & First Lactation Milk

55% mature weight @ breeding82 - 85% mature weight @ 1st calving

≥90% achieving

*Breeding: Avg. 56% MW (69% Achieving) *Calving: Avg. 78% MW (14% Achieving) (Dykeman)

Nail BiologicalGrowth Targets

1st Calf “Treated” as Calf/Heifer* ≤ 30% ? 24 hrs. 3 mos. ____ 4 mos. fresh ____

DOAs in first calf heifers ≤ 9% 19% Male DOAs 19% Female DOAs 19%

1st Calf avg. peak ≥ 80% of Mature 71% or total lactation ≥ 80% of Mature 80%

1st Calf Culls ≤ 60 Days in Milk ≤ 5% 5%

1st Calf ME’s ≥ Mature < (-595)

1st Calf “Treated” in Lactation* ≤ 15% ?

≥ 85% retention (any herd) to 2nd lactation 90%

Reduce #1 reason for 1st lactation culls (continuous improvement) Repro

Biological Advantage Scorecard (BAS)

Blood IgG >10mg/ml or Blood serum protein >5.5g/dl (at 48 hours of life) ≥85% achieving (95% is achievable) (86%* Dykeman)*2 calves receiving colostrumreplacement did not achieve

Passive ImmunityAchievement

*Adapted from Farm Credit’s Business Consultants’ Heifer Management Index

What Makes a “Quality Heifer” --Maintaining Management Momentum

(Dykeman)

Heifer Management Evaluation Snapshot – Two Components

Longer Term – Factors Affecting Asset Growth (IHG)

Replacement Generation Capacity (RGC)*

Herd Birth Rate

(Freshening eventsas % avg. cow nos.)

≥108%**distorted during

expansion(115% Dykeman)

% Heifers Born

(Female birthsdivided by all births)

≥46 – 47% (55 – 60% sexed semen)

(46% Dykeman)

% Heifers DOA (≤ 24 hrs.)

(Female births DOAdivided by all births)

≤5%(5% Dykeman)

Annualized Heifer Cull Rate

(Heifers died/culleddivided by avg. # heifers)

≤3%**distorted during

Expansion 24 hrs. 3 mos. ____

4 mos. fresh ____(2% Dykeman)

Age at First Calving (Months)

(Age and standarddeviation)

23 ± 2.5 mos. SD (&82 – 85% Mature Wt.)

(23 ± 2.1 Dykeman)

Optimize Pre-Weaning Gains

Double birth weight In 56 days

≥90% achieving1.85x (avg.)

14%*(Dykeman)

*Currently battlingE Coli strain

Dykeman Case Farm

REPLACEMENT PROGRAM, Importance to the Dairy

Jason Karszes

Farm Management Specialist

PRO-DAIRY

Cornell University

Cathy Wickswat

Farm Management/Dairy

Extension Educator

Cornell Cooperative Extension Rensselaer County

Goal of The Replacement Program

The primary goal of all heifer programs is to raise the highest quality heifer who will maximize profits once she enters the lactating herd. A quality heifer is one carrying no limitations into the dairy herd that would hinder her ability to produce under the farm’s management system. Profits are maximized by obtaining the quality heifer at the lowest possible cost.

Impact of The Replacement Enterprise

The bottom line of a dairy is impacted by:

• Costs– Direct – In-direct

• Number of animals being raised

• Quality of the animals

Relationship with the Dairy

• Total cost to raise heifer

• Number of heifers being raised– Age of first calving

• Investment in replacement enterprise

• Quality of heifer enterprise

• Number of animals needed by dairy– Cull rate

What is the Impact?

• How does the replacement enterprise impact the dairy business performance?

• Setting the base– Treat heifer enterprise as a separate business– Set budget for dairy to buy heifers– Current performance– Map changes in performance

Base Scenario

• 300 cow dairy• Stable herd size• 36% cull rate, last 5

years• Budgeted expense per

heifer = $2,200• Sell calves for $600

• Cost/day, raising costs (cash), per heifer = $1.70

• Age of first calving = 27 months

• Capital invest./ heifer = $700

• % heifers cull rate per year = 7%

Replacement Enterprise - Base

• Number of heifers needed to maintain herd size = 264• Total cost per day per heifer completing system =

$2.28(cash cost + depreciation + non-performance expense)• Total cost of animal = $1,874(no beginning value or interest on

investment)

• Net enterprise income = -$17,359• Total investment in enterprise = $590,100• % return on total investment = -2.94%• Overall dairy business % return = 6.8%

Enterprise Impact

Changes that Can Be Made

• Lower raising costs

• Decrease calving age

• Decrease number needed – dairy cull rate

• Decrease replacement cull rate

• Improve quality of animal

• Do them all

Summary Table – Replacement Only

Net Enterprise Total Return onNumber

Income Investment Investment Raised

Base -$17,359 $590,100 -2.94% 264

Cost -$7,730 $578,068 -1.34% 264

Age $2,198 $476,397 0.46% 225

Dairy Cull% -$14,466 $491,750 -2.94% 220

Heifer Cull% -$6,051 $550,335 -1.10% 254

Premium Paid -$14,743 $600,328 -2.46% 264

Combined $22,958 $365,799 6.28% 179

Comb w int. inv. $18,065 $429,819 4.20% 179

Comb sell excess $28,032 $499,767 5.61% 233

Enterprise Impact Calculator

Summary Table – Overall Business

Net Farm Total Return on Number

Income Investment Investment Raised

Base $180,930 $2,690,100 6.80% 264

Cost $190,558 $2,678,068 7.19% 264

Age $200,487 $2,576,397 7.86% 225

Dairy Cull% $204,823 $2,591,750 7.98% 220

Heifer Cull% $192,238 $2,650,335 7.33% 254

Premium Paid $183,546 $2,700,328 6.87% 264

Combined $242,278 $2,465,799 9.91% 179

Comb w int. inv. $237,354 $2,529,819 9.46% 179

Comb sell excess $249,321 $2,529,819 9.59% 233

Enterprise Impact Calculator

What is The Cost?

• They are free?• Just purchased feed?• Just hired labor?• The sum of:

– All inputs, cash and non-cash

– Fixed costs associated with capital investments

– Opportunity cost of capital

– Charges for animals not completing replacement program.

Reported Costs to Raise Dairy Replacements

• Michigan 1973 $6171980 $1,0851986 $1,177

• Wisconsin 1982 $1,5491987 $1,3261998 $1,099

2000 $1,360

• Washington 1992 $1,242

• Pennsylvania1998 $1,0881985 $925 Low

$1,271 Medium$1,597 High

• Idaho 1992 $1,159

• New York 1990 $1,2651993 $1,1502003 $1,4292007-8 $1,682

What is The Cost?

• Hard to know what the “Average” is.

• Few farms treat the replacement enterprise as a separate business and know their actual costs.

• Can use various tools to estimate what costs may be for different areas of the system.

The Big Two

• Feed– Is enough grown?– Proper quality?– How much purchased?– How much does it cost?– Where is the manure going?

The Big Two

• Labor– Is it doing a good job?– How much is it costing?– Does it have the right tools?– How efficient/inefficient is the set-up?

• Size of barns• Hand labor• Location/design of facilities

– “Free” barns may cost too much!

The Big Two

• Feed and Labor– 60%-70% of the total costs to raise heifers– Are they being used efficiently?– Is a quality heifer being produced?

Number of Heifers

• How many total heifers are being raised?• How many are needed to maintain herd size?• How many are needed to offset heifer cull rate?• Investment level

– How much barn space?– How much equipment?– Dollar value of heifers– Net Income is divided by investment to determine

profitability

Number of Heifers

• Two - 200 cow dairies

• One has 130 total heifers in system?

• One has 180 total heifers in system?

• Who has less barns, equipment, bunks, etc?

Age of First Calving

• Number of heifers needed

• Production life

• Investment level

Number of Heifers NeededNumber of Heifers Maintained, All Ages, for Various Calving Ages and Replacement Rates

Average Herd Size, Milking and Dry Animals 100Non-Completion Rate*, Dairy Replacements 8.00%

Cow Replacement Rate, Percentage

Calving Age 20 23 26 29 33 36 39 42 45Months

18 31 36 41 45 52 56 61 66 70

20 35 40 45 50 57 63 68 73 78

22 38 44 50 55 63 69 75 80 86

24 42 48 54 61 69 75 81 88 94

26 45 52 59 66 75 81 88 95 102

28 49 56 63 71 80 88 95 102 110

30 52 60 68 76 86 94 102 110 117

32 56 64 72 81 92 100 109 117 125

* Non completion rate represents the percent of heifers that start the replacement system that don't enter the dairy herd.

Prepared by: Jason Karszes, Senior Extension Associate, PRO-DAIRY, Cornell University

Quality of the Replacement

• Growth vs. milk• Calving problems

– Too heavy (fat)– Too light (frame)

• General condition of the animal– Mastitis– Feet and legs– Injury

• Prior treatment(s)

Summary

• Quality heifers should be the first focus.

• Need to look at all costs to raise heifers.

• Impact on the dairy business performance is more than the cost to raise a heifer.

• Number of heifers being raised, number of animals needed by the dairy to maintain herd size, and quality of heifer play significant role.

Costs to Raise Dairy Replacements

• 12 Farms completed in time for meetings• 5 additional farms being summarized• Final report will be available on the website

with other materials from this program• Snapshot of how much spent to raise heifers

last 3 months of 2007• Used to estimate total spent in raising the

replacement over the 23 months.

TOTAL COSTS TO RAISE HEIFERS 12 New York Dairy Farms, December 2007

Total Cost per Animal Completing Average Per Day Per Pound Percent Feed Total $883 $1.28 $0.73 53% Grown Feed $560 $0.81 $0.46 Purchased Feed $326 $0.48 $0.27 Labor $215 $0.31 $0.18 13% Bedding $67 $0.10 $0.06 4% Health $37 $0.05 $0.03 2% Breeding $48 $0.07 $0.04 3% Trucking $3 $0.00 $0.00 0% Insurance $8 $0.01 $0.01 0% Machinery Operation $35 $0.05 $0.03 2% Machinery Ownership $21 $0.03 $0.02 1% Building Operation $18 $0.03 $0.01 1% Building Ownership $106 $0.15 $0.09 6% Manure Storage Operation $0 $0.00 $0.00 0% Manure Storage Ownership $4 $0.01 $0.00 0% Manure Spreading $55 $0.08 $0.05 3% Custom Boarding $7 $0.01 $0.01 0% Professional Services and Fees $4 $0.01 $0.00 0% Non-Performance Expenses $36 $0.05 $0.03 2% Interest on Daily Investment $136 $0.20 $0.11 8% Total $1,682 $2.43 $1.18

Number of Heifers 943 Age, Months 22.8 22 24 Calving Weight, Pounds 1,314 1,272 1,375 Average Daily Gain 1.77 1.64 1.88 All Heifers per Labor Hour 46.7 35.4 65.13 Pre-Weaned Heifers per Labor Hour 12.2 6.65 14.86 Post Weaned Heifers per Labor Hour 71.1 51.2 90.5 Total Investment in Animal $1,832 $1,698 $2,072 % Non-Completion Rate 7.37 4.9 9.8 Cost per Worker Equivalent $36,185 $32,572 $39,789

Average Total Heifer Raising Costs

12 New York Dairy Farms, December 2007

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

4.50

5.00

5.50

1 5 9 13 17 21 25 29 33 37 41 45 49 53 57 61 65 69 73 77 81 85 89 93

Age in Weeks

Do

llar

s

Per DayPer Pound

Average Heifer Feed Costs

12 New York Dairy Farms, December 2007

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

1 5 9 13 17 21 25 29 33 37 41 45 49 53 57 61 65 69 73 77 81 85 89 93

Weeks of Age

Do

llar

s

Per DayPer Pound

Breakdown of Costs of Raising Heifers by Stage of Growth 12 New York Dairy Farms, December 2007

Per Pound of Gain Stage of Growth Birth to 200 Lbs 201-700 lbs 701-850 lbs 851-Calving Feed $1.362 $0.538 $0.666 $0.790 Labor 0.727 0.112 0.123 0.123 All Other Costs 0.536 0.383 0.539 0.551 Total $2.625 $1.033 $1.328 $1.464 By Total Investment Stage of Growth Birth to 200 Lbs 201-700 lbs 701-850 lbs 851-Calving Feed $149.8 $269.0 $99.8 $369.8 Labor 80.0 56.2 18.4 57.6 All Other Costs 59.0 191.6 80.9 258.7 Total $288.7 $516.7 $199.2 $686.1 % of Total Cost 17% 31% 12% 41% % of Total Growth 8% 38% 12% 35%

Questions

Koval Brothers Dairy, Stillwater, NY

Adam Chris

300 Cows235 Heifers

Baby Calves Housed in Well-bedded Individual Pensin Adapted Older Cow Barn (on right).

Im winter, Pre-Breeding Heifers are in separatelean-to section (at left).

Baby CalvesPre-Breeding Heifers

High Quality Colostrum -- huge priority! - sound dry program - fresh cows milked ASAP - cleanliness paramount - colostrometer tested, must meet standard - fresh only, discard before microbial growth

Newborn Calf “Jug”

High Quality Milk Replacer - solids quantity adjusted for weather - bucket/bottle cleaning protocols in place to keep them dry and functionally “sterile”

Clean Water, High Quality Grain

“Walk-through” observation protocol

Wean at 7 weeks

Baby Calf Pen

Overly ComfortableCat

Electronic Scale with Double Gate Cage for Weighing Calves

Hutches are backup to individual calf pen overflow.

“Pre-Transition” areaof calf barn during times of overflow

Transition Barn Built in 2005 Approx. Day 50 7 or 8 months (600 day on 1/8/08!)

End View – 6 pens ofincreasingly larger calves

Clean & Comfortable – Sand Bedding in Summer

All Six Pens get 75% Haylage/25% Corn SilageMix plus 3.5 lbs. grain.

Some good quality hay to the smallest calves in pens 1 & 2.

Simple, effective curtain system.

“Winter Quarters”Pre-Breeding Group

Summer on Pasture; Supplemented as Needed

Approximately 8 - 10½ months

75% Haylage/25% Corn Silage Mix plus 2 lbs. grain.

Open to South, Cold Housing, Protected from Wind/Draft Most of the Time

“Airy”, Clean Bedded Packfor Breeding Heifer Group

Outdoor Headlocks for Breeding Age Heifers from Laneway at Left and for Bred Heifers from Laneway on Right. Both Groups Prefer to be out “Ramming Around”.

75% Haylage/25% Corn Silage plus 1 Lb. Grain

Short-bred Heifers on Pasture in Season

“Close-up” Heifers on Bedded Pack Behind Bred Heifers…

…Across from Cow Barn, Easy to Observe

Bedded Pack “Around the Corner”

Sun’s out, plenty of feed, room to ram, clean and dry place to lie…

Life is Good!

Questions

KovalBreakdown of Costs of Raising Heifers by Stage of Growth

Koval

Per Pound of Gain Stage of GrowthBirth to 201 to 701 to 851 to200 Lbs 700 Lbs 850 Lbs Calving

Feed $1.003 $0.472 $0.791 $0.790Labor $1.045 $0.169 $0.177 $0.091All Other Costs $0.633 $0.477 $0.804 $0.413

Total $2.681 $1.118 $1.773 $1.295

By Total Investment Stage of GrowthBirth to 201 to 701 to 851 to200 Lbs 700 Lbs 850 Lbs Calving

Feed $110.3 $236.2 $118.7 $355.6Labor $115.0 $84.3 $26.6 $40.9All Other Costs $69.6 $238.3 $120.6 $186.0

Total $294.9 $558.8 $265.9 $582.5

% of Total Costs 15.8% 30.0% 14.3% 31.2%

% of Total Growth 8% 38% 12% 35%

Koval

Age Leaving Replacement Program 24.0 Months

Weight Leaving Replacement Program 1317 Lbs.

Average Daily Rate of Gain 1.69 Lbs.

All Heifers per Labor Hour, On Farm Only 33.10

Pre-Weaned Heifers per Labor Hour 6.22

Post Weaned Heifers per Labor Hour 54.6

Total Investment in Animal $1,907.00

% Dairy Replacement Cull Rate 5.02%

% Non-Completion Rate, Based on Animals Entering System 9.55%

KovalAverage Cost Per Animal

Per day Per Pound Completing Programper Animal of Gain 103.9 wks Percent

Feed $1.150 $0.681 $835.85 47.6%

Labor $0.381 $0.226 $276.77 15.8%

Bedding $0.088 $0.052 $63.99 3.6%

Health $0.036 $0.021 $26.33 1.5%

Breeding $0.094 $0.056 $68.24 3.9%

Trucking $0.005 $0.003 $3.75 0.2%

Insurance $0.008 $0.004 $5.50 0.3%

Machinery Operation $0.093 $0.055 $67.67 3.9%

Machinery Ownership $0.029 $0.017 $21.28 1.2%

Building Operation $0.038 $0.022 $27.40 1.6%

Building Ownership $0.168 $0.100 $122.15 7.0%

Manure Storage Operation $0.000 $0.000 $0.00 0.0%

Manure Storage Ownership $0.000 $0.000 $0.00 0.0%

Manure Spreading $0.053 $0.032 $38.77 2.2%

Custom Boarding $0.000 $0.000 $0.00 0.0%

Professional Services & Fees $0.000 $0.000 $0.00 0.0%

Non-Performance Expense $0.070 $0.041 $50.91 2.9%

Interest on Daily Investment $0.204 $0.121 $148.41 8.4%

Total $2.417 $1.432 $1,757.00 100.0%

Health Program Koval 07

Per Animal per Per Pound of Per Per Animal per Per Pound of Per Day Gain Animal Day Gain Animal

Group 1 Group 7 Preventative $0.23 $0.13 $12.50 Preventative $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Treatment $0.07 $0.04 $3.78 Treatment $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Veterinary $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Veterinary $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Total $0.30 $0.16 $16.28 Total $0.00 $0.00 $0.00




Group 5 Group 11 Preventative $0.01 $0.01 $2.27 Preventative $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Treatment $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Treatment $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Veterinary $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Veterinary $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Total $0.01 $0.01 $2.27 Total $0.00 $0.00 $0.00


SummaryAll Groups Per Animal per Per Pound of Per

Day Gain Animal

Preventative $0.03 $0.02 $18.70 Treatment $0.01 $0.01 $7.63 Veterinary $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Total $0.04 $0.02 $26.33

Koval Brothers Dairy Total Heifer Raising Costs

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

1 5 9 13 17 21 25 29 33 37 41 45 49 53 57 61 65 69 73 77 81 85 89 93 97 101

104

Age in Weeks

Do

llar

s

Per Day

Per Pound

Koval Brothers DairyHeifer Feed Costs, Off Pasture

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

1 5 9 13 17 21 25 29 33 37 41 45 49 53 57 61 65 69 73 77 81 85 89 93 97 101

Weeks of Age

Do

llar

s

Per Day

Per Pound

Questions

Calf Nutrition and Management: Colostrum, Nutrition and Long

Term Performance – It’s all about getting more milk, believe it or

not!

Mike Van Amburgh, Jenny Mills, Douglas Waterman, Bill Stone

Overview

Introduction

Colostrum management

Nutrient status and immune function

Early neonatal events and milk yield

Colostrum

Energy and protein intake

Mammary development

Summary

Passive Transfer Target for Newborn Calf Health

• Want to target 10 mg/ml IgG in calf serum following colostrum ingestion

• Calves with levels less than 10 mg/ml have

“Failure of Passive Transfer” (FPT)

Failure of Passive Transfer Reduces Long Term Performance

•Calves with FPT:

- Delayed time to first calving (Can Vet J., 1986, 50:314)

– Decreased average daily gain to 180 days

(J. Dairy Sci., 1988, 71:1283)

– Decreased milk and fat production at first lactation (J. Dairy Sci., 1989, 72:552)

– for each unit of serum IgG > 12 mg/ml there was a 18 lb increase in ME milk

Calf Program Goals:

1. Double birth weight by 56 days

90 lb birth weight 180 lb @56 days

2. Calf mortality less than 5%

3. Calf morbidity (treatments) less than 10%

Why do this?•Achieve breeding weight at an earlier age•Potentially reduce AFC/increase BW@calving•Increase potential for Internal Herd Growth•Potentially increase milk yield•Potentially increase herd life

Nutrient Requirements and Compensatory Growth

• Many producers believe that calves can “compensate” from early life nutrient restrictions

• Most neonates, including pre-weaned calves do not have compensatory gain mechanisms– Effects of early life nutrient restriction are

difficult to overcome (immune system and normal growth)

Effect of Malnutrition (50% normal intake for three weeks) and Refeeding (normal intake)

During Different Stages of Life on Bodyweight

(Burrin, et al. Cornell Nutrition Conference Proceedings, 2001)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Bod

y w

eigh

t, %

con

trol

Neonatal Early Weaning Adult

Restriction After Feeding

-51%

-21%

-47%

-15% -30%

0%

Nutrient Requirements

• In the last 10 years we have made remarkable progress in understanding the nutrient requirements of calves and heifers (body composition data on over 400 calves and heifers from Cornell, Univ. of Illinois and Virginia Tech)

• Further we have learned how to manipulate the composition of gain through diet design

Environmental and Stress Effects onMaintenance Requirements

The thermoneutral zone for young (< 21 days of age)lightweight calves is 59 to 82°F

In New York, we spend at least 160 days/year belowthe lower critical temperature.

For calves > 21 days of age the lower critical temperature is 42 °F.

Temperature, °F

68 50 32 15 5 -5 -20

Bodyweight, lb

60 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.4

80 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.7

100 1.0 1.1 1.3 1.6 1.7 1.8 2.0

120 1.1 1.3 1.5 1.7 1.9 2.0 2.3

Amount of Milk Replacer/Milk Dry Matter Required to Meet Maintenance Requirements

Temperature

68 50 32 15 5 -5 -20

Bodyweight, lb

60 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8

80 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.7 1.9 2.0 2.2

100 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2 2.3 2.5

120 1.6 1.8 2.1 2.2 2.5 2.6 2.8

Amount of Milk Replacer/Milk Dry Matter Required to Meet Maintenance Requirements and Gain One Pound per Day

Environmental and Stress Effects on Maintenance Requirements

Calves that are transported, experience significant alterations in temperature, social environment or dietary change experience stress.

This is manifested by increased heat production and appears to last up to 14 days after the event

Equal to 0.25 lb DM/d in extra heat production

Updated Nutrient Requirements of a 100 lb Calf Under Thermoneutral Conditions

Rate of gain, lb/d

MEa, mcal/d

DMI,

lb/d

ADP,

g/d

CP, g/d CP, % DM

0.44 2.35 1.12 87 94 18.0

0.88 2.89 1.40 140 150 23.4

1.32 3.48 1.67 193 207 26.6

1.76 4.13 1.98 235 253 27.5

2.20 4.80 2.39 286 307 28.7

Van Amburgh and Drackley, 2005

Effects of Neonatal Nutrition on Productivity and Mammary

Development

• Data are emerging that suggests early life nutrient intake has long term impacts on productivity

• Data are not conclusive• Mechanism is not completely understood• Might be certain cells in the mammary gland

or other tissues, immune system stimulation and maturation – or all of the above!

Summary of Published Data

Study Response

Bar-Peled et al., 1998 + 998 lb

Foldager and Krohn, 1994 3,092 lb

Foldager et al., 1997 1,143 lbMean response + 1,744 lb

These responses were achieved by increasing pre-weaning milk intake by at least 75% over conventional intake

Preliminary Data - Studies in ProgressStudy Response

Miner Institute, Chazy, NYand Zenoh, Japan +1,543 lb(JDS Abst. 2005) @ 200 DIM

Again, responses were achieved by increasing milk replacer intake by at least 75% over conventional intakes

First lactation milk yields (Univ of Illinois)

Variable Control Enhanced

Age at calving (mo)Year 1 25.4 26.5Year 2 24.0 24.4

Calving BW (kg) Year 1 1276 1338Year 2 1278 1217

ME milk* (kg) Year 1 20,341 23,270 (2929) Year 2 19,351 20,104 (753)

Pollard et al., JDS abstr. 2007* Treatment x year, P = 0.15. Year P < 0.05 for all.

Michigan State Study

• Moderate feeding vs Intensified program• Followed heifers up to 150 DIM• Intensive fed heifers calved ~ 22 days earlier

– Produced 1,100 lb more milk in first lactation (Based on projected ME 305 milk) not significant

• Concluded intensified feeding with earlier calving and milk difference was economically advantageous

JDS 2006 Abstr 89:438

Effects of feeding ad-lib milk vs ad-lib milk replacer with or without additional protein

from 150 to 300 days of age

• Milk replacer (23% CP: 12%Fat – containing soy protein) vs whole milk to weaning

• From 150 to 300 days of age half of each group provided 2% additional protein (fish meal)

• Basal diet was low in protein (< 14%)

• Calves fed whole milk and supplemented with 2% added protein produced ~ 2,500 to 3,000 lb more milk in first lactation (P < 0.007) (I had to interpret the graph… they didn’t provide any means so those are my estimates)

JDS 2006 Abstr. 84:32 (M78)

Age at first Calving

20.0

22.0

24.0

26.0

28.0

30.0

A B C D E AllHerd

Ag

e i

n M

on

ths

Conventional Program Cows Match Program

Field Data from Land O’Lakes

23 herds summarized – five with lactation data

Field Data from Land O’Lakes

All Herds

Control Cows Match

40

50

60

70

80

90

DIM

0 100 200 300

Lactation Curves from Five Herds

AFC: 26.8 to 24.3 = 2.5 Month

The Cornell T&R Herd

• We started feeding a “Intensified” milk replacer in 1998.

• We have over 1000 weaning weights from this data

• We have ~ 725 finished first lactations from this data

• We wondered if any calf measurement had any relationship to first lactation milk yield

• We analyzed the lactation data with the Test Day Model (TDM) – allows us to control for year, season, genetics and management variation over the period of measurements

• Generated TDM residuals for lactation and then regressed the lactation data on all calf variables measurable

The Cornell T&R Herd

Traits Evaluated

• Birth weight• Weaning weight• Average daily gain until weaning• Hip height at birth• Hip height at weaning• Gain in hip height• Wither height at birth• Wither height at weaning• Gain in hip height

What We Learned is Consistent with the Previous Data

• Differences between years are highly significant

• Average daily gain to weaning is highly significant

• The top 2% of the gainers out produced the bottom 2% of the gainers by 1,477 pounds of milk in their 1st lactation as evaluated in the Test Day Model.

Cornell Herd - Effect of Pre-Weaning Daily Gain on Milk Yield

• The range in growth rate in the data set was 0.52 to 2.67 lb per day to weaning

• For every 1 lb of gain above 0.5 lb per day, milk yield increased by 900 lb per lactation

Therefore, an ADG of 2 lb/d versus 0.5 lb/d prior to weaning is worth 1,350 lb of milk in first lactation


• The standard deviation in milk yield for first lactation is approximately 3000 lb

• In this evaluation 20% of the variation in first lactation milk yield was explained by pre-weaning growth rate up to 42 - 49 days of age

Effects of Pre-Weaning Gain and other effects on Milk Yield

• Year effects were worth 2,118 lb of milk in the first lactation

• We’re not sure what that means relative to pre-weaning growth rate

• Possibly due to colostrum status (variation in dry cow vaccinations/heifer exposure)

• Could also be nutrient intake relative to version of milk replacer fed, housing, (or fetal programming, previous generation effect (imprinting or epigenetics))

• Month was not significant

• Hip height and hip height change also carried some positive effects on milk yield

- probably correlated with the ADG effect


University of Illinois Data

• Similar responses to Cornell herd• They had conventional versus “Intensified”

milk replacer fed calves• Calves fed conventional diets (1 lb DM milk

replacer per day) had a negative regression slope for preweaning ADG and first lactation milk yield whereas Intensified calves had a positive slope

• Suggests the milk effect is in the first 3 to 5 wks of life

0

2

4

6

8

10

100 150 200 250 300 350

Epithelial Cell Proliferation

*

0

2

4

6

8

10

Slaughter Weight, lb

TRT: P = 0.08BW: P < 0.01TRT*BW: P = 0.16

Brd

U la

bele

d ep

ithel

ial

cells

, %

*Denotes treatment effect within slaughter weight. (P < 0.05)

E

R

440330220 550 660 770

Conclusions• Nutrient intake prior to weaning has a positive

influence on both milk yield and specific aspects of mammary development– The most likely mammary candidate – stem cells in the

neonatal mammary gland. Less than 5% of the cells present – responsible for up to 50% of the proliferation in the early gland. Capuco, 2006

BOTTOME LINE: THERE IS MILK IN THIS FIRST 3 TO 5 WEEKS OF EARLY LIFE NUTRIENT INTAKE

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

10 30 50 70 90

Dry Matter Intake

Fee

d c

on

vers

ion

(lb

.gai

n/lb

.fee

d)

(g/kg0.75)

Efficiency of feed conversion with traditional calf feeding practices

(Birth to 6 weeks)

Calf

(.37)

Piglet

(.83)

Adapted from Davis and Drackley, 1998

Lamb

(.71)

Calves can be here – functionally Calves can be here – functionally and economicallyand economically

Calves can do this!Hammon et al. 2002

Pre-Weaning Feed Efficiency and Economics

Data from Mills (2005):

Calves were fed milk replacer to maintain growth rates close to 2.2 lb per day – no dry feed

Ambient temperatures were less than 20°F, barn temperature less than 40°F

Feed efficiency was 0.78 lb gain per lb feed intake.

Milk replacer cost was ~$0.90 per lb, thus the cost per lb of gain was $1.15

• Feed efficiency is a function of colostrum status, health status, hygiene and energy intake above maintenance

• Feed efficiency on most farms: 0.29 – 0.35 lb of gain per pound of feed.

• Example: milk replacer @ $0.80 per lb

• Feed efficiency of 0.30 lb gain per lb feed

• Cost per lb of gain: $2.67

Pre-Weaning Feed Efficiency and Economics

Summary

• Early life events have long term effects on calves

• Decisions on nutrient status and requirements need to be more dynamic

• We need to create tools that allow us to make integrated management decisions on a systems basis and not day to day– Example is economics of a feeding system

Feeding Program

• 1.5% BW DM intake day 2 to day 7• 2% BW DM intake day 8 to day 35 or 42• Offer starter from day 8 and clean fresh

water• On day 43, reduce milk or milk replacer by

50% and feed once per day for 7 days• On day 51, remove all liquid feed• Calf should be consuming ~1.5 lb starter

per day over the week period

Feeding Program• Calves tend to prefer textured starters – pellets with

corn/oats on the outside with a little molasses• For best growth results – starter should be 21 to

23% CP on a DM basis• NO dust, fines, mold• Sugar content – less than 8% - calf has a hard time

buffering the rumen – watch molasses applications• Major criteria for starter – something they will readily

consume• Minimize hay and forage intake prior to 8 wks of age

Blood IgG >10mg/ml orBlood serum protein>5.5g/dl

(at 48 hours of life)≥85% achieving(95% is achievable)(59%* Koval)

*spurred improvementsin colostrum mgmt.

Passive ImmunityAchievement

Koval Bros. Case Farm


≥90% achieving1.90 x

33% achieve

(using group avg.)

93 lbs. 173 lbs.1.86 x (Koval)




33% achieve

(using group avg.)




33% achieve

(using group avg.)



Questions

Meeting Growth and Body Weight Targets for Post-Weaning Heifers

Mike Van Amburgh

Department of Animal Science

Cornell University

What’s the Appropriate Endpoint for Growth Targets?

• Have used ~ 1,250 lb post partum as a “Rule of Thumb”

• Should be a function of the herd mature body weight:

Is a herd or region specific variable due to breeding and management decisions

• “Unofficial” measured range in NY state for Holsteins: 1,375 to 1,800 lb

INC

RE

AS

E IN

1S

T L

AC

TA

TIO

N M

ILK

(lb

s)

1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 BODY WEIGHT AT FIRST CALVING (lbs)

0

500

1000

1500

2000

900

Relationship Between Post Calving Body Weight and Improvement in First Lactation Milk YieldDHIA data base ~1975 - 1985

Keown and Everett, 1986

Post Weaning Heifer Management and Nutrition

Need to be systematic – goals should reflect performance and management

Age at first calving is a conscious managementdecision

– should be made in early life- should be based on optimum performance under herd management conditions- younger is more profitable on a lifetime basis

~ Growth rate during pre-pubertal period should reflect AFC goals – nutrient requirements andsupply should reflect those values

New Approach - Target Growth

Nutrient Requirements for Dairy Cattle (2001 NRC)publication updated growth model – new concept:

Target growth rates – purpose was to integratemanagement factors such as age at first calving(age at pregnancy), post-calving BW and mature weight with nutrient requirements and supply

Use mature body size of cows in a particular herd – scale nutrient requirements

Assumption – requirements are not the same for all cows at a constant weight

Target Growth Rates – Integrates Managementand Biology

Approach determined by: Mature body weight (3rd and greater parity cattle – not cull cows)

Concept of physiologic maturity - puberty occurs at a given percentage of mature size (45% to 50%)

Pregnancy should occur by 55% maturebody weight

Herd goals for age at first calving

Target Growth Rates – Integrates Management and Biology – Use of Mature Size

•Based on the available data percent mature size where first lactation milk yield is optimized: 82 to 85%

•Alters the “one size fits all” recommendation

Growth & Puberty Data

Variable H L SE

n

Preweaning ADG, g

36

960a

36

640b 15

Postweaning ADG, g 929a 657b 7

Number reaching puberty

9 7 -

Age at puberty 8.25a 11.7b 0.26

BW at puberty, kg 274 289 7.4

a,bMeans with uncommon letters differ (p < 0.05)

Meyer et al., 2004

Milk Yield Residuals Compared to Post Calving Body Weight as a Percent Mature Size

Van Amburgh et al., 1998

What if Mature Size is Not Known? (the pot belly trailer shows up with a couple loads and no data

Optimum Body Size of Holsteins - from Pat Hoffman, 1996

Suggested a Minimum and Maximum Rangebased on literature values

First calving 7d post-partum weight

Mature weight (calc.)

Minimum: 1,182 lb 1,442 lb 1,500 lb

Maximum: 1,280 lb 1,561 lb

Target weights Mature weight, lb 900 1,300 1,760 %

mature wt.

Target weight, lb

pregnancy 55% 495 715 968 1st post calf 85% 765 1,105 1,496 2nd post calf 92% 828 1,196 1,619 3rd post calf 96% 864 1,248 1,690

Input AFC – sets breeding age for you and breeding weight is a function of the mature size. Requirements are then calculated to meet the targets.

Cornell Dairy Herd Mature size ~ 1,474 ± 120 lbTarget AFC – 22 monthsTarget post-calving BW (82% of mature weight ~ 1,209 lb)

Therefore the target pregnant weight is 55% of the mature size (811 lb) – breeding is initiated at 750 lb to achieve the target - independent of age

Applying targets to the Cornell herd

Control Sunflower oil

EnerGII CaCLA Std. Dev.

n 16 16 17 16

Pre-pubertal ADG, lb 1.90 1.92 1.96 1.87 0.15

AFC, mo 21.8 21.6 22.3 22.3 1.5

BW at calving, lb 1,227 1,199 1,241 1,267 76

Days in milk 299 294 294 290 10

Milk yield, 3.5% FCM, lb 25,057 24,599 25,538 25,344 2,450

Pre-pubertal growth rate, AFC, BW at calving, days in milk and 3.5% FCM yield of Holstein heifers fed a control diet or diet containing a FA supplement

Age at Calving < 21 22-23 >23 Std. Dev.

P

n 19 27 19

Pre-pubertal ADG, lb 2.16 2.03 1.96 0.09 0.05

AFC, mo 20.2 21.8 24.2 0.6 0.01

BW at calving, lb 1,179 1,219 1,313 92 0.01

Days in milk 298 299 285 14.0 0.7

Milk yield, 3.5% FCM, lb 24,817 25,484 24,976 2,405 0.6

Post-hoc analysis of the management and production characteristics of Holstein heifers ranked by age at first calving, independent of dietary treatment

Smith and Van Amburgh, 2003

What is an Acceptable Standard Deviation for AFC

Part of the variation is due to management:

Heat Detection Rate and Conception Rate

Good heat detection rates are > 70% but range from 60 to 80%

Ranges in conception rate for heifers 50 to 74%

Therefore ranges in pregnancy rate would be 30 to 58%

If you started breeding 100 heifers at 14 months:

• At the lower end of HDR and CR, the AFC would be 26.1 ± 2.6 mo

• At the higher end of HDR and CR the AFC would be 24.3 ± 1.7 mo

What is an Acceptable Standard Deviation for AFC - Management

Koval Bros. Case Farm

55% mature weight @ breeding82 - 85% mature weight

@ 1st calving

≥90% achieving*Breeding: Avg. 56% MW

(67% Achieving) *Calving: Avg. 79% MW

(67% Achieving)(Koval)


55% mature weight @ breeding82 - 85% mature weight

@ 1st calving

≥90% achieving*Breeding: Avg. 56% MW

(67% Achieving) *Calving: Avg. 79% MW

(67% Achieving)(Koval)


1st Calf “Treated” as Calf/Heifer* ≤ 30% ?24 hrs. 3 mos. ____ 4 mos. fresh ____

DOAs in first calf heifers ≤ 9% 7.5%Male DOAs 7% Female DOAs 8%

1st Calf avg. peak ≥ 80% of Mature 77%or total lactation ≥ 80% of Mature 85%

1st Calf Culls ≤ 60 Days in Milk ≤ 5% 3%

1st Calf ME’s ≥ Mature > (+601)

1st Calf “Treated” in Lactation* ≤ 15% ?

≥ 85% retention (any herd) to 2nd lactation 88%

Reduce #1 reason for 1st lactation culls(continuous improvement) Mastitis

What Makes a “Quality Heifer” --Maintaining Management Momentum

(Koval)

Age in Months

Lb

s. B

od

ywei

gh

t

Heifer Growth Lines with Breeding, Post-Freshening & Mature Weight Targets

23Month

Freshening

23Month

Freshening0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

1200

1300

1400

1500

1600

1700

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 230

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

1200

1300

1400

1500

1600

1700

14 MonthBreeding

TargetWeight

1045 (1900)990 (1800)935 (1700)880 (1600)825 (1500)770 (1400)715 (1300)660 (1200)605 (1100)550 (1000)495 (900)

Post-FreshWeight

MatureWeight

1615 -------- 1900

1530 -------- 1800

1445 -------- 1700

1360 -------- 1600

1275 -------- 1500

1190 -------- 1400

1105 -------- 1300

1020 -------- 1200

935 -------- 1100

850 -------- 1000

765 -------- 900


On the next slide we are blowing up the portion of the graph lines for the Case Farm’s Breeding Age month (14) and Calving (23). All size lines are removed except for their “average” frame size heifer and “large” frame size heifer. (based on Dam’s known size)

050

100150200250300350400450500550600650700750800850900950

100010501100115012001250130013501400145015001550160016501700

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

1550

1500

1450

1400

1350

1300

1600

1650

1000

1050

950

900

850

050

100150200250300350400450500550600650700750800850900950

100010501100115012001250130013501400145015001550160016501700

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

800

Lines for Heifers from Large Framed DamsExpected Mature Weight 1800 Lbs

(match up with individual heifers)

KOVAL

23 MonthsFresh

14 Months

Breeding

(1236)

Lines for Heifers from Medium Framed DamsExpected Mature Weight 1450 Lbs

(match up with individual heifers)

Questions

Raising Fiscally Responsible Replacements! Winter Dairy Management ‘08 January 21 – Richfield...

Documents

Transcript of Raising Fiscally Responsible Replacements! Winter Dairy Management ‘08 January 21 – Richfield...