Forage & Nutrition Guide 2015-

Forage and
Nutrition
Guide 2015
€5

Premier Molasses Co. Ltd.
Harbour Road, Foynes, Co. Limerick.
Deepwater Berth, Ringaskiddy, Co. Cork.
t: 069-65311
f: 069-65537
e: info@premiermolasses.ie
Contact us or your local Co-op/merchant today:
www.premiermolasses.ie
Prevent Grass Tetany
this Spring with
Magnesium supplementation in ruminant diets has been recognised as having the
greatest influence in preventing both grass tetany and milk fever.
Premier Ultra-Mag, formulated from a diverse range of quality ingredients including
a highly bio-available form of magnesium is specifically designed for both dairy and
beef cows. Combining magnesium with an extremely palatable energy dense liquid
is the perfect option to prevent grass tetany this spring.
Premier Ultra-Mag(2.5%)

3
FORAGE AND NUTRITION Guide 2015
Editor: Liam de Paor
Managing Editor: Bernie Commins
Design: Barry Sheehan
Advertising Manager: Brian Murphy
Advertising Executive: John Sheehan
Chief Executive: Rebecca Markey
Publisher: David Markey
Accounts: Tricia Murtagh
Administration & Subscriptions: Sue Nolan
Publishers: IFP Media
Printing: Anglo Printers Limited
Forage & Nutrition Guide 2015, 31 Deansgrange Road,
Blackrock, Co Dublin. Tel: +353 1 289 3305 • Fax: +353 1 289 6406
e-mail: ciaran@ifpmedia.com • www.irishfarmersmonthly.com
Copyright IFP Media 2015. No part of this publication may be
reproduced in any material form without the express written
permission of the publishers.
CONTENTS
4 Life after quotas – now the work begins
6 Multi-species grassland swards for silage
8 Fertilising the grass silage crop
11 Concentrate feeding and turnout date on weanling performance
14 Understanding the new Pasture Profit Index (PPI)
17 Grazing management with Automated Milking Systems (AMS)
19 Investigation into body condition at drying off
20 The answer lies in the soil
23 Yield benefits from film and film wrapping
24 How to achieve full financial benefit when investing
26 Moderate concentrate build-up
27 An impressive Claas of mowers
28 Profitable lamb production trials at UCD
30 Challenges of post-quota milk production
32 Managing the risks of farming
34 Managing dairy stock for improved health and performance
36 Breeding & feeding - how new technology can help
39 FRS - there when you need it most
40 Magnesium supplementation through molasses
42 Getting your soil to deliver its potential for grass growth
45 Saving time with clever technology
14
45
28

4
The abolition of milk quotas after 2015 is
focusing minds on future expansion. However,
much lower milk prices and the threat of future
price volatility is also focusing minds on how to
improve production while also reducing costs.
The new quota, as pointed out by Brian Reidy
(see page 30), will be on land and labour. So, dairy farmers will
need to significantly improve herd performance if they are to
make a decent profit from increased production.
There is a record number of dairy cows and cattle in the country.
According to the CSO, in June 2014, the total number of cattle
increased by 148,500 to 6,902,600 while the number of dairy
cows increased by 63,200.
After April 2015, there is also likely to be a further increase in
dairy cow numbers, with replacement heifers, and extra calves
from dairy herds being reared on beef farms.
Dairy farmers need to optimise production from grass if they are
to increase milk yields per hectare. Our most efficient farmers
are growing and utilising in excess of 12 tonnes of dry matter
(DM) per hectare, yet the national average is only 7.5 tonnes so
there is significant scope for improvement.
Cattle farmers also need to improve live-weight gains during the
grazing season. To improve farm incomes all producers need to
minimise the purchase of expensive concentrates and have extra
silage for winter feed.
The experience in recent years has shown us that there was
insufficient forage to cater for a late spring or an early winter,
so, we had to import hay from abroad and feed record levels of
compound feed during the fodder crisis.
Even during a normal year many farmers complain about the
cost of purchased compounds when they could easily minimise
these costs by reseeding about 15 per cent of their land each
year. Yet, only about 25 per cent of landowners reseed on a
regular basis.
According to Teagasc, dairy farmers are losing €300 per hectare
as a result of old pastures and such fields are 25 per cent less
responsive to fertilisers. Indeed, since 2000, fertiliser prices have
increased by 81 per cent, so it is important to optimise their use
in a cost-effective manner.
No matter what price calves, cattle, lambs or milk are making -
poor health will impact on busy farmers, livestock performance
and consequently on farm incomes. So, improving the health of
your herd or flock will save time, money and, ultimately, improve
livestock performance.
One sick animal takes as much time to look after as 40 healthy
ones. This can be a nightmare in springtime, when more than
60 per cent of the herd may calve in six weeks. Any problems at
calving or lambing may also have longer-term consequences.
According to Dr Henk Hogeveen, a Dutch animal health expert:
“The total economic damage caused by production diseases in
livestock is larger than the damage caused by notifiable diseases
such as foot and mouth.”
For example, the average cost of a single case of milk fever in a
cow (from mild to severe) is over €300 when we factor in the
effects on future milk production.
Many dairy farmers have cows that should be culled for reasons
such as poor fertility, lameness, high somatic cell count (SCC),
mastitis problems and low milk solids. Reducing cow numbers
by 20 per cent and replacing them over the next three years, with
better bred replacements, would solve a lot of problems. For a
start, there would be more grass and silage available, therefore
improving milk yields and reducing the cost of purchased feed.
T
Life after quotas – now the work begins
LiamdePaor

Never approach or touch.
Contact our emergency service immediately.
CALL 1850 372 999
FALLEN ELECTRICITY
WIRES ARE LIVE
AND DANGEROUS
Serving all electricity customers
www.esbnetworks.ie
Never approach or touch.
Contact our emergency service immediately.
CALL 1850 372 999
FALLEN ELECTRICITY
WIRES ARE LIVE
AND DANGEROUS
Serving all electricity customers
www.esbnetworks.ie

6
Perennial ryegrass
Perennial ryegrass has been the preferred grass species for most
grassland research undertaken to date in temperate climates. This
reflects its suitability for grazing and for producing high yields of
digestible and readily ensilable herbage with good, season-long
production and persistence over many years.
In order to deliver on this potential and, therefore, justify the costs
and risks associated with establishing a new sward, ryegrass swards
usually require high soil fertility and the input of high rates of
nitrogen (N).
The biology of both the individual ryegrass plant and the whole
sward, and their responses to a range of management and
environmental factors, have been extensively researched. It is
evident that the potential exists to further increase herbage
production across an extended growing season and to avoid declines
in herbage digestibility at specific stages during the year.
Whereas newer management strategies can provide some of these
increases, those dependent on grass breeding and evaluation
programmes will take some time to develop. This raises the question
of whether other grass sward types have potential to increase the
productivity, or reduce the costs of livestock production systems,
while also providing any simultaneous ecological or environmental
benefits.
Ryegrass and clover
Introducing legumes, such as white or red clover, into seed mixes
with ryegrass can increase herbage yields under grazing or silage
production conditions, respectively. This reflects the synergistic
effects that occur when species of different growth habits are
grown together (e.g. differing in root depth, nitrogen fixation,
canopy structure).
In a grass-clover mixture, for example, clover has the ability to
facilitate specialised unique bacteria, resident in nodules on their
roots, to absorb nitrogen from air and convert it to a form that can
be used to stimulate plant growth. This is similar to the effect of
N in purchased inorganic fertiliser. Besides increasing herbage
production, this can also facilitate reducing the input of fertiliser N
and, thus, reduce the costs of providing feed for cattle.
The benefits from growing legumes with grass are further
advanced by the very palatable and digestible nature of legumes,
such as white clover for livestock. Despite these advantages, there
can also be risks associated with legumes, including the challenge
of getting good initial establishment or ensuring their long-
term persistence in permanent grassland swards. The extent to
which their annual growth pattern differs from grass, the greater
challenge they can pose if preserving as silage, and the risks
associated with ailments such as bloat.
Multi-species grassland
swards for silage
Words: Padraig O’Kiely and Thomas Moloney, Teagasc, Grange, Co Meath
Grass trial plots at Teagasc, Grange

7
Multi-species
Progressing the species mixture in a grassland sward beyond
perennial ryegrass, plus white or red clover, offers the opportunity
to provide further complementary competitive effects that can
better optimise season-long production of quality herbage.
The identification of the larger number of appropriate species (and
varieties) to include in such complex mixtures, requires considerable
knowledge of their individual biology, and how they interact together.
Just as there are some combinations of species that are
complementary to one another, there are others that will be neutral
or even antagonistic to one another.Therefore, not all multi-
species grassland sward mixtures will be attractive. The three
main categories of forages considered for inclusion, if sowing a
multi-species grassland sward, are: perennial grasses; legumes;
and herbs. Criteria of importance when identifying the constituent
species from each functional group include: their yield and nutritive
value potential; ease of establishment and persistence; ability to fix
atmospheric N; absence of anti-nutritional characteristics; rooting
depth; foliage structure and habit; tolerance of drought; wetness; and
cold etc.
European research
A large, Irish-led, multinational European research study, extended
over a number of years, showed that annual herbage production was
increased when species diversity within a sward was expanded by
the inclusion of appropriately matched contrasting species. It also
showed that yield variability between years was reduced with the
multi-species swards. Thus, some multi-species swards appear to
have potential that is worth investigating.
Irish research
The Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine (DAFM) has
funded a large collaborative study in Ireland between University
College Dublin (UCD), Teagasc and the Agri-Food and Biosciences
Institute (AFBI), from Northern Ireland. This study involves
comparisons of conventional perennial ryegrass and newer multi-
species swards. The latter includes: grasses such as perennial
ryegrass and timothy; legumes such as white and red clover and
greater birdsfoot trefoil; and herbs such as chicory, ribwort plantain
and yarrow. The overall research programme includes both grazing
(sheep, at UCD Lyons Farm) and silage production management
regimes (Teagasc, Grange), but also involves soil chemistry and
biology assessments, and quantification of the biodiversity of plants
and both soil and above-ground invertebrates. When all the findings
are assembled there will then be a cost-benefit analysis undertaken
of a livestock production system based on a perennial ryegrass
monoculture or a multi-species sward. Further and updated
information on this project can be found at http://smartgrass.ie/
The aims of the research ongoing at Teagasc, Grange, are to:
• Compare seasonal and annual herbage production for a number
of monocultures, binary mixtures and multi-sward mixtures
managed for silage production;
• Quantify the yield, botanical composition, nutritive value and
ensilability responses of these swards;
• Quantify the impacts of the timing of the completion of spring
grazing (i.e. number of sequential spring grazings) on sward yield
and nutritive value when subsequently harvested for silage;
• Describe how the yield and composition (chemical, phenological
and botanical) of the primary growth of the various swards
change during May and June;
• Quantify any carry-over effects of these management options on
subsequent silage harvests and on annual production; and
• Determine the effects of sward type and the other management
factors on the efficiency of the ensilage process.
For further information on the research ongoing at Teagasc, Grange
contact padraig.okiely@teagasc.ie

8
areful fertiliser management is required to
ensure that maximum grass yields are achieved
by the target harvest date. These target harvest
dates are important, in order to achieve the
desired silage quality required for the livestock
production system. Where silage crops are
lighter than expected, there is often a temptation to allow the grass
to grow and ‘bulk up’for an additional couple of weeks. However,
this can often have detrimental effects on silage quality. This article
looks at planning and nutrient management required for a high-
yielding grass silage sward.
Analysis
The starting point is to check soil test reports to identify the fertility
status of the silage fields. This will provide information on: soil pH;
lime requirement; and the major plant nutrients phosphorous (P)
and potassium (K). Soil test results are the basis for making the right
slurry and fertiliser application decisions, in order to deliver the
correct balance of nitrogen (N), P and K for yield. On average, silage
fields tend to have lower levels of P and K for a number of reasons.
Firstly, these fields are continuously cut for silage, thus, large
quantities of P and K are removed each year, and secondly, these
fields tend to be furthest from the farm yard and may not receive
an annual application of organic manures due to the longer travel
distances.
pH and lime
The productivity of silage swards very much depends on keeping
soil pH in the optimum range of pH 6.3 - 6.5. This is required for the
survival of perennial ryegrass in the swards and is essential for the
release of major soil nutrients (N, P and K). Where fields have lower
than optimum soil pH, leading to a lime requirement, a strategy
for liming must be put in place. As the date of closing silage areas
is approaching fast, it may be best to delay lime applications on
these fields until after the first cut of silage. Ideally, leave at least a
minimum of three months between lime application and closing for
silage to reduce the risk of problems with ensiling grass in the pit.
N
N is the key driver of yield but too much N in the grass at harvest
will make it difficult to ferment properly, as it reduces the grass
sugar levels and dry matter (DM) content. In contrast, too little N
will reduce grass growth and overall yield and delay harvesting date.
Grass swards with high levels of perennial ryegrass will use N more
efficiently than older swards. Recently reseeded swards (0-3 years)
will have 25 per cent higher N demand, especially when reseeded
after a tillage rotation. First cut grass silage (5 to 6tonne/hectare of
DM) will require 125 to 150kg N/hectare (100 - 120 units/acre). The
grass silage crop will uptake, on average, 2.5kg/hectare/day of N (2
units/day). Therefore, it is necessary to apply the N fertiliser at least
50 days before harvesting to ensure full N utilisation.
Where fields received early N applications for grazing, assume 30 to
50 per cent of this N will be available and deduct from the above N
total for the silage crop.
Reseeded swards will respond better to N than old, permanent
swards.
P and K
P and K are essential to maximise grass yields, therefore adequate
supply of these nutrients in the soil is critical. Assess the most
recent (< 5 years) soil test reports to determine the P and K
requirements for silage fields. A crop of grass silage will remove
approximately 4kg P and 25kg K/tonne of grass dry matter (DM). A
5tonne/hectare DM crop (fresh grass silage yield of ~10 tonnes/acre
at 20 per cent DM) will remove 20kg P/hectare and 125kg K/hectare
at harvest time. Where insufficient P and K are applied for silage
swards, soil P and especially K levels will decline rapidly due to the
high off-takes of these nutrients in the silage crop.
Fertilising the grass silage crop
Over the coming days and weeks it will be time to consider closing up
silage fields, to ensure that enough grass silage is produced to meet winter
feed requirements. Plan to maximise both grass silage yield and quality to
help reduce the costs associated harvesting and ensiling the grass
C
Words: Mark Plunkett & David Wall, Teagasc, Johnstown Castle, Wexford

9
Manures
Organic manures are an effective source of N, P and K and can
provide a large proportion of crop P and K requirements at relatively
low cost. Table 1. shows the available N, P and K content for a range
of organic manures.
Table 1. Available N, P and K values for a range of organic manures
Manure type N P K
kg/m3
Cattle slurry (7% DM)1 0.7 0.6 3.3
Dilute cattle slurry (3.5% DM)1 0.6 0.3 1.65
Pig slurry (4% DM) 2.1 0.8 2.2
kg/tonne
Farmyard manure (FYM) 1.35 1.2 6
Spent mushroom compost (SMC) 1.6 1.5 8
1Actual N, P and K value for cattle slurry.
To convert kg/m3 to units/1,000 multiply by nine. To convert kg/tonne to units/tonne multiply
by two.
Cattle slurry is the most common manure applied to silage fields
and good quality cattle slurry (7 per cent DM) has the correct ratio of
P to K for to match silage crop requirements. Diluting cattle slurry
with water is beneficial for ease of agitation and can help to improve
the N availability in the slurry, However, it will also dilute the P and K
content of the slurry.
Table 1. shows the typical available N, P and K values for a typical 7
per cent DM and dilute (3.5 per cent DM) cattle slurry. It is important
to take account of slurry DM content when considering appropriate
application rates to reduce the risk of under fertilising silage crops.
The slurry hydrometer is a useful tool than can be used to measure
the DM percentage of your slurry and to predict the nutrient
content more accurately. Once you know how much N-P-K you are
applying in slurry, you will be able to select a suitable fertiliser type
to complement, or top up, these nutrients levels to the required
levels to maximise grass yield (see Table 2.).
For example 3,000 gallons per acre of good quality cattle slurry (7
per cent DM) will supply (18 units N, 15 units P and 90 units K) a
large proportion of the crops’P and K requirements. Cattle slurry
contains N which needs to be deducted from the total crops N
requirement. Table 2. shows the recommended rates of N, P and
K and suggested fertiliser programmes at different soil P and K
indexes (1 to 4) required to grow 5 tonne/hectare grass DM (10
tonnes fresh grass/acre).
• Apply slurry to very bare stubble or short grass.
• Where slurry cannot be applied for first cut, apply after silage
harvest.
• Application of cattle slurry with trailing shoe/band spreader will
increase N recovery by 0.4 kg/m³ (3 units/1,000 gal).

10
Table 2. First cut grass silage N, P and K requirements (5 tonne/hectare DM) and suggested fertiliser programmes
Soil index
N kg/hectare
(units/ac)
P kg/hectare
(units/ac)
K kg/hectare
(units/ac)
Fertiliser options3,4
No slurry Cattle slurry 3,000gal/ac
11 125 (100) 40 (32) 175 (140)
3.5 bags/ac 0-7-30
4 bags/ac CAN
3 bags/ac
27-2.5-5.0
21
125 (100) 30 (24) 155 (120)
3 bags/ac 0-7-30
4 bags/ac CAN
3 bags/ac
27-2.5-5.0
3 125 (100) 20 (16) 125 (100)
5 bags/ac 15-3-20
1 bags/ac CAN
3 bags/ac CAN
43
125 (100) 0 0 4 bags/ac CAN 3 bags/ac CAN
1Index 1 and 2 soils apply P and K balance advice to build soil P and K levels to after grass for example apply as 24-2.5-10/0-7-30.
2Index 4 soils omit P for 2/3 years & retest. Index 4 K omit for one year and revert to index 3 advice thereafter until next soil test.
3Urea can replace CAN as main N source. Light rain (up to 10mm) before or after application will reduce N losses from urea.
4For new/older swards with higher/lower yield potential reduce N, P, K by 25kg N, 4kgP & 25kg K per tonne of grass DM.
Timing
Apply crop N, P and K requirements when closing silage fields in late
March or early-apply April. Where cattle slurry is applied, delay the
top-up fertiliser applications for one week. In wetter soil conditions
fertiliser N can be split 50:50 for example 50 per cent in late March/
early April and the remainder, two weeks later to reduce the risk of
N losses.
Future
Where the soil P and K status of silage fields has been worn down
over a number of years, put a plan in place to build these up and
restore their high grass yield potential. Apply additional P and K (soil
build-up rates) to index 1 and 2 soils after first cut silage, or later
in summer. For example fertiliser products such as straight 16 per
cent P or 50 per cent K, or compounds such as 0-7-30, 18-6-12 etc.
are very suitable for building soil P and K levels to the target index 3.
This strategy will generally take a number of years, however, this will
be rewarded with higher grass yields of more consistent quality.
Sulphur (S)
S deficiency is most likely on light, sandy and free-draining soils
with low soil organic matter levels. Grass silage crops have a
requirement of ~20kg S/hectare per cut. The application of S to soils
where it is required will improve grass DM yields and quality as
it helps to maintain an optimum N:S ratio which will improve the
efficiency of N use by the grass. Apply S with the main N split as N
+S (e.g. CAN +S / Urea +S).

11
rofitability of suckler beef systems is greater
where the quantity of grazed grass in the
annual feed budget is higher. The main reason
for this is the lower cost of grazed grass
compared to conserved feeds or concentrates.
Consequently, a short indoor feeding period
in association with a long grazing season is desirable. However,
under Irish conditions, grass is available for grazing only seven to
eight months of the year.
Despite challenges relating to soil type and prevailing weather
conditions, which limit grazing season length, improvements
in grassland management and infrastructure can provide
opportunities to increase the number of grazing days on beef
cattle farms. Improved profitability could derive from turning
cattle out to pasture early in spring, particularly if increased live-
weight gain is sustained through to finish.
Finishing spring-born beef cattle at 24 to 26 months of age, following
an indoor finishing period during their second winter, is commonly
practiced. The relatively expensive indoor feeding period might be
eliminated if weanlings are supplemented during the first winter to
achieve higher live-weights at turnout, and consequently finished at
grass at the end of the second grazing season. However, the benefit
of supplementing weanlings during the first winter is lessened
by the capacity of weanlings on lower feeding levels to exploit
compensatory growth following turn out to pasture.
Teagasc experiment
An experiment was conducted at Teagasc, Grange, to determine the
effects of turnout date to pasture and supplementary feeding during
the first winter on live-weight gain, carcass traits and the financial
performance of suckler calf-to-finish systems.
Concentrate feeding and
turnout date on weanling
performance
Management routines carried out by dairy farmers vary greatly
throughout the country, but there are some general tips that can
help farmers run a healthy and efficient dairy enterprise
P
Words: Paul Crosson and Mark McGee, Animal and Grassland Research
and Innovation Centre, Teagasc, Grange, Co Meath

12
Experiment
A total of 72 (28 male and 44 female) Charolais and Limousin
suckler-bred calves were used. Male calves were castrated in August
and all calves were weaned and housed indoors on October 20.
Weanlings were housed in slatted floor sheds and offered good
quality (dry matter digestibility [DMD] 72 per cent) grass silage
to appetite. The silage was supplemented with either 0.5kg or 2kg
concentrate per head daily. The concentrate offered comprised 43
per cent rolled barley, 43per cent molassed beet pulp, 8 per cent
soyabean meal, 4.5 per cent molasses and 1.5 per cent mineral and
vitamins. Concentrate was offered in one daily feed in the morning.
At the end of the winter feeding period half the steers and heifers
were turned out to pasture on March 22, whereas their comrades
remained indoors for another three weeks and were turned out on
April 12. The ‘early’turnout date is appropriate for Grange where
grass growth commences in mid-March. Near the end of the grazing
season, heifers were finished indoors in a slatted floor shed and
offered grass silage ad libitum and 3kg of a barley-based concentrate
per head daily. At the end of the grazing season, steers were also
housed in a slatted floor shed and received grass silage ad libitum,
plus 4kg of a barley-based concentrate daily.
Traits
At turnout to pasture, weanlings fed higher levels of concentrate
were heavier due to higher growth rates (Table 1. and Figure 1.). An
additional 1kg live-weight per 5.5kg of extra concentrate offered
to the high concentrate groups was obtained. Similarly, weanlings
turned out to pasture later were heavier, as they were three weeks
older than their counterparts turned out early, and also due to
a greater gut-fill. However, on April 20 (eight days after the late
turnout date), the animals turned out earlier had surpassed the
live weight of animals turned out later. This was because dietary
differences in gut-fill no longer existed and that the animals turned
out to pasture earlier were growing faster than those still indoors.
An important finding was that the live-weight of the weanlings,
offered the high level of concentrate and turned out late, was not
significantly different to their counterparts turned out early i.e. they
exhibited compensatory growth. In contrast, weanlings fed the low
level of concentrate and turned out late were lighter than all the
other treatments at final housing, which did not differ.
This demonstrated that where feed restriction during the indoor
winter period occurred over a longer period, animal live-weight
gain at pasture is lower i.e. compensatory growth is not expressed.

13
Conversely, when the duration and/or severity of the restriction is
not great, live weight gain is higher (i.e. compensation occurs).
Slaughter and carcass weight were similar for both concentrate
levels. This shows that live-weight gain responses by continental
crossbred weanlings, to additional supplementary concentrate
offered during the indoor period, were subsequently largely lost due
to compensatory growth at pasture. Slaughter and carcass weight
were heavier for weanlings turned out earlier. There was no effect
on kill-out proportion, carcass conformation and fat score between
the treatments.
Financial
There was no effect of concentrate feeding level during the first
winter on net margin. The effect of turnout date to pasture for
the second grazing season was modest with a slight increase in
profitability where turnout date was advanced by three weeks.
However, in a scenario (not presented here) where progeny were
sold at the end of the indoor winter feeding period, a higher
level of meal feeding improved net margin, as this is captured in
heavier sale live-weight and consequently, higher animal value.
Where sale was delayed until after a season at pasture, the
effect of compensatory growth at pasture for progeny fed lower
levels of concentrate during the first winter, eliminated most of
the live-weight advantage gained by those fed higher levels of
concentrate. Correspondingly, the net margin was greater for the
low concentrate feeding regime. A notable aspect of the results
was the sensitivity of the scenarios to beef carcass price, with the
effect of concentrate price being much lower.
As initial turnout date to pasture in spring is largely dependent on
interactions between many factors, including soil type, weather,
grass growth, sward management and grazing conditions, the
degree to which this practice can be easily exploited will vary
substantially, especially according to geographical location,
but also from year-to-year. Consequently, flexibility in grazing
management is required. This may include using strategies such
as ‘on-off’grazing, whereby animals are given restricted access
time to pasture daily.
Table 1. Effect of supplementary concentrate feeding level and turnout
date to pasture on live-weight and carcass traits
Concentrate level Turnout date
Low High Early Late
Live weight (kg)
Weaning 317 319 318 318
Turnout 356 391 368 380
On 20 April 367 394 387 374
Housing 523 531 537 518
Slaughter 598 607 611 594
Carcass traits
Carcass weight (kg) 327 333 336 323
Kill-out proportion (g/kg) 546 545 547 545
Carcass conformation1 3.1 3.2 3.1 3.2
Carcass fat2 3.6 3.9 3.7 3.8
1 Scale 1 to 5 (best conformation); 2 Scale 1 to 5 (fattest)
Figure 1. Effect of winter concentrate feeding level and turnout date to
pasture on live-weight gain of beef cattle
Table 2. Effect of supplementary concentrate feeding level and turnout
date to pasture on net margin (€/hectare)
Sensitivity analysis
Concentrate
feeding1 Turnout date2 Net margin
(€/hectare)
Sale price3 Concentrate
price4
0.5 kg/day 22 March 405 158 6.27
0.5 kg/day 12 April 396 152 6.91
2.0 kg/day 22 March 407 157 8.29
2.0 kg/day 12 April 389 156 9.36
1Concentrate feeding level during the first winter; 2Turnout date to pasture for the second
grazing season; 3Impact of 10c/kg change in live animal or beef carcass price on net margin per
hectare. 4Impact of €10/tonne change in concentrate price on net margin per hectare.
Effect of concentrate feeding and turnout date
700
650
600
550
500
Housing
Low conc. – Early turnout Low conc. – Late turnout
High conc. – Early turnout High conc. – Late turnout
Liveweight(kg)
Early
Late
Steers
Heifers
450
400
350
300
Nov Jan
HOUSING
TURNOUT
Mar May Jul Sep Nov Jan Mar

14
he Pasture Profit Index (PPI) has been
developed by Teagasc in conjunction with
the Department of Agriculture, Food and the
Marine (DAFM). The purpose of the PPI is
to assist farmers when selecting perennial
ryegrass varieties for their farm. The PPI
quantifies the total economic merit (€/hectare/year) of individual
perennial ryegrass varieties.
This spring, for the first time, the PPI has being officially
released. It is published in the National Recommended List
for grasses and is also available to download from the Teagasc
website.
Sub-indices
The PPI comprises of a number of sub-indices, with each
variety receiving an economic value within each sub-indices.
This indicates if a variety is above or below the average of all
varieties for that particular trait. The sub-indices comprise the
following:
• Seasonal dry matter (DM) yield;
• Spring DM yield;
• Mid-season DM yield;
• Autumn DM yield;
• Quality (across the months of April to July, inclusive);
• April;
• May;
• June;
• July;
• Persistency;
• Silage;
• First cut silage DM yield; and
• Second cut silage DM yield.
Economic value
In order to calculate the total PPI value of a variety, the economic
value of each individual trait was first calculated. The Moorepark
Dairy Systems Model was used to determine the economic value
of a unit change in each trait (€/hectare/year). The economic value
of each trait within the PPI is as follows:
Estimating value
A base level of performance was determined for each trait. The
performance of an individual variety, relative to the base was then
assessed to determine if a variety got a positive value (improved
performance relative to the base) or negative value (reduced
performance relative to the base) for that particular trait. The
difference between the performance of a variety within a trait and
the base performance for that trait is multiplied by the economic
value for that trait to determine the economic merit of that trait for
that cultivar (see example below for spring DM yield):
• Base level of performance for spring DM yield = 1,200kg DM/
hectare (A);
• Performance of variety X for spring DM yield = 1,320kg DM/
hectare (B);
• Difference between variety X and base for spring DM yield (B-A)
= 120kg DM/hectare (C);
• Economic value for spring DM yield = €0.163 (D); and
• Economic merit of variety X for spring DM yield (C × D) = €19.56/
hectare per year.
This example indicates that variety X should give an additional
€19.56/hectare/year for spring DM yield relative to the base. The
economic merit of all traits for a particular variety is summed to
give the PPI (€/hectare/year) for the variety.
Understanding the new
Pasture Profit Index
Dr Mary McEvoy explains the function of the new Pasture Profit
Index (PPI) released for the first time this spring, and how it assists
farmers in selecting perennial ryegrass varieties for their farms
T
Figure 1. The traits and their economic values which are used to
calculate the PPI value of a variety
Pasture Profit Index
€/hectare/year
Spring: €0.16
Summer: €0.04
Autumn: €0.11
Seasonal DM yield
(per kg change
in DM yield)
April: -€0.001
May: -€0.008
June: -€0.010
July: -€0.009
Quality
(per unit change
in DMD/kg DM)
1st cut: €0.04
2nd cut: €0.03
Silage
(per kg change
in DM yield)
-€56 per ha
per year
Persistency
Words: Dr Mary McEvoy, Germinal Seeds

15
Late diploids
Pasture Profit Index sub-indices (€/hectare/year)
DM production Quality Silage Persistency Total PPI €/hectare/year
Variety Ploidy1 Heading date Spring Summer Autumn
AberChoice D 10-Jun 24 52 47 57 9 -5 184
Drumbo D 07-Jun 27 35 35 36 -4 -11 118
Glenroyal* D 05-Jun 25 41 46 -2 6 -11 105
Majestic* D 02-Jun 43 38 43 -23 0 0 101
Glenveagh* D 03-Jun 37 39 34 -22 7 0 96
Stefani* D 01-Jun 25 34 27 -9 9 0 86
Piccadilly* D 03-Jun 31 38 22 -30 16 0 77
Tyrella D 04-Jun 41 23 19 -1 0 -11 71
Mezquita D 06-Jun 22 30 18 -22 6 0 54
Clanrye D 06-Jun . . . . . . .
Late tetraploids
AberGain T 05-Jun 42 50 43 58 26 -11 208
Kintyre T 08-Jun 29 40 58 25 14 0 166
Astonenergy T 02-Jun 10 41 43 54 12 0 160
AberPlentiful* T 08-Jun 15 44 48 30 15 0 152
Navan T 06-Jun 14 41 50 21 10 0 136
Aspect* T 05-Jun 26 45 29 30 10 -5 135
Delphin T 02-Jun 13 42 27 10 21 0 113
AberCraigs T 04-Jun 14 38 21 17 18 0 108
Twymax* T 07-Jun -11 48 20 27 17 -5 95
Solas T 10-Jun . . . . . . .
Intermediate diploids
AberMagic D 30-May 47 53 78 21 13 -28 184
Rosetta* D 24-May 97 40 39 -2 19 -28 165
Solomon D 23-May 66 32 35 -30 22 0 125
Boyne* D 22-May 42 39 33 -56 41 0 99
Rodrigo D 27-May . . . . . . .
Intermediate tetraploids
Dunluce T 30-May 43 45 58 35 24 -11 194
Seagoe* T 29-May 30 45 43 13 38 -11 158
Magician T 22-May 59 37 42 -5 28 -11 150
Giant T 20-May 39 50 39 -2 22 0 148
Trend T 24-May 25 41 30 3 38 0 137
Carraig T 24-May 42 40 38 -19 31 0 132
1D=Diploid, T=Tetraploid; *Limited data based on one sowing year (two harvest years only) Germinal varieties are highlighted in yellow
Using PPI
Figure 1. presents the 2015 PPI for 2015 according to ploidy
(the number of sets of chromosomes in a cell) and heading date.
Information is presented for each variety on total PPI value
and the sub-indices (performance across the individual traits).
The sub-indices provide the farmer with a good indication as
to the relative performance of each variety across all traits. A
high value for spring, mid-season, autumn, silage and quality
is desirable and indicates a variety that is performing well in
each of these traits. A value of ‘0’is desirable for persistency as
it indicates a persistent variety. Negative values for persistency
indicate varieties that may be less persistent.
PPI rankings
The first thing to look at is the ploidy and heading date of each
variety. To simplify this, the table below ranks varieties within the PPI
according to their heading category (intermediate or late) and ploidy
(diploid or tetraploid). For grazing mixtures you should select varieties
with a heading date of June or late May. Grazing mixtures should
contain approximately 40 per cent tetraploid, but use less tetraploid if
you are reseeding a heavier soil.
AberChoice and Drumbo are the top ranked late diploids, both of these
have excellent performance across spring, summer and autumn and
also have exceptional quality. Majestic, Glenveagh and Tyrella also
perform well in spring, but they have much poorer performance in the
quality sub-indices, meaning they have a lower total PPI value.

16
AberGain and Kintyre are the top two late tetraploids. Both
varieties have exceptional seasonal DM yields, high quality and
good performance in the silage sub-indices hence, they have a
high total PPI value.
Abermagic is the highest performing intermediate diploid, with
a heading date of 30th May, it is suited to both a grazing or
silage system. It is the 4th highest ranked variety overall in the
PPI.
Dunluce and Seagoe, top the intermediate tetraploids on
the PPI list. Both varieties have high seasonal performance,
excellent quality and also give more profit to a silage system.
They are suited to either a one-cut and graze or an intensive
silage system. Seagoe and Trend have the highest performance
overall in the silage sub-indices.
If a variety is being selected for grazing, the farmer should place
a lot of emphasis on the seasonal performance of that variety
(spring, mid-season and autumn), quality and persistency,
with less emphasis being placed on the silage sub-index. If
on the other hand, a farmer is interested in reseeding a field
specifically for silage, then the focus on silage will be prioritised,
with quality and persistency also being important.
There are three varieties (Clanrye, Solas and Rodrigo) that
do not have any values in the PPI list. These varieties have
insufficient data in the DAFM simulated grazing protocol
to generate a PPI value for them. Therefore, when selecting
varieties you should also use the DAFM Recommended List as
it presents some information on these varieties.

17
t is estimated that there are approximately 30,000
automated milking systems (AMS), also known as robotic
milking machines, worldwide. The vast majority are located
in Western and Northern Europe, the US and Canada. As
witnessed across Europe, the uptake of AMS in Ireland
is increasing at an accelerating rate, anecdotal evidence
suggests there are approximately 200 robots on the island of Ireland.
In the south, the majority of robots are integrated with a spring-
calving, grazing-based system of farming. Cows on these farms are
full-time grazing outside which contrasts with the majority of AMS
farms worldwide, where cows spend most of their time indoors, fed
with a total mixed ration diet.
The robot removes the necessity for farmer involvement in the
milking process and herding. The cow decides when to leave the
field, volunteer for milking and the robot milks the cow. This decision
is motivated by the trained knowledge that new grass is available
every eight hours (an ABC system with three grass allocations) or 12
hours (an AB system with two grass allocations), which is accessible
upon passing through the milking yard. The farmer can control cow
movement from the field by precise grass allocation and management
and in the milking yard with specific settings on the AMS, which
calculate how often a cow has permission to milk each day.
Grass allocation
Critical to the system is the attention to detail and the
precision of grass allocation for the herd on a daily basis. It
assists with cow movement to the milking yard and maintains
good subsequent grass quality when low grass residuals are
achieved. For example, if excess grass is allocated in field A by
the farmer, either one of two things may occur, depending on
the time of the year and how well the cows are trained to the
system:
(1) High grass residuals are left behind in field A - cows exit
the field. Once they have been trained, they anticipate the
time of day they have access to new grass in field B, prior
to consuming the quantity allocated to the herd;
(2) High grass residuals are left behind in the next grazing
(field B) - cows may stay grazing too long in field A and
don’t move to B in time to consume the quantity allocated
to the herd.
On the Teagasc Dairygold Research farm we operate a three-way system
of grazing, where the farm is divided into three sections (A, B and C - see
above) with an eight-hour grass allocation in each section daily. Cows
have access to section A from midnight to 8am, section B from 8am to
4pm and section C from 4pm to midnight. Grass allocations are carried
out in sections B and C before 8am and at 12pm in section A.
Grazing management
with AMS
Anecdotal evidence suggests there are approximately 200
automated milking systems (AMS) in Ireland. Precise grass
allocation and management are essential in order for the
AMS system to be successful
I
Words: Dr Cathriona Foley, Teagasc, Moorepark

18
To carry out grass allocations there cannot be any cows present in
the section, if cows are present they are herded from the field prior
to grass allocation. Usually there aren’t cows in the field, however, it
does occur from time to time and under this circumstance, herding
cows to the milking yard is beneficial to maintaining subsequent
herd grass consumption and movement through the system. With
this system in place during 2014 we had an average post-grazing
height of 5cm and cows entered pre-grazing covers of 1,509kg grass
dry matter (DM) per hectare, on average. Grass walks were carried
out once a week on the shoulders of the year and twice weekly
during the main grass growing periods of the year. This assisted
greatly for grass budgeting throughout the year and on average
13,287kg grass DM per hectare was grown during 2014.
Milking
A challenge arises when the number of cows milking on a single
AMS unit is increased - 70 cows on the Teagasc Dairygold Research
farm in 2014, for example. In this situation there is less free time
in the AMS for cows to milk, which could potentially increase time
spent waiting to be milked on hard surfaces, and reducing time
spent grazing. However, farmers could reduce milking permission
(MP), which would also reduce milking frequency, allowing cows out
to grass more often. Cows are permitted to milk, based on time since
last milking and expected milk yield. The number of times the cow
voluntarily visits the AMS, and is permitted to be milked, is defined
as the milking frequency (MF). For example, in a three-way system
a cow voluntarily visits the milking yard three times daily. However,
for one of the three visits, if not enough time has elapsed since her
last visit she will be directed straight out to grass, resulting in a MF
of two times per day.
Two separate experimental trials were carried out on the Teagasc
Dairygold Research farm during 2014, assessing the effect of
different MP levels on subsequent MF during mid- and late-
lactation. During mid-lactation (April to August) cows with a MP of
two times per day had a MF of 1.4 times per day and cows with a MP
of three times per day had a MF of 1.8 times per day. Interestingly,
there was no difference in milk yield per cow per day between cows
with a MF of 1.4 versus 1.8 times/ per day.
A second study compared two levels of MP (3.2 vs 1.8 times per day)
and two levels of concentrate supplementation (3 vs 0.84kg) in late-
lactation (August to November). Cows with a MP of 3.2 times per day
had a MF of 1.9 times per day and cows with an MP of 1.8 times per
day had an MF of 1.3 times per day. There was a milk yield per day
difference of 5 per cent between the groups as cows with a MF of 1.8
times per day produced 15.7kg per day and cows with an MF of 1.3
times per day produced 15 kg per day. Interestingly, a lower milking
permission resulted in less time spent waiting to be milked per day
as cows with an MP of 3.2 waited 2.1 hours per day compared to
cows with an MP of 1.8 waiting 1.6 hours per day. Cows receiving 3kg
concentrated produced 16.3kg of milk per day compared to 14.5kg
milk per day from cows receiving 0.84 kg concentrate per day. There
was no difference between cows on high and low concentrate for
time spent waiting to be milked.
Table 1. Effect of milking permission and concentrate supplementation
on milk yield (MY kg) and milking frequency (MF) per day
Milking permission/day
1.8 3.2
Milk yield/day 15.0 15.7
Milking frequency/day 1.3 1.9
Concentrate (kg)
0.84 3
Milk yield/day 14.5 16.2
Milking frequency/day 1.6 1.7
Conclusion
Reducing milking frequency reduced time spent waiting to be
milked. This may benefit lower ranking cows, providing them
increased opportunities to access the AMS, and also reducing time
spent standing on hard surfaces. This enhances cow welfare. This
study demonstrated that, by implementing appropriate settings on
an AMS it is possible to achieve a milk yield response to concentrate
supplementation in the latter stages of lactation. This research
suggests management strategies involving reduced milking
frequency and increased concentration supplementation towards
the latter stages of lactation in an effort to maintain milk yield and
reduce pre-milking waiting time.
Acknowledgements
This research is funded by the FP7 EU funded project AUTOGRASSMILK
which is coordinated by Dr Bernadette O’Brien from Teagasc Moorepark.
Fullwood provided the use of their Merlin 225 automated milking system.
This research was possible due to the work and dedication of PhD student
John Shortall and technician James Daunt. The contribution of numerous
work placement students and farm staff on the Teagasc Dairygold
research farm has also been instrumental to this research.
Figure 1. Displays milking frequency differences between a group with a milking permission of three times per day (MP3) and a group with a milking
permission of two times per day (MP2) over 12 weeks in mid lactation
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
2.2
1 2 3 4 5
Week
Milking permissions 2 v 3 times/day
Milkingfrequencycow/day
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
MP2
MP3

19
his issue is now being investigated by the
by Agri-Food and Biosciences Institute
(AFBI) in Hillsborough, thanks to co-funding
from producers and the exchequer through
AgriSearch and Department of Agriculture
and Rural Development (DARD) through the
Research Challenge Fund (RCF).
The modern Holstein-Friesian dairy cow was bred to produce
high milk yields throughout lactation. When these high-yielding
cows do not consume enough energy to meet their requirements,
they break down their own body-tissue reserves to provide
energy for milk production.
This mobilisation of body tissue is particularly evident in early
lactation when the energy requirements for milk production are
at their greatest. Cows normally begin to regain this lost body
condition from approximately day 100 of lactation onwards.
However, if diet quality is poor or if grazing conditions are
difficult cows may reach late lactation with less than ideal body
condition scores.
Previous AgriSearch-funded research at AFBI Hillsborough
demonstrated that cows gain relatively little body condition during
an eight-week dry period. Thus, cows with below-target body
condition scores at drying-off will generally be too thin at calving,
with AFBI research showing that these cows are more likely to be
culled during the subsequent lactation.
Consequently, it is generally recommended that cows are dried-off
at the target body condition score for calving of 2.5 to 3.0. For this
reason, strategies need to be developed to allow thin cows to gain
body condition in late lactation.
The effects of three late-lactation and dry-period management
strategies are being examined.
These strategies consist of:
(1) Offering cows 5kg of a standard ‘control’concentrate (17 per
cent protein) each day for five weeks prior to drying-off at eight
weeks pre-calving;
(2) Offering cows 5kg of a ‘low-protein’concentrate (13 per cent
protein) each day for five weeks prior to drying-off at eight
weeks pre-calving; and
(3) Giving cows an ‘extended dry period’by drying-off at 13 weeks
pre-calving.
This study will examine the effect of these management strategies
on milk production and food intake in late lactation, body-condition-
score change during the dry period, calving difficulties and calf
live-weight, and cow performance during the subsequent lactation.
All cows will remain on the study for 19 weeks after calving and full
results of the study will be available later this year.
See www.agrisearch.org for details of this and other industry backed
research aimed at making NI beef, lamb and milk production more
competitive.
Investigation into body
condition at drying off
Cows dried off below the target condition score for calving of 2.5 to 3.0
often cannot regain enough condition over the eight weeks they are dry
T

20
rass is the cheapest source of nutrients for
ruminants, with an average production cost
of only 6c/kg dry matter (DM). In comparison,
bought-in concentrates cost 25-35c/kg DM.
And yet, down on the farm:
• Milk from forage is in long-term decline and dropped below
2,000l/cow for the first time in 2013. Efficient grassland farmers
are achieving 4,000 l/cow from grass;
• Beef cattle average daily live-weight gain on grass is 0.80kg
compared to the potential of 1.20-1.30kg;
• General dissatisfaction with grass growth from reseeded
pastures is widely reported;
• Feeding value of grass silage has stalled over the past 10 years;
• Average grass utilisable dry matter (DM) per hectare per year is
around seven tonnes, compared to the potential of 12 tonnes.
This difference is worth over €50,000 to the average herd;
• Mineral trends for grass silage over the past 20 years has shown
an approximate 50 per cent increase in potassium (K), a doubling
in iron (Fe) and a 33 per cent increase in molybdenum (Mo). All
three elements are implicated in cattle nutritional disease, as risk
factors for hypocalcaemia, depressed immunity and infertility
respectively; and
• At a time when livestock production should be becoming more
forage-dependent, in reality the reverse is occurring. The answer
to the decline in yield nutritive value and contribution of grass to
milk and beef production lies in the soil.
Soil compaction
Soil compaction is the greatest threat to grassland production
and can reduce yields by up to 40 per cent. Furthermore, a recent
survey reported 70 per cent of grassland soils in England and Wales
exhibit severe or moderate soil compaction.
Soil compaction has many causes including:
• Intense rainfall (1”water per acre - weight 101 tonnes);
• Cows poaching;
• Heavy machinery;
• Excess slurry applications; and
• Soil mineral imbalance (high magnesium (Mg) – low calcium
(Ca) soils).
The consequences of compaction include:
• Grass growth reduced by up to 40 per cent;
• Fertiliser requirement increased – nitrogen (N) by X 2.5 to
achieve the same yield;
• Root penetration reduced;
• Earthworm counts reduced by 95 per cent;
• Nutrient run-off increased;
• Soils take longer to warm up in spring;
• Soils are biologically dead; and
• Anaerobic soils resulting in residues degrading more slowly
and an increase in the solubility and uptake of iron and
molybdenum by grass.
The bottom line is that compaction squeezes air out of soils,
and air is just as essential for life below the ground as it is for
life above. As soil life declines, soil fertility - which is the ability
of soils to supply nutrients to plants in a sustainable way - is
reduced.
Soil life
Soils comprise a myriad of dependent complex life forms from
microscopic bacteria and fungi, through protozoa, nematodes
and arthropods, to earthworms. But it is earthworms that are the
most visual sign of soil life. Healthy soil is reckoned to have over
three tonnes of earthworms per hectare, which is considerably
more than the weight of livestock grazing on the surface.
They consume over 15 tonnes of soil during the course of a year
which is essential for nutrient cycling, drainage and building a
stable soil structure which is more resistent to soil compaction.
Look for 15-20 worms in a typical spade-hole if the soil is in a
healthy state. The other significant threat to soil life is excessive
application of putrid, anaerobic, smelly slurry. Cattle and
especially pig slurry contains a high level of ammonia, which
is highly toxic to worms. The sight of gulls following the slurry
spreader and picking up dead earthworms used to be all too
common, but on many farms now the birds stay away because
the worms have long gone.
The answer lies in the soil
As cost pressures continue to rise for livestock farmers, it is increasingly
important that they get maximum production from their pastures
Words: Dr David Atherton, Thomson & Joseph Ltd
G

21
So, compaction reduces soil life, which is further compromised by
slurry, resulting in up to 40 per cent less grass yield. In addition, the
mineral balance of grass changes with higher levels of K, Fe and Mo
increasing the risk of hypocalcaemia, infertility and poor cow health.
Dig a hole
To assess the extent of soil compaction, dig a hole. A spade’s
depth and width will provide a wealth of information, not only on
compaction but also soil health and fertility.
Look for the following criteria:
Good Poor
Compaction Not apparent Surface compaction
Texture Uniform Horizontal compressed bands
Smell Earthy Stale
Colour Brown Grey and mottled
Rooting depth Deep Shallow
Earthworms 15-20 <10
Drainage Effective Surface waterlogging
The photo (left) shows a typically surface-compacted soil, with a
horizontal band of compressed soil at 10-15 cms deep, just below
the grass line. Going below this compacted zone the soil is more
crumbly and open. Rooting is shallow and no earthworms can be
seen. This is definitely a soil with poor fertility that is not achieving
its potential in growing grass.
Soil Improvement Plan
At a time when livestock farmers are being encouraged to grow
more grass, and to produce more milk and meat from forage, soil
compaction is the single biggest threat to achieving these aims. The
key actions required to improve soil fertility are to get air into the
soil, keep it there and support soil life. In 2013, in conjunction with
Devenish Nutrition and Lakeland Dairies, a Soil Improvement Plan
was developed based on:

22
1. Aeration – to disrupt surface compaction and get air into the
soil. Most of the soil nutrients and biological activity is in the
top 15-20cm. The McKenna Aerator was selected because of its
design and workload. It can operate up to 15km/hour and has the
capability to cut through the surface compacted layer to a depth
of 7”allowing air penetration and improving drainage;
2. Improving soil structure – to keep air in the soil and make
it more resistant to compaction. It has been recognised for
many years that high magnesium soils are ‘sticky’and more
liable to clump and compact. High calcium soils are more
‘open’, but again are potentially unstable leading to collapse
and compaction. Getting the calcium-magnesium balance
right for a stable soil structure involves a soil analysis.
Corrective actions can include liming, or the application of
gypsum (calcium sulphate) or kieserite (magnesium sulphate);
and
3. Composting slurry – converting slurry from a putrid, toxic
waste into a valuable fertiliser nutrient source that supports
soil life requires an aerobic digestion or composting process
to occur.
Translating this principle to slurry can have the same positive
effects. BioAg’s Digest-it liquid microbial composting culture
has been proven to improve N levels by 33 per cent by
converting ammonia into the more stable organic-N form. It also
progressively composts slurry by moving the microbial balance
from anaerobic (putrid) to aerobic (composted). Slurry solids are
digested producing a more uniform slurry which requires less
energy to stir, pump and spread. Surface crusting is reduced and
odour gradually dissipates. A cost-effective ratio of 2.5:1 in slurry
fertiliser nutrient status has been shown from the composting
action of Digest-it.
Benefits
Building and maintaining soil life and fertility using the Soil
Improvement Plan will have the following benefits:
• Increased grassland production;
• Higher feeding value of grass;
• Improved mineral balance and reduction in risk
factors to cow health;
• Environmental benefits from reduction of potent
anaerobic greenhouse gases such as Nitrous Oxide,
Methane and Hydrogen Sulphide; and
• Increased livestock production from forage.
Monitor farms
Lakeland Dairies has established monitor dairy farms to evaluate
this Soil Improvement Plan over the next three years to measure its
impact on both grassland productivity and cow health.

23
hase two of a trial examining the Film&Film (F&F)
bale wrapping system has concluded that the F&F
system continued to offer better protection to baled
silage during an extended bale storage period of 13
months.
The use of the F&F wrapping system resulted in
an increased average forage yield of 5.7kg dry matter (DM) per F&F
bale. When quantified in terms of ME (metabolisable energy) this
additional 5.7kg of DM per bale, offers dairy farmers an additional
11.6l of milk production or beef farmers an additional 1.5kg of beef
production. Whilst it is generally accepted that a longer storage
period increases the opportunity for losses to occur, this second
phase of the trial demonstrated that these F&F wrapped bales, that
had been stored for over a year, had 54 per cent fewer losses on
average, compared to the traditionally wrapped net and bale wrap
bales, also produced in this trial.
The superior performance of the F&F wrapping system over a longer
storage period, follows an even better performance during phase
one of the trial, which demonstrated that the F&F wrapping system
delivered an additional 7.35kg DM per F&F bale following a more
standard six month storage period. When quantified in terms of ME,
this earlier batch of F&F bales offered dairy farmers an additional
15l of milk production or beef farmers an additional 1.9kg of beef
production. Together, both phases of this commercial farm trial have
shown that the F&F wrapping system can be beneficial to farmers.
Key findings
Whereas the phase one bales were opened and assessed 206
days after ensiling, the phase two bales were stored for a further
200 days taking their total ensiling period to 406 days. The keys
findings of the on-farm assessment and the chemical analysis of
both the F&F and net & balewrap treatments were:
• The F&F wrapping system offered better protection and
preservation to silage bales stored for extended periods;
• Whilst the total storage losses for both wrapping systems
increased with a longer storage period, the losses incurred on
the net & balewrap bales (24.5kg) were more than double those
of the F&F bales (11.4kg);
• The average mould losses for the net and bale wrap bales of
16.8 kg DM were significantly higher than the average mould
losses of 6.59 kg DM recorded for the F&F bales;
• At 13 months, the F&F bales showed a similar level of storage
losses as the net & balewrap bales had displayed at six
months;
While the longer storage period saw the sugar levels drop in both
wrapping systems, the sugar level measured in the F&F bales
(48.8 g/kg DM) was 21 per cent higher than the sugar level in net
and bale wrap bales (38.4 g/KG);
More forage
As with phase one of the trial, the reduced losses that resulted
through the use of the F&F wrapping system meant that the farmer
gained more forage to feed to his herd. For the beef farmer involved
in this trial the additional forage meant:
• The farmer gained an average of 5.7kg DM per F&F bale;
• As 1kg DM = 11.8 MJ (mega joule) ME this means that the farmer
gained 67.26 MJ ME per F&F bale;
• In order to produce 1kg of beef you need approximately 45 MJ ME;
Therefore the 67.26 MJ ME averagely gained for each F&F bale could
give an additional 1.5kg of beef production.
Although an additional 1.5kg of beef production per bale may sound
like a small gain, one should consider that, when multiplied across the
total F&F bales that a herd could consume annually, it could make a
difference.
For example, a farm using 300 F&F bales during the winter months
could potentially add 450kg of additional beef production.
In the case of a dairy farmer, the additional forage would also have
facilitated an increase in production as follows:
• A dairy farmer would gain an average of 5.7kg DM per F&F bale;
• As 1kg of DM = 11.8 MJ ME, this means that the farmer gained 67.26
MJ ME per F&F bale (5.7kg DM x 11.8 MJ ME);
• In order to produce one litre of milk you need: ± 5.8MJ/litre MJ ME.
Therefore the 67.26 MJ ME averagely gained for each of the F&F bales
could give an additional 11.6l of milk production (67.26 / 5.8 = 11.5l).
Commenting on the findings of phase two, Seán O’Connor, general
manager, Silotite Ireland said: “The extra 15l of milk production made
possible through the use of the F&F system in phase one has been
further enhanced by an additional 11.6l of milk for each F&F bale
opened in phase two. Collectively, the F&F system could provide an
overall 387.5l of extra milk or and additional 49.3kg of beef production
across the 27 bales made using the F&F system during this trial.”
“Increases of this magnitude can make a significant difference to the
profitability and success of farming operations. Switching to the F&F
system for greater bale numbers could provide tangible and ongoing
financial benefits,”he said.
Commenting on the outcomes of phase two of the F&F wrapping
comparison trial, Dr Dave Davies of Silage Solutions Ltd (the
independent consultant who conducted the trial) said: “The results for
the ‘on-farm’assessment of the bales after 406 days of ensiling are in
broad agreement with those from the 206 days assessment, with the
F&F bales being better than the net & balewrap treatment.”
“The better film seal, the lower storage losses and the lower mould
losses combined to give a lower total loss per bale which can be
quantified into real milk or beef production gains for the farmer.”
Yield benefits from film and film wrapping
Trial results examining the Film&Film bale wrapping system show that it offers better
protection during an extended bale storage period
P
Words: Dr Dave Davies, Silage Solutions Ltd

24
ignificant investment continues to be evident
in the agri sector, primarily, but not exclusively,
driven by dairy farmers due to abolition of milk
quotas. The nature of farming, like any business,
is that farmers are continually investing in their
farms, whether it is for buildings and machinery, or
measures to improve productivity or to expand from their current
position. Farm investment activity is likely to remain buoyant with
the anticipated announcement of further grant-aided schemes.
Volatility, across all farm systems, has been a feature of the agri
sector in recent years, impacting incomes and making farm planning
and cash flow management much more difficult. It is important to
account for this volatility in investment plans and ensure that the
farm business is able to weather periods of reduced income, while
taking advantage of the good years.
Volatility
It is widely accepted that not every year will be a great year in
farming, or indeed a great year for all farm sectors. Farmers
have always contended with a level of income cyclicality that has
heightened significantly in the past decade. At AIB we now consider
volatility to be the norm that we must factor in when lending to
the sector on day one. All of our research indicates that farmers
now see income volatility and weather as the key challenges in the
years ahead. In lending to the agri sector, we lend on the basis of
a through-the-cycle view of prices, factoring in periods of low and
high prices. We recognise that, in reality, some years the farm will
generate a cash surplus and some years a cash deficit that must be
managed. This is not a simple challenge.
It is useful to look at a farming sector that has been dealing with
volatility for many years.
How to
achieve full
financial
benefit when
investing
John Farrell, agri sector specialist
AIB, examines some of the key
considerations for farmers planning
farm investment, to ensure they
achieve the full financial benefit
S

25
AIB has much experience of banking the pig sector, which has long
been exposed to the vagaries of the world market, receives no
market support and experiences a high level of income volatility
exacerbated in recent years by feed price fluctuations. Pig
farmers have responded to this volatility by improving production
efficiencies on an ongoing basis, managing their cost base (in
particular feed cost), undertaking strong financial management,
including cash flow budgeting, and building a buffer cash fund in
good years to support the business through lean years.
Better before bigger
Undoubtedly, the greatest opportunity to mitigate against volatility
lies inside the farm gate. As price takers for both inputs and outputs,
improving the efficiency and cost base of the farm is central to
remaining profitable, particularly at times of low income. While lower
cost producers are not immune to the effects of income volatility,
over the long term,. they are more resilient to income swings as they
are more profitable at lower output prices and are better able to
withstand tough periods over time. A vital part of planning for the
future involves looking at the present and establishing the existing
levels of efficiency. The Teagasc Profit Monitor shows that there is
considerable scope within the farm gate to improve efficiency and
profitability among farms, across all farm sectors. The priority should
be to improve and maximise existing efficiencies before considering
further investment or expansion.
While a significant level of farm investment has taken place over the
past few years, our research shows that one-in-three farmers are
planning to make an investment in their farms in the next three years.
This figures rises to one-in-two in the dairy sector, as farmers plan to
avail of the opportunity presented by the removal of milk quotas, with
two-thirds of dairy farmers planning to increase milk output.
Our core message to farmers considering farm investment or
expansion is ‘better before bigger’. Seek to improve your efficiency and
cost base before embarking on any further investment or expansion,
otherwise the result will be a multiplication of inefficiencies
resulting in, either no, or low increased profits. Farm profitability is as
dependent on cost control and technical management as it is on scale.
Structure
When undertaking farm investment, it is important to structure
finance correctly to ensure you get the full benefit of the investment.
Borrowings should be structured over the useful life of the asset; 15
years for farm buildings and five to seven for machinery or breeding
stock. This will help ensure that you don’t put undue pressure on farm
cash flow by trying to repay a loan in an unrealistic time frame. This is
particularly true in an expansion scenario as there may be a lag period
before there is a positive impact on farm cash flow.
A well-structured investment on day one should enable you to see
the full financial benefit of the investment at an early stage. In good
income years, it can be tempting to undertake capital investment
from cash flow. If investment is undertaken from cash flow it is
essential to cost the investment properly, seeking quotations from
suppliers. Starting an investment from cash flow and running out of
money, because the investment was not accurately costed, may lead
to delays and add further to costs.
Even in cases where investment is not funded from cash flow, it is
important to understand the effect, if any, the investment may have
on the farm’s cash flow. For example, if you are building a new shed
to accommodate increased stock numbers, the cost of retaining
additional stock and the opportunity cost of not selling them needs
to be factored into plans, and this can be easily overlooked.
Management
All indications are that the level of volatility we have experienced
is likely to continue into the future. As a result, all farmers, like pig
farmers, should consider how they can ‘buffer’their business from
the effects of volatility. It is worth considering putting some cash
aside in good years to support the business through the lean years.
Forward purchasing of inputs can help manage cash flow going into
a challenging income period. For example, some farmers bought
fertiliser forward at the back end of 2014 when they had cash available
and in anticipation of the possibility of rising fertiliser prices in 2015.
For all farmers considering investment it is important to take the
necessary time to plan the investment, ensuring it fundamentally
serves to enhance and strengthen the existing operation. If you are
contemplating farm investment or seeking additional working capital,
contact AIB to see how best we can support your individual needs.
Allied Irish Banks, p.l.c. is regulated by the Central Bank of Ireland.

26
lmost 200 dairy farmers attended this
AgriSearch farm event, where the merits
of taking a moderate build-up approach
to feeding concentrates at the start of
lactation, were examined.
Drew and Valerie McConnell, along with
four other farm businesses, were involved in on-farm research,
co-funded by AgriSearch and the Department of Agriculture
and Rural Development (DARD) Research Challenge Fund,
which has sought to test a novel approach to early lactation
feeding.
Opening the on-farm debate Dr Andrew Dale of Agri-Food
and Biosciences Institute (AFBI), Hillsborough, said that most
health problems occur immediately pre-calving, or within two
to four weeks post-calving, due to physical, social, dietary and
metabolic stress. One possible way to reduce metabolic stress
levels is to delay concentrate build-up and reduce dietary
protein levels. Two studies carried out at AFBI showed that
delayed build-up strategies led to higher forage intakes, which
in turn, improved rumen health. Over the whole lactation period
there was no effect on milk yield or composition and no effect
on fertility.
Protein
The concept was then examined on five local dairy farms, including
Drew and Valerie’s, in a study involving 385 cows, calved from
October to April. One treatment involved an immediate build-up of
concentrates with normal protein levels and the other treatment
used a delayed build-up strategy with lower protein levels.
This trial showed that there is some loss of milk with the delayed
build-up, but this is compensated for, by feeding less concentrates.
In addition, conception to first service was significantly improved
with the delayed build-up strategy, although overall conception rate
was not affected.
The delayed build-up strategy could have a role on farms with high
rumen health issues. However, farms wishing to embark on this
strategy must have high quality silage available.
Taking the combined results of the Hillsborough and on-farm
studies, Dr Dale recommended that a moderate build-up approach
should be adopted, with concentrates increased over the first 21 days
of lactation.
See www.agrisearch.org for details of these and other projects
selected for support by AgriSearch, and the NI Agricultural R&D
Council.
Moderate concentrate
build-up
Farmers Drew and Valerie McConnell, from Omagh, played host
to a successful AgriSearch farm walk recently, which attracted
producers from Donegal, Leitrim and Northern Ireland
A
Ian McCluggage, Valerie McConnell, Mary McAvoy, and David Little pictured at the AgriSearch farm walk.

27
he simpler Trend mower units from Claas are
operated using the tractor spool valves without
any electric control terminal, but if required,
can be incorporated into the tractor’s headland
management. The optional individual lifting
function is operated using a hydraulic isolator
valve, which makes it possible to pre-select the mowing units.
Contour series mowers are, again, operated using the tractor’s spool
valves, but the pre-selection is made using the new Operator control
panel or an ISOBUS control terminal.
Business and Duo mower units utilise load-sensing hydraulics
and are controlled using either the new Operator terminal or the
ISOBUS-compatible Communicator II terminal, which allows the
various mower functions to be assigned to the function buttons
on the tractor’s multi-function control lever. The AutoSwather
model series is also controlled using the ISOBUS Communicator
II control terminal.
The company’s new high output triple mowers are equally
impressive. A total of seven new high output Disco triple mower
and mower conditioners are now available, ranging from the
9.10m wide Disco 9400 C Duo to the Disco 8500 Trend, which has
a working width of 8.10m. This is a new entry-level model that
has a low power requirement and is simple to operate, targeted
at medium-sized farms. The range also includes two Contour
specification models, the Disco 8500 (8.10m) and the Disco 9200
(8.90m), which are also new additions.
On Business, AutoSwather and reverse drive Duo ranges, the load
sensing hydraulic system enables active control of the ground
pressure directly via the ISOBUS control terminal. They also have a
hydraulic non-stop, break-back system as standard, which enables
the mower unit to swing back automatically without reversing.
A total of nine new mounted or trailed Contour straight mower, or
mower conditioner versions are available, ranging from the Disco
2800, which has a working width of 2.80m up to the 3.80m-wide
Disco 4000, providing a wide range of models for small and
medium-sized farms.
New features, such as the optional hydraulic transport lock, make
these models easy to operate. There is also a new unhitching option,
which allows the mower to be unhitched in the transport position
safely, and in a way which saves space. In the trailed mower range
two new models are available, the Disco 3200 TC and the TC AS
which has a conveyor system for swath grouping, both of which have
working widths of 3m.
All the new Contour models retain the hydro-pneumatic active float
suspension, which enables the ground pressure on the mower unit
to be changed from the driver’s seat when mowing and adjusted to
the conditions in the field. They are also protected by a mechanical
break-back system which moves the mower unit backwards and
up, so that it is raised above the obstacle. To continue driving, the
machine must be reversed slightly until the mechanical break-back
system is locked again.
Completing the Disco mower line-up are two front mowers, the
Disco 3200F and the Disco 3200FC mower conditioner, both of
which have a 3.00m cutting width. To ensure optimum ground
contour following, the mower units are fitted with the existing
‘Profil’kinematics. On the principle that it should be the ground
that guides the mower, and not the tractor, the mower is suspended
and pulled using a trailing linkage around a pivot point close to the
ground.
This allows the mower bed to swing both longitudinally and laterally,
so accurately following the ground contours independent of the
tractor front axle. There is a choice of spring-based suspension
or the hydro-pneumatic active float suspension to allow the
suspension to be adjusted to the current conditions at any time
from the cab.
An impressive
Claas of mowers
Claas has introduced some very
impressive upgrades to its mower
ranges. Editor of Irish Farmers
Monthly, Matt O’Keeffe, gives an
overview of the offering
Words: Matt O’Keeffe, Editor Irish Farmers Monthly
T

28
Profitable lamb production trials at UCD
Dr Tommy Boland discusses UCD researchers’ sheep grazing trials, and their
findings, in the exploration of profitable lamb production
ver the last three to four years, the national
sheep flock has stabilised and began to
increase, indicating a degree of confidence in
the industry. This is coupled with increased
lamb prices over the last number of years, but
seasonal variability remains. Perhaps this was
most stark in 2014 when lamb prices dropped by €20 per head in
the space of a couple of weeks. The real negative impact of this was
on farmers who were feeding high levels of concentrates to ensure
lambs finished for the higher priced early market, but failed to quite
make it. To a large degree the price farmers receive for the lamb is
dictated by outside influences and only partially under the control
of the farmer. The same can be said of input prices, but the farmer
can exercise more control over the volume of inputs utilised. Sheep
profit monitor figures for 2013 (the most recent available) show that
feed and fertiliser are the two main variable costs on lowland sheep
farming, accounting for a combined total of 57 per cent of total
variable costs incurred.
Supplementation
Research work at Lyons Research Farm, University College
Dublin (UCD), is looking at ways to reduce these costs. Frank
Campion is engaged in a PhD looking at the nutritional
management of the ewe throughout the production cycle. His
work in 2014 focused on concentrate supplementation of twin
suckling ewes during the first seven weeks of lactation.
Milk yield in a twin suckling ewe will peak at three to four weeks
after lambing. The lamb will begin to consume solid feed at
around seven weeks of age, although this can happen significantly
sooner depending on the system.
Concentrate supplementation during this early lactation window
is quite common on Irish sheep farms. But, the question remains
as to whether or not we see an improvement in performance, and
most importantly, a financial return on the investment.
Three treatments
Frank’s study consisted of three treatments, with ewes all
offered grass to appetite. In addition, one group received 500g of
concentrates per day for the first three weeks of the lactation, the
second group received 500g of concentrates per day for the first
seven weeks of lactation and the final group received no concentrate
supplementation.
In this study, grass was zero grazed and fed to the ewes indoors. We
needed to do this to accurately measure intakes. Grass offered was
of high quality throughout the study with an average pre-grazing
herbage mass of 1,100kg dry matter (DM) per hectare. The findings
indicated that when concentrates were offered, intakes of grass
declined and offering concentrates had no beneficial effects in terms
of increasing total daily (DM) intake.
Ewes offered concentrates throughout the feeding period did
regain more body weight and body condition prior to weaning and
they tended to produce more milk than their un-supplemented
counterparts. It also appears that ewes, supplemented with
concentrates, tend to have a more persistent lactation curve than the
un-supplemented ewes.
These differences in milk yield were not transferred to improvements
in lamb growth rates. This may be partially explained by the fact that
milk yield differences were not observed until week six of lactation
and the supplement was removed in week seven of lactation.
O
Words: Dr Tommy Boland, UCD

29
The findings
These findings would indicate that where adequate supplies of good
quality grass are available in springtime for twin suckling ewes,
performance benefits from concentrate supplementation are minimal.
It is important to state that these ewes were fed indoors and repeating
this work outdoors is required before final conclusions can be drawn.
An additional, and perhaps even more important finding from this
study, is the impact grass moisture content has on the intake of grass,
and more accurately grass DM. On wet days and days when grass DM
was low, intake was significantly reduced. For the range of grass DM
recorded in this study, as grass DM increased, we witnessed an intake
increase of 20 per cent. This suggests that even where good quality
grass is available, intake can be greatly restricted in wet conditions.
As this study was conducted indoors, one could reasonably expect
that the impact would be even greater in outdoor grazing conditions,
where the wet weather conditions will alter the animals’grazing
behaviour.
Alternative mixtures
The second area of study we are engaged in is examining the role of
alternative grazing mixtures in the grazing rotation for sheep. This
work is being carried out by Connie Grace, in conjunction with doctors
Bridget Lynch and Helen Sheridan. This year we have four
farmlets established at Lyons’s farm, containing pastures
consisting of one of the following mixtures: perennial ryegrass
only; perennial ryegrass plus white clover; a six species mix
(two grasses; perennial ryegrass and timothy, two legumes;
white clover and red clover, two herbs; plantain and chicory);
and a nine species mix (three grasses; perennial ryegrass,
timothy and cocksfoot, three legumes; white clover, red clover
and birdsfoot trefoil, three herbs; plantain, chicory and yarrow).
The focus of our part of the study is to examine the level
of animal performance which can be supported by these
multi-species swards that are known to give benefits form an
ecological and biodiversity point of view. Our early results,
from plot based studies, clearly show that these types of
mixtures have very good DM production potential with
yields of up to 19 tonnes of DM achieved with some mixtures.
Questions remain about the quality of DM, particularly in
terms of digestibility. Other questions revolve around the
seasonality of production and the persistency of the various
components of the sward under sheep grazing management.
The next two years will hopefully answer some of these
questions and can potentially point to new sward mixtures for
sheep grazing.

30
his new era of quota-less production provides a
fantastic opportunity for Irish milk producers. It is
worth stating however, that it is about producing
more milk, as an industry, and not a race to have
as many cows as possible. All of the talk is about
controlling feed and variable costs, but fixed costs
can easily spiral out of control if extra cows are put on a farm where
further infrastructure is required.
There is a new quota on the way in the form of land and labour. Very
high figures are quoted for rented land at present in an effort to get
more grass for all the extra cows. Skilled labour for the expanding
dairy enterprises will also prove difficult to source.
Exploiting potential
For all milk producers, exploiting the optimum potential of grazed
grass should form the basis of their management systems. It is still
by far the cheapest feed on a dry matter (DM) basis. But before it can
be utilised effectively, it is necessary to ensure that it is managed
correctly. Many of the grazing problems that occur are associated with
the mismanagement of grass in early season, up to first cut silage.
Grass management
I often have to remind dairy farmers that it is their responsibility
- and not their cows’- to manage their grass! Under-utilisation,
by either delaying turnout or by applying insufficient grazing
pressure, will waste grass and result in poorer quality swards in
later season.
Over-stocking of grazing ground in poor conditions can result in
poaching which may do permanent damage to the grass quality.
Ultimately, in order to optimise your cows’genetic potential you
must feed and manage them properly. Be sure to complement
grass when they can’t eat enough of it, or don’t have access to
enough of it.
It is worth remembering that if cows respond to feeding with extra
production, and there is a positive economic response, then it is
correct to keep feeding them. However, if cows don’t respond to
extra feeding then stop feeding them. Too often we are told that
cows need nothing other than grazed grass. This is not an accurate
reflection of the quality of cows on most Irish dairy farms. Now
that quotas are gone, many will discover that with good nutrition
management, their cows are much better than they have given
them credit for.
Reseeding
Providing a good diet for dairy production is vital to maximise
on-farm profit. Reseeding grassland is an important way to
ensure quality forage. The benefits can be seen in a number of
ways. New grass swards will provide higher yields of quality
grass at lower costs, with a 25 per cent (and upwards) increase in
DM yields, an increase in digestibility, and therefore, improved
animal performance. Reseeded swards also respond much better
to nitrogen (N) application. Key signs that reseeding is needed
include: a noticeable decrease in silage quality; patchiness in the
sward; a decrease in milk production in a particular field; and a high
proportion of weed grasses compared to perennial ryegrasses.
Challenges of post-quota
milk production
For the first time in 31 years, milk production is free from quotas, but
it is important not to lose focus on what matters most, and that is
overall farm profit and return on investment
T
Words: Brian Reidy, Premier Farm Nutrition

31
Production
The above factors not only affect grazed grass quality but also the
quality of grass silage, which may be conserved off these swards.
Livestock are the best judges of the feeds which we provide them
with. As with grazing, the starting point for good quality silage is
the sward. Old permanent pastures are likely to be more difficult to
ensile and will have a lower feed value than ryegrass swards which
have high sugar contents and are ideal for ensiling. The heading date
of varieties has a large impact on cutting date and subsequent feed
value as the feed value will fall rapidly as seed heads are produced.
Grassland deteriorates with age and unbelievably only 50 per cent
of the sown species remain in most swards after five years! The
presence of a high proportion of weeds in a sward results in later
growth, lower digestibility of grass, lower digestibility of silage, lower
palatability, lower yields, slower growth and a poorer response to
N. All this means that inferior quality food is being provided for the
high producing animals on the farm.
Poor quality forage sources result in an increased dependency on
more expensive concentrates. When ensiling grass it is vital to try
to maximise the DM and metabolisable energy (ME) values of the
silage. Good intake characteristics and energy will result in better
productivity from the forage and as a result a reduction in milk
production costs. Remember also that poor quality silage will have a
detrimental effect on replacement heifer growth and performance.
Small heifers never mature into good cows that last in your herd.
The basics
On most dairy farms in Ireland, grass silage is not of desired quality.
That statement may not please farmers but it is a reality. Silage
quality has not improved in Ireland over the last 25 years, despite all
the technology and information now available.
What do we need to do better?:
• Soil science needs to be used to establish the appropriate
nutrients required to grow a successful crop of silage;
• N application for silage really should be split in two to feed the
crop when it needs it rather than spreading it all in the one day
and hoping it all gets used;
• First cut silage should be cut in the first two to three weeks of
May, if good quality is to be achieved;
• There should be good field practice with regard to mowing and
rake usage. Leave the clay in the field;
• The decision to use an additive should be based on the desire
to ensile a good quality grass, ensuring you get to feed a good
quality silage;
• Compact the silage very well in the pit and cover it properly
eliminating air; and
• When feeding out silage the pit face must be managed to prevent
waste - a shear grab really should be used.
Changing practices
Over the last few years silage production practices have changed
and many have had a negative effect on silage quality. I often see
that mowers are cutting too tight, resulting in clay entering the
silage pit, causing contamination and moulds. Perhaps we should
go back to rolling silage fields in the spring! Also of concern is the
use of rakes on silage which are set too tight to the ground, raking
in further clay. The above issues have seen moulds and toxins in
a significant number of silage pits in the last few years. High ash
readings in analysis are confirming this problem. There is also a
tendency to over wilt silage. Grass really should not spend longer
than 24 hrs on the ground before getting to the pit. Over-dry silage
is difficult to ensile and does not feed well.
Better nutrition
More and more producers will look at getting extra milk from
each cow in their herd. This will be driven by a scarcity of available
grazing ground, a requirement to spend more on facilities and a
lack of labour. Firstly, if cows can milk more over their lactation
they need to consume more food and utilise it well. Higher yielders
are associated with fertility problems, however that is too easy
an excuse to give for cows not going in calf. The main reason
that dairy cows do not go back in calf on Irish farms is a lack of
energy during the critical periods post calving right through to the
breeding season.
Alternatives
With land limitations due to availability and rental costs, many
have looked at outsourcing feed and forages for milk production.
Rather than producing all of the silage required on the grazing
platform many are now buying maize silage and whole-crop
cereals for their cows. Growing or purchasing maize silage or
whole-crop cereals are actually cheaper per tonne of DM than
home produced grass silage and far cheaper than producing silage
on rented ground. Apart from being cheaper these alternative
forages also provide a more reliable source of quality forage for
efficient milk production. In a year when silage quality is not
good due to conditions outside your control it must still be fed
and either you accept underperformance or you spend a lot of
extra money to maintain performance, either way you are out of
pocket. Apart from providing a more reliable forage source these
alternative forages are an ideal complement to grazed grass. As
buffer feeds where cows cannot meet their energy requirements
from grazed grass, these forages are ideal as they are low in protein
and high in energy in the form of starch. This means that they are
a good complement to grazed grass and have a very low grass
replacement relative to concentrates.

32
arm deaths comprised 55 per cent of all workplace
deaths in 2014, even though just 6 per cent of the
workforce is employed in the sector. This sad fact
must motivate us all to cut the level of tragedy,
pain and suffering associated with farming.
Farm accidents occur for a wide range of reasons,
Figure 1. indicates that farm vehicles and machines, livestock,
collapsing objects and slurry incidents account for 89 per cent of
accidental deaths.
Prevention strategies use the following approaches: firstly they
remove hazards from the farm environment and then influence
human behaviour to adopt safe procedures. These strategies are
urgently needed for Irish farming.
Profile
The risk of being struck or crushed by a moving vehicle has increased
substantially and is now the predominant cause of farm deaths. In
2014, 16 (60 per cent) deaths were associated with farm vehicles or
machines and the majority involve crushes or blows.
Over time, the size of the average Irish tractor has increased, and
as a consequence, good visibility in all directions may not always
be achievable when operating such a vehicle. It is vital to ensure
that people, particularly older farmers and children, are not in the
vicinity of moving vehicles in the farmyard.
There have been a number crush deaths associated with tractors
rolling away in farmyards. These are silent killers! Farmers,
preoccupied with the task at hand, do not see or hear the vehicle
coming until it is too late.
There have been several deaths associated with baled silage
also. Farmers have been crushed either by a falling bale, or while
removing the bale wrapping with the load raised.
Safety
Attention is needed when parking vehicles to prevent ‘run-away’
which can occur on slopes, and can result in crushing. The principal
precautions are as follows:
Managing the risks
of farming
Following a tragic 2014 when 30 people died in
farm accidents, farm safety must be given top
priority by all in the sector
F
Words: John McNamara, Teagasc farm safety specialist
Farm vehicles, machinery and collapsing objects are among the causes of 89 per cent of accidental deaths on farms.

33
• Stop the engine, leave the fuel-control in the shut-off position
and remove the key;
• Apply the handbrake securely;
• Park on level ground where possible. Leave the vehicle in gear.
If on a slope, use the reverse gear if facing downhill and low
forward gear if facing uphill;
• Use wheel stops if necessary to prevent a vehicle rolling from its
parked position; and
• As vehicles vary in operating procedures, always follow the
handbook instructions.
The majority of accidents with power take-off (PTO) occur when
using stationary-operated machines, particularly slurry tankers,
slurry agitators or grain rollers, so particular care is needed in
these situations. Ensure complete covering of the power-shaft and
adopt a work procedure where you do not operate near the rotating
shaft. Also, particular care is needed when adjacent to operating
stationary-powered machines, such as diet feeders. Getting caught
in the moving parts can be fatal.
Tyre inflation
Tyre-pumping practices should be reviewed following two tragic
tyre-related farm accidents in 2014. The Health and Safety
Executive in Britain has issued a guidance leaflet on safety during
tyre inflation in motor vehicle repair, including agricultural-type
tyres. This is available http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg433.pdf and
should be read in its entirety.
This leaflet advocates using a clip-on chuck to connect the air line
with a quick-release coupling at the operator’s end. Use an air line
hose long enough to allow the operator to stay outside the likely
explosion trajectory during inflation.
Use enough bead lubricant when seating the tyre and remove the
air line after use to prevent air seepage and possible over inflation.
Don’t use a valve connector that requires the operator to hold it in
place, and don’t exceed the recommended tyre pressure. Do not use
unrestricted air lines or allow the control valve to be jammed open.
Load collapses
Loads collapsing or falling, particularly from heights, and untidy
farmyards are associated with a significant number of deaths. Farms
are dynamic places and this aspect of managing the farm needs to be
kept under constant review. Particular attention needs to be given
to positioning sharp objects in a safe manner and securing weights,
for example, unattached heavy gates can pose a particular threat to
children. Always consider the safest way to access heights and use a
safe platform with edge protection.
Freshly calved
A recent trend in livestock accidents is an increase in the number
of fatal accidents involving freshly calved cows. The number is
now almost as high as bull fatalities. Farmers should use a range
of protective measures when handling these cows, including using
facilities to minimise contact with them, culling animals that show
aggression, and breeding for docility. Vigilance is always required in
the presence of cows and calves.
Risk assessment
Completing and updating a risk assessment document is a legal
requirement under the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act
(2005). In this document, key questions regarding safety and health
are asked and information on causes of accidents, along with
pictures of key controls, are provided. Safety and health actions
needing attention should be listed and acted upon.
The document should be kept on the farm and a HSA inspector can
examine the document during an inspection. The HSA recently
announced that it plans to use a direct prosecution approach in the
following situations: children under-seven carried as passengers on
tractors; and uncovered power-shafts and slurry tanks.
Safety training
Teagasc provides half-day training courses to farmers on completion
of the risk assessment document. The feed-back from half-day
training courses is very positive. Ninety nine percent of farmers
agreed that it would be worthwhile to offer the course to all farmers,
97 per cent of farmers agreed that the course motivated them to
implement health and safety measures while 100 per cent stated
that they planned to make health and safety improvements on their
farms.
Discussion groups
Teagasc will be highlighting farm health and safety issues in its
publications, at events and particularly at discussion groups during
2015. Discussion groups are particularly valuable due to their
interactive nature. Sometimes it may be hard to spot hazards on
your own farm. Why not ask a friend or neighbour to take a look
around and suggest ways to improve safety.
Machinery, 36, 19%
Livestock, 26, 13%
Drowning/Gas, 22, 11%
Falls from height, 17, 9%
Falling objects/Collapses, 14, 7%
Timber related, 13, 7%
Electrocution, 3, 2%
Others, 4, 2%
Tractors/Farm vehicles, 58, 30%
Figure 1.

Forage & Nutrition Guide 2015-

Forage & Nutrition Guide 2015-

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Forage & Nutrition Guide 2015-

Similar to Forage & Nutrition Guide 2015- (20)

More from de Paor Consultancy

More from de Paor Consultancy (14)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Forage & Nutrition Guide 2015-