ARCHIVE FILE
This article was published in 1967
See the original document
INSTITUTE OF INSPECTORS OF STOCK OF N.S.W. YEAR BOOK.
Observations on Livestock Production Trends Overseas
J. M. HOLDER, B.V.Sc., Ph.D., Agricultural Research Station, Wollongbar
In an address limited by a time schedule it is impossible to more than highlight some of the observations I made during a tour through New Zealand, North America and Europe in 1966. To this end I shall restrict observations to aspects of the dairy, beef cattle and pig industries. I should emphasise that the primary objective of my tour was to assess progress being made in nutrition and management research associated with these industries. Thus many of my observations, regarding production trends particularly, were made in passing.
1. The Dairy Industry:
(a) New Zealand: Traditionally possessing the most efficient dairy industry in the world for the production of milk from pasture, New Zealand is currently passing through a period of "agonising reappraisal" when even apparently high production figures are being challenged as being not good enough. A national herd average of 300 lb, butterfat per cow was achieved in the 1964-65 season. But if one carries out calculations based on the area of land actually in dairy production, production per acre of grassland is still under 200 lb. butterfat. This is despite the fact that some research projects and demonstration farms are showing production well in excess of 300 lb. butterfat/acre and there are many commercial properties now in excess of 400 lb./acre.
What is happening in the industry? Table 1 shows dairy cow numbers, herd size and per cow production at three stages since the pre-war peak year of 1935 (abstracted from Ref. 1).
TABLE 1
| Year | Cows in Milk | Butterfat/Cow (lb.) | Herd Size |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1935 | 1,827,962 | 240 | 47 |
| 1950 | 1,850,089 | 258 | 51 |
| 1964 | 2,010,868 | 300 | 72 |
Dairy cow numbers, production and herd size have risen and as a corollary the number of dairy farms in production have fallen.
The guidelines for increase in production per acre utilised appear to be quite clearly defined. As an example of the increases which can be achieved commercially, Table 2 shows the increase in fertilizer usage, stocking rate and production per acre achieved on a Taranaki dairy farm of 160 acres in a 30-60 in. rainfall area.
TABLE 22
| Year | Fertilizer* (cwt./acre) | Stocking Rate (cows/100 acres) | Butterfat Production (lb./acre) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1949-50+ | 1.5 | 72 | 185 |
| 1956-57 | 3.0 | 75 | 200 |
| 1958-59 | 4.5 | 77 | 248 |
| 1960-61 | 6.0 | 84 | 300 |
| 1962-63 | 6.0 | 92 | 316 |
* Potassic Superphosphate.
+Prior to start of development.
The management changes effected on the property to achieve production increases (the property exceeded 400 lb. butterfat/acre in 1964-65 with stocking rate approx. 1 cow/acre) were:
(a) Increased stocking rate.
(b) Increased fertilizer rate.
(c) Changed feeding system-elimination of a winter crop (chou moellier) and reliance on pasture.
(d) Use of DDT to control grass grubs.
(e) Adoption of artificial breeding.
(f) Labour saving—e.g. new herringbone shed, tanker collection, once-daily calf feeding.
Despite the increases achieved, a Government demonstration farm in the same province has shown further increases are possible.3 Table 3 indicates production where fertilizer application was 4 cwt. superphosphate and 2 cwt. potash/acre. The low stocking rate was 1 cow/acre and the high 1.5 cows/acre.
TABLE 3
Butterfat (lb./acre)
| 1961/62 | 1962/63 | 1963/64 | 1964/65 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Low S.R. | 260 | 370 | 370 | 351 |
| High S.R. | 340 | 495 | 530 | 505 |
At the famous Ruakura No. 2 Dairy originally set up by McMeekan, production in the 1965-66 season reached 620 lb. butterfat/acre.
Some years ago predictions that per acre levels in excess of 500 lb. butterfat could be achieved from New Zealand pastures, were scoffed at. In the light of production figures already achieved one should not be sceptical of a recent prediction that 1000 lb. butterfat/acre can be reached without recourse to bought in feed!4
(b) United States of America: In the five years to 1965 cow numbers in U.S.A. fell by 12 per cent while per cow production increased by the same percentage. By 1965 there were the same number of cows on U.S. dairy farms as in 1900. Dairy herd size has increased rapidly with the 15.20 (sic) cow herd virtually disappeared. Holstein Friesian cattle dominate as a breed with over 80 per cent of all cattle under official test in the Lakes States. The latter, Michigan, Minnesota and Wisconsin hold 25 per cent of milk cows in the U.S. and produce 28 per cent of the milk.
Total milk production has increased slightly and individual cow production has risen rapidly in the last decade. Table 4 illustrates the rise with the example derived from Illinois Dairy Herd Improvement Association records.5
TABLE 4
Illinois D.H.I.A. History
| Year | No. Cows Tested | Av. Milk (lb.) | Av. Butterfat (lb.) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1925 | 11,400 | 7,482 | 282 |
| 1935 | 23,371 | 8,098 | 312 |
| 1945 | 27,925 | 9,011 | 350 |
| 1955 | 54,567 | 9,844 | 381 |
| 1965 | 74,001 | 11,911 | 458 |
As in most areas the rise in milk production illustrated has been accompanied by higher levels of concentrate feeding with considerable emphasis on use of maize, soyabean meal, maize silage, lucerne hay and less emphasis on pasture. The opinion is commonly expressed in the U.S. that pastures have no place in modern dairy farming. Yet if one examines production in the Netherlands where national per cow production is approximately 10,000 lb., very little concentrate is fed while cows are at pasture. One cannot escape the conclusion that as "feed" grains become relatively scarce in the U.S., as they already are in many parts of the world, more rather than less use of grasslands is inevitable.
It is of interest to record that consumption of dairy products has increased from 449 to 517 lb. per head in the period 1940-60 and the trend has continued.6
(c) Republic of Ireland (Eire): I mention dairy production in this country not because of present high production levels but for what appeared to be the production potential. No doubt my opinion was influenced by the tremendous enthusiasm of the research workers I met but it is not difficult to conceive of Eire becoming the "New Zealand of the northern hemisphere".
There are some five million acres (or 80 per cent of the total area) under old permanent pastures of Yorkshire fog, perennial rye and white clover. At present little if any fertilizer is used and virtually no pasture renovation or reseeding is practised. However, on one farm of 130 acres which had supported prior to 1964 about 20 cows, drainage plus application of fertilizer (superphosphate, potash and in some areas nitrogen) has allowed in 1967 a stocking rate of 96 cows.
On two small commercial dairy farms some of this potential is being realised. Both properties (No. 1: 65 acres, No. 2: 90 acres) are in County Cork. On both, fertilizer (4 cwt. superphosphate, 11 cwt. muriate of potash + 50-75 lb. nitrogen/acre) is applied and about 40-50 per cent of area is shut for grass silage (winter feeding is for about four months). Table 5 indicates production levels.
TABLE 5
| Area | Property 1 65 acres | Property 2 90 acres |
|---|---|---|
| Stocking Rate (cow equivalents/acre) | 1/1.2 | 1/1.3 |
| Milk/cow (lb.) | 8,000 | 8,500 |
| Milk/acre (lb.) | 6,650 | 6,500 |
| Net Income/acre ($A) | 102 | 110 |
Walshe7 suggested that when fertilizer rate, stocking rate, milking technique, farm management become optimal, milk production per acre in County Cork could well reach 12,000 lb.!
As Eire has recently applied for membership of the E.E.C. there is further reason to worry about the long-term prospects for marketing of Australasian dairy and beef products in Europe.
2. The Beef Industry:
(a) U.S. Cattle Feed Lots: The feed lot operation is a North American phenomenon. Meat consumption (1965) in U.S.A., compared with Australia, was:
| U.S.A. (lb.) | Australia (lb.) | |
|---|---|---|
| Beef | 99 | 101 |
| Pork and Bacon | 58 | 19 |
| Mutton and Lambs | 4 | 89 |
| Chicken | 33 | ? |
| TOTAL | 194 | 209+ |
Rate of beef consumption has increased recently. In 1940, U.S. consumption per head was 54.5 lb., by 1960 85 lb., and 1965 99 lb. Consumption by 1980, when the U.S. population will reach 245 million, is estimated to reach 117 lb. These trends incidentally are similar in Europe.
It is difficult to estimate the proportion of beef type animals finished through feed lots relative to the national output but the numbers marketed through the feed lots of three major feeding states, Iowa, Nebraska and California, in relation to the total for the 11 leading feed lot states were in thousands:8
| 1960 | 1961 | 1962 | 1963 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Iowa | 2,555 | 2,586 | 2,586 | 2,862 |
| Nebraska | 1,439 | 1,704 | 1,822 | 2,012 |
| California | 1,595 | 1,699 | 1,814 | 1,899 |
| TOTAL | 9,948 | 10,776 | 11,161 | 12,196 |
Calculations suggest that the feed lot operations of the three leading states finish between 35 and 40 per cent of beef consumed in U.S.A.
Reference8 to California, where I inspected two feed lot operations, indicates that in terms of numbers finished per lot the state has the largest enterprises (3100 head) annually and rate of growth in numbers of cattle at 4.2 per cent is behind only Texas (6.1 per cent) and Arizona (4.4 per cent).
The type of cattle fed and average rate of gain achieved (between 650 lb. live purchase weight and 1050 lb. live finish weight) in California lots are in Table 6.8
TABLE 6
Type and Performance of Feed Lot Cattle, California
| Proportion of Total (%) | Dairy (sic) Rate of Gain (lb.) | |
|---|---|---|
| British breed and crosses | 30.1 | 2.44 |
| Mexicans | 14.2 | 2.17 |
| Okies* | 40.1 | 2.45 |
| Brahman crosses | 11.6 | 2.33 |
| Dairy breeds | 4.0 | 2.52 |
* Nondescript beef-dairy types.
Details of a large-scale operation in San Joaquin county were: Annual throughput was 30,000 head with 10-12,000 head on hand at any time. Mainly British breed and crosses were finished but Okies were present. On average about 200 sq. feet/beast was allowed (300 in wet weather, 150 in dry) with trough space about 3 feet/beast. Feeding was ad lib.
with diets containing at least 90 per cent grain, 5-10 per cent lucerne plus cottonseed meal plus vitamins A and D and up to 2 per cent tallow plus molasses was incorporated in the diet. Gains aimed for were 3 lb./day. Usually the same price per pound liveweight is paid when cattle are bought as feeders as when sold as fats (say 25 cents). Thus the margin of profit is made only on efficiency with which cattle convert food. Operators must make a minimum of $10 per beast.
The operational profit depends largely on price of the feeder into the lot (and includes freight costs) and on the price of grain. Thus, as for dairy production, as human competition for grain increases higher grain prices will reduce levels of grain fed and there will presumably be more emphasis on pasture finished beef.
(b) Barley Beef Production: This is primarily a European, largely United Kingdom, phenomenon. It is a product of subsidised agriculture—without subsidy on the price of grain for feeding and on the price of the beast produced it could not survive. Reference to the papers of Preston and co-workers9 will provide scientific data on which barley beef production is based. Research continues at the Rowett (Aberdeen) primarily aimed at clarifying the level of protein required in diets and possible alternative sources of nitrogen.
Production is based on the use of Friesian type calves. In small-scale enterprises calves are typically bought in at three weeks of age, fed on reconstituted whole milk (or replacers) plus ad lib. access to meal (flaked maize, fishmeal, soybean meal plus vitamins-minerals). When meal intake is about 2 lb./day, calves are weaned and reared to about three months of age then gradually brought on to the barley beef diet. At this age calves would be about 300 lb. live. The aim is to finish at about 1050 lb. live, aged about 11 months. The overall food conversion ratio in this "barley" feeding period is about 5.0 to 5.2 lb. meal/lb. gain. Steers are implanted with hexoestrol at six-seven months old.
In a large-scale enterprise inspected, I estimated that the capital investment in buildings, including 1000-ton grain silo, plus machinery, was $A200,000. The unit capacity was 700 head (slatted floor sheds) and annual turnover about 1200 head. The overall investment in buildings, grain, animals at any one time must be about $A300,000. The cost of calves brought in at two-three months was about $A50 and average return per beast about $A210. This allowed a margin over all costs, including building depreciation, of $A30-35 per beast of which $A25 was subsidy on the sale price!
My calculations based on Australian costs firmly establish this is not an enterprise suited to our industry.
3. Pig Meat Production:
(a) General: A major impression gained in U.S.A., Canada, the United Kingdom and to a lesser extent in Denmark and France, was that the scale of operation is increasing rapidly. Allied to this growth is the development of the "vertically integrated" system of production. That is of single company control of grain plus protein meal production, of supply of performance tested boars and gilts to contract growers, of processing and of marketing of pig meats and by-products. A development similar in many ways to the earlier developments in the poultry industry.
A further strong impression was of the emphasis placed on the need for lean meat production (as it has been for some time in Denmark, where significant advances have been made). It is worthwhile quoting the report of a study group10 which examined pig herd improvement and testing in the United Kingdom. "We endorse the reasoning which led to the adoption of 'lean percentage' as the principal assessment of carcase quality. It appears to be a feature desired by all sections of the industry though there is no adequate financial inducement to achieve it...." The latter is a feature also unfortunately true of Australia.
To achieve this objective, emphasis is being placed on the potential for use of performance tested (cf. progeny tested) animals for breeding. In Canada, at least one commercial breeder supplies "breeding groups", that is a boar plus five or six gilts as a package deal, each animal having met criteria for growth plus food conversion efficiency and carcase quality as estimated by back fat probe. The animals are hybrid, the breeder reasoning that colour or breed type are not important so long as animals sold meet performance standards. Steps are being taken in the United Kingdom to organise an official breeding scheme based on performance testing but it was suggested to me11 that commercial schemes could be established well before a government programme.
Unless prompt action is taken by Australian governments to initiate the practice of performance testing pigs, in this country commercial enterprise may also lead the way. Some might think this wholly desirable!
(b) Denmark: Because of its high reputation as an efficient producer of pig meats the Danish industry is worthy of brief examination from the viewpoint of its breeding policy.
Danish farming is mainly on small holdings on most of which pigs are raised. The average farm size is about 50 acres with modal size about 62 acres. Only about 75,000 of the Danish population of approx. 5.2 million are fully engaged in agriculture.
About 12.5 million pigs are marketed yearly and the income from pig meat exports represents about 40 per cent of the total agricultural export income, itself 50 per cent of total Danish export income.
Although most pig production is on small holdings there is extensive co-operation in husbandry practices, processing and marketing. Indeed, regimentation, a strong word, has led to the primacy of the Danish pig industry in the world.
The Danish Landrace virtually excludes all other breeds. To secure breed improvement Denmark has been divided into nine regions in which are some 260 "approved elite pedigree herds". In general these herds are small, over half running five-ten sows and only three in excess of 30 Sows.
All centres are under supervision by district committees which in turn are responsible to a Central Committee for Pig Breeding. District committees inspect each herd biannually and score breeding stock and the herd generally for conformation, husbandry, fertility and rearing ability and for gain, feed conversion efficiency and carcase quality (the last three criteria by progeny test). Government approval is withdrawn if a herd fails to meet requirements. Deregistration is serious because cooperative societies and individual farmers largely purchase breeding stock from these herds. The impact of these herds is great. Each year about 25,000 boars are used on a sow population of about 800,000. Approximately half of these boars are replaced annually. Sales from elite herds are about 12,000 boars and 15,000 sows.
All testing of pigs from elite herds is conducted at four test stations, built and run by co-operatives under government control, each having 400 individual pens and with a total of 5000 pigs tested annually. In addition to these stations there are 18 local stations open to "progressive" breeders but where test pigs are run as a group. carcase evaluation is as for the main stations.
Improvements in carcasees made since 1926 to 1962-63 have been:
Body length...889 to 962 mm. ("Ideal" sought is 960 mm.)
Av. back fat....40.5 to 26.9 mm. ("Ideal" sought is 23-25 mm.)
"Slight of lean"...27.5 to 22.6 mm. ("Ideal" sought is 16-18 mm.)
It should be noted that a recent analysis12 of Danish data indicated that very little genetic progress had been made and the largest part of the above improvement had been environmental. The Danes are aware of this and in an attempt to make further progress are setting up a unit so that hams of tested pigs may be dissected to better assess lean content. They are also considering performance testing of potential breeding stock.
Be that as it may, the Danish industry presents a picture of organisation and progress which would be extremely difficult to match elsewhere. Whether it can withstand the competition of larger enterprises in open markets remains to be seen.
CONCLUSION
I returned with an overriding impression of the tremendous potential for improvement in livestock production which exists in the world. To me problems of food shortage generally remain those of organisation and distribution rather than of technique. Obviously politics will be the dominant force for good or evil.
As far as Australia is concerned, I felt that lessons were to be learnt in the organisation of livestock production enterprises, particularly the more intensive pig and dairy cattle industries. In the latter, particularly, there is a great deal to be done in the handling and marketing of dairy produce in this country.
REFERENCES
1. Anon. (1965) — Farm Production Report No. 41 (1964-65 season), New Zealand Dairy Production and Marketing Board, Wellington
2. Graham, J. V. (1963) — Report on a Taranaki survey. Dairyfarming Annual 1963. pp. 167-177
3. Smith, B. A. J. (1965) — Progress at Waimate West Demonstration Farm. Dairyfarming Annual 1965. pp. 56-60
4. Stitchbury, J. W. (1963) — Animal Production and the Society. Proc. N.Z. Soc. Anim. Prod. 25:1
5. Anon. (1965) — Summary of Illinois D.H.LA., Univ. Illinois Coll. Agric. Urbana, Ill.
6. Anon. (1966) — Outlook for food and agriculture. USDA Agric. Econ. Res. 18:1
7. Walshe, M. J. (1966) — Dairy Res. Inst., Fermoy, Co. Cork, Eire. Private communication
8. Hopkin, J. A., and Kramer, R. C. (1965) — Cattle feeding in California. Bank of America NT. & S.A.
9. Preston, T. R., et al. (1963) — Anim. Prod. 3: pp. 47, 53, 245
10. Robertson, A., et al. (1965) — Rep. Study Groupon Herd Improvement and Testing. P.I.D.A., London, W.C.1
11. Bichard, M. (1966) — Univ. Newcastle on Tyne. Private communication
12. Smith, C. (1963) — Genetic change of backfat thickness in the Danish Landrace breed of pigs from 1952 to 1960. Anim. Prod. 5:259-268