1992 Annual Report for LNC92-053
Rotational Grazing Systems for Wisconsin and Minnesota Dairy Farmers: An Evaluation of Animal and Forage Performance and Whole-Farm Socio-Economic Analyses
Summary
Objectives/Methods:
Experiment Station Component:
1) Compare the productivity of two Intensive Rotational Grazing (IRG) systems with a
conventional stored forage confinement system.
2) Monitor grazing patterns of cows and identify relationships between forage selection by
animal and ruminant environment.
On-farm Component:
3) Conduct a comparative economic analysis of costs and returns for IRG and conventional
systems on six of the 12 cooperating farms.
4) Observe and record animal breeding data and whole-farm labor, cash flow, lifestyle and other
implications of combining seasonal milking with IRG on three of the 12 cooperating farms.
5) Examine how changes of grain feeding affect milk yield and composition throughout the
grazing season on two of the 12 farms.
6) Observe and record pasture management techniques (including establishment strategies,
fertilization, seeding rates, plant species, animal movement strategies) on all 12 farms.
Farmer-Researcher Relationship Component:
7) Practice and evaluate "balanced role reversal" model of farmer-researcher interaction and
collaboration.
Results:
Three years of experiment station research comparing the milk production of pastured cows and
cows managed in a conventional "confinement" set-up indicate that there is no significant
difference in per-cow milk volume produced in the two systems. In fact, pastured cows, despite
forage quality setbacks due to bad weather in two of those years, produced more milk per hectare
than confined cows fed alfalfa silage. A fourth year of experiment station research, a fiber
kinetics study, showed cows on pasture had the same level of milk production and milk
components as cows fed alfalfa silage, but they consumed less grain, forage and total dry matter.
That resulted in lower rates of forage and liquid passage, lower total digested weight and lower
rumen volume.
Farmers pasturing their dairy cows found that their feed costs average $2 per hundredweight
lower during the pasture season (May through October) than during the winter (November
through April). This finding motivated many of the project farmers to change their breeding to a
seasonal schedule so that cows' peak productivity coincides with that of the pastures (April
through June). "Going seasonal" poses problems for farmers, however. Not all cows get bred in
the 90-day breeding window farmers feel is the ideal for a seasonal milking system. Farmers face
the decision to either continue to winter-mild the few cows who don't get bred in the ideal
calving window, or to cull those cows. Some of the project farmers found that the diary
industry's favorite cow - the Holstein - may be less than ideal for seasonal milking because of its
summer heat intolerance relative to other breeds.
Project farmers also found that while grazing changed the kind of work they do (e.g. less
machinery work) it doesn't necessarily change the amount of work they do. Though cows are, in
effect, doing some of the work their owners used to do for them, grazing dairy farmers still
cannot avoid very long hours and long days. Nevertheless, farmers report that "grass farming" is
more enjoyable and more accessible for family members than confinement dairying.
Finally, the success of the "balanced role reversal" model of farmer-researcher collaboration was
mixed. Only a few instances did project participants feel the collaboration really benefitted them.
As the team sociologist reported, stereotypes held between farmers and university researchers
about each other were reduced, but were also retrenched.
Operational Recommendations:
Few "one-size-fits-all" prescriptions exist for the variety of questions about pasture management,
renovation and establishment, which the project farmers addressed. A multiplicity of variables -
climate, farmers' management skills and lifestyle desires, soil types and terrain, debt load, among
others - indicate the components of a grazing system farmer eventually adopt. Project farmers'
advice to other farmers was, "Ask a lot of questions, visit a lot of farms, do your homework, and
don't do anything too permanent."
Farmer Adoption and Direct Impact:
In 1993, about 8 percent of more than 500 dairy farms surveyed indicated they were using at
least three of five practices the researchers identified as intensive rotational grazing practices.
After the completion of this project, Anecdotal evidence suggested that between 1,000 and 1,500
dairy farms (out of a total of about 28,000) used some form of rotational grazing for their milking
cows or young stock. Also in 1993, there was one or two farmers' networks devoted to grazing;
now there about a dozen. There was no working group looking at rotational grazing in the
University of Wisconsin system; now there is. There was not a lot of collaboration among
farmers and researchers, or between farmers and farmers, but now due to the development of the
Internet, and annual statewide grazing conferences, there is a great deal of information
exchanged.