Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
FrancoAngeli Journals

Regular Articles

Vol. 24 No. 1 (2022)

Short-Term Impact of a Zero Concentrate Supplementation on Organic Dairy Production

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3280/ecag2022oa12367
Submitted
agosto 12, 2021
Published
2022-02-18

Abstract

This study investigates the short-term economic impact of a zero-concentrate supplementation in organic dairy production systems with Holstein cows. Based on experimental data and using prices recorded in 2018 in Switzerland, the study calculates the difference in profits between two annual herbage-based feed rations: one supplemented with 750 kg and the other containing 0 kg concentrates per cow and lactation. The cut in concentrates led to a considerable increase in the average culling rate (14.4 percentage points). If it is assumed that the culling rate cannot be lowered by means of breeding or management adjustments, a zero-concentrate supplementation leads to a 375 CHF drop in profit per cow and year, which is equivalent to a 14% decrease in the remuneration of labor input. If the culling rate could be decreased to the status quo, then not feeding concentrates leads to a smaller, non-significant decrease in profits of 141 CHF per cow and year. Overall, it is concluded that there is a short-term trade-off between profitability and a reduction in concentrates. A zero-concentrate supplementation would be economically feasible only if the culling rate can be kept under control, for instance, by using adapted cow breeds. However, high-quality roughage is a prerequisite and may be more difficult to produce in alpine regions with less favorable production conditions.

References

  1. Agristat (2018). Statistisches Monatsheft Februar 2018 bis Januar 2019. Brugg: Schweizer Bauernverband.
  2. Agristat (2019). Statistische Erhebungen und Schätzungen über Landwirtschaft und Ernährung 2018. Brugg: Schweizer Bauernverband.
  3. Agroscope (2016). Fütterungsempfehlungen für Wiederkäuer – Grünes Buch. -- www.agroscope.ch/gruenes-buch.
  4. Altwegg, D. and Sektion Geoinformation (2015). Die Bodennutzung in der Schweiz. Auswertungen und Analysen. Neuchatel: Swiss Federal Statistic Office.
  5. BioSuisse (2020a). Who is BioSuisse. Retrieved March 2, 2020, -- from www.biosuisse.ch/en/whoisbiosuisse.php.
  6. BioSuisse (2020b). Bio-Richtpreise Archiv. -- Retrieved 21 February, 2020, from www.bioaktuell.ch/markt/biomarkt/markt-Biofleisch-allgemein/schlachtvieh/richtpreise.html.
  7. BioSuisse (2021). Richtlinien für die Erzeugung, Verarbeitung und den Handel von Knospe-Produkten. -- Retrieved April 8, 2021, from www.bio-suisse.ch/media/Produzenten/Richtlinien/bio_suisse-richtlinien_2021_de_def.pdf.
  8. Federal Office for Agriculture (2020). -- Retrieved 25 February, 2020, from www.blw.admin.ch/blw/de/home/markt/marktbeobachtung/milch.html.
  9. Cerca, M., Mann, S., Kohler, A., Wunderlich, A., Logatcheva, K., van Galen, M., Helmling, J., van Berkum, S., Rau, M.L., & Baltussen, W. (2019). Concentrate animal feed as an input good in Swiss agricultural production – The effects of border protection and other support measures. Bern: SECO.
  10. Delaby, L., Faverdin, P., Michel, G., Disenhaus, C., & Peyraud, J.L. (2009). Effect of different feeding strategies on lactation performance of Holstein and Normande dairy cows. Animal, 3(6): 891-905. doi: 10.1017/S1751731109004212.
  11. Ertl, P., Knaus, W., & Steinwidder, A. (2014). Comparison of zero concentrate supplementation with different quantities of concentrates in terms of production, animal health, and profitability of organic dairy farms in Austria. Organic Agriculture, 4(3): 233-242. doi: 10.1007/s13165-014-0077-z.
  12. FiBL (2020). Fütterungsrichtlinien 2020 nach BioSuisse. Merkblatt Nr. 1398. Research Institute of Organic Agriculture, Frick.
  13. FAO (2020). FAOSTAT Producer Prices – Annual. -- Retrieved March 5, 2020, from www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/PP.
  14. Frehner, A., Muller, A., Schader, C., Boer, I.J.M.D., & Zanten, H.H.E.V. (2020). Methodological choices drive differences in environmentally-friendly dietary solutions. Global Food Security, 24, 100333. doi: 10.1016/j.gfs.2019.100333.
  15. Gazzarin, C., Amman, H., Schick, M., Van Caenegem, L., & Lips, M. (2005). Milchproduktionssysteme in der Tal- und Hügelregion. Was ist optimal für die Zukunft? Tänikon: Agroscope.
  16. Hoop, D., Spörri, M., Zorn, A., Gazzarin, C. & Lips, M. (2017). Wirtschaftlichkeitsrechnungen auf Betriebszweigebene. In: M. Lips (Ed.),
  17. Wirtschaftliche Heterogenität auf Stufe Betrieb und Betriebszweig. Tänikon: Agroscope.
  18. Hoop, D., Schiltknecht, P., Dux-Bruggmann, D., Jan, P., Renner, S., & Schmid, D. (2019). Grundlagenbericht 2018. Tänikon: Agroscope.
  19. Ivemeyer, S., Walkenhorst, M., Holinger, M., Maeschli, A., Klocke, P., Neff, A.S., Staehli, P., Krieger, M., & Notz, C. (2014). Changes in herd health, fertility and production under roughage based feeding conditions with reduced concentrate input in Swiss organic dairy herds. Livestock Science, 168: 159-167. doi: 10.1016/j.livsci.2014.08.009.
  20. Mack, G., Heitkämper, K., Käufeler, B., & Möbius, S. (2017). Evaluation der Beiträge für Graslandbasierte Milch- und Fleischproduktion (GMF). Tänikon: Agroscope.
  21. Leiber, F., Schenk, I.K., Maeschli, A., Ivemeyer, S., Zeitz, J.O., Moakes, S., Klocke, P., Staehli, P., Notz, C., & Walkenhorst, M. (2017). Implications of feed concentrate reduction in organic grassland-based dairy systems: a long-term onfarm study. Animal, 11(11):, 2051-2060. doi: 10.1017/S1751731117000830.
  22. R Core Team (2020). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna.
  23. Röös, E., Bajželj, B., Smith, P., Patel, M., Little, D., & Garnett, T. (2017). Greedy or needy? Land use and climate impacts of food in 2050 under different livestock futures. Global Environmental Change, 47: 1-12. doi: 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2017.09.001.
  24. Schader, C., Muller, A., Scialabba, N.E.-H., Hecht, J., Isensee, A., Erb, K.-H., Smith, P., Makkar, H.P., Klocke, P., Leiber, F., & others (2015). Impacts of feeding less food-competing feedstuffs to livestock on global food system sustainability. Journal of the Royal Society Interface, 12(113), 20150891. doi: 10.1098/rsif.2015.0891.
  25. Swiss Farmers Union. (2020). Richtpreise für Futtermittel. Retrieved 25 February, 2020, -- from www.sbv-usp.ch/de/preise/pflanzenbau/futtermittel/.
  26. Schori, F., & Münger, A. (2021) Effects of an all-herbage versus a concentratesupplemented ration on productivity, body condition, medical treatments and reproduction in two Holstein cow types under organic conditions. Livestock Science, 257. doi: 10.1016/j.livsci.2021.104768.
  27. Soder, K.J., & Rotz, C.A. (2001). Economic and Environmental Impact of Four Levels of Concentrate Supplementation in Grazing Dairy Herds. Journal of Dairy Science, 84(11): 2560-2572. doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(01)74709-1.
  28. Swissgenetics (2020). Requested price information provided by phone.
  29. Van Zanten, H.H.E., Herrero, M., Van Hal, O., Röös, E., Muller, A., Garnett, T., Gerber, P.J., Schader, C., & De Boer, I.J.M. (2018). Defining a land boundary for sustainable livestock consumption. Global Change Biology, 24(9): 4185-4194. doi: 10.1111/gcb.14321.
  30. UFA (2020). Requested price information provided by e-mail.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...