Wastage of conserved fodder when feeding livestock

Stockdale, CR

doi:10.1071/an09164

Cited by 12 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While larger total losses (e.g., ≥12%) are reported over all stages of hay or silage harvest [40][41][42] the processes and equipment employed vary greatly, and some of these losses may occur during stages after harvest quantities are reported. Second, to account for fodder losses during sale and/or transfer, storage, delivery, and feeding, we subtracted an additional 17% from quantities of all hay, haylage, silage, and crop residues collected for fodder and we subtracted an additional 10% from all reported "market feeds" including primary crop, grain and byproduct feed items [43][44][45][46][47].…”

Section: Annual Fodder Stocks Per Nation Estimation Of Fodder Losses and Waste And Fodder Intakementioning

confidence: 99%

Global Rangeland Primary Production and Its Consumption by Livestock in 2000–2010

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Livestock grazing occupies ca. 25% of global ice-free land, removing large quantities of carbon (C) from global rangelands (here, including grass- and shrublands). The proportion of total livestock intake that is supplied by grazing (GP) is estimated at >50%, larger than the proportion from crop- and byproduct-derived fodders. Both rangeland productivity and its consumption through grazing are difficult to quantify, as is grazing intensity (GI), the proportion of annual aboveground net primary productivity (ANPP) removed from rangelands by grazing livestock. We develop national or sub-national level estimates of GI and GP for 2000–2010, using remote sensing products, inventory data, and model simulations, and accounting for recent changes in livestock intake, fodder losses and waste, and national cropland use intensities. Over the 11 study years, multi-model average global rangeland ANPP varied between the values of 13.0 Pg C in 2002 and 13.96 Pg C in 2000. The global requirement for grazing intake increased monotonically by 18%, from 1.54 in 2000 to 1.82 Pg C in 2010. Although total global rangeland ANPP is roughly an order of magnitude larger than grazing demand, much of this total ANPP is unavailable for grazing, and national or sub-national deficits between intake requirements and available rangeland ANPP occurred in each year, totaling 36.6 Tg C (2.4% of total grazing intake requirement) in 2000, and an unprecedented 77.8 Tg C (4.3% of global grazing intake requirement) in 2010. After accounting for these deficits, global average GI ranged from 10.7% in 2000 to 12.6% in 2009 and 2010. The annually increasing grazing deficits suggest that rangelands are under significant pressure to accommodate rising grazing demand. Greater focus on observing, understanding, and managing the role of rangelands in feeding livestock, providing ecosystem services, and as part of the global C cycle, is warranted.

show abstract

Section: Annual Fodder Stocks Per Nation Estimation Of Fodder Losses and Waste And Fodder Intakementioning

confidence: 99%

Global Rangeland Primary Production and Its Consumption by Livestock in 2000–2010

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, conservation imposes additional costs on the production, conservation and handling of forage, along with wastage during the feeding of the conserved forage (Stockdale 2010). Dairy systems in south-eastern Australia are inherently efficient due to their high levels of utilisation of homegrown forage (Dillon et al 2005) and low cost of production.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Climate change effects on pasture-based dairy systems in south-eastern Australia

Pembleton¹,

Cullen²,

Rawnsley³

et al. 2020

Crop & Pasture Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Increases in temperature, along with possible decreases in rainfall will influence the production of forage on Australian dairy farms. A biophysical simulation study was undertaken to compare the performance of perennial pastures and annual forage cropping systems under historical and two possible future climate scenarios for three key dairy locations of southeastern Australia. Pastures and forage cropping systems were simulated with the biophysical models DairyMod and APSIM, respectively for a location with a heavy reliance on irrigation (Dookie, Victoria), a location with a partial reliance on irrigation (Elliott, Tasmania) and a dryland location (Terang, Victoria). The historical climate scenario (baseline scenario) had no augmentation to climate data and an atmospheric CO2 concentration of 380 ppm, while the two future climate scenarios had either a 1 o C increase in temperatures (with an atmospheric CO2 concentration of 435 ppm) and a concurrent 10% decrease in rainfall (+1/-10 scenario) or a 2 o C increase in temperatures (with an atmospheric CO2 concentration of 535 ppm) and a concurrent 20% decrease in rainfall and (+2/-20 scenario). Mean annual dry matter (DM) yields (t DM/ha) at Dookie of the forage cropping options and the pasture systems increased under both the future climate scenarios but more irrigation was required. At Terang, the forage cropping systems increased yield while the yield of the pasture systems decreased under the future climate senarious. At Elliott, irrigated pastures and cropping systems increase yield while there was minimal or a negative impact on dryland pastures and cropping systems yields under the futre climate senarious. At all three locations forage production in the colder months of the year increased with a decrease in production during the warmer months. This study indicates that double cropping and irrigated pasture systems at all three locations appear resilient to projected changes in climate, however, for irrigated systems this assumes a reliable supply of irrigation water. The systems implications of how a shift in the seasonality of forage supply within these options impacts on the farm system as a whole warrants further investigation.

show abstract

“…A survey of dry cows grazing kale in Canterbury, NZ revealed that DMI is typically lower than targeted by farmers, which the authors attributed to inaccuracy in feed allocation (Judson & Edwards 2008). Supplementary feed wastage can range from 4 to 46% in good weather conditions, and is increased in wet weather and with increasing feed allocation (Stockdale 2010), so the 88% utilisation estimated by surveyed farmers here may be an over estimation, although the mean crop utilisation of 83% is similar to the 80% reported by Judson and Edwards (2008). More accurate feed allocation combined with Lwt monitoring may help improve heifer performance on farms.…”

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 99%

Commercial practice of out-wintering dairy heifers in Great Britain

Atkins

Walley

Sinclair

2020

Journal of NZ Grasslands

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The majority of dairy cattle in Great Britain (GB) are housed during winter but replacement heifers are out-wintered on some farms, a practice that may reduce the need for high capital-cost housing and facilitate herd expansion. Dairy farmers that were out-wintering replacement heifers in GB in 2012 were surveyed to determine current practice and attitudes. A typical system involved heifers strip grazing pasture or a crop, with baled grass silage as supplementary feed; strongly resembling outdoor wintering systems in New Zealand. Many used more than one grazed forage; predominantly, pasture on 68%, kale on 53% and fodder beet on 33% of farms. Supplementary feed was 44% of the diet in younger, and 35% in older heifers. Although farms were approximately three times larger than the national average and 60% were expanding, expanding herd size was not the primary reason for out-wintering, with the main reasons being to reduce cost and improve animal health and welfare. Farmers that out-wintered heifers typically reported good animal average dairy gain of 0.6 kg/d and high body condition, however, this contrasts with some measured performance in GB. Farmers may benefit from accurate feed allocation and monitoring heifer live weight during winter to ensure high performance.

show abstract

Wastage of conserved fodder when feeding livestock

Cited by 12 publications

References 12 publications

Global Rangeland Primary Production and Its Consumption by Livestock in 2000–2010

Global Rangeland Primary Production and Its Consumption by Livestock in 2000–2010

Climate change effects on pasture-based dairy systems in south-eastern Australia

Commercial practice of out-wintering dairy heifers in Great Britain

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About