This paper presents a summary of results from a 2012 survey that investigated feeding and housing management regimens currently adopted by dairy farmers in Britain. Responses from 863 farms provide a snapshot of dairy industry structure and a description of the range of management systems currently in operation. Outcomes highlight a diversity of management practices, showing that 31% of farms maintained a traditional grazing system with no forage feeding indoors during the summer, whereas 38% of farmers indicated that all their milking cows received some feeding indoors during the summer. A system of housing dairy cows for 24 h/d while they are lactating was implemented by 8% of farms, whereas 1% of farms did not house their cows at any time of the year. Statistical analyses were carried out on 3 distinct groups identified from survey responses: (1) farmers who did not undertake any indoor feeding during the summer; (2) farmers who fed all their milking cows indoors during the summer; and (3) farmers who continuously housed their cows for 24h/d while lactating. Results showed a significant relationship between management type and herd size, and between management type and breed type; on average, herd sizes were larger within systems that feed indoors. No significant relationship was found between management type and farm location when classified by estimated grassland productivity. The results indicate that traditional all-summer grazing is no longer the predominant system adopted by dairy farmers and that other systems such as all-year-round indoor feeding and continuous housing are becoming more prevalent in Britain.

Agriculture across the globe needs to produce "more with less." Productivity should be increased in a sustainable manner so that the environment is not further degraded, management practices are both socially acceptable and economically favorable, and future generations are not disadvantaged. The objective of this paper was to compare the environmental efficiency of 2 divergent strains of Holstein-Friesian cows across 2 contrasting dairy management systems (grazing and nongrazing) over multiple years and so expose any genetic × environment (G × E) interaction. The models were an extension of the traditional efficiency analysis to account for undesirable outputs (pollutants), and estimate efficiency measures that allow for the asymmetric treatment of desirable outputs (i.e., milk production) and undesirable outputs. Two types of models were estimated, one considering production inputs (land, nitrogen fertilizers, feed, and cows) and the other not, thus allowing the assessment of the effect of inputs by comparing efficiency values and rankings between models. Each model type had 2 versions, one including 2 types of pollutants (greenhouse gas emissions, nitrogen surplus) and the other 3 (greenhouse gas emissions, nitrogen surplus, and phosphorus surplus). Significant differences were found between efficiency scores among the systems. Results indicated no G × E interaction; however, even though the select genetic merit herd consuming a diet with a higher proportion of concentrated feeds was most efficient in the majority of models, cows of the same genetic merit on higher forage diets could be just as efficient. Efficiency scores for the low forage groups were less variable from year to year, which reflected the uniformity of purchased concentrate feeds. The results also indicate that inputs play an important role in the measurement of environmental efficiency of dairy systems and that animal health variables (incidence of udder health disorders and body condition score) have a significant effect on the environmental efficiency of each dairy system. We conclude that traditional narrow measures of performance may not always distinguish dairy farming systems best fitted to future requirements.

No abstract

Applying holistic indicators to assess dairy farm efficiency is essential for sustainable milk production. Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) has been instrumental for the calculation of such indicators. However, ‘additive’ DEA models have been rarely used in dairy research. This study presented an additive model known as slacks-based measure (SBM) of efficiency and its advantages over DEA models used in most past dairy studies. First, SBM incorporates undesirable outputs as actual outputs of the production process. Second, it identifies the main production factors causing inefficiency. Third, these factors can be ‘priced’ to estimate the cost of inefficiency. The value of SBM for efficiency analyses was demonstrated with a comparison of four contrasting dairy management systems in terms of technical and environmental efficiency. These systems were part of a multiple-year breeding and feeding systems experiment (two genetic lines: select vs. control; and two feeding strategies: high forage vs. low forage, where the latter involved a higher proportion of concentrated feeds) where detailed data were collected to strict protocols. The select genetic herd was more technically and environmentally efficient than the control herd, regardless of feeding strategy. However, the efficiency performance of the select herd was more volatile from year to year than that of the control herd. Overall, technical and environmental efficiency were strongly and positively correlated, suggesting that when technically efficient, the four systems were also efficient in terms of undesirable output reduction. Detailed data such as those used in this study are increasingly becoming available for commercial herds through precision farming. Therefore, the methods presented in this study are growing in importance.