ANÁLISIS DE RESULTADOS

use as an indicator of a low profitability problem

Another indirect indicator of a low profitability problem is a client’s use of supplements and the cost of those supplements. To identify if this is a problem, the consultant considers how much bought-in feed is used by a client, and then he considers this in terms of the amount of feed fed per cow (Figure 5). For the consultant, high feed use occurs when a client feeds 1.0 tonnes DM/cow or more. As such, he is using a classification process (Rogers et al., 1996a,b; Gray et al., 1999a,b; 2000; Bruce, 2013) again to help identify a potential problem. In the client’s region, the average dairy farm would be feeding 0.5 – 0.8 t

DM/cow. If a client is using a high level of bought-LQIHHG•W'0FRZthe

consultant will assess if this is being used efficiently in terms of either wastage or more importantly impact on pasture residuals and dry matter harvested per hectare. The next step for the consultant is to determine what feeds make up the supplement ration. He asks the client what specific feeds are being fed to the herd. From this information, he determines if the client is using high cost feeds and expensive additives. For example, they might be feeding high protein feeds and a range of different minerals. Net imported supplements (t DM/cow) was found to be a poor indicator of operating profit (R² = 0.02 – 0.10) in a review of New Zealand studies by Ho et al. (2013). Savage and Lewis (2005) in a study of their Dairy System Monitoring farmers also reported that supplement fed per cow and supplement type had little impact on profitability. Rather it was the farmer’s ability to turn supplements into milk that impacted on profitability. Silva-Villacorta et al. (2005) in a study of 600 New Zealand dairy farms also concluded that the efficiency with which farmers were able to convert additional inputs into profit varied and that this was influenced by their goals and management capability. The consultant in this study is also focused on management capability, but he does believe that farmers can achieve similar

Classify farm by soil type, location and system Calculate MS/ha, S.R. & MS/cow for the farm

Compare farm performance to benchmarks Classify farm as poor, average or good Is the farm classified as poor? Yes No Potential low profitability problem identified

Continue with problem identification process

levels of productivity and higher levels of profitability with less expensive supplements rather than buying in high cost feeds.

Figure 5. Using bought-in feed data to identify a potential low profitability problem.

The consultant uses key people in his networks for advice on what is correct when using bought-in feeds. He uses a DairyNZ nutritionist as an important source of information about supplement feeding. However, his other key source is a local farmer who runs a high input system and is one of the most profitable farms in the lower North Island based on Dairybase analysis. The consultant knows what feeds this farmer uses and what feeds he does not use. This farmer mainly feeds maize silage and palm kernel with a few other things. He is the consultant’s mentor in this area and is used as a sounding board. Importantly this shows that the consultant is using actors that can provide both explicit (what & why knowledge) and tacit (How to knowledge) knowledge in his networks (Klerkx and Proctor 2013). The consultant chose the farmer as a mentor, but stated that he had to prove himself first and the consultant used Dairybase data to check that the farmer was as good as he made out. This farmer also responds to milk price and adjusts his feeding levels accordingly. The consultant stated that the difference between the various feeds is basically the cost of energy (cents/MJ ME). The cost difference between a low cost and high cost feed could be 3 – 5 cents/MJ ME, but this adds up over a season and can reduce profitability considerably. As such, the consultant is looking at firstly the amount of bought-in feed fed per cow and then the types of feed fed to the herd. The consultant is also suspicious of clients that use meal feeders because there is a good chance that they are losing money. Where a client has just outlaid $80,000 on a meal feeder, he will not want to admit that it is not profitable so the consultant has to be careful when he explores sensitive areas such as this. Farmers argue that with a meal feeder they will obtain better herd reproductive performance. However, the consultant has data from a trial that showed feeding 150 kg of grain over the early lactation and mating period only increased the number of cows in-calf by 1%. This demonstrates how the consultant is using evidence-based research to assess farmers’ practice.

Assess if bought-in feed is comprised of

high or low cost feeds Assess if bought-in IHHG•W'0FRZ Potential low profitability problem is identified Assess if bought-in feed is wasted or reducing pasture DM harvested/ha

3.3.5.4 Using reproductive performance and the quality of