Dairy systems are so organised and regimented now, but there’s still a place for a dedicated feeder who handles bunk management.
up. Others make a 1% push out work, while some opt for a higher 3–5%. “In general, 3–5% is a decent number for most dairies,” Brady states. “It’s partly visual. It looks like they won’t go hungry, but it’s not a complete loss with the prices these days. We don’t want to waste it but if we’re too cheap we’ll hinder ourselves on the production side by running too tight.” Allowing bunks to run empty for too long also comes with potentially severe consequences.
Rumen damage “If cows go hungry enough to overeat or ‘slug feed’, they consume too much, causing it to begin fermenting all at once,” Brady says. “A couple of issues occur; first, we need to ask, what was the rate of rumen exit? Was mass lost since they went without feed for too long, causing a reduction in the rumen bacteria population? And second, is the rumen PH affected, pushing it below the desired range where it begins to kill off rumen bacteria?” The answers to these questions could indicate the loss of abil- ity for fibre-digesting bacteria to ferment in the production of butterfat. Butterfat suppression and acidosis circumstances can appear, and, in extreme cases, lameness ensues. Brady says for older heifers, replacements and dry cows, the strategy returns to the philosophy of the consultant or the farm wishes. Increased quantities of lower energy, higher fibre rations could be used without bunks ever running emp- ty. This approach keeps cattle satisfied without the fear of undesired weight gains. “For calves, they’re unique because they’re young; they’re still immune compromised, growing actively and we want
34 ▶ DAIRY GLOBAL | Volume 9, No. 3, 2022
that growth from them. We desire some level of push out in this group.”
Social behaviour A further consequence of poor bunk management is reflect- ed in the social behaviour cows exhibit when hungry. They come in all sizes, personalities and levels of aggression, and if they must fight to gain a position to eat, their maintenance energy needs are instantly increased. “Hypothetically, if a cow’s energy requirement is X grams/day, a competitive situation with the added physicality of social interaction could drive her requirement to X + 5 grams/day,” Brady states. “But usually if this type of event is routine, we aren’t accounting for the higher number. Essentially, cows facing poor management, or placed in a non-consistent situation, lose feed efficiency, which is the biggest driver of profitability.” He believes that staff experience and accrued knowl- edge, along with the addition of technical options such as monitoring camera systems, help with reliability. “Quality employees are still our biggest asset. They’ll drive past a bunk and make the decision to give a little more or a little less. Even though technologies are beneficial, having good people is still going to trump them. I don’t think we’ll ever get away from the human side.” While beef and dairy operations differ in many aspects – such as goals, breeds and types of cattle – proper bunk manage- ment remains a constant in both industries. Reading bunks well and reacting with foresight and strong communication is a must to promote productivity in both situations.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36
