DELIVERABLE. Grant Agreement number: FP7-SME Project title: Research for the benefit of SME associations. Deliverable Number: D 4.

Transcription

1 DELIVERABLE Grant Agreement number: FP7-SME Project acronym: AUTOGRASSMILK Project title: INNOVATIVE AND SUSTAINABLE SYSTEMS COMBINING AUTOMATIC MILKING AND PRECISION GRAZING Funding Scheme: Research for the benefit of SME associations Deliverable Number: D 4.2 Deliverable Name: Web based decision support tool for North western Europe on economics of AM and grazing 1

2 Decision Support Tool How to combine grazing with an automatic milking system The research has received funding from the European Union s Seventh Framework Program under Grant Agreement FP/-SME AUTOGRASSMILK Abstract This Deliverable is an interactive web based decision support tool for farmers and advisors. Browsing this Deliverable will provide you direct access to information that can be used around grazing and AM (Automatic Milking) based decisions. The objective of this simple tool is to allow more informed decisions to be taken by farmers. The tool informs farmers and advisors in north-western Europe on the decisionmaking process around grazing and AM systems from an economic perspective. It provides an overview of relevant topics, research results, practical experiences and links to relevant interactive internet tools and to further information to be found on the internet. 2

3 Introduction To combine the use of one or more Automatic Milking (AM) systems with grazing on your dairy farm presents challenges for you as a dairy farmer. For many farmers purchasing an AM system represents a reason to stop grazing. In some countries, however, it is obligatory to graze the dairy cows or it is preferred by the consumers. Also many farmers want to accept the challenge to combine grazing with automatic milking because they see added value and expect to reach good economic results with grazing. Good economic results require that costs and benefits are in balance. Since buying AM systems involve large investments, high yields and therefore good technical results are required. This document/decision support tool is designed for farmers that already decided to accept the challenge of combining AM with grazing and want to obtain information on this combination which is available to them from different sources. This document combines research and practical knowledge accumulated in the EUproject Autograssmilk. The scientific results are generally shown in figures or tables and reports and papers may be reached through links available in the text. The participating countries are (in alphabetical order): Belgium, Denmark, France, Ireland, the Netherlands, Sweden. User s guide A number of topics concerning grazing and AM systems have been accumulated. By clicking on a topic, you are navigating into the document to the location where this topic is described in one or more questions and answers. From a specific topic you can navigate back to the list of topics and click on an alternative topic. You can also scroll through the document from top to bottom and study all available information you meet. In a number of topics, links to external tools or documents are included. They are in most cases situated on the site Generic and country specific Some information is generic, meaning that it is valid for all countries but information can also be country specific. Information that is generic is marked with all the national flags: Information that is gathered in a specific country but is generic is marked with all the national flags and an extra national flag of this country For instance: information is generic and the research took place in Sweden: Information that is country specific is marked with the national flag of the country only. For instance: information is only valid for the Netherlands: 3

4 Topics : Click on topics to find more information Factors influencing the performance of an AM system Milk production per cow with AM system Number of cows per AM system when integrated with grazing Effect of integrating grazing and AM system AM system parameters - Milking frequency - Milking interval Cow traffic and use of a grazing gate Distance from pasture to AM system Availability of water Grazing management Sustainability Economy - Economic web-based tools - Costs for AM system - Labour and AM systems Direct links to internet tools: GrazingWise: The goal of GrazingWise is to estimate quickly the consequences for labour requirement, economy and manure legislation of alternative grazing systems. With GrazingWise different grazing systems can be compared. It can evaluate rotational systems: day and night grazing, day grazing, grazing during afternoon and evening; indoor systems: permanently indoors with fresh grass, permanently indoors with conserved roughages; and continuous grazing. The amount of indoor feeding with roughages combined with grazing can be varied in a number of situations. Beteskalle: The goal of Beteskalle is to estimate quickly how much grass is available per cow, depending on number of cows, area of grassland and production per ha. With the results the profit that can be achieved from grazing is also estimated. Besteskalle is developed by the Swedish partner in cooperation with H. Kohnen from Luxemburg who worked parallel with the project Autograssmilk on a project with the same name and goal for Luxemburg. 4

5 Factors influencing the performance of an AM system How do factors that influence the net profit of an AM system, relate to each other? One of the most important parameters of an AM system is the net profit of the farm. Milk yield is an important factor in the net profit. Milk yield, however, is a result of many factors. These factors are not all independent but can influence each other. For instance the genetic potential of the herd influences the milk production but to reach the potential yield the ration should be optimal and the number of failed milkings should be as low as possible. The schematic on the next page indicates the relations between a large number of factors. If the performance of your robot is not optimal, it will help to choose which factors can be checked to find out what the problem might be. The schematic on the next page is constructed by Danish experts. 5

6 BHB: Beta-hydroxybutyrate, indicator for ketosis 6

7 Milk production per cow with AM system What is the effect of AM system on milk yield per cow and per farm? The potential milk production of a dairy cow is primarily determined by her genetics. An optimal ration, fresh grass, other roughages and concentrates help her to reach her potential milk production. With a conventional milking system the milking frequency is often twice a day and when this is increased to three times a day, milk production increases. So the choice of the milking frequency affects the milk production. The introduction of an AM system on a farm represents an additional factor that affects milk production. Milking frequency is not a direct choice of the farmer with this system, but is an outcome of the system, since an AM system is based on voluntary visits of the dairy cows. AM itself is unlikely to result in an increase in milk production. If any increases in production are realised they will most likely be a consequence of increased feed consumption and/or increased milking frequency. In the first year after an AM system is introduced it is likely that the dairy cows, the farmer and his personnel have to get acquainted with the new system. This might decrease the milk production temporarily. In an Australian information booklet a drop in milk production of 5-10% is mentioned. For you as a farmer it is sensible to take this into account for your economics in the first year. The number of cows that can be milked by an AM system depends on: - Manufacturer of AM system/ type of AM system - Milk production per cow per day (lactation stage) - Slow or fast milking cows When the capacity of the AM system(s) is too low, milk production can also decrease: cows are queuing too long and do not visit the robot as often as is desired. This will have a negative effect on milk production. Want to know more? pdf - 7

8 Number of cows per AM system when grazing When an AM system is combined with grazing, what number of cows can I milk with an AM system? In general combining grazing with an AM system will mean that you can have less cows per AM system than when the cows are kept indoors. This is because the cows tend to walk in groups to the AM system and then have to wait for their turn (unless the AM system is in the pasture). When the number of cows exceeds a certain threshold, milk production will decrease. This is true for both indoor and grazing cows. Two studies were conducted in France. One involved 20 farms which had AM and cow grazing. The remaining study had 37 farms with AM and different feeding systems for the dairy cows. Farm results were monitored. When cows were grazed, the number of cows per AM box was 10% lower than when cows were kept indoors. The average number of cows per AM system with grazing (on the 20 farm study) was 53 and on the 37-farm study was 60. See table 1 and 2 below. Table 1 Number of cows milked by one Automatic Milking System and milk production per box in French study of 20 farms. Farms had various backgrounds (on plains and mountains). Data 2010 average max min Nbr of cows per box Milk production per box (*1000 l) Table 2 Results of 37 farms in France using an Automatic Milking System, without grazing, with intermediate grazing and full grazing, average over a three-year period ( ). No grazing Intermediate Grazing grazing Number of farms Share of grazed grass on forages of dairy herd % Number of boxes per farm Number of cows per box Milk produced per box (1,000 l) ± ± ± ± ± ± 135 Source: BROCARD V., HUCHON J-C., GEORGEL R., FOLLET D., CARLES A. (2014). Pratiques et résultats de 20 élevages français conciliant la traite robotisée des vaches laitières avec un système de production pâturant. Rencontres Recherches Ruminants. 21. pp Want to know more? 8

9 Effect of grazing with an AM system on milk production What is the effect of grazing on milk production when an AM system is used? The effect of grazing on milk production with an AM system is generally slightly negative (compared to not grazing). But this effect may also be influenced by other factors such as a different ration or feed intake. Often the decrease in milk production can be traced back to intake of less energy or protein by the cows. On French pilot farms milk production decreased up to 1.7 kg milk per cow per day when grazing fulltime compared to 1.4 kg milk per cow per day in winter. The dairy cows also consumed less concentrates during the grazing period. Want to know more? 9

10 AM system parameters Which parameters of the AM system are most important? An AM system has many parameters which are often related. To check if the system (grazing+am system) works well, some parameters should be checked quickly and daily: Milking frequency number of milkings per cow per day. This assists in deciding if the herd is on track to achieve production targets. The farmer can adapt the robot settings to allow/deny milking for individual cows based on stage of lactation, etc. and influence the milking frequency in this way. Milking interval is the number of hours between milkings and is related to milking frequency. If the milking interval is too long there will be a decrease in production, and an increase of risk of mastitis. If the milking Interval is too short the milk yield will also decrease and there is a potential risk for poor attachment with a flaccid udder and a low milking rate (milk yield per minute). If the milking interval is too irregular the milk yield is not optimal either (=decreased). Other parameters have to be checked weekly/monthly or if one of the key parameters does not meet the expectation. The other parameters may give an indication of the source of the problem: Machine utilisation number of milkings per unit. Sometimes measured as litres harvested per machine per day or as idle time per machine per day. Milking pattern is related to milking interval. The most ideal milking pattern would be when the milking units would be used consistently over a 24 hour period, then the capacity of the AM system would be optimized. This is, however, not very likely to happen during grazing. During night-time cows are often not very motivated to be milked, in many cases the number of milkings occurring during night-time are lower. Milk production per cow per day is a consequence of the whole farm system. By testing and eliminating different potential causes in a step by step manner, the problem can be detected by a process of elimination. See Factors influencing the performance of an AM system 10

11 Milking frequency What effect has milking frequency on milk yield? In a conventional system increasing the milking frequency (e.g. from 2 to 3 times a day) often increases milk production per cow. However, it does not follow that the milking frequency with an AM system should be as high as possible. Milk production is dependent on the factor that is limiting the milk production. If feed intake and rate of mobilisation of body reserves are the key factors limiting production, then increases in production will be minimal if milking frequency alone is increased. The optimal milking frequency depends on the whole system and the lactation stage of (the majority of) dairy cows. The milking frequency alone is not an adequate factor to indicate optimization of the system; milking frequency has to be regarded in combination with Milking interval and Milk production per cow. It is, however, an important first attention indicator for the system. In many cases milk production can be maintained if milking frequency decreases. In Ireland cows were divided into two groups. One group had a milking permission of 2 times a day (MP2), the other group had a milking permission of 3 times a day (MP3). Milk production was measured for 12 weeks. The milking permission had an influence on the milking frequency: MP2 resulted in a milking frequency of 1.5 and MP3 resulted in a milking frequency of 1.8. The milk yield per visit was higher at MP2 but the milk yield per day was the same at these two milking permissions over 12 weeks. Table 3 Effect of milking permission of two (MP2) and three (MP3) times per day on milking frequency (MF), milking interval (MI hrs), milk yield (MY kg), milking duration (MD min), return time (RT hrs) and waiting time (WT hrs) per cow per day (d) and per visit (v). Least square means and standard error (S.E.) are presented. Want to know more? 11

12 How many milkings per cow per day (milking frequency) should I target? The milking frequency (MF) depends on a number of factors. MF increases when: - Low number of cows have to be milked - High proportion of cows is in high lactation stage - Cows are indoors for 24 hours (e.g. in winter) MF decreases when: - (Too) many cows have to be milked - High proportion of cows are in late lactation stage, enhanced by a high interval between calvings - Grazing These are factors that are part of the individual farming system and not necessarily good or bad. Milking frequency is about 0.2 per day lower during grazing periods compared to indoor periods. In a review of 21 studies milking frequencies of different systems AM system farms in Europe, Australia and New Zealand were studied (see table 4). Table 4 Milking frequency (milking events/cow per day) reported from 21 studies of cows managed in indoor-based AMS or in a pasture-based AMS with different amounts of allowed grazing time (h/d). MF Indoor based AM system <24 h grazing 2.6 ( ) Indoor based AM system 24 h grazing 2.4 ( ) Pasture based AM system 24 h grazing 1.7 ( ) Source: N.A. Lyons, K.L. Kerrisk, S.C. Garcia; Milking frequency management in pasture-based automatic milking systems: A review. Livestock Science 159 (2014) In Belgium practical farms that combine an AM systems and grazing were monitored. The milking frequencies measured are shown in the table below. On average the milking frequency was 0.27 lower in summer (grazing period) than in winter (indoor period). Table 5 Milking Frequency (MF) on 4 practical farms in summer (with grazing) and winter (without grazing). farm MF Milk yield winter summer winter summer mean

13 In France, the grazing period was compared to the indoor period in terms of milking frequency and milk production on 20 commercial farms as well as on the experimental farms of Derval and Trévarez. These farms had more than 1 ton dry matter grazed grass per cow per year.. - Milking frequency decreased with 0.2 milkings per cow per day - Milk production decreased 1.4 kg milk per cow per day In the Netherlands, 5 grazing concepts or options are suggested and available for combining AM and grazing systems. Depending on the grazing system and amount of indoor feeding the achievable milking frequency varied between 2.4 (> 10 kg dry matter per cow per day from fresh grass grazed) and 2.7 (~2 kg dry matter per cow per day from fresh grass grazed). When grazing was not employed during winter time, the achievable milking frequency was (in Dutch) What measure can I take if I think my milking frequency is too low? Strategies to increase the milking frequency of target groups of cows are: Increase the milking permission for (groups of) milking cows or the entire herd in the robot. Manage cows that require less frequent milking so as to free up robot capacity. This allows target groups to be milked more often as a consequence of reduced queueing. 13

14 Milking interval What milking interval should I aim for? The average milking interval is influenced by the milking frequency. An important feature of the milking interval is not only the duration of the interval itself but also the variation between cows or between days of a particular cow. A cow should have a regular milking interval. In an international overview of 21 studies, where farms in Europe, Australia and New Zealand were monitored or researched, the conclusion was: A milking Interval shorter than 6 hours or longer than 16 hours would cause problems. But the range between 6 and 16h is very wide. An milking interval with a milking frequency of 2 would of course ideally be 12 hours. If a cow chooses to come to the robot in intervals of 6 and 18 hours, the average interval will still be 12 but the difference is large and the cow may develop problems. On the 21 study farms, the frequency distribution of milking intervals showed a large variation but most intervals were of between 12 and 16 hours duration (Figure 1). Figure 1 Frequency distribution of milking interval (h) resulting from 2-way grazing (2WG; ) and 3-way grazing (3WG; ) allocations per 24 h. Significant (P<0.05) treatment differences at each milking interval category are identified accordingly (*). The time intervals below each bar correspond to the milking interval range (i.e., the bar at 4-8 relates to all milking events that had a milking interval between 4 and 8 h). The categories <4 and >24 represent milking intervals smaller or greater than 4 and 24 h, respectively. Source: N.A. Lyons, K.L. Kerrisk, S.C. Garcia; Milking frequency management in pasture-based automatic milking systems: A review. Livestock Science 159 (2014)

15 Cow traffic and use of a grazing gate What is the role of cow traffic? Cow traffic is an important factor influencing the success or otherwise of the AM system. Milking with an AM system requires voluntary cow traffic. This means that you as a farmer have to manage and direct the dairy cows such that they will visit the AM system sufficiently often, resulting in as little fetching of cows as possible. The strongest incentive for cows to come to the milking unit is the expectation that fresh feed will be found. This is the incentive that is used to initiate cow movement. This is especially true for high producing cows, early in lactation, that have a high feed requirement. Such cows will be easily guided if they know they will reach good quality, fresh feed. The use of grazing gates can help to regulate cow traffic. The cow traffic and the use of grazing gates should be planned and put in place before and during installing the AM system, not afterwards. For the position of pasture gates and gates in general, ensure that: - backtracking of cows is discouraged or even made impossible at exit locations of paddocks. - gates are logically oriented from a cow s point of view. They need to direct the cow to the location where she wants to go and that she will not have to backtrack to reach her goal. - sharp corners should be avoided as cows need to see where they are going (their destination). If cows are not entering the AM system or other parts of the system where you want them to (e.g. pasture, indoor), then they need to be fetched. But monitoring cows that need to be fetched regularly can help to solve problems with voluntary cow traffic. Some examples are given below. More than 20% of the herd need fetching: - Obviously it depends on your individual situation but as a rule of thumb, if more than 20% of the herd need fetching, take action. If it happens on a regular basis, you need a major change in the system. Start by providing smaller parcels of feed to encourage more regular movement. High number of early lactation cows need fetching: - Early lactation is a period of high motivation so the percentage of cows not moving well should be well below 10% (e.g. less than 10 cows in a 150 herd or around 7%). Check that feed allocation is accurate and made available to the cows. If cows are averaging 2.5 milkings per day, look out for freshly calved cows milking less than twice a day. These may need a health check to ensure they do not have metritis (inflammation of the uterus) or some other illness. Long queues at the dairy - While this does not require staff to fetch cows from the paddock, it still presents a problem. If the last cow has to wait more than 2 hours to get milked, the system performance may be compromised. Again, start by allocating smaller parcels of feed to encourage regular movement. Source: Management%20guidelines%20for%20pasture-based%20AMS%20farms.pdf 15

16 How can cow traffic be regulated? What is the function of a grazing gate? To regulate cow traffic, the so called AB-systems or ABC-systems are devised where the pasture is partitioned in two or three parts,. The principle behind the systems is that cows finish the fresh grass in one part and have pass the AM system to enter a new part with fresh grass. The software in the AM system will decide whether the cow is sent back or is permitted to the new pasture and is milked or not. To direct cows in an AB- or ABC-system, grazing gates can be of assistance, both before the cow enters the robot (pre) or after the cow exits the robot (post). Four systems have been described in leaflets: AB- and ABC-systems, with both pre- and post-grazing gates or only post-grazing gates: 1.1 ABC Description (pre & post) 1.2 ABC Description (post) 2.1 AB Description (pre & post) 2.2 AB Description (post) For both the AB- and ABC-system information for cow management and grass management is given: 3.1 ABC Cow Management 3.2 ABC Grass Management 4.1 AB Cow Management 4.2 AB Grass Management Cow traffic and use of grazing gate. The cow traffic and use of grazing gate should be planned and put in place during the purchasing and implementing of the AM system, not afterwards. Three main situations are distinguished: - The robot door is close to the door of the barn, then no drafting gate is necessary. The robot door can direct cows to the paddock or inside the barn (farm example below) 16

17 - The robot is at the opposite side of the exit from the barn to the pastures. Then a drafting gate needs to be installed at the barn gate, inside the barn or just outside (farm example below). - The number of cows is relatively low, then free cow traffic is possible (farm example below) Information in Danish: e.aspx 17

18 Distance from pasture to AM system What is the maximum distance from AM system to pasture at which voluntary cow traffic still works out well? Distance to pasture Factors that affect visiting the pasture and the AM system: Cows can see pasture from barn Pasture has to be easy to access Shorter distance is correlated to shorter milking intervals Cows are more likely to be synchronised in their behaviour if the pasture is further away Cows want to see their herd and/or where they are going and their destination Cowlane condition increases in importance as distance increases Longer distances may result in lower milk yields Fetching instances increase with longer distances Advised optimum distance: 500 m 18

19 Availability of water Where should water be available? A lactating cow needs at least the amount of water she produces in milk together with the amount of water required to sustain all body-processes during the day. However, a grazing cow can get a significant amount of water from the grass she takes in. Water on pasture If water is available at pasture, the cow drinks considerable amounts at that location No difference in milk yield or water intake was found in experiments with or without access to water on pasture (pasture distance up to 330 m in experiment). Water trough should not be placed in the cow lane, as it could disturb cow traffic and create muddy conditions Pay attention to: water hygiene, water flow Grass is a feed that contains a lot of water which is often sufficient to fulfill the required amount for the cow during grazing. It is, however, strongly dependent on the weather. On hot days and when paddocks are at a distance of more than 400 m from the barn, it is recommended to supply water to the cows. About 50% of French monitor farms with an AM system have water available for the cows in the pasture. Simple rule: Avoiding welfare problems= providing water And Producing milk = providing water 19

20 Grazing management How to manage grazing? Grazing management is an important factor on all farms with grazing animals including farms with AM systems. A first but crucial step in grazing management is to decide how much grassland is available for grazing and how this grassland can be divided in paddocks. The scheme below is a useful flowscheme in which the steps for paddock division are laid out. In Belgium experiences of experimental farms and one pilot farm were recorded. On these farms night and day plots were used. To change plots, the cows had to pass the milking robot. This was considered to be a convenient system. When strip grazing was applied, more time was needed to manage the grassland but utilization of the grass improved, less grass was wasted and the grass quality was improved leading to a greater incentive for cows to graze. Want to know more? In the Netherlands, 5 grazing concepts or options are suggested and available for combining AM and grazing systems. (in Dutch) 20

21 Sustainability Sustainability is a key condition for future dairy systems. The ability of the dairy farmer to conduct a sustainability assessment of the system is critically important to ensure long term optimization. Therefore a decision support tool specific to sustainability is developed. The operation of this tool is aimed to evaluate sustainability onfarm, as defined by a range of criteria (e.g. energy and water usage, carbon footprint, cow fertility, lameness and milk quality). Economic sustainability can also be examined. You as a farmer can fill in the various Excel sheets and will be presented with a sustainability report. In the tool, you can select the reference values of your country, but also compare it to other countries. This can contribute to the awareness of differences in dairy production systems in different countries. This tool gives insight in the sustainability performance of your dairy farm on environmental, economic, social and governance themes. To assess the sustainability performance you will have to fill in the sheets 1 to 4 in this file. To fill in the registrations you will need the financial accounts from the year to be assessed as well as information to fill in the mineral balance (i.e. input and output of manure, fertilizer and concentrates). The performance of several environmental indicators are calculated using two other tools, this is further explained in sheet 4 (Environmental). The data you fill in is used to calculate your sustainability performance using the tool (sheet 5). When you open sheet 5 you select which countries' reference values you wish to use (drop down menu). You have the possibility to insert your own reference values at the bottom of the tool sheet and select 'Customized' as the reference values. You can play with the tool, by inserting values which you think you could achieve, and see how this would influence your results. The outcomes of the tool are presented in the report (sheet 6). On the first page of this sheet a polygon shows the performance on the four dimensions of sustainability. The tool is created in a collaborative approach of partners involved in the EU research project Autograssmilk. The country reference values are created by experts of the EU research project Autograssmilk. It is important to realize that the tool and the reference values are one perspective on sustainability; what is good or bad for sustainability is a topic of continuous debate. Therefore, the tool presents the opportunity to customize your own reference values. This tool should be considered as a discussion support tool to improve our understanding of sustainable dairy farming systems in Europe. 21

22 Economy An important factor for implementation of an AM system on a dairy farm is the economics. According to an Irish study in the project Autograssmilk the key factors of an AM system that differ from conventional systems are - Labour - Capital investment - Energy costs - Milking equipment maintenance costs In this study the profitability of an AM system and a conventional milking system was compared in two situations, with 70 and 140 dairy cows (1 and 2 robots). In the figures below the profitability of both systems are shown. For both herd sizes the AM system is less profitable than the CM. Of course, the calculated profitability depended on the basic assumptions. These can be found in the following publications: Figure 2 Annual profitability for CM and AM systems with a herd size of 70 cows across a 10 year period. Figure 3 Annual profitability for CM and AM systems with a hers size of 140 across a 10 year period. 22

23 In Denmark and France, AM farms with and without grazing have been compared. See tables below. In Denmark, the differences in feeding costs were small and not statistically significant. In France, the farmer s profit was 33 per 1000 l of milk with no grazing and 57 per 1000l of milk with grazing. Table 6 Results of comparison between 14 automatic milking system (AMS) farms with grazing and 67 farms without grazing in Denmark. 1, 2 Table 7 Production costs of three groups over three year period in France

24 In model calculations in the Netherlands labour productivity was higher when the annual fresh grass intake per cow was higher, see figure below. Figure 4 Income with grazing minus income with summer feeding relative to the amount of fresh grass intake in kg dry matter (DM) per cow per year for three soil types as simulated by the whole farm model DairyWise. Positive numbers indicate an economical advantage for grazing. Source: Van den Pol-van Dasselaar A., Philipsen A.P., de Haan M.H.A. (2013). Economics of grazing. Grassland Science in Europe 19: In Danish: 24

25 Economic web-based tools In the project Autograssmilk economic web-based tools were developed to support you as a farmer in the choices on your farm when you combine grazing with automatic milking. The goal of GrazingWise is to estimate quickly the consequences for labour requirement, economy and manure legislation of alternative grazing systems. With GrazingWise different grazing systems can be compared. It can evaluate rotational systems: day and night grazing, day grazing, grazing during afternoon and evening; indoor systems: permanently indoors with fresh grass, permanently indoors with conserved roughages; and continuous grazing. The amount of indoor feeding with roughages combined with grazing can be varied in a number of situations. Tool GrazingWise (English): In cooperation with : Luxemburg Tool Beteskalle (Multi lingual): The goal of Beteskalle is to estimate quickly how much grass is available per cow, depending on number of cows, area of grassland and production per ha. With the results the profit that can be achieved from grazing is also estimated. Besteskalle is developed by the Swedish partner in cooperation with H. Kohnen from Luxemburg who worked parallel with the project Autograssmilk on a project with the same name and goal for Luxemburg. Costs for AM system What does an AM system cost? Running cost of AM system at Liège (Belgium), Derval and Trévarez (France): 20 c per milking (incl. (routine)maintenance, repair). 25

26 Labour and AM Systems For many farmers the decision to purchase an AM system is not made by economic considerations only, other motivations play a role also. Many farmers state that the purchase of an AM system is considered to increase labour flexibility and/or to improve social life and health. The decrease of labour is therefore important. In Ireland labour demand on 7 farms with AM and on 10 farms with a conventional milking system was measured over a 12-month period. This was achieved through the operator recording their labour input on 3 consecutive days each month. The labour requirement associated with milking was 25 hours per cow per year for conventional and 16 hours per cow per year for automatic milking systems (figure 5). The difference in labour requirement between the two systems was greatest during the period of highest milk yield (summer time) in the seasonal production system (Figure 6). In winter (nov-dec) no milking took place, so no difference was measured in that period. Figure 5 Average hours/cow/month and extrapolated hours/cow/year for automatic (AM) and conventional (CM) milking systems. Figure 6 Average labour input associated with the milking process on farms with automatic (AM) and conventional (CM) milking systems

27 Information in Danish: 27

28 1.1 Back to Cow traffic and use of a grazing gate 28

29 1.2 Back to Cow traffic and use of a grazing gate 29

30 2.1 Back to Cow traffic and use of a grazing gate 30

31 2.2 Back to Cow traffic and use of a grazing gate 31

32 3.1 Back to Cow traffic and use of a grazing gate 32

33 3.2 Back to Cow traffic and use of a grazing gate 33

34 4.1 Back to Cow traffic and use of a grazing gate 34

35 4.2 Back to Cow traffic and use of a grazing gate 35