improving soils and cutting costs

Volume 28, No. 6June-July 2021

‘by graziers, for graziers’

By Tamara Scully

Improving soils and cutting costs

Pages 4-5, 8

Lab proteins create

opportunities

6 Page 18Pages 6, 11 Page 22

Scientific proof

Page 14

Sheep profit tips

Drought strategies

Strike the match

Russ Wilson’s herd grazes nearly year-round in NE Pennsylvania

Keeping it clean

continued on page 9

By Martha Hoffman Kerestes

Kathy Neff

continued on page 2

The ins and outs of alt-milking options

Tionesta, Pennsylvania — Ten years ago, Russ Wilson was spending tens of thousands of dollars annually in making hay for his beef cow-calf and finishing animals. He was feeding that hay on this north-eastern Pennsylvania farm about half of the year.

Things are different now. Haymak-ing a thing of the past, with most of the equipment sold. In the 12 months ending April 1, Wilson Land and Cattle Co. grazed 80 to 90 animal units for 317 days, primarily on 135 acres of his 220-acre farm, plus 15 acres of rented acreage pasture just over a mile distant.

Cattle here have grazed at least 300 days in each of the past seven years, even though wetland soils comprise

40% of the farm’s total acre-age.

Gone is the more than $26,000 spent on fertilizer, plastic and diesel fuel in 2011. Annual diesel usage has fallen from 3,500 gal-lons to 200 with the move to quit haymaking and clipping pastures. Profits and free time have risen accordingly.

“Hay costs are half of what it costs to make hay,” Russ says. The total cost is not that great when hay is be-ing fed just 40 to 60 days each winter, and the imported feeds brings fertility onto the farm.

Russ, who grew up on a conven-tional dairy farm, once fed his cattle two to three tons of grain each week. But over the past 10 years he has changed the course of his operation.

“My sole focus is soil health,” he explains. “It used to be live-stock were number one. Now the livestock are merely no more than tools. They graze where they’re needed. It just depends on what we need to do on any particular field at any given time.”

Russ has embraced adaptive multi-paddock (AMP) grazing, which focuses on providing the management that swards and stock

need at any given time. In the process, the farm’s carrying capacity has in-creased from one animal unit per two acres over 180 days, to one animal unit per 1.62 acres, with an average 308-day grazing season over the past four years.

In addition to the 50 cow-calf pairs (registered and commercial Black Angus cattle raised primarily for

Russ Wilson

AMP grazing with periodic ultra-high stocking densities greatly improved Russ Wilson’s swards.

Milking typically represents half of yearly la-bor needs, so reducing the number of times cows are milked can make a major dent in labor costs. Twice-a-day (TAD) milking limits time available for important management tasks, and the need to milk morning and night can be tough on family-operated dairies.

Alternative milking schedules that vary from 12-hour interval TAD often reduce labor and can even offer economic benefits. Once-a-day (OAD) milking is a popular alternative, but other options are available.

The following information is from a recent University of Vermont Extension webinar on alternative milking timing. Paul Edwards, senior scientist in farm systems with Dairy NZ, New Zealand’s farmer-funded research organization, presented research on a variety of options, and

it appears that higher-producing cows are less suited to OAD and suffer greater production decreases.

The NZ data indicated that cows producing less than 660 lbs. milk solids/lactation saw a slight increase in production, which Edwards suggests might show some limiting factor was addressed by the switch to OAD, such as the farmer having more time to make better manage-ment decisions.

Cows in the next higher tier of 660-770 lbs. milk solids/lactation saw a moderate decrease in production. Edwards said OAD still could make economic sense overall if feed, labor or other costs were reduced enough to compensate.

For cows producing 770-880 lbs. milk solids/lactation, the NZ data indicate that OAD results

two farmers spoke on their experiences with OAD milking. What are the options?

Full-season OAD Edwards said OAD offers the very best flex-

ibility of all the options. Each operation can choose which part of the day to schedule milking depending on what fits best with other commit-ments. But while OAD can be very helpful in some situations, it is not as well suited for others.

The first consideration is herd milk production. Five-year-old NZ data followed dairies four years before and four years after their switch to OAD. A production drop typically occurs in the first year of the switch. (NZ data tracked milk solids production, which usually drops less than total milk volume when switching to OAD.)

Whether or not milk solids production returns to near the original TAD milk output seems to depend on the milk production levels. Overall,

June-July 2021

Improving soilscontinued from page 1

seedstock), the farm usually grazes about 200 to 300 pastured chickens, 20 sheep, a few dairy goats, a handful of mules, some horses, about eight to ten hogs raised from feeders to finish each summer, five steers, five bulls and 25 replacement heifers. But Russ thinks in terms of animal units rather than livestock numbers.

Grazing based on soil needsJust when and how the livestock

graze the pastures depends primarily on the needs of the soils, balanced by the livestock’s nutritional require-ments. Sheep and goats can graze wetter riparian areas without damag-ing the soils, so they are often utilized in pastures the cows can’t access.

Other than that, animals are moved where they are needed to promote soil health, with each species grazing separately.

The goal is to graze as much as possible without harming soils. “I’m always trying to figure out the cow behavior and sheep behavior,” Russ explains. “How can I graze them dif-ferently to get a better job?”

Cattle can access a covered cement pad, but it’s now used only a few weeks each year because Russ prefers to “bale graze” out on pasture. Square

paddocks and frequent moves — up to 10 times a day when needed — limit soil compaction. Annual precipi-tation averages 45 inches.

“It’s a learning experience to graze when it’s wet,” Russ says.

He no longer employs sacrifice areas, instead implementing longer rest periods on wet fields. This in turn helped increase water infiltration and aggregate stability of the soils, as the longer root systems act as a “geo-textile fabric” keeping things in place even in very wet weather. Square paddocks reduce foot traffic on any given area, unlike long, narrow paddocks that generate a lot of hoof pressure per square foot.

“It’s not the first footstep; it’s the many,” Russ explains.

Wetter fields are grazed in dry times, and drier fields are saved for wet periods. He also grazes portions of pastures, saving wet areas for dry periods and dry sections for wet days, fencing out areas as needed. At any given time, a half-dozen or more pas-tures are only half grazed.

Russ normally targets 90 animal units as the carrying capacity of his land during the grazing season, although he has stocked up to 120 animal units while sacrificing grazing

days and increasing costs. In winter, carrying capacity dips to 80 animal units.

Up to eight daily movesWinter stocking density is about

50,000 to 100,000 lbs./acre on stock-piled forages. In spring this decreases to 60,000 lbs., with 40,000 lbs. the limit on wetter soils. Summer rates increase to 200,000 to 400,000 lbs./acre, with moves up to eight times per day.

“It’s all about the soil. It just boils down to the soils and the plants,” Russ says of the changes in stocking density.

The swards have been diversified through the years to provide more

grazing days. Pastures are primar-ily perennial cool season grasses, plus legumes, forbs and native plants such as coneflowers and wild berga-mot. Russ says there are always at least seven species in the permanent pasture mixes, and that more than 70 species can be found across the farm’s pastures.

If legumes are being seeded into perennial pasture, he broadcasts the seed after the first grazing of the year. Russ believes this provides better seed-to-soil contact than frost seed-ing.

Cover crops are planted on approxi-mately 10% of the land each year to

revitalize pastures. Russ says they break pest and disease cycles in the perennial pastures, while the plant di-versity adds resilience to the system, which in turn increases production.

Utilizing cover cropsCover crop mixes, which typi-

cally include sorghum-sudangrass, Japanese millet, clovers, sunflowers, radishes, turnips and a variety of other species, are planted for one season and grazed.

His preferred method is to broad-cast the seed into the sod, graze the pasture and then burn it down. This increases seed-to-soil contact, is less labor intensive than other meth-ods, and often produces exceptional stands. A no-till drill is used if the window for broadcasting in front of the livestock is missed. The farm is 100% no-till.

His cover crop mixes vary de-pending on soil needs, with different species for specific goals. Phosphorus can be increased by planting buck-wheat. Sunflowers can be alleopathic and reduce problem plants while also featuring deep taproots extending into the subsoil to mine nutrients.

Small grains can help keep living roots in the soil, even during the win-ter months. Gray striped sunflowers have a very high feed value, similar to very high-quality alfalfa, Russ says.

Perennial grasses are replanted after one year in the cover crops.

First of two parts

Tamara Scully is a writer based in Columbia, New Jersey.

Russ figures that if his soils are healthy, a lot of other good things will happen.Russ Wilson

Russ says he gets at least 8,000 lbs. of dry matter per acre from the covers, adding that they provide 30% of the farm’s grazing despite accounting for just 10% of the total pasture area.

This works well with his philoso-phy that grazing is better than feed-ing hay. Russ figures establishing the covers costs about $45/acre, including labor and equipment.

“Cover crops bring a lot of extra forage to the table,” he asserts.

Natives and pollinatorsAbout 25 acres of pasture are per-

manently in a diverse mix of native grasses and pollinator plants. These mixes are adapted to soil conditions such as lower pH levels, and also at-tract beneficial insects that decrease fly control needs.

Russ notes that native New Eng-land aster and deer tongue are good forage crops. Forage analysis shows the asters are similar to sunflowers in feed value, and the deer tongue is highly palatable and very suitable for grazing during certain lifecycle stages. Cup plant, a native perennial with roots that penetrate 30 feet, is a good forage crop and an excellent pollinator plant.

Russ collects seeds from these stands, and incorporates them into his permanent cool season grass pastures as well. Most of these seeds are not patented. He can harvest a dozen pounds of seed per hour, saving

money compared to the costly seeds that are available commercially.

Stockpiling for winterWinter grazing means stockpiling

forages. Russ likes orchardgrass, as it maintains its quality and can be equivalent to a second grass cutting even in February — this year it tested at 14% crude protein.

Russ plans carefully for winter grazing in an area that averages 68 inches of annual snowfall. Fields saved for stockpiling are grazed once in the summer before being provided a 120-day rest period.

He says that if stockpiled forages are only a foot high, the cows are not going to bother to go through snow cover to graze them. He aims to have stockpiled pastures with at least 4,000 lbs. DM/acre, with 5,000 to 6,000 lbs. being ideal.

The cows stick their noses down, make a circle, and clear away snow in three-foot diameter areas. Russ says they will do this even if the snow is three or four feet deep. Even hard-packed ice of up to a foot can be broken up into chunks by hoof action.

Keeping the cows moving is key to utilizing stockpiled forages. Bunching and moving them two or three times per day will keep cows eating while preventing them from becoming too selective.

During the growing season, plants are grazed to the point of leaving at

least 50% sward density. Russ says that by grazing only half of the actual plant material, the overall pasture yield increases 45-50 % without im-pacting the plant’s ability to recover.

On average, paddocks are rested 100 to 120 days. But each field is ana-lyzed individually, and some may rest only 60 days, particularly if they’ve received heavy rains that keep the ani-mals out of wetter paddocks. If cool season grass stands are thinning, he might rest the pasture an entire year, allowing seeds to form and disperse, rejuvenating the stand.

Russ uses the livestock to impact soils and plants in problem areas, seeking solutions by mimicking

nature. For instance, if Canada thistle is present, compacting the field with very high stocking density will keep the rhizomes from spreading.

And high-density grazing with up to 800,000 lbs./acre for short periods distributes nutrients, aids nutrient cycling and reduces selectivity, thus improving areas with less-desirable forages.

“It’s all about what we need to do on any specific field,” Russ explains.

In the next issue of Graze, Russ will describe animal performance and labor needs in his system.

June-July 2021

If you have a question you’d like addressed, contact Graze.

advisorsThis month’s question:

How do you deal with dry weather?

Jim Feete

Scott Wedemeier

Jim Feete milks cows near Galax, Virginia.

Bulk Pricing on Raw Apple Cider Vinegar for Livestock

(785) 562-7495 • thevinegarguys.com

60-Grain Totes $3.25/Gal or 55-Gal Drums $3.50/Gal

60-Grain Organic 55-Gal Drums $5.75/Gal

Our climate has changed quite a bit over the past few decades, and what used to be a major issue is now very short-lived. For the past few years we have had an overabundance of rain and only needed to slow the round down for a few weeks to get through.

While we have used different strategies over the years, our newest is adding plantain to the sward. We started using it in our mixture several years ago, and over the past two years I have been trying to plant it with a goal of achieving a 50% plantain population in a few fields. We have clay soils, and plantain’s deep taproots help it grow through droughts very well. I have been very impressed with how hardy it is: I have several two-year old stands that seem to be going strong even under heavy grazing. So we will continue to plant it.

I generally don’t monitor exact pasture covers through May and June, instead doing quick pasture walks and rough assessments to make sure everything is making sense. However, by the end of June I will start checking dry matter in each field every week, comparing average cover of the platform week to week. As soon as I start to see a drop in average cover I start slowing the round ag-gressively to get ahead of any changes. We generally feed only a few pounds of grain, but we can take that up to 14 lbs. if necessary to take some pressure off the grass. In past extreme droughts we dropped down to one break a day and supplemented with hay, but I hope to never be in that situation again.

Here in northeast Iowa our average annual precipitation is about 35 inches, with about 29 inches coming during the growing season. Most years lately we tend to count on more rain than that, although in July and August pasture growth and feed quality can decline due to longer stretches without rain (about two weeks) or excessive heat.

One of the advantages of being a dairy farm is that every other day when the milk is picked up we get a milk volume weight, which indicates overall quality or heat stress. Fat percentage (fiber quality), protein percentage (energy level), and milk urea nitrogen test (protein level) are all direct indicators of what is

I bought a set of glasses a few years ago that filter out some green light and let you see plant stress earlier. (I think they are for golf course management.) I was surprised how well they predicted slowing grass growth, and they made me react more aggressively to heat stress. The biggest mistake I regularly make is returning to grazing too early after a drought. Having the average farm cover information helps slow me down. It is very hard to be in grass rationing mode when you can see the recovery, but waiting until it is truly recovered is vital.

We have used irrigation fairly successfully in the past. We installed a K-Line system about 10 years ago on our first farm. It covers about 45 acres, or about half of our grass fields. We pumped out of a three-acre pond and could put out half an acre/inch per week. This added a significant amount of labor and diesel fuel to our system, but it was very effective. The irrigation carried us through some pretty severe droughts, and one year we were able to graze more than 100 cows for six weeks on those 45 acres. The hardest parts were managing the pond’s water and refill rate. If we could do it again, I would definitely have a series of wells instead of surface water. I would love to install a small system on our new farm as well, but it seems unnecessary with the amount of rain we have been getting.

While we have tried several different annual crops over the years to carry us through the summer, we have never had a clear success. We never seem to get everything just right to time the crop for when we would need it, so we decided to stay with perennials and focus on managing what we knew.

Scott Wedemeier milks cows on a certified organic dairy near Maynard, Iowa.

“With the Aitchison Drill we now have excellent seed-to-soil contact any time we hit the field, even in dense sod. Everything we sow takes. I have sown 9 different seed species uniformly without separation.” — Joe Langmeier, Prairie Du Chien, WI

LOOK TO AITCHISON!!When looking for the BEST no-till forage drill at the BEST price

• 7’-12’ width 5” - 6” row spacing• Affordable: $1100 per row• Sponge-feeding system sows forage mixes evenly, accurately• Reduce seeding rates 30%+ due to increased

Our Drill: ┴-shaped slot 1-5/8” wide prunes competing roots, slowing the growth of the existing sward. Creates soil tilth, increasing access to soil nutrients. Retains 8x more moisture and 3x more oxygen than other planting systems. Clean, smear-free, cocoon-shaped, ideal mini-seedbed, yields consistent, uniform stands.

Other Drills: The V-slot made by disc drills have frequent poor emergence due to residue pressed into V-slot with the seed; and creates sidewall compaction. Poor depth control=over 50% of small seeds buried too deep or on top of the ground. Performance is speed sensitive.

www.aitchison.co.nz • www.tigercoinc.com

CALL TODAY FOR FEWER PROBLEMS TOMORROW

emergence

(800) 432-4020

Ted Miller

continued on page 8

We typically expect to see around 55 inches of rain over the course of the year. However, that precipitation is often not distributed evenly throughout the year, so we must plan for the potential for summer drought. Add to that the long periods of hot weather we experience, and it does not take long for soil mois-ture levels to plummet after the rain stops falling.

Fortunately, our location on the lower Mississippi River Delta allows us to irrigate fairly economically to mitigate drought risk. Five center pivots utilizing groundwater service around 700 acres — about 60% of our total grazing area. On the main dairy platform there are three pivots tied together with under-ground 10-inch pipe, with the water supplied by a 100-hp., 1,400 gallons-per-minute electric pump. On the heifer platform, two pivots are supplied by a 30-hp., 500 gpm electric pump. Having the entire system powered by three-phase electric captures significant energy cost savings compared to diesel-powered pumps. Groundwater table levels fluctuate from 20 to 40 feet below the surface, and lifting water from this shallow of a depth also helps keep a lid on pumping costs.

Between running the pumps and walking the pivots, our total water applica-tion costs typically range between $1.80 and $2.00 per acre inch. Over the past

happening in the pasture. I try to guess what is happening to pasture quality on a daily basis, then compare that to the actual milk test data. Feeding adjust-ments are then made to account for decreasing or increasing pasture quality by changing the partial TMR fed in the barn twice daily. If the pasture growth begins to slow, I will increase haylage fed to fill the void.

We have the room to make such adjustments since we typically run well over the minimum dry matter intake from pasture required for organic. These adjust-ments have worked most of the time since I began using mob-type grazing strategies with taller turn-in height, greater stock density and more post-graze residual. In the early years with the shorter turn-in heights and residuals, it seemed that every year was a drought. We needed more timely rains to maintain the three-week or shorter rounds compared to the 26-32 day rounds we run to-day. I guess our grazing success boils down to how well we are managing root reserves and the capacity of our soil to infiltrate rains when they come. Each year our best pastures are the ones that were “a little rank” the prior year and were mobbed down by the heifers, leaving a coarse mat on the soil surface.

In most years these strategies have worked well, with 2020 being the excep-tion. Last year’s July-August stretch was the driest we have had, with a little over three-quarters of an inch during that time. The first round in July didn’t show much reduced growth, but after a shower of rain in early August the pastures just didn’t want to come back. The grazing kept getting shorter and shorter, and destocking became the only option to not overgraze the roots.

I decided to pull all the bred heifers from the grazing rounds and feed on a sacrifice pasture that needed to be reseeded. This allowed more acres to be add-ed to the milking herd rotation, thus increasing rest periods. My goal is to graze the herd until the end of September and the bred heifers to early December. I knew I couldn’t do both if I continued to graze shorter and shorter (rounds and grass), which would cause root loss. I felt we had the root reserves for regrowth when the cooler temperatures and rain came, but needed to get there without stealing roots while waiting for that to happen.

Our heifer destocking lasted 17 days, but I felt we would have never had the length of the grazing season without pulling them off as soon as we did. I have waited too long in the past and ended up feeding stored feed for longer durations through both shortened fall grazing seasons and slow green-up in the following springs. Overgrazing truly does affect two grazing seasons!

nine years our annual energy cost for pumping has averaged around $27 per milk cow. For us, investing in irrigating when a dry period sets in makes more economic sense than purchasing hay. Center pivot technology allows for rela-tively low labor input per acre irrigated. We are working at improving that labor efficiency through more automated remote control of pivots and pumps. Several of our units are programmable, and one pivot has cellular capability that allows us to monitor and operate it with our smartphones. As this technology continues to come down in price, I would like to install it on all of our systems, which would decrease the amount of time spent travelling to pivots.

Yet our goal is to pump as little water as possible. We have implemented several management practices to accomplish this. We start by planting a winter annual crop of ryegrass, cereal rye and oats over our warm season perennial pastures in the fall. I feel the extensive root system from the winter annuals that break down during the summer months provides a porous void that allows the soil to absorb water very quickly, even from a hard rain event. And since our drought events usually occur during the summer, the majority of irrigation water is being applied to Bermudagrass, which utilizes water much more ef-ficiently than any of the cool season grasses. I try to maintain as much cover as possible in summer pastures without compromising Bermuda’s forage quality too much.

Soil fertility is another very good drought mitigator. As our soil organic mat-ter levels have increased over the years, we’ve seen a lot more resilience during droughts due to the substantial increase in the water holding capability of those soils. We also utilize the pivots for fertigation, applying liquid nitrogen through our irrigation water. As we move into the heat of summer, I try to apply around

June-July 2021

Fake proteins offer opportunity for graziersJoel McNair

Joel McNairEditor/Publisher

is published 10 times each year — monthly except for July and September — by No Bull Press, L.L.C., 5792 Alpine Road, Brooklyn, WI, 53521-9457. Subscrip-tion price: $30 per year. Periodical postage paid at Brooklyn, WI, and additional mailing offices. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Graze, P.O. Box 48, Belleville, WI 53508-0048. ISSN: 1940-6185

“by graziers, for graziers”

Telephone: 608-455-3311

e-mail:

U.S. mail: Graze P.O. Box 48 Belleville, WI 53508

How to reach Graze:

Ruth McNairBusiness/Advertising Director

[email protected]

Contributing Editor: Martha Hoffman Kerestes, Streator, IL.Grazier Advisory Board: Leon Corse, Whitingham, VT; Jim Feete, Galax, VA; Ted Miller, Baskin, LA; Scott Wedemeier, Maynard, IA; William Yoder, Butler, OH.Contributors: Daniel Olson, Lena, WI; Jim Van Der Pol, Kerkhoven, MN; Janet McNally, Hinckley, MN; Nathan Weaver, Canastota, NY; Allen Williams, Starkville, MS; Jon Bansen, Monmouth, OR; Cheyenne Christianson, Chetek, WI; Karen Hoffman, Norwich, NY; John Arbuckle, Newcastle, ME; Greg Brickner, Wonewoc, WI, Andy Schaefers, Garnavillo, IA, Matt Schlabach, Morrisville, NY, Ron Holter, Jefferson, MD.

Web site: www.grazeonline.com

U.S. subscription rates are $30 for one year (10 issues); $54 for two years (20 is-sues). Mexico/Canada rates: $38 U.S. for one year; $69 U.S. for two years. Over-seas: $60 U.S. one year; $108 U.S. two years. Single issues: $5.00. Copying or reprinting of articles originating in Graze is prohibited without written approval of the publisher. All materials are copyrighted 2021 by No Bull Press, L.L.C.

USPS 024-496

I am subscribing for:

One year (10 issues): $30

Two years (20 issues): $54

name

street or rural address

city, state, ZIP

Please make check payable to Graze

Mexico/Canada: $38U.S.; overseas: $60U.S.

Mexico/Canada: $69U.S.; overseas: $108U.S.

subscribe to

One year: $30 • Two years: $54 • For international rates see below

Online

By mail

Visit www.grazeonline.com, click “Subscribe,” and follow instructions from there.

Fill out the form below and mail it to:

GrazePO Box 48Belleville, WI 53508

Back issues also available:

see page 20

‘by graziers, for graziers’

Greg Brickner pretty much hits the nail on the head in his article starting on page 11.

Greg’s argument is that within the foreseeable future, alternative live-stock agriculture will not be compared to industrial livestock ag in terms of environment, animal welfare, health safety and all of the other food-related questions that increasingly come to the fore.

Instead, new age fake meats and dairy invented in laboratories and made in factories will be the standard of comparison. Or at least they will be if production costs and retail pric-ing can be reduced to equal or below those of real meat and milk.

That seems likely, given the feed conversion and other inefficiencies suffered in particular by cattle, and to somewhat lesser degrees by the other meat and dairy species. One need only compare per-capita trends in U.S. chicken and beef consumption over the past 50 years to realize that feed and overall production efficien-cies make a big difference in what Americans choose to purchase.

Of course the ruminant sector will argue that livestock utilize feeds that humans cannot. This argument is damaged by the truth that there is no reason why we must grow billions of bushels of field corn to feed the great majority of those ruminants.

Certainly we can make a lot of ex-cellent, fact-based arguments against the lab proteins, and that’s especially

true for graziers. But I’m not going to go there now.

Instead I’m here to reinforce Greg’s view regarding the near-certainty that these concocted meat and dairy sub-stitutes are indeed going to become the force to contend with for anyone who wants to make some sort of living from livestock, and perhaps sooner than most of us realize.

It is a mistake for anyone in livestock agriculture to simply write off this stuff because of bad ingredients, astronomical costs or any other current weaknesses in the lab proteins.

Doing so may well be akin to laughing at the performance and costs of personal computers in 1976, or di-al-up internet access in 1996. As with those technologies at those times, a lot of money, many major companies and at least a few powerful govern-ments are lining up to boost initiatives to improve alternative proteins.

Close is good enoughI’ll acknowledge that attempting to

mimic biology may not be as easy as improving computer chips and cel-lular infrastructure.

Yet the reality of the matter is that the labs do not necessarily have to concoct exact copies of hamburger and Cheddar, nor do the processes that commercialize this stuff have to be better in all ways compared to

today’s livestock agriculture.

The reality is that when it comes to food buying, the vast major-ity of the consuming public is

almost entirely concerned about three things: taste, price and convenience. Add slick marketing and “experienc-es” to those three, and you basically take care of America’s mainstream modern food sector.

Fake meat and dairy are already packaging for convenience, and the marketing machinery has become so overwhelming that any vegan, veg-etarian or flexitarian worth their salt has jumped onto this rocket to at least some degree. Taste remains a work in progress despite glowing reviews by big-time influencers, and in the main the pricing is not ready for prime time.

As Greg points out, recent events have primed this pump. Covid-19 exposed livestock’s industry weak-

nesses. Costs to produce basic food commodities are heading skyward and retail sticker shock is taking hold, pri-marily due to production and market-ing disruptions caused by Covid and (at least in China) livestock disease. China wants to reduce its dependence on foreign food commodities.

Major U.S. food companies see the writing on the wall, investing huge sums to boost development of new age, plant-based and cellular proteins. The U.S. government is under pres-sure to do the same.

Here is the bottom line: If these people can reduce the costs of plant/cell alternatives to below those of conventional meat products and com-modity dairy, it’s only a matter of time until they win.

Upwards of 90% of American meat, milk and commodity dairy products demand could well be satisfied by the alternatives. Not right away, but maybe sooner than we think.

If the prices are right and the taste is in the ballpark, then something close to this is almost certainly going to happen.

You can debate how long it will take, but damage to meat and dairy complexes will be evident long before the switch is nearly complete among the bulk of American (and global) citizens currently consuming animal proteins. It’s going to be a tough time for a lot of meat and dairy animal producers, perhaps even worse than what happened to many major U.S.

Joel McNair is editor and publisher of Graze and has a small farm in southern Wisconsin.

No issue next monthGraze is starting its summer publishing schedule, so there will be no issue in July. The next edition will carry an August-September dateline and should arrive in your mailbox in early August.

Organic milk sales up 4.8% in early ‘21

Organic SpecialistsCashton Farm Supply, Ltd.

300 State Hwy 27, Cashton, WI 54619

CFS Specialties, Inc.800-822-6671 FAX 608-654-5696E-mail: [email protected]

www.cfspecial.com

All Products are Approved for Organic Use

CUSTOM BLENDS – INGREDIENTS BLENDED AND LABELED TO YOUR SPECIAL NEEDS

& BUYERS AND END USERS OF ALL ORGANIC GRAINS Corn - Wheat - Barley - Flax & Poultry Rations Starter – Grower - Layer

& Blender of Natural/Organic Fertilizer Ingredients

920.684.0227Fax: 920.684.4499

ORDER 800.258.0848

PRODUCEROW CROPS

DRAMMManitowoc, WI • U.S.A.www.FishFertilizer.com

PASTURE

Natural Fish Fertilizers for

Organic Crop Production

Extremelyhigh levels of available

Calcium &

Phosphorus

®

manufacturing sectors over the past 50 years.

Your customers know betterBut then there is the 10%; the

people who will see the lab proteins for what they are.

They won’t like the ingredient labels. They will understand the envi-ronmental and potential human health problems presented by the soybeans that are likely to provide protein for many of these products.

As is the case now with mega-CAFO production and mega-factory processing, they will not cotton to the inevitable future consolidation of the fake meat sector.

These customers will also un-derstand the soil-to-plate benefits of grazing, grassfed and principled organic livestock systems. They will be willing to pay more for meats and milk produced and handled through traditional methods.

Grassfed/organic/family farm dairy could see something bigger than that 10% total market share, if for no other reason than it will be very difficult for the labs to match the taste and func-tional characteristics of high-quality cheeses and butters.

Opportunity awaitsSo all is not lost. Yet as Greg

Brickner notes, we will have to up our games to meet the challenge.

As Greg says, perennial agriculture

will become increasingly important in this future. But there is more to this.

People willing to pay more to buck the lab protein trend will demand con-sistently high quality and reasonably easy convenience.

Virtually all of them will be at least relatively well educated in a variety of sciences ranging from environmental impact to nutrition, and they will have expectations for all of it. They will want animals to be managed and mar-keted under relatively strict animal welfare standards.

No more gamey, tough meat. No breeding hormones. Very little outwintering, at least in northern dairy climates. “Net Zero” carbon scoresheets. Erosion, runoff and groundwater monitoring. The list will be long, and a bunch of it will be a pain in the rear end.

But there will be plenty of good, too. CAFO competitors will find it harder to co-opt the alternative markets after their primary sector has been decimated and the remain-ing consumers of real meat and dairy products are better educated.

Small grass farms, small process-ing facilities and producer-controlled marketing entities would have a chance to thrive — if they can get their collective act together. (See Jim Van Der Pol’s column in this issue.)

Farm level pay prices could im-prove and remain relatively stable with less pressure from the commod-ity meat and dairy markets.

Buyers of real meat and dairy might be more loyal to the sector, as the differences between the real foods and the lab stuff will be more pronounced than is currently the case in comparison to CAFO-produced products.

Pressure from grassfed imports might subside with better-educated customers — at least if U.S. quality and (to a degree) price are competi-tive.

The messages here are:• It is highly unlikely that anyone in agriculture is going to stop this lab protein train.• Conventional livestock agriculture is looking at serious problems.• Grass farmers will have opportuni-ties to do well and be better rewarded for their toil. But only if they get better at what they’re doing while controlling the marketing.

Organic milk sales rose 0.2% in March and 4.8% for the first three months of 2021 compared to the same periods last year, the USDA esti-mated.

Organic whole milk sales rose 0.3% in March compared to March 2020, and for the first three months of this year were seen as increasing 3.4% compared to the first quarter of 2020. Reduced fat (2%) sales climbed 1.1% in March and 8.9% for the first quarter.

Low fat (1%) declined 1.1% in March but was up 2.1% for the first quarter, while skim sales were off 10.9% and 5.4% respectively. Both of these categories are much smaller than the whole and 2% segments that compose roughly three-quarters of all organic milk product sales.

The sales numbers for 2021 may well have slid into negative territory in April and May, as last spring’s huge, pandemic-induced sales jumps will be the comparison point when USDA releases its estimates.

2020 was a banner year for organic milk sales, with USDA estimating a 10.4% increase in organic milk sales compared to 2019. The latest numbers for March, which is the first compari-son with last year’s pandemic period, indicate that the hot pace has cooled.

June-July 2021

continued from page 5

Advisors

Leon Corse milks cows on a certified organic dairy near Whitingham, Vermont.

Ted Miller milks cows near Baskin, Louisiana.

Leon Corse

30 units of N per month to the Bermuda pastures. Keeping the plants well fertil-ized going into a time of year when we are the most exposed to drought seems to give help the pastures better withstand a dry spell.

Roots and cover make big differenceIt seems like a healthy root structure and a moderate amount of cover on top

allows for tremendous water uptake by the soil. Because of this, I view water applied through irrigation as depositing money in the bank. I will begin ir-rigating if we’ve gone a week without rain and the forecast pattern is looking dry. With limited pumping capability, it takes several days for the pivots to get across all acreage, so starting early is important. We have plans to develop up to another 100 acres under pivot and add another 100 hp. pump to the system on the main dairy platform, which would allow for more aggressive watering.

Typically I will apply around 0.7 inch per pass to get some water to all avail-able acres, and continue pumping nonstop at that rate until we get rain. The goal is to retain as much subsurface soil moisture as possible. It seems that even a moderate amount of water is enough to prevent dormancy and maintain some dry matter production. Obviously we can’t replace the benefits of a good, soak-ing rain. However, timely irrigation can keep soil from getting too dry, which allows for much quicker forage response when we do get the big rain.

Truthfully, we don’t really have a drought strategy. Before 2020, drought issues were few and far between, or perhaps even nonexistent. At our eleva-tion (2,000 feet), and being just east of the highest of the Green Mountains, we typically get plenty of summer thundershowers. (Lightning during one 2007 storm burned the milking parlor, but that’s a story for another time.) We always felt we had an abundance of land (along with an abundance of landlords — 26!), which allowed us to sell significant quantities of stored forage. In 2020 I

realized in July that our forage production was going to be way below normal. I notified our regular customers right then that we would not have feed to sell.

Given our hilltop location, with no rivers or ponds nearby and only limited artesian water, irrigation isn’t a feasible option. I am somewhat stumped as to how to better manage drought situations. Last year we did have (barely) enough pasture for all the animals during all of our normal grazing season. For many years I had a life goal of creating/improving enough pasture to have all the animals pastured within walking distance of the barns. I accomplished that goal in 2019.

But about a month ago we were offered a good pasture about two miles away, and we took it in case we continue to have droughts bad enough that our regular pastures are not adequate. Some of that “new” pasture can be harvested for first-crop if we don’t need it for grazing. We can also do that with some of our other pasture, which will give us more total forage acres. We also altered our manure application plan for 2021 and plan to use more organic fertilizer. However, those additional fertility measures will only help if Mother Nature provides at least some water!

In conclusion, I guess I should admit to having a drought strategy of more acres, improved fertility and fewer forage customers!

William YoderOur job as graziers is to take a raw material (grass) that is nutritious and

inedible for humans and turn it into a highly nutritious food (milk) for human-ity that we sell at a profit to our labor. So if the rains dry up and grass quits growing, cows still need to be fed. Our supply of raw material no longer meets

demand, so drought can be stressful. Drought is often worse psychologi-cally than in reality, and overgrazing during a drought may cause us as much harm as the drought itself.

I apply two rules in a drought: Never completely run out of grass, and do not overgraze plants.

To do this, we try to be prepared. If we need to buy hay, I will try to have it bought or at least prepaid. I find that if I wait to buy hay until it’s needed, I will tend to wait longer to start feeding it. If it’s getting drier, I try to walk the pastures at least once a week, calculating in my head how many days of grazing are out there at the current growth rate. Summer grazing rounds are usually 28 days, but when it’s getting dry I plan for about five weeks, and if a drought is setting in I’m looking out 40 days.

I want to start feeding hay three weeks before I’m going to be running out of grass. This allows us to provide smaller pasture allocations, which lengthens our rotation and allows the plants more recovery time. We will start supple-menting hay at milking time and increase the amount fed as needed. When the rains return, a plant that has been overgrazed due to not leaving adequate residual or not having enough recovery time will be slower to come back to production. But a properly rested plant will have more reserves and be quicker to respond.

We do plant some sorghum-sudan or sudangrass in our outwintering pad-docks, and they help fill in the summer growth slump with our cool season grasses. Planting some warm season annuals seems to be a nice fit with our out-wintering and our limited acreage. However, for a long-term drought strategy, building soil organic matter is the better solution.

William Yoder milks cows near Butler, Ohio.

I want to start feeding hay three weeks before I’m going to be running

out of grass.

Milking alternativescontinued from page 1

continued on page 10

in long-term production loss. These cows may be a better fit for a 3-in-2 milking schedule.

3-in-2 milkingThis strategy employs three milk-

ings over two days, with a repeated interval of 12 hours, 18 hours and 18 hours. For example, milking could be done at 5 a.m. and 5 p.m. one day, then 11 a.m. the next day, followed by 5 a.m. and 5 p.m. the next day, with the pattern repeating.

Edwards cited a 1998 study that found milk secretion increases steadily until beginning to flatten off more quickly past 16-18 hours after milking. In a one-year study of 3-in-2, a herd producing 11,000 lbs./milk per cow on TAD appeared to have a 4.4 lbs./cow decrease in production for each day of 3-in-2.

Not all components were affected evenly: fat decreased 3%, protein decreased 8%, and lactose decreased 12% over the 270-day lactation. Body condition scores increased slightly over a 270-day lactation.

Edwards noted that 3-in-2 provides less consistency in milking, as every other day sees changes in how many milkings occur and when they are done. The cycle does repeat itself

every two weeks. One twist is to do 3-in-2 weekdays,

with OAD on weekends. This results in 10 milkings in the week (10-in-7). The pattern results in a consistent weekly schedule and 29% fewer milk-ings compared to TAD.

TAD optionsEdwards said NZ studies seem to

suggest that the number of milkings matters more than the exact interval. While 10- and 14-hour daily inter-vals with TAD are common, some New Zealand farmers are switching to 8- and 16-hour intervals. This can provide a later start or an earlier finish to the day, such as with a 6 a.m. and 2 p.m. milking schedule.

Edwards noted that such a schedule requires a good milking routine to handle the larger volume of milk from the 16-hour interval.

Farmer experiencesTwo Vermont farmers, Cameron

Clark and Brian Howlett, shared their pros and cons of OAD milking.

Cameron has been exclusively OAD for more than three years. “I love it and have no plans to go back,” she said.

With just one part-time employee, Cameron does almost everything

herself for her 40-cow grassfed herd. Her goal is to keep labor needs low enough that she could handle every-thing herself if the employee ever moves on.

She’s been organic since 2012 and grassfed for a year and a half, and said that with the management required she just couldn’t justify spending two sessions a day in her 65-year-old, double-three parlor. The transition to OAD milking was mainly for quality of life.

“It was the right decision for me,” she said. “It has worked really well.”

Cameron previously used OAD on some cows close to drying off, but nothing at large scale. “Taking the leap with the whole herd was kind of daunting at the time,” she said.

She started OAD in January and planned to switch back to TAD after winter was over. But as spring and summer came, OAD was going so well that she stayed with it. “There’s so much more time in the day to get things done,” she explained. “It’s a major stress reducer on me and on the cows.”

Herd production dropped about 20% from the switch to OAD, but production held steady several years later when she stopped feeding grain. Cameron said OAD and grassfed strategies complement each other well, and she was glad she switched to OAD first.

SCC nearly doubled the first month

or so after going OAD, and Cameron said she was concerned since the herd had typically run 200,000-250,000 on TAD milking. However, cell count soon leveled out, and for the past two years has been steady at 100,000.

Cameron’s herd is crossbred, with a Holstein base plus Jersey and other breeds. She said health issues are minimal and the cows breed back well.

She said that while animals carry-ing too much condition and not breed-ing are potential issues, better body condition scores are an overall benefit — particularly since the herd winters in open freestall barns that get very cold. Also, her first-lactation heifers perform better with OAD.

For her operation, OAD is eco-nomically viable and sustainable. “We have actually been more profitable in the last three years than previous to the switch,” she said.

Cameron has seen savings in labor and supplies, and says she has more time to do better grazing manage-ment. The higher pay price for grassfed has been a benefit as well. She emphasized that having time to do other things and not being com-pletely tied to the farm all the time is important.

“Is your farm working for you?” Cameron asked. “Or are you working for your farm?”

June-July 2021

Milking alternativescontinued from page 7

FLY ASIDE CONTAINS HIGH LEVELS OF SULFURFertrell Fly Aside

CALL FOR A COPY OF CATALOG: 800-347-1566 | WWW.FERTRELL.COM

PRODUCER OF NATURAL & ORGANIC FEED SUPPLEMENTS & FERTILIZERS

• Decrease external parasites – flies, ticks, mosquitoes• Essential for Rumen microbial synthesis• Increase milk production• Increase rate of gain on meat animals• Buffer high nitrogen from pastures and forages• Reduce Milk Urea Nitrogen (MUN)• Formation of essential amino acids – methionine, cysteine

10 % discount for any orders placed during June . Restrictions apply.

*10% OFF during month of June

Brian’s experience was a little dif-ferent than Cameron’s, since he was doing seasonal OAD. He recently retired from milking about 40 Jersey crosses in a grass-based system with some grain.

He milked OAD in the winter start-ing in late 2016. The previous winter featured weather so bad that he’d finish the morning milking and chores just in time to have a cup of coffee before starting the evening milking.

Brian recommended seasonal OAD, but said people should ask

themselves some questions in consid-ering whether OAD might make sense for their situation.

“How much do you need the extra time?” he asked. “How much do you need the extra money from the extra milk?”

OAD poses a number of potential logistical challenges, Brian noted. It may not be feasible for farmers who need to keep cash flow and production

as high as possible to pay down debt. Brian saved money by cutting grain

in half in winter. He saw milk produc-tion go down by about a third, but the milk check didn’t drop that much due to a distinct gain in components. In fact, last winter protein went up by half of a percentage point in just the week following the switch.

He said having a break in the winter with OAD milking made life

I am starting my third year of OAD milking my Jersey herd (32-34 cows), and to date I’m very happy with the results of just milking in the morning. Here are some of them:• Fresh cow problems are almost nonexistent, with no ketosis and very few milk fevers. It wasn’t a wreck before, but definitely the energy balance is now much better in early lactation.• All cows calved in 46 days this year, which means more milking days for my strict-seasonal herd. Ninety percent of them freshened within four weeks after the March 10 start to the season.

averaged about 6 lbs./cow.) Now with OAD, I have to be more careful about keeping the cows completely full at all times. We have a bale of hay (dry cow quality) out on pasture near shade, and they’ll eat it if they’re hungry. I sometimes roll it out if the fields are dry enough.• They have access to all the grain they can eat for the 10 minutes they’re in the parlor. But when the grass is at its best they average maybe 2 lbs. Now (in early May) they’re at a little more than 3 lbs., but some of the heifers and older cows are eating 2 lbs. I have a couple of cows giving 60-70 lbs., and they eat about 7-8 lbs.• Last year total net income was within a few dollars of what it was a couple of years ago with TAD, and my milk price hasn’t changed. I think this year I’m going to be there or even better than last year.• We all like this lifestyle; it’s just too nice. Labor has decreased about 25%. We probably needed 50 hours a year per cow with TAD, and now we’re down to around 36-37 hours. With a decent parlor we could get down to 20-25 hours/cow.

That’s up from the 70-75% we saw over four weeks when we milked twice-a-day. The average start for days in milk was April 5 with TAD, but now it’s March 22. That gives us more days of 40 lbs./cow production.• The cows seem to be adapting. The first year with OAD (2019), peak milk was 37 lbs. Last year it was 40 lbs. This year (through early May), we’ve had several days at 44 lbs. already, although a dry spring is helping. April 2021 but-terfat was in the 4.9-5.0 range, and protein was 3.6-3.7.• SCC averages about 200,000, and we don’t quarter-milk. Most of the time it’s less, but some-times we see a spike.• We must coax milk out of the cows after 100 days in milk, as any drop has no chance of rebounding with OAD milking. With TAD, the cows would come in and eat more grain and hay at afternoon milking. (Daily grain consumption

Editor’s note: This is a follow-up to my column from January 2020 (“Why graziers should con-sider OAD milking”), which included informa-tion from southwestern Ohio dairy grazier Gene DeBruin’s experiences with once-a-day milking.

By Gene DeBruin

An OAD milking update


Lab proteins are the new standardmuch easier. He remembered the first time he tried OAD on Christmas Eve, when he milked early in the day and then went with his family to the city for Christmas shopping and came back at 10 p.m. He appreciated being able to spend time with family with-out worrying about milking the cows again that day. “I never looked back.”

More research neededWhen starting a new milking

schedule, Edwards emphasized the need to plan in advance to achieve the overall goals of the switch. In addi-tion, farmers need to see what man-agement needs to change along with the shift in milking times.

U.S. researchers say that more study is needed to provide more detailed U.S. data on the milk produc-tion and economic impacts of differ-ent milking schedules.

Dr. Heather Darby of University of Vermont Extension is beginning a research project funded by North-east SARE (Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education) to look at al-ternative milking strategies including OAD milking, seasonal production and robotic milking. One of the goals of the project is to analyze the eco-nomics of such practices to provide data for farmers considering a switch.

Martha Hoffman Kerestes is Graze contributing editor and a grass farmer based in Streator, Illinois.

To those of us involved in alter-native agriculture, the standards to which our systems and practices are held always shift. Now there is an arms race in new categories and de-grees of purity for marketing. (Heir-loom eggs? Syntropic farming?)

I think a new standard we should consider comes from the developing world of alternative proteins.

The development of alternative proteins — “fake” meat and milk produced from plant raw materials, or lab-grown meats produced from animal cell cultures — is often per-ceived as the work of activist vegans with agendas solely driven by animal welfare concerns. That is not true.

The drive to develop these foods has become a very large project. In fact, the amount of money and intel-lectual firepower behind this project makes development of these products nearly inevitable.

The goal is not to make foods that are almost as good as meat, and then hope consumers can be convinced to accept them. No, the goal is to produce products that taste at least as good as meat and milk, and are also at least as cheap as our products.

They want to make the switch to these products as easy as the switch

from cord to cordless phones. Few miss cord phones.

The development of alternative proteins is not directed by small companies driven by activist agendas. The parties involved include major U.S. and European food corporations such as Tyson, JBS and Nestle, along with several governments, including China. Much like car manufactur-ers competing to create electric cars, these entities are in a heated race to come to market with the first alterna-tive proteins.

It is important to respect that there are legitimate reasons fueling the drive to develop alternative proteins. While the alternative ag movement usually compares its practices and results with the standards of industrial animal ag, alternative proteins are in-tended to eliminate industrial animal agriculture.

So we need to compare our practic-es to the promises of alternative pro-teins, and address those concerns if we are to have a future in agriculture. Here are some of the major concerns that alternative proteins promise to reduce or eliminate:1. Risk of disease pandemics. Covid-19 made us aware of the devastating impacts of a pandemic. Most novel viruses responsible for pandemics arise from livestock or the mingling

of wild animals and domestic live-stock. It is argued that eliminating animal agriculture will significantly reduce the risk of new pandemics arising.2. Antibiotic resistance. Develop-ment of bacteria with antibiotic resistance is accelerated by overuse of antibiotics in food-producing animals. The majority of antibiotics produced in the world are fed to food animals. The loss of effective antibi-otics threatens modern medicine, as many of the procedures and surgeries to which we have become accustomed depend upon the availability of anti-biotics3. Food security. Covid laid bare the risks of a food supply chain depen-dent of the steady flow of live ani-mals through consolidated slaughter and processing facilities. Impossible Meats claims the flow of food from their facilities never slowed during the pandemic. China’s meat supply suffered the impacts of Covid, and recently African Swine Fever has devastated hog farms and made pork an expensive commodity. Far from veganism being the primary driver, the Chinese government wants to develop these products for better food security.

By Greg Brickner

June-July 2021

Proteinscontinued from page 11

4. Efficiency. No matter how inten-sive and efficient animal agriculture is made, it will never compete with plant-based manufactured alternatives in terms of calories in/calories out. The growing of annual grains solely for the use of feeding to animals is a grossly inefficient process in compari-son to manufacturing “meats” directly from those grains.

5. Climate change/environmental degradation. All of us realize the dramatic effects of modern industrial animal agriculture on ecosystems. While the degree of contribution to climate change can be argued, there is no doubt that industrial animal agriculture is a significant contributor to climate change and environmental degradation.

There are discussions to be had around how we respond to each of the points above. Instead I would like to address how our systems can respond to the climate/environmental question.

Perennial agricultureThe standard set by alternative

proteins is high, so in my opinion livestock can continue to have a place only if they are produced primarily on perennial landscapes that preserve biodiversity, improve water quality,

sequester carbon and provide other ecological services.

When speaking of the carbon benefits of perennial forages, I think we primarily mean no tillage, living roots and a soil surface protected by living plants and/or dead plant mulch. Obviously, perennial forage species accomplish these goals most readily, and achieving a truly perennial agri-culture is an admirable goal.

Yet there are very good reasons to utilize annual species as well. Harsh cold, winter ice and severe droughts can kill perennial species, and it is critical that we have the ability to quickly fill open spaces in peren-nial stands. Even in normal years, a variety of annual species drilled into perennials can thicken stands and improve digestibility. It will be impor-tant to reestablish plant cover quickly.

In other words, we will need to employ annuals as tools for enhanc-ing primarily perennial systems rather than concentrating on annuals in their own systems.

Addressing biodiversity, we should try to have as many acres as practical in complex systems such as savanna/silvopasture and prairie. Producing food from acres that are also habitat for a variety of plant and animal spe-cies seems very defensible.

Daniel Olson’s recent articles in Graze have done an excellent job of explaining how forage fiber can be an excellent source of energy. It is tempt-

ing to respond to this information by identifying and growing the annual forage species that have the high-est fiber digestibility. But perennial forages can also be excellent sources of digestible fiber. We could use this same information to recognize and improve our perennial forage species.

Annual forage species are only incrementally better than annuals as sources of energy. With care in soil fertility, harvest timing and harvest technique, perennials can be excel-lent sources of fiber energy. And with just a little bad luck in weather and timing, annuals can easily become mediocre forages.

Well-managed perennial forages will need to provide both pasture and stored feed. Dairy farming has come to rely on annual forages, particularly corn silage. Tillage’s negative effects on carbon sequestration, soil health and biodiversity will be hard to de-fend when used to grow feed for live-stock instead of directly for people.

A place to start may be in reducing the role of annuals to being a ration supplement, with perennials making up the majority of the forages. Oppor-tunities for grazing annuals may be available in the form of cover crops grown after harvests of row crops intended for human consumption. By-products such as soyhulls, beet pulp, citrus pulp, wheat and those from corn processing will be available, but they are useful only to ruminants that

can ferment and make use of the fiber.The main point is that the standard

promoted by alternative proteins is zero impact from livestock. To defend our practices against this standard, we need to be a net positive.

We cannot win the feed efficiency argument, but we can produce real food from diverse perennial eco-systems that build ecological diver-sity and health. It seems that farms dominated by perennial forage stands, interseeded with annual forages and supplemented with commercial by-products, may be able to satisfy these goals. Alternative proteins will not be able to do this, at least if all of the system’s costs are accounted for.

Our niche If alternative proteins develop as

predicted, our market will continue to fill a niche. The larger demand will be filled by these cheap alternatives. Our customer base will continue to be a more sophisticated consumer who appreciates the nutritional complexity of real food, but is also be quite aware of the concerns expressed above.

Fairly soon the alternative proteins will supplant conventional livestock agriculture as our standard of compar-ison. In some ways those proteins will be tougher competitors. But graziers can also compete in this world.

Greg Brickner grazes sheep near Wonewoc, Wisconsin, and is a staff veterinarian with CROPP cooperative.

Transferring knowledgecontinued from page 8

Getting a profitable start with sheep June-July 2021

Tips for making money with a no-frills grazing start-upBy Janet McNally

So you want to add some grazing sheep to the farm.

What do you need to get started? I am pretty sure you can get many dif-ferent answers to this question.

For this article, I am going to assume you’re starting a spring-lambing, pasture-based operation that needs to provide an income instead of being a hobby. So no frills — just the basic necessities. What I am about to describe is very portable, being easily moved from one place to another with just a few hours of work.

Flock size realitiesObviously you need some sheep.

I am not going into breeds here, but rather how many you should have. If you are just starting out and have no livestock experience, I suggest start-ing with 10 to 20 ewes. However, this flock will be too small to pay its way.

If you have some previous live-stock experience, know that a mini-mum of 100 ewes is required to attain some efficiency of scale, and that a ratio of one person per 350 ewes at lambing time is typical. Once lambed,

one person can manage 600 or more. Some land is needed. You do not

need to own the land, and it does not need to have the perfect pasture planted upon it.

Just native or naturalized plants will do. All the better if it is an improved hayfield or was previously used as pasture, but for starters you simply need a patch of grass or even just the potential to grow grass.

Three ewes per acre is a good place to start in the more humid areas east of the Mississippi River. Carrying capacity can vary greatly, so this is a big generalization.

Portable works Next you will need fencing. For

the purposes of this article I am going to suggest electrified netting. If there is an existing fence, such as four- or five-strand barbwire or woven wire, adding one hot wire to the inside about eight inches off the ground can make it sheep-tight.

But if you are starting with bare land, netting will give you the most secure option. Once you have mas-tered grazing in netting, you can venture into strand fencing.

Seven rolls (164 feet per roll) of netting will be enough for 150 to 200 ewes and their lambs if moved one or two times a day on productive land (three tons forage/acre or better). You will need more netting if you wish to move less often or are on particularly unproductive land.

Let’s figure this land has three-quarters of a ton dry matter of stand-ing forage. I would use 13 rolls of netting for 170 ewes. That would be eight rolls to contain the flock for one day, and five more to set up the next day’s paddock. Here are the numbers.

If four rolls are used, the enclosed area equals 0.62 acre, so eight rolls equals 1.86 acres.

So 1.86 x 0.75 tons/acre = 1.4 tons, or 2,790 lbs. forage DM. Figur-ing ewes will graze half of that DM, 1,395 lbs. is consumed. A lactating ewe needs 8.5 lbs. dry matter of for-age per day. So 1,395 divided by 8.5 equals a stocking rate of 170 ewes.

Since you have already set up the next paddock, moving the sheep will amount to just opening the fence to let them in. Experience will tell you if you need to make these paddocks bigger (or simply move more often).

You will need to develop your eye for estimating pasture dry matter avail-ability, and using a measuring device can help you in this.

Next you need a fence-charging system. There are a lot of options, but as a starting point I will describe what I use. My system is on a two-wheeled cart towed behind the ATV. It has a solar panel, a 12-volt battery, a con-verter for the battery, and the charger (see photo).

The charger can be too bigFor our location in Minnesota, a

60-watt panel is the minimum re-quired if using a 3.5-joule output charger for seven to twelve rolls of netting. This will keep the fence charged for up to 14 days during cloudy weather.

The fence sales people will rightly tell you that you need a 6.0-joule or larger charger for ten or more rolls of net. However, I found that 6.0-joule chargers drew so much power that the solar panel/battery system would last only three days during rainy or cloudy weather. You will need to move to a larger solar panel if using a 6.0-joule fencer.

Janet McNally

Solar panel, battery, charger, converter, netting: everything is portable.

If you move your sheep often enough and ensure they always have adequate grass underfoot, a reading of 2.8-3.2 kv on your tester is enough to keep them in. Again, the fence sales people would recommend a read-ing of at least 8 kv, but I found this to be unnecessary with good grazing management.

If you are going to run more than a dozen rolls on a regular basis, you definitely will need a larger charging system. Just keep in mind that the more output from your charger (in joules), the bigger the drain on the battery.

I also found that for larger fence setups, it was better for two charging carts to electrify different sections of fence rather than having one bigger charger for the entire system. That way, if one went down for any reason, I still had something. After weaning I also had two fence systems, one for lambs and the other for ewes.

For smaller flocks there are all-in-one solar panel/battery/charger units with convenient handles, but most of these are 0.25-0.5 joules. A 0.5-joule unit will charge only two or three nets, while the 0.25-joule units are too small for netting.

Going without pipesNext you will need a watering

system. After laying down 1.5 miles of pipe to water our sheep, I found out in the third year that I was spending

a lot of time repairing the pipe. Local cattle farms admitted they were re-placing their pipe every third year. If I was watering cattle I would probably put up with the trouble of constantly repairing or replacing pipe, or I would bury it.

But sheep do not demand nearly as much water, and I found that haul-ing my water in a 100-gallon tank on the back of a two-wheel trailer was more reliable. Plastic, 50-gallon water troughs provide the water access. Figure about two gallons of water per lactating ewe for the hottest of summer days. Obviously much larger flocks will use larger tanks placed in the back of a truck, and larger flocks also justify buried pipe.

Border Collies important Our sheep are now fenced and

watered, so the next consideration is moving and protecting the flock. If the sheep are to be moved any distance, investing in a trained Border Collie is no different than a crop farmer buying a tractor. A good Border Collie can make up for the lack of facilities and save millions of steps — and maybe your marriage!

If you are new to Border Collies, work with a trainer or attend clinics to get the most out of your dog. It is my opinion that lack of knowledge on how to use a Border Collie is the single biggest deterrent to utilizing available grazing resources.

The other dog(s) you will need are livestock guardian dogs. The nature of the predator problem will determine how many you need, and this is a topic for another day. But most farms could use at least a male/female pair.

A portable handling system is a must. It could be as simple as a four-foot wide alley that you can crowd sheep into, or a single-file chute in a bugle coral system. Having the ability to contain the sheep means health maintenance will get done.

Lower on the list, but still impor-tant, is some kind of secure place to

Janet McNally grazes sheep near Hinckley, Minnesota.

put the flock during times of need. For us that could be a visit from a pack of wolves, or as a way to keep the flock off early spring grass.

After four rebuilds over the course of 40 years, my current “fortress” is made of five-foot high by sixteen-foot long welded wire panels, with wooden posts placed every eight feet. Figure on 100 square feet per ewe, and be sure to build this in a well-drained location.

June-July 2021

Science backs adaptive grazing advantages

Call us to receiveyour FREESamples

Voted THE #1 Electric Fence Solution Since 2011

timelessfencesystem.com(800) 788-4709

YOUcan become an

AUTHORIZED RESELLERCall for details

Let us show you how affordable rigid PVC posts are when compared to other types of posts.

• Self-Insulating• Never rusts or rots!• Pre-drilled every 3”• NRCS EQIP Approved• Organic Approved

Plus...Get *Free Shipping!

*To Continental US only, on

Never beforeOFFERED!

Applies to the purchase

of any Timeless Fence System

Rigid PVC products.

The problems of many current conventional grazing systems can be avoided by ecologically sensitive management of ruminants across the landscape.

Wild ruminants by the hundreds of millions existed for millennia on the North American landscape, and were responsible for the tremendous fertil-ity and soil carbon that amazed our ancestors as they moved across this

continent. By implementing biomim-icry and eco-mimicry in our grazing practices, thus emulating the way wild ruminants once roamed across this vast land, we can restore soils and ecosystems to a high state of function.We call this adaptive grazing.

Adaptive grazing management using multi-paddock grazing strate-gies has been shown to be superior to continuous grazing practices. It may be called several things: adaptive multi-paddock grazing (AMP), adap-

tive stewardship grazing (ASG), and regenerative grazing (RG).

Continuous comparisonA long-term study conducted by

Dr. Richard Teague at Texas A&M University confirmed that compared to continuous grazing, adaptive graz-ing improves vegetation, growth and recovery of vegetation, soil health parameters, soil carbon and animal production.

The study measured impacts on pasture vegetation and soils achieved by graziers who adapted grazing management practices allowing for flexibility in response to changing cir-cumstances in order to achieve desir-able outcomes (Teague, et.al., 2011).

At the ranch scale, adaptive grazing at higher stock densities provides the best outcomes in vegetation and ani-mal performance, and is superior to continuous grazing in providing con-servation and restoration of resources, ecosystem goods and services, and farm profitability.

The study by Teague differed sig-nificantly from prior grazing studies by researchers who examined multi-paddock grazing in relatively small areas, used set stock rotations, and did not manage adaptively. Teague’s study added the elements of real-world grazing conditions through whole-ranch grazing, high stock densities, and flexible management adapted to actual conditions.

The study showed significant improvements in soil aggregate sta-bility, water infiltration rates, water holding capacity, vegetative biomass production and plant recovery period. Additionally, the soil fungi-to-bacteria ratio was significantly improved, indicating superior soil microbial functioning and mineral cycling.

Teague’s research has been critical to better understanding the benefits of adaptive grazing. More recent research has continued to substantiate these benefits.

Research conducted by Martin et.al. (2014), Jakoby, et. al. (2014), and Teague, et. al. (2015) showed that ecological function and grazing profit-

ability improved with an increase in number of paddocks. These were tem-porary paddocks that facilitated adap-tive management — not permanently constructed paddocks that would dic-tate more prescriptive management. The consensus from these trials:• Short periods of grazing with adequate recovery gave the greatest profit and ecological function;• adjusting grazing management with changing conditions increases eco-logical function and profitability;• fixed management protocols reduced benefits;• profitability decreases if recovery is too short or too long, and;• stocking rates can be increased with-out damaging ecological function as number of paddocks is increased.

Antibiotics and GHGsIn a study published in 2016 (Ham-

mer, et. al., Proc R. Soc. April 2016), it was revealed that routine antibiotic use in cattle has unintended conse-quences on micro- and macro-organ-isms in our ecosystems.

Routine antibiotic use alters the gut microbiome of the ruminant, which then alters microbial emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs). The result was increased methane fluxes from the manure of cattle due to alteration of the natural interactions between methanogenic archaea and bacteria in cattle rumens and dung.

The antibiotics not only changed the microbiota of the gut, but also the microbiota of non-target organisms like dung beetles and other important soil insects. This created negative downstream effects on the microbiota of both the cattle manure and the dung beetles.

The results of this research are profoundly important because almost all prior research regarding methane emissions from livestock has been conducted using conventional systems as the model. Thus, heavy antibi-otic use was routine in the systems measured. Results from regenerative models produce significantly differ-ent responses and alter the accepted “conventional science”.

By Allen R. Williams, Ph.D.

Grassfed Alliance joins Good Meat Project

Dr. Allen Williams is a partner in Under-standing Ag, LLC, based in Starkville, Mississippi. He can be reached at 662-312-6826 and [email protected]

Adaptive grazing and GHGsA study published in 2020 (Shrest-

ha, et.al., Agronomy. 2020) found that adaptive grazing lowered GHG emis-sions by altering extracellular enzyme activity. Extracellular enzymes break down complex organic matter (i.e., lignified plant materials, cellulose, organic phosphates, etc.) into soluble sugars that can then be used for me-tabolism by other organisms.

The study compared adaptive graz-ing ranches to neighboring conven-tionally grazed ranches. The results showed that methane uptake was 1.5 times greater in the adaptively grazed soils compared to the conventionally grazed soils.

The conclusion was that adaptive grazing has the potential to miti-gate the impact of warmer soils on GHG emissions by consuming more methane compared to conventionally grazed lands.

Enhanced soil C and NA study by Mosier, et.al. 2021

(J. Enviro. Man.) found that while grassland soils are large reservoirs of soil carbon, they are at risk when cul-tivated or subjected to poor grazing management.

Adaptive grazing increases soil C and other soil health parameters, and lowers the risk of rising atmospheric CO2. The study on southeastern U.S. grazing lands showed that adaptive grazing enhances soil C and soil nitro-gen stocks through mineral associa-tion.

It found that adaptive grazing in-creases soil C stocks, with 13% more C on the adaptively grazed farms compared to those conventionally grazed. In addition, more of this soil C was shifted to persistent organic matter, which is a strong indicator of long-term carbon storage.

There were also greater N stores on the adaptively grazed farms, with an average of 9% more soil N. The researchers concluded that adaptive grazing can sequester and stabilize more C and N in agricultural soils.

An earlier study (Cong, et. al., J Ecology. 2014) found that soil C and N stocks are increased when plant species diversity is richer, even in the absence of legumes. Cong’s study

admitted that while legumes can play a major role in N2-fixation, many species of grasses — especially warm season grasses — can form associa-tions with free-living, N-fixing bacte-ria in the soil.

The study showed that soil C and N stocks increased by 18% and 16% respectively in eight-species mixes compared to monocultures of the same plant species. The increased soil C and N stocks produced posi-tive feedback for plant productivity through enhanced N mineralization, which in turn accelerates soil C and N storage.

Species diversity mattersOne final study I will mention

found that as plant species diversity increases, there are a multitude of benefits derived (Eisenhauer, et. al., Scientific Reports. 2017). Diversity increased the composition and func-tioning of the entire soil microbiome.

Specifically, where there were more diverse stands of plant species, there was a significant increase in plant shoot biomass, root biomass, root exudate production, soil bacterial biomass and soil fungal biomass.

The greatest increase came in the fungal biomass, with a significantly improved fungi-to-bacteria ratio. The enhanced microbial biomass was prin-cipally due to the increased organic inputs derived from roots.

Growing body of evidenceProof of adaptive grazing benefits

continues to grow, substantiated by real-life results and ongoing research findings. The increases in soil ag-gregation, water infiltration and retention, plant and microbial species diversity, plant biomass production, and resilience to environmental stres-sors are significant.

The additional benefits of reduced GHG emissions and improved ecosys-tems are hard to ignore. When you add in the economic benefits, all of this starts to beg the question, “Why don’t all graziers implement adaptive grazing?” Why not, indeed.

Grassfed Alliance announced that it has become part of the Good Meat Project, a nonprofit whose mission is to build pathways toward responsible meat production and consumption.

Grassfed Alliance is a nonprofit dedicated to expanding grassfed product markets. It becomes part of the Good Meat Coalition, an ongo-ing Good Meat Project initiative that aids in collaboration between industry trade groups representing farmers, ranchers, chefs and butchers.

“By working together, we will influence the national conversa-tion about what kind of meat will be valued and supported in the coming

years,” said Camas Davis, Good Meat Project executive director.

Grassfed Alliance President Tim Joseph and Program Director James O’Donnell said efforts to expand mar-ket access will receive a boost under the direction of Good Meat Project.They said Grassfed Alliance will work alongside and across Good Meat Project’s other programs by leverag-ing grassfed principles and promoting sound stewardship of grassfed beef as well as other species, including pastured pork and poultry.

Questions can be directed to Camas Davis at [email protected].

Nebraska and Iowa lawmakers unanimously approved bills to assist small meat processors and livestock producers as they work to clear ob-stacles brought on by the pandemic.

Nebraska Legislative Bill (LB) 324 and Iowa House File (HF) 857 received final approval and as of mid-May awaited signatures from the re-spective states’ governors. Nebraska’s LB 324 makes it easier for consumers to buy meat directly from produc-ers or processors. It also creates the Independent Processor Assistance Program to help processors with expansion, modification, or construc-

tion of buildings; efficient packaging, processing, and storage equipment; technology to improve logistics or en-able e-commerce; and educational or workforce training programs.

Meanwhile, Iowa’s HF 857 will establish the Butchery Innovation and Revitalization Fund and Program to provide assistance to new and exist-ing small meat lockers in the form of grants, low-interest loans, and forgiv-able loans to help them grow. Ad-ditionally, a task force to explore the feasibility of establishing a communi-ty college artisanal butchery program would be established.

Nebraska, Iowa aiding meat processors

June-July 2021

Managing for safe raw milkBy Martha Hoffman Kerestes This is the third installment in a

series on producing low-risk raw milk based on a recent Raw Milk Institute (RAWMI) presentation.

Careful herd and facility manage-ment sets the stage for low bacteria counts in raw milk. The smallest bacteria counts are where the udder meets the milking machine. Mistakes in the process of milking, chilling and equipment cleaning can foster bacte-ria growth and contamination.

Because of this, it is imperative that every step of the chain from milking and beyond is done with utmost care.

Mark McAfee of Organic Dairy Pastures Company uses the acronym KISS — Keep it Short and Simple — to remind himself of the ideal milking setup. The idea is to provide the short-est distance between the cow and the milk container.

He said the smallest operations using a bucket milker are the easiest to keep clean and monitored. Larger handling systems with pipelines and bulk tanks can work well, but require extra care and consideration.

No matter the equipment or scope, it is possible to have a well-managed raw milk program. Mark said the details make all the difference in raw milk risk.

Milking Milking needs to be a clean, orga-

nized process monitored and done

with as little stress to cows and work-ers as possible. Building a culture of cleanliness on the farm is vital for everyone involved.

On Mark’s farm, milkers are given a wage bonus for keeping bacteria counts low, which he said has been a very effective incentive. The workers are focused on problem solving and keeping everything as immaculate as possible. Easy access to hand and boot washing stations helps as well.

All areas where cows are confined, such as holding pens, need to be clean and well-maintained. The closer to where the milking is done, the more important cleanliness becomes.

All milking equipment needs to be kept clean, inside and out. Vacuum pressure needs to be managed, as high pressure has been associated with mastitis. Replacing inflation liners by manufacturer recommendations is a good idea.

Mark noted that a RAWMI-listed farm learned the importance of this when they found Listeria bacteria coming from a torn inflation liner. Any vacuum holes in the claw need to be kept clean and dry at all times.

Before cows are milked, udders should be brushed or washed well with a damp cloth. Udders and teats should be dried with a clean udder

cloth, with teats done first before moving to outer areas while avoiding touching the clean, dry teats. A new cloth should be used for each animal.

Next, a teat dip solution should be used and left on teats for 30 seconds before being wiped off. Teat dip cups can be contaminant sources, so RAWMI recommends using a spray bottle, making sure to spray all sides of teats.

With clean hands or gloves, strip teats to eliminate foremilk, and ob-serve milk quality. Salty-tasting milk can be a sign of subclinical mastitis — Mark’s milking employees will taste milk as needed before attaching units. After milking, follow with teat dip — preferably iodine.

Iodine and hydrogen peroxide-based dips carry pros and cons. Iodine is currently very expensive, has a longer shelf life, and requires more effort to wipe off since it’s quite thick. Hydrogen peroxide has been shown to allow a slight increase in mastitis incidence compared to iodine, but is significantly cheaper at this point.

Regardless of which is used, RAWMI, an organization that pro-motes safe raw milk production and handling practices, emphasizes the need to have good processes in place for both.

RAWMI recommends that raw milk marketers trim udder hair and tail switches to boost cleanliness. Or-ganized procedures, such as separate buckets for clean and used udder rags, also help prevent contamination.

Mark’s farm has a pre-milking ud-der and belly shower that reduces fly habitat, gives udders an initial clean-ing, refreshes cows in hot weather, and (most of the time) causes cows to leave their manure in the spray pen instead of the parlor. Since water moves bacteria, and dry udders are best, the shower is far enough away from the parlor (about 10-20 minutes

ahead) that the cows are dry by the time they enter to be milked.

Milk storage/managementMilk bacteria counts double every

20 minutes, so rapid chilling is vital. Bulk tanks or (for smaller operations) ice baths that cool milk to 38 degrees F. in less than an hour are ideal. Any transportation must be done with adequate refrigeration, or on ice in coolers.

Raw milk should not have rising bubbles, which can signal high coli-form bacteria levels. Comingling milk from multiple milkings can increase the chances of a bacterial problem and should be avoided as much as pos-sible. One bad batch can contaminate the rest. Milk already in the tank will be warmed and chilled again when adding the new batch, which creates additional risk.

And sizing a bulk tank to milk volume is important in avoiding prob-lems with milk freezing in too-large tanks.

RAWMI sees risk in a farm produc-ing both farm-pasteurized and raw milk for sale, explaining that pasteur-ized milk provides an ideal growth environment for Listeria monocyto-genes, with no beneficial bacteria to outcompete the bad. McAfee said it is imperative to keep the two milks completely separated on the farm.

With those producing for both raw and commodity markets, Mark rec-ommended first using freshly cleaned equipment on the best and cleanest cows to carefully harvest milk des-tined for raw uses, followed by milk-ing the rest of the herd for commodity sales.

When cleaning milking equipment, very hot water and effective cleaners must be used. The valve on the milk tank must be completely disassembled and cleaned each time the milk tank is emptied. Valves and gaskets must be disassembled and cleaned often to prevent biofilms from forming.

Biofilms are symbiotic colonies of bacteria growing from milk fats and sugars. They can be safe havens for the four major raw milk pathogens. Biofilms adhere to milk lines, particu-larly in valves, crevices, bends and low points.


The regulatory climate for locally produced food has improved consid-erably in many states since the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic. Legisla-tures and regulatory agencies have moved to increase access to local food to meet growing consumer demand and to strengthen food security.

Several states have moved to in-crease access to raw dairy. The Mon-tana Local Food Choice Act legalizes the unregulated direct sale of raw milk and all other raw dairy products from producers to consumers. The law, which went into effect April 30, includes limited testing requirements for producers, but no inspection or licensing. The producer must keep no more than “5 lactating cows, 10 lactating goats, or 10 lactating sheep” for the production of milk.

Previously, a limited exception to the prohibition on the distribution of raw milk had been allowed under Montana securities law. It was an exception few producers chose, as they instead opted to sell raw milk on the black market. With the new law, the expectation is that substantially more Montana dairies will produce raw milk for direct consumption than

raw milk for pasteurization, as just 45 Grade A dairies remain in the state.

On May 17, new regulations amending the state raw milk dairy code went into effect in Texas. The regulations are a big improvement over the prior law.

Now, delivery from licensed raw milk producers (in Texas only li-censed producers can legally sell raw milk) to consumers can take place anywhere in the state the two par-ties agree to. Prior law limited sales and delivery to on-farm, which was a major problem for producers far away from any population centers.

The new rules expand the number of raw dairy products licensed pro-ducers can sell. Under the previous law it was only clear that producers could sell raw milk. Now they can also sell cream, sour cream, yogurt, buttermilk, whey, eggnog and kefir.

The new regulations recognize the legality of herdshares. If there is a written bill of sale for the purchased interest, and the consumer receives an amount of milk proportionate to that ownership interest, the arrange-ment is legal. Previously, the Texas Department of State Health Services

They work together to protect each other from sanitizers — a phenom-enon known as quorum sensing — making biofilms particularly hard to kill. The major concern is that pieces of biofilm can detach and contaminate the milk.

Biofilms can become resistant to specific cleaners, so different clean-ers should be employed about once a month to target resistant strains. Clean-in-place (CIP) protocols need to include both alkalines and acids.

CIP protocols should start with cool water first to reduce the chance of milk coagulating in the lines, fol-lowed by very hot water and alkaline sanitizers. RAWMI recommends avoiding quaternary ammonias, as they create risk of Listeria resistance. Water temperature should be mea-sured at the system’s exit to ensure it’s hot enough throughout to kill bad bacteria.

Separate the processesThe milk handling and processing

area should be well separated from the milking parlor and other places livestock are kept, and no birds or bird nests should be anywhere close to the processing (or milking) areas. Mark notes that inspectors don’t like to see bird nests near creameries.

Using a household kitchen as a milk handling location is not ideal, with many possibilities for cross contamination. Extra care must be taken if a domestic kitchen is used for a small-scale operation.

Smooth, cleanable and dry surfaces are the goal for clean milk processing. The room should have clean, wash-able walls and work surfaces. Clean equipment should be stored upside down if possible. Overall, whatever the equipment employed, keep it spot-less inside and out.

Inventories need to be protected from contamination, such as keeping clean bottles closed within packaging. Everything should be food grade: A food-grade, plastic five-gallon bucket is easily washable, as it does not have the nooks and crannies of a nonfood-grade bucket. Clean and easy to oper-ate is ideal.

Proper equipment management requires knowing what is clean and

keeping it clean, what is not clean, and keeping the two separated. If equipment is cross-contaminated, it needs to be sanitized or discarded.

Mark’s operation color codes and separates equipment based on whether or not it contacts food. For example, brushes and shovels are white, and brushes and brooms for floors and non-food are red. He said those de-tails help keep everything clean, and any food inspectors will be impressed by your thoroughness.

Rooms should be well-lighted, and floors must be sloped to flow to a drain and not create puddles. Wet floors must be avoided, as they can harbor bacteria and can cause con-densers to freeze up and lose chilling capabilities.

Air management is also key. Filtered air sucked into the container-filling room creates positive air pres-sure because the air rushes out when the door is opened. This helps to keep out flies and dust. Plastic curtains into cooler areas help retain expensive cold air.

For bottling, small operations can pour directly from the milker pail into jars that can be chilled. Larger bottling systems should have careful protocols as well, including hair nets, boots, coats and gloves.

Single-use plastic milk jugs, or thoroughly cleaned glass jars with plastic lids, are ideal. Metal lids are a risk, as they can rust and shed the ferrous ion to iron-loving raw milk pathogens.

Beware poor cleaning jobsImproperly cleaned jars can be

a major bacterial concern. When customers return jars you have no idea what they were used for, or if and how they were cleaned.

Milk crates should be washed and kept clean, and sunlight can be used to help kill bacteria.

Next month, we’ll ask a RAWMI-certified producer/marketer in Penn-sylvania about his testing procedures for raw milk.

For more information, visit www.rawmilkinstitute.org

Martha Hoffman Kerestes is Graze contributing editor.

Raw milk access increasingRaw milk update

By Pete Kennedy

June-July 2021Blair Sanders passes

back issuesAlso available at

www.grazeonline.com

See www.grazeonline.com for sample articles.

P.O. Box 48Belleville, WI 53508

Price includes postage!

Send $5 U.S. for each issue to:

Please specify issues being requested

February 2017: A Missouri dairy where grass is king. We can build soils faster than conventional wisdom says. Fighting pasture flies. A holistic grazing plan. Dealing with the chaos of a diverse farm. No-stress weaning starts long before the actual event.

March 2017: Dairy outwintering system isn’t pretty, but it works. Advisors on managing the spring growth flush. Grazing lessons learned. Selecting sheep for parasite resis-tance. Rebuilding soils. No-stress weaning. Organic forum: avoiding skinny cows.

April 2017: Ben Simmons stacks grassfed enterprises in the Deep South. Advisors on their use of grazing annuals. What to look for in a grassfed dairy cow. Soil healh indica-tors you can see. Perennial pastures as the goal. Embrace those crazy consumers!

May 2017: Charles Opitz and Ted Miller re-invent dairy grazing in Louisiana. Advisors deal with heat stress. Watch mineral intake in no- and low-grain rations. How to profit from consumer tendencies. Explaining fatty acids. Grassfed soil fertility strategies.

June-July 2017: Deep South graziers building soil health. Advisors on establishing pas-ture. Stockmanship: getting problem animals going. How to produce grassfed lamb, part one. Start with the head when looking for a grazing cow. Tapping the guilt market.

August-September 2017: Grassfed dairy pioneers look to future. Handling dry weather. In cattle breeding, let form follow function. Saving organic dairy from itself. Leaving linear thinking behind. Finishing lambs on grazed forages. Mineral programs for no-grain dairy.

October 2017: Ohio company turning cropland into organic dairy pastures. Advisors deal with dry weather. Water’s role in the carbon cycle. Cobalt often overlooked in sheep pastures. What’s new in perennial grazing forages. In mating, treat cows as individuals.

November 2017: Midwestern farmers are planting trees in their pastures. Fake meat is going nowhere. What’s with those “happy lines” on cows? Retrofit milking parlors revis-ited. Grassfed organic forum: keeping good forages in front of no-grain cows.

December 2017: Schlatters keep pace with changing direct-market situation. What farm owners need to know about motivating employees. Advisors: drying off and freshening cows. The value of livability PTAs. Exploring soil frontiers. Community marketing.

January 2018: Paying off the mortgage with no-grain dairy. Advisors on raising calves. Dairy heifer grazing economics. Soils grow up. Money talks in hiring. Grassfed organic forum: what makes a good dairy cow. How to graze amid trees. Relationship marketing.

February 2018: Grassfed beef co-op success, and lack of success. Gabe Brown on improving your degraded resource. Grazing math for healthy soils and wallets. Janet McNally: which sheep work best on pasture? Ensuring grassfed dairy’s future.

March 2018: Selecting cows for a 14,000-lb. no-grain herd. Advisors on manure han-dling. The real benefits of diversity. McNally’s picks for pasture-based lamb production. Thinning a woodlot for pasture. Organic cow treatment. Gabe Brown’s better soil test.

April 2018: A Minnesota couple does what it takes to improve soil health. Advisors describe their perfect cow. How cows help the environment. Getting a grip on grassfed dairy costs. How to get disruptive with your grazing. Time to take raw milk seriously.

May 2018: Small New England dairy making a go of processing. Advisors get cows bred. Thoughts on marketing your own milk. Starting a grazing farm from scratch. Establishing forages in a newly opened woodlot. Organic forum: dealing with flies. Don’t clip!

June-July 2018: Gabe Brown and Allen Williams on how to avoid cover crop failures. Cover crops for sheep grazing. Advisors manage summer pasture. Marketing milk as burgers, butter and pork. Grassfed hopes rising in the Northeast.

August-September 2018: Can pigs be finished without grain? Managing late-season pasture. Starting from scratch: buying beef cows. Cover crop success stories. Grassfed organic forum: addressing lower prices. Managing vegetation in silvopasture.

October 2018: A cash grain farmer moves to no-grain dairy. Advisors discuss what they feed, and why. Selling pasture butter. Creating shade on pastures. How one sheep gra-zier fights parasites. Run the numbers before reducing grain feeding for pastured pigs.

November 2018: Building a grassfed genetic base. Advisors tell how they raise replace-ment heifers. Grassfed Alliance to promote “authentic” milk and meats. What if “local” isn’t making enough money? Grassfed organic forum: Dealing with weird weather.

December 2018: Why a cheesemaker values grazing. Wet weather forces grazing changes for an Ohio dairyman. Getting minerals into cows. Tackling cobalt deficiency in sheep. Microbes mine soil minerals. Study showed special qualities of pasture milk.

January 2019: A hybrid grazing dairy calculates most profitable pasture intake. Advisors on dealing with tough times. Sheep grazing lessons learned. Restoring land with pigs. New soil tests offer interesing insights. Grassfed organic forum: our toughest challenges.

February 2019: This locker plant invites the public to visit. Feeding forages with butterfat in mind. A policy plan with family-scale farmers in mind. “Living barns” provide low-cost winter shelter. Grass farmers need to define grassfed dairy. We need each other.

April 2019: A specialty cheese maker values great grazing. The farming side of a direct-market business. Getting water to pastures. How to build a regenerative movement. Internet marketing examples. Soil health and the health of the people.

May 2019: One grazier’s robotic milking report. The fallacy of “feeding the world”. Adding legumes to pastures. How to have pigs improve soils. Grassfed organic dairy challenges. Not all grassfed beef is created equal. Farm programs for the soil and the people.

August-September 2019: Grass-based dairy producers moving ahead. Advisors talk soil fertility strategies. What’s with those MUN readings? Unintended consequences.Fake meat, big money. Hue Karreman on organic fly control. Managing in wet weather.

October 2019: Grazing as an organic soil health tool. More on soil fertility strategies. Are micro-dairies the answer? Mob vs. rotational grazing in the Northeast. Regenerating soils with cattle and pig grazing. Allen Williams: more unintended consequences.

November 2019: Micro-dairies look to get better, not bigger. To vaccinate or not. Ques-tioning grazing research. In search of low-cost grazing. Dealing with rain and cold during lambing season. The twin crises of farm people and their land.

December 2019: Grazing works better than plowing for PA dairy. Assessing a tough year. Telling the real story about fake meats. Putting grazing at the forefront of value-added. Finishing lambs when the rain won’t stop. Getting cattle out of the mud.

January 2020: Ohio dairy grazier says no-grain and once-daily milking work well togeth-er. Putting numbers to once-daily milking. Advisors on improving milk quality. Improving a pastured pig operation. Avoiding overgrazing. Returning livestock and people to the land.

February 2020: Doing what it takes to launch a grass dairy. Resilience for difficult times. Boosting forage productivity in a no-grain dairy. More thoughts on once-daily milking. Al-len Williams: health is for the living. Telling the public about how we’re different.

March 2020: Fall calving and no-grain milk production. Cow comfort affects no-grain success. Advisors control pasture weeds. Janet McNally likes her new sheep handling system. Allen Williams: Returning our land to what it was. Managing swards for decades.

April 2020: Organics and grazing keep a farm in the family. Advisors say why they aren’t going no-grain. Grassfed/organic dairy forum returns. Cow sidewalks work for these dairy graziers. The downsides of modern cattle breeding. Waiting for others to change.

May 2020: Direct marketers seeing sales surge. Allen Williams says food system’s weak-nesses are showing. Advisors deal with bloat. Once-daily calf feeding. Janet McNally: managing rank pasture growth with sheep. Personalized dairy breeding indexes.

June-July 2020: Leveraging a lamb market premium. Finding a mating strategy. Pinkeye solutions. A promising bottled milk startup. Ten tips for successful summer grazing. Grassfed/organic forum: making hay. Three-in-two milking tips. Too much demand?

August-September 2020: A booming grass-finished beef business. Advisors balance pasture vs. milk production. Taking the marketing leap. Corn grazing for milk cows. Janet McNally: bonding a guard dog to your flock. Allen Williams: natural parasite control.

October 2020: Illinois dairy successfully selling grass-based, non-organic milk. Advisors describe their weak links. Janet McNally: fixing guardian dog problems. Vermont graziers graze sheep with cattle. Grassfed organic forum: finding the right cow. Lessons learned.

November 2020: New York dairy marketing to new neighbors. How an investor group helped fund a farm expansion. In search of good research. Take most grazing research with a grain of salt. High on hedgerows. Defending bigger cows. Land and the Bible.

December 2020: Bringing meat processing into focus. Grazing goats with sheep and cattle. Advisors on achieving a work-life balance. Meeting the meat processing chal-lenge. Passing the torch on a dairy farm. Custom grazing thoughts. Adding value.

January 2021: A young dairy couple learns the value of career patience. Advisors plan their finances. Why I built a baleage dryer. Big taste variability found in 100% grassfed milk samples. Custom grazing is a balancing act. Grassfed organic forum: winter feeding.

February 2021: Solving a soggy farm problem. Building a solar baleage dryer prototype. Boosting forage energy. Silvopasture saved us in a drought. Pastured protein promise. A blizzard of bad farming practices. Labels are hurting small-scale farmers.

March 2021: Solar baleage dryer showed promise. Why a dairy grazier didn’t build a creamery. Advisors: introductions and challenges. Pricing your lamb. Meat processing options. Grassfed organic forum: spring grazing transition. We are only stewards.

April 2021: Graziers pool community resources to launch dairy processing/marketing venture. Advisors transition to spring grazing. Solar bale dryer plans for 2021. Nurse cow power. Raw milk’s tremendous possibilities. Get your succession house in order.

interpreted herdshare agreements to be an illegal sale of raw milk if the farmer operating the herdshare was unlicensed.

In Vermont, the legislature passed a bill going into effect July 1 that allows farm stands and CSAs to sell raw milk “produced on a farm other than the farm or farms where the farm

stand or CSA is located.” The new law increases potential markets for raw milk producers, as under current law farmers can sell only their own production to consumers.

Finally, the West Virginia legisla-ture recently legalized the sale of raw pet milk as part of a broader agricul-ture bill. State law currently allows the distribution of raw milk through herdshare agreements if the farmer

registers with the West Virginia Department of Agriculture. But few farms have registered so far, partly due to the high cost of the herd testing requirements. The new law opens up new markets for producers.

Raw milk updatecontinued from page 19

Pete Kennedy ([email protected]) is an attorney who works with the Weston A. Price Foundation (westonaprice.org, 703-820-3333) consulting with small farms and consumers on policy and legal matters regarding raw milk and other nutrient-dense foods.

May 2021: “Stock cropping” combines grazing and cash crops. Allen Williams: knock out the props in genetic selection. Advisors on raising calves. Solar bale drying economics. Nurse cow profits. No-grain organic forum: soil fertility. Making safe raw milk.

George Blair Sanders, 57, a grazier near Dublin, Virginia and a former Graze advisor, died April 27, 2021.

Blair owned and operated Black Hollow Farm along with his wife, Kim, who contributed to the writing of Blair’s advisor columns.He is sur-vived by Kim, son Matthew and his girlfriend, Ciara, and daughter Grace, her husband, Zac, and grandchildren, Farmer and Dorothy, along with his two sisters, Lynn and Kay.

Ayrshires graduate from endangered list

Livestock genetics

Marketplace

· Adapts to any shape or size field, 1-1000 A.· Ideal for uneven terrain, hills and obstacles· Easily adapts to rotational grazing plans· Easy to install, move, and winterizeK-Line Irrigation NA4270 Hollywood RoadSt. Joseph, MI 49085Phone 866-665-5463

New irrigation product foralfalfa and other forage crops.

www.k-linena.com

Can’t depend on Mother Nature for your moisture requirements?

Take control! Manage it yourself with K-LINE IRRIGATION.

K-Line is simple to install, easy to move, and perfect for rotational grazers!

The

Fencing, water, supplies

Nevill Supply8415 S. Eberhart Ave.Clare, MI 48617-9736• Temporary fence supplies• Water systems• Livestock supplies

Don, Deb & Andy NevillPhone: 989-386-4522

Fax: 989-386-4073E-mail: [email protected]

Forage genetics

• Forage• Silage• Cover Crops

www.alseed.com • (800) 352-5247

FARM SEED FOR:

“We’re Local & Independent, Just Like You.”

Schools, publications

Is STRAY VOLTAGE the unwelcome visitor on your premises?

Now there is an affordable, reliable way to deal with it.

The ERTLIZER® Stray Voltage Device

Providing solutions for Stray Voltage,Ground Currents and Electrical Pollution

Infinity Missionwww.ertlizer.com715-305-2387

Dare to be different!Consider the Black Welsh Mountain Sheep

A hardy, dual-purpose heritage breedProduces fi ne-textured, fl avorful lamb and mutton on FORAGE!

Older ewes have fl avorful, marketable meat, offering an economic advantage.

AMERICAN BLACK WELSH MOUNTAIN

SHEEP ASSN.P.O. Box 534

Paonia, CO 81428-0534

LET’S TALK FENCE

Max Ten High Tensile Fencing * Speedrite Energizers * Grazing Supplies * Wood and Fiberglass Posts

* Agrifit Water Fittings & Water Tanks* Stay-Tuff Fixed Knot Fencing

62411 386th Ave. Zumbro Falls, MN 55991

Phone: 507-753-2943www.kfence.com

Dr. Paul’s Lab LLCNature’s Finest Remedies

www.drpaulslab.net1-833-805-2532

[email protected]

Premier1Supplies.com800-282-6631

Move Fence, Fast!Move Fence, Fast!

Contact us for FREE catalogs.

To subscribe, see page 6.

Burket Falls Farm1321 Polecat Road • East Freedom, PA 16637

Phone: 814-239-2260www.burketfallsfarm.com

The polled solution!• Polledgeneticsfor50+years• Nodehorningcost/stress• Highcomponentcowfamilies• Longevity• BalancedbreedingwithaAa• Semen,embryosand breedingstockavailable

Organic meat has fewer bacteria issuesClassified Rates: Minimum charge

$15.00 for 20 words. Additional words 80 cents/word. Call 608-455-3311.

ClassifiedsFor sale: Five service bulls, Hol-stein and Red and Whites, 11 to 21 months old. A2A2 and polled. Central Indiana. Call or text War-ren Amstutz at 812-371-6813.

612-823-7212 [email protected]

normandethe ultimate trouble-free cow!

4.4 F, 3.6 P • fertility • longevity

Maybe you don’t want a large ad, but you don’t like how

smaller ads get lost in the clutter of some other publications.

TheMarketplace

Call 608-455-3311 for details.

Try our most affordable display advertising option:

The Livestock Conservancy an-nounced that Ayrshire cattle have graduated from its Conservation Priority List of endangered livestock and poultry breeds.

The ranked list of rare breeds is based on the annual number of regis-trations in the United States and the breed’s estimated global population size. Today, more than 3,000 Ayrshire cows are registered each year in the U.S., and 5,000 to 6,000 are born an-nually in the United Kingdom.

Worldwide, the population of Ayr-shire cattle well exceeds the 25,000

animals needed for graduation. The Livestock Conservancy credits dedi-cated Ayrshire breeders and partners like the U.S. Ayrshire Breeders Asso-ciation and other global conservation organizations with helping make this graduation possible.

They characterize Ayrshire cattle as an excellent choice for small dairies, family farms, and mixed-breed dairy herds, noting that they are produc-tive dairying animals for grass-based operations.

USDA-certified organic meat is less likely to be contaminated with

dangerous bacteria, including danger-ous, multidrug-resistant organisms, according to a study from research-ers at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

The researchers found that, com-pared to conventionally processed meats, organic-certified meats were 56% less likely to be contaminated with multidrug-resistant bacteria. The study was based on nationwide testing of meats from 2012 to 2017 as part of the U.S. National Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring System.

The rate of contamination was 4% in the conventionally produced meat samples and just under 1% in those that were produced organically.

June-July 2021

The tinder is dry; time to strike the matchConversations with the land

By Jim Van Der Pol

We are living, I am convinced, at a time of intersection. Massive change impacts our economy and, more than that, our very way of thinking and be-ing in the world.

Our politics is spinning out of our control. Changes in the climate bear down on us. Fingers point toward cows and tillage rather than cars, air travel and suburbs. All about whose ox is to be gored, I guess.

We try to wrap our heads around the idea that we will not be safe from Covid until the entire population of Earth is. We also haven’t taken on board the strong possibility that the variants to come may be much more virulent than the original.

The arrogant tech moguls at the top of our economy have learned from the financial industry barons how to col-lect the fruits of any trend into their own pockets. Meanwhile, the rest of the population suffers and regresses in standing, each year working more for less — a circumstance guaranteed to annoy those who formerly had some status.

Our cities are troubled with racial

strife, a direct result of not seriously facing our racial attitudes and their impact upon fellow citizens for these many decades — centuries, really. The swelling rage makes even the simplest political solution impossible.

Change is now possibleBut it is critical that we remember

that a time of intersection makes pos-sible many changes — differences in direction that would not have been possible even a year to two ago. I sense that, for the first time since I became an adult more than 50 years ago, there is an opportunity, a leverage, for us to make a change favorable to us on the farms and in the rural places.

When philosophies are confused, when alliances fall apart, when no one is heard because everyone is yelling — that is the time a few strong, rational and determined people can push for real change.

Look. A few of us — from Min-nesota and Iowa, from Colorado and Kansas, from Missouri and Wiscon-

sin — have been talking regularly by videoconference and are beginning to plan.

A goodly number of us are gray-beards, bloody and beaten from fighting the powers that be in the meat industry all our lives, but unbowed and wanting a chance to bring the battle to them now.

And here is what we are beginning to come up with: From our own ex-

periences as market-ers, many of us know there to be a real hun-ger in the population for a closer and real connection with the people at the source of their food.

While we don’t know how large a proportion of the pop-ulation this is, we do know that collectively

we have not accessed more than the tiniest part of the entire population. We also know there is a deep-seated suspicion of corporate motives and the people in corporate power.

We think the meat supply inter-ruptions during the pandemic made

that view real for many people. And we think this attitude on the part of a significant number of Americans is the hill that “Impossible Meat” and various other iterations of the idea are going to have to climb over.

Building a systemAnd while they are doing that, this

is what we must do: build a complete system, from animal to meat on the eater’s plate, that is completely free of any involvement by the industry.

This will not happen in one day, but the system must be ours. If the industry has any part of it, they will engineer us out the door. Speaking for myself, I have 50 years of experience at just exactly that.

We need infrastructure. We need to rebuild the local butcher shop with a goal of making it the pandemic-proof source of meat for its community. And we need public markets in our urban centers, which would give us access to the huge part of the market we have yet to meet. Think farmers markets, only more.

These must operate year-round. They should include viewing op-portunities for processing all kinds

Jim Van Der Pol grazes and markets from his farm near Kerkhoven, MN.

of foods, including — yes — cutting and breaking down whole and half animals, as well as sausage making and smoking. Also vegetable washing and preparation for the table, as well as cheese making and kitchen work.

It will be important to prepare and cook there, with demonstrations and hands-on teaching part of this. Com-munity kitchens have a role. We are talking about a huge amount of view-ing glass.

Restaurants would of course be part of it in addition to the storefronts sell-ing table vegetables and baked items (also baked on site) and meat coun-ters. Perhaps delivery food could be assembled from our ingredients.

We would be bringing the means by which people have always fed them-selves into the open for all to see, in contrast to the industry that has spent the last century hiding itself from public view. And we gain a tremen-dous inventory of trust by doing so in a population inclined — and rightly so — to suspicion.

As we strive to put this together, our approach on the meats side should be that we slaughter the animal as close as reasonably possible to where the animal is (part of humane prac-tice), and do the breakdown, cutting up and further processing where the people are.

We need several regional slaughter sites focusing on local animals, in ad-dition to mobile slaughter. This would

help ensure that local butcher shops, some now beginning to buy their meat from the national wholesale markets rather than slaughter themselves, have a source of local animals instead.

Where does the money come from? Farms such as ours that are already in marketing can be expected to contrib-ute, but this needs to be a small part, on the order of a token.

We should expect the farm groups that have benefitted from farmer willingness to build them to contrib-ute from their equity and the profits of their businesses. This could be a somewhat larger portion.

The heavy lifting needs to come from the states and the one-time Covid relief money coming to the states. These public markets could be part of what gets called urban redevel-opment.

My state of Minnesota demon-strates the opportunity. Urban politi-cians, largely Democrats, want the entire state to share in the costs of the recent, and probably ongoing, racial troubles in the Twin Cities. These costs go far beyond restoring burned neighborhoods.

Rural politicians, largely Repub-lican, have no desire to pony up the money to further advance the urban areas at the expense of the rural.

What is needed is an approach that satisifies some of this need for everyone.

This thinking generated by my

friends and I needs to be built upon. There are and will be other ideas, some of which can be fitted together.

Striking the matchWe know the empty store shelves

during the pandemic gave the lie to our fantasy of a stable food supply. We know much of the population hungers for a better way of being in the world, with part of this being a close connection with their necessities including, for many, the Earth itself.

We fear the variants of this virus,

or the outbreak of the next one, will be worse. We see that as a population we must become our brother’s keeper, more inclined to care for and support one another to take the edge off the idea of the profit motive as the only motivator of human activity.

The tinder is dry. The match is ready. It remains for us close to the land and animals, the very basis of food, to strike the match and start the fire.

improving soils and cutting costs

Documents