How to profit from forage-based dairy-beef system even in extreme weather

Forage-based dairy-beef systems are profitable even in extreme weather conditions, a two-year study at Harper Adams University has concluded.

The project investigated whether it was feasible to finish dairy-bred beef calves on forage alone by 21 months.

Led by Adas, funded by AHDB Beef & Lamb and supported by the Hereford Cattle Society and Dunbia, the study aimed to develop a blueprint for farmers wanting to finish dairy-beef animals predominantly on home-grown forages.

See also: How to set up rotational grazing on your beef farm

Researchers compared the performance of 35 Hereford cross Holstein-Friesian and 35 pure Holstein-Friesian autumn 2016-born steer calves to see how native-bred cattle compared with pure dairy animals on the same system.

Even though animals failed to finish by the target date due to adverse weather, which affected growth rates, the study still delivered net margins a head of £99.94 and £113.98, with the Hereford crosses faring the best.

The trial consisted of four main phases:

1. Calves were purchased at an average age of 126 days after being reared on milk powder
2. Animals spent their first summer at grass from March 2018
3. They were overwintered on fodder beet
4. And spent a final summer at grass before being sent to slaughter.

Final results

After achieving poor growth rates of 0.34-0.45kg on fodder beet last winter due to adverse weather conditions, cattle were turned back on to grass in April – a month later than anticipated due to the cold weather.

High levels of compensatory growth were seen in both breeds, with daily liveweight gains of 1.64kg/day and 1.76kg/day for Hereford crosses and Holstein-Friesians respectively recorded between 18 April and 5 July.

But little let-up in difficult weather conditions forced researchers to remove the animals from the 10ha grazing platform on 13 July as dry weather saw grass covers dip below 1,500kg DM/ha.

Instead, cattle were moved to 4.75ha of permanent pasture and didn’t return until 17 August, when trough feeding commenced just four days later.

The feed rate increased from 1.3kg a head a day to 4.9kg a head a day over eight days.

This 14% crude protein beef nut was fed until the end of November, when the fifth batch of cattle were sold.

However, five remaining Holstein-Friesian cattle had to be housed for two weeks to achieve an adequate level of finish.

These were fed ad-lib grass silage and gradually transitioned on to maize silage, which was fed alongside 5kg of concentrates a head a day.

Cattle were sold to Dunbia in six batches, with the final group sent to slaughter on 10 January 2019.

The results

• Overall, 85% of the Holstein-Friesians and all of the autumn-born Hereford crosses sold off grass, albeit with supplementation required at specific times to counter poor grass growth and weight gains due to the drought.
• Extra feed required to counter poor weather throughout the trial amounted to £50 a head for Hereford crosses and £95 a head for Holstein-Friesians.
• Hereford-cross animals performed better than Holstein-Friesians. Not only did they sell six weeks earlier but they achieved a better killing out percentage and had better fat and conformation (see table 1, above). Herefords also maintained a better fat cover for longer in periods of restricted intake compared to Holstein-Friesians.
• This meant they realised a higher value of £172.02 than the Holstein-Friesian animals. At a standard base price of £3.65/kg (+15p premium for native beef) and £3.50kg for Holstein-Friesians, the total value (after applying the pricing grid) was £1,129.63 for Hereford crosses and £957.61 for Holstein-Friesians.
• While Hereford crosses generally received 10p/kg below base price because they graded as an O+ carcass (R 3/4L achieves base price), Holstein-Friesians were worse, receiving 35-80p below base because they had poorer conformation and leaner fat classes of P+/-O 2-3. The penalty for fat class two compared to fat class three was -5p/kg and -15p/kg for -O and P+ conformation.
• Both breeds generated a positive net margin, but Herefords were £14.04 a head better off (£113.98 a head for Hereford crosses and £99.94 for Holstein-Friesians).
• Meat quality assessments on 14 Hereford-cross carcasses and 31 Holstein-Friesians revealed similar pH levels of 5.54 and 5.60 respectively, with scores above 5.9 deemed high.
• Warner-Bratzler shear force measures that indicate toughness returned values of 4,506 g/mm and 4,892g/mm for Hereford cross and Holstein-Friesian, respectively. Values typically range from 2,000-10,000g/mm, with anything above 7,500g/mm considered poorer than average. Only two samples from Holstein-Friesian animals exceeded this.

What the study shows

Marc Jones, from Adas, who oversaw the trial alongside Simon Marsh, principal beef lecturer at the university and assistant farm manager Chris Ruffley, believes more farmers could achieve bigger margins between purchase and sale by emulating the study and buying calves at a younger age (126 days versus the AHDB finishing average of 441 days).

“By purchasing cattle at a younger age than traditional dairy-beef finishing systems, the aim is to generate a larger gross output, while controlling variable and fixed costs to increase profitability – even though the cattle are on farm for a much longer period before finishing.”

He said more beef finishers could also reduce their overheads by outwintering cattle and using grass and forage more effectively.

“The positive margins show the durability of the production system after some of the worst weather for 30-40 years.

“Initially, the very cold and late spring in 2018 [The Beast from the East] reduced cattle growth rates while the cattle were on the fodder beet.

“The cold weather delayed the cattle going to grass in the spring, while the extreme dry period and heat during the summer reduced grass growth through July and August, causing the cattle to lose condition and weight gain.

“This led to a loss of about 30-40 kg of weight gain over the season.

“Crucially, even after these challenges, the system is still profitable, even on rented ground, with paid labour and without subsidy or environment payments.”

But he stressed farmers do need to have a back-up plan to deal with adverse conditions and must weigh stock regularly to avoid having to house animals for a second winter.