On 2/6/06 6:21 AM, "F. W. Owen" <fwo@bright.net> wrote:
> The agricultural economists are, as usual, out of the loop all together.
I like that one FW.
Ours are the same.
The new chief of AgResearch here claimed recently that they could double
dairy farm productivity and halve costs. He didn�t say how long it would
take! I could have told him - NEVER.
The previous one said they aimed to increase dairy farm productivity by 4%
pa. This would mean a 100% increase (a doubling) in 18 years. What idiots.
So they go back into their ivory towers looking for silver bullets that
don�t exist. Simple basics are the things to work on and improve.
I�ve been telling our research boffins for decades that they should do all
trials in profits not yields and talk profits and nothing else. They�ve bred
and released grasses that don�t last and recommended high stocking rates/ha
that cost more than they return in profit because they didn�t allow for the
fact that it costs $500 to keep a cow for a year.
Productivity is a meaningless word that they can hide behind, but they can�t
hide behind a lack of profit.
Our farmers� biggest problem after trade sanctions is bureaucracy, backed by
politicians that are loading all sorts of costs (Resource Management, dog
chip identification, useless research, etc.) onto our farmers of all types
of which there are only 60,000 so have little voting clout.
Our farmers are charged fees to go into agricultural research and the
bureaucrats research things like trying to reduce the 0.4% of the world�s
methane produced by NZ ruminants. They tell us they can about halve it by
growing and feeding Sulla (Hedysarum coronarium) because of having condensed
tannins and improving digestion, but it costs a lot to establish, yields
less per hectare and doesn�t last.
Get this - or skim across it!
>From http
://www.publish.csiro.au/?act=view_file&file_id=SA0401007.pdf
Australia research showed -
Pasture-fed lambs grew at 116 g/day over the duration of the trial and
achieved a final LW of 34.5 kg, which was significantly lower than all other
treatments. Lambs fed sulla and lucerne:sulla had the most rapid daily gain,
achieving final LW Animal Production in Australia 25, 25-28 27 of 43.3 �
43.4 kg. Intakes of lambs fed sulla and lucerne:sulla were higher than those
fed pasture or lucerne. Rumen ammonia, volatile fatty acids and pH Rumen NH3
concentration was highest in lambs fed lucerne and lowest in lambs fed
sulla, while adding sulla to lucerne significantly reduced rumen NH3
concentrations (Table 1). Lambs fed pasture and sulla had lower
concentrations of rumen VFA (Table 1), but sulla and lucerne:sulla had a
higher percentage of propionate (24 and 21%) and butyrate (12 and 11%), with
less acetate (62 and 64%) compared with lambs fed pasture and lucerne (17
and 20% propionate; 9 and 8% butyrate; 70 and 68% acetate, respectively).
Table 1. Effects of dietary treatment on feed intake, liveweight (LW) gain,
whole body (WB) cysteine and sulphate fluxes and absolute WB protein
synthesis. Least squares means � s.e.m. are reported.
Did you get all that? It is useless research because it doesn�t mention per
hectare figures.
I like to end with solutions. More clover in pastures reduces methane and
increases profits and in most Waikato pastures (including Scott and Lye
research farms) more lime is what is needed to increase the percentage of
clovers.
Best wishes,
Vaughan Jones
Hamilton
New Zealand
