technology and farm management practices the...

Technology and farm management practices

of the Australian dairy industry

Technology and farm management practices

of the Australian dairy industry

ABARE report prepared for the

Dairy Research and Development Corporation

Robert Telford and Jess Jennings

August 1997

e AB ARE

Telford, R. and Jennings, J. 1997 Technology and Farm Management Prac- tices in the Australian Dairy Industry 1995-96, ABARE report prepared for the Dairy Research and Development Corporation, Canberra, August.

Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics GPO Box 1563 Canberra 2601

Telephone +61 2 6272 2000 Facsimile +61 2 6272 2001 Internet www.abare.gov.au

ABARE is a professionally independent government economic research agency.

ABARE project 1223

DAIRY INDUSTRY

Foreword

This report is the third of a planned series intended to review changes in farm management practices and technology use on Australian dairy farms. Similar studies were completed by ABARE in 1992 and 1994, and estimates from those studies have been included in the tables at the end of the report for reference and comparison.

Using ABARE's Australian dairy industry survey as the vehicle for collecting data on specific topics such as this has the added benefit of allowing analysis to be linked to other physical and financial farm data.

STEPHEN C . BEARE Acting Executive Director

August 1997

DAIRY INDUSTRY

Acknowledgments

Industry ABARE relies heavily on the voluntary cooperation of farmers, their account- ants and marketing organisations in providing data for its farm surveys. Without this assistance the surveys would not be possible.

ABARE staf This report was prepared by Robert Telford from the Agricultural Eco- nomics Section and Jess Jennings from the Rural Economic Analysis Sec- tion.

The survey information presented in this report was compiled by the Rural Economic Analysis and Information Services Sections.

Design of the survey questionaire, management of the survey operations and tabulation were undertaken by Laurie Cannon, Bruce McConnell, Vern Rudwick and Paul Phillips.

Training of interviewers and data collection, entry and editing were undertaken by Peter Beath, Lorraine Crowe, Carolyn Doyle, Fiona Fitzsim- mons, Ron Godenzi, Peter Hibberson, Ian Milthorpe, Damo Nambiar, Lou Sissian, Robin Stafford and Tony Wain. Assistance was also provided by a number of economic research assistants and temporary staff.

Programming and computer systems'support was provided by Ken Col- bert, Keron Beath and Tri Lam of the information Services Section.

Sample design, sample weights and data handling assistance was provided by Ray Lindsay, Greg Griffith, Walter Shafron and John Grivas of the Rural Economic Analysis Section.

Funding This project was funded by the Dairy Research and Development Corporation, which also provided financial assistance for the Australian dauy industry survey.

DAIRY INDUSTRY

Contents

Summary

1. Introduction

2. Background and objectives of the study

3. Method 3.1 Survey of the Australian daily industry 3.2 The sample 3.3 The questionnaire

4. Results of the survey 4.1 Feeding 4.2 Fodder conservation 4.3 Soil testing, fertiliser use and drainage 4.4 Management advice and herd management 4.5 Herd breeding 4.6 Herd health 4.7 Milking shed and equipment 4.8 Milking shed productivity and numbers of cows milked 4.9 Change of technologies or practices

5. Likely impact of technological change on the Australian dairy industry 5.1 Relationship between the type of milking shed used and

milking herd size

Appendix A Reliability of estimates

DAIRY ZND USTRY

Figures A Dairy farm numbers B Cow numbers, yields and milk production C Changing distribution of dairy farm size D Primary reasons for feeding concentrates and grain E Source of farmer advice on fertiliser use F Different uses for computers by dairy farmeks G Labour efficiency, by shed type H Distribution of dairy farm size, by milking shed type

Regional maps Australian Dairy Industry regions New South Wales Victoria

List of tables Australia, by state

1 Feeding regimes 2 Fodder conservation 3 Soil testing and drainage 4 Management advice and herd management 5 Herd breeding 6 Herd health 7 Milking shed and bulk vat 8 Milking shed equipment 9 Milking shed productivity and numbers of cows milked

New South Wales, by region 10 Feeding regimes 42 11 Fodder conservation, soil testing and drainage 43 12 Herd breeding and health 44 13 Milking shed, bulk vat and equipment 46 14 Milking shed productivity and numbers of cows milked 48 15 Management advice and herd management 49

Wctoria, by region 16 Feeding regimes 17 Fodder conservation, soil testing and drainage 18 Herd breeding and health

DAIRY INDUSTRY

19 Milking shed, bulk vat and equipment 20 Milking shed productivity and numbers of cows milked 21 Management advice and herd management

Response to change 22 Dairy farms wanting to change technologies or practices 23 Factors limiting ability to change dairy shed and dairy equipment,

and use of more fertiliser and computers

Productivity/eficiency ratios 24 Australia, by state 25 New South Wales, by region 26 Victoria, by region

Financial performance 27 Receipts and costs, by state, 1993-94 and 1995-96 28 Receipts and costs, by region, 1995-96 29 Financial performance measures, 1993-94 and 1995-96 30 Financial performance measures, by region, 1995-96

vii

DAIRY INDUSTRY

Summary

Improving farm productivity has been targeted by the Dairy Research and Development Corporation (DRDC) as an important way of improving producer returns and fostering the increased international competitiveness of the Australian dairy industry.

This report is the third occasion that ABARE has, with the financial assistance of the DRDC, included additional questions in the Australian dairy industry survey on the use of farm management practices'and technology on Australian dairy farms. The previous occasions were 1991-92 and 1993-94.

In comparing the 1995-96 survey results with those reported for previous years, the following key points were observed.

An estimated 85 per cent of Australian dairy farms fed concentrates or grains to their cows in 1995-96, compared with 79 per cent in 1991-92 (table 1). Victoria and Tasmania recorded lower rates than other states with an estimated 75 per cent and 85 per cent, respectively, of farms indicating that they used this practice in 1995-96.

Lifting milk production was the primary reason for feeding grain and concentrates for almost half of all dairy farms in 1995-96 (table 1).

In 1995-96, an estimated 78 per cent of hay cut on Australian dairy farms was stored in round bales (table 2). This figure is higher than the level recorded in 1991-92, when around 55 per cent of hay was stored in round bales.

An estimated 3 1 per cent of all dairy farmers used computers in their farm enterprise, which is considerably higher than in 1991-92 and 1993-94, when around 15 per cent of all dairy farms used computers (table 4).

The primary uses of computers in dairy farm management in 1995-96 were for keeping records on breeding performance and milk production, and for budgeting and financial purposes (table 4).

DAIRY INDUSTRY

1. Introduction

The Australian dairy industry has undergone significant adjustment over the past two decades with reduced rates of government assistance, improvements in technology and changes in both domestic and international markets. Strong demand growth for Australian dairy products, mainly in the Asian region, resulted in milk production in Australia expanding over the 1980s, with more rapid increases in production occurring in recent years.

Between 1975 and 1996, the number of dairy farms in Australia more than halved to'around 14 000. The early 1990s heralded a new period of growth for the Australian dairy industry with cow numbers beginning to rise in 1992 (figure A) and the rate of decline in the number of farms moderating.

From 1991, milk yields per cow also appear to increase at a faster rate than earlier trends (figure B) as dairy farmers increased their adoption of improved technologies and farm management practices such as use of supplementary feeding, improved dairy cattle genetics apd better pasture management.

Another factor to consider about the industry since the mid-1970s is the increase in the average milking herd size from around 81 cows in 1975 to 136 cows in 1996. This, along with the increase in fann area and increased production is reflected in the long term trend toward larger farms. Figure B illustrates the shift in the distribution of farm sizes since 1985-86 (as measured by the estimated value of agricultural operations, EVAO).

DAIRY INDUSTRY

Therefore, when interpreting the results from this study it is important to recog- nise the trend toward larger farms, as some of the observed changes in technology use reflect changes in industry structure. For example, rotary dairies are only adopted by large farms and the proportion of farms using this technology will increase as smaller farms leave the industry.

The collection of data on the use of technology and farm management practices since 1991-92 has provided the Australian dairy industq with the opportunity to identify the characteristics of those farms which adopt various technologies and analyse the potential for further adoption of particular technologies. The insights gained from this research are likely to facilitate the development of effective strategies in managing the adoption of new technologies, thereby ensuring that industry is able to capture more of the benefits that these technologies can provide.

DAIRY ZND USTRY

2. Background and objectives of the study

This study contributes to two of the DRDC's portfolios. The Farm Porgolio objective is 'to improve the productivity and prosperity of dairy farming, while maintaining social and environmental sustainability' and the aim of the Eco- nomic and Marketing Portfolio is 'to foster the increased competitiveness of the Australian dairy industry' (DRDC 1996).

To help meet the portfolio objectives, the DRDC provided funding to develop a database from which productivity gains could be measured. Using the frame- work of the Australian dairy industry survey (ADIS) ensured a comparable data collection across all states.

ABARE designed a questionnaire to collect information on the management practices and technology used by Australian dairy farmers which would enable:

determination of existing levels of technology use and how they differ between states;

profiles to be developed of farms using different technologies and management practices by linking survey results to the broader ADIS collection of physical and financial farm data; and

determination of states or regions which the DRDC could target to pro- mote the use of new technologies and management practices.

The 1991-92 data set provided the base for a time series that would be used to measure dairy farm productivity gains, the adoption of technology and changes in management practices.

The DRDC funded ABARE to collect similar data as part of the 1994 and 1996 ADIS collections. Although the 1996 collection is only the third occasion that questions on the use of technology and farm management practices have been included in the ADIS, some clear changes are becoming evident, particularly at the national level. The 1992 and 1994 survey results are included in the tables at the end of this report for reference and comparison. It is important to note when intrepreting the tables that the results expressed as an average per farm have been calculated on the basis of all farms covered by the survey, irrespec- tive of whether or not all farms are using a particular technology or practice.

DAIRY INDUSTRY

3. Method

3.1 Survey of the Australian dairy industry The Australian dairy industry survey has been conducted annually by ABARE since 1979 and usually involves visits to approximately 300 dairy farms in all states. For 1995-96 the sample was increased to 339 dairy farms.

This survey covers establishments defined by the Australian and New Zealand Standard Industrial Classification (ANZSIC) class 0130 (daiw cattle farming) - those engaged in dairy farrning'and with'an estimatedvalie of agricultur% operations (EVAO) of $22 500 or more.

A more detailed description of the survey can be found in the Australian Farm Surveys Report (ABARE 1997).

3.2 The sample The 1995-96 estimated population and number of dairy farms sampled in each state are shown in the table below.

New Queens- Western South South Wales Victoria land Australia Australia Tasmania Australia

Population 1987 7 824 1852 460 831 759 13713 Sample 77 92 40 57 43 30 339

Regional level estimates are also produced for New South Wales and Victoria. The numbers of 1995-96sample farms, by region, for these two states are as follows:

- -

11 12 13 Central and

Northern Southern Riverina

New South Wales Population 755 982 250 Sample 19 44 14

-

21 22 23 Western Gippsland -South GMID (excl. MIA) Other

Victoria Population 1 361 2 599 1 994 1 870 Sample 19 7 1 22 26

Note: MIA refers to MacAllister irrigation Area; GMID refers lo the Goulbum-Murray Irrigation District.

5

DAIRY INDUSTRY

DAIRY INDUSTRY

Maps of New South Wales and Victoria displaying regional boundaries are shown on page 6.

Information on the reliability of the estimates given in this report can be found in appendix A.

3.3 The questionnaire The questionnaire used to collect data concerning the management practices and technology use on Australian dairy farms covered the following aspects:

type of dairy, time taken to complete a milking and types of equipment and machinery used

bulk vat type, age and capacity

effluent disposal system

feeding regimes and fodder conservation practices

soil testing and drainage

farm management

- sources and frequency of advice

- discussion group attendance

- computer use

- planning horizon

dairy herd management

- breeding technology

- herd health

- incidence of specific diseases

farmers' intentions to change and factors limiting their ability to change.

Responses to this questionnaire were obtained at face to face interviews with dairy farmers who were also providing data for the ADIS. All farmers partici- pating in the ADIS also responded to this technology questionnaire.

DAIRY INDUSTRY

Additional data on items such as farm labour, milk production and receipts were sourced from the 1996 ADIS collection and used in the productivity1 efficiency ratio tables. Other ADIS data are included in tables detailing receipts and costs and financial performance measures.

DAIRY ZND USTRY

4. Results of the survey

Generally, the 1995-96 results indicate that Australian dairy farmers have continued to change their management practices and type of milking shed technology used.

Outlined below are highlights of the national results, which are shown in more detail in the tables attached to this report. It is important to note that although not discussed below, regional data are also provided for New South Wales and Victoria (see tables 10-21).

4.1 Feeding Around 90 per cent of Australian dairy farmers used some form of 'intensive' rotational grazing in 1995-96 (table 1). Strip grazing, using movable electric fences, remains the most popular method of intensive grazing practised, with an estimated 61 per cent of all farms using this method in 1995-96. The second most common form of intensive grazing used was the small paddock system, with around a quarter of all farms using this method in 1995-96. These results are similar to those reported for 1991-92 and 1993-94.

The average total farm area in 1995-96 is estimated to have been 228 hectares per farm (table 1). Of this around 107 hectares was estimated to have been used by the milking herd. Dairy farms in Western Australia were the largest of all states, reflecting the larger beef enterprises on these farms, with an average farm size in 1995-96 estimated at 428 hectares and an estimated 0.9 cows per hectare on the area used by the milking herd. In contrast, the smallest farms were in Victoria, with an average farm size of 180 hectares and the highest number of cows per hectare used by the milking herd of 1.7. This result highlights the more intensive nature of dairy farms in Victoria and the greater availability of irrigation.

An estimated 85 per cent of Australian dairy farms fed concentrates or grains to their cows in 1995-96. The manufacturing milk states, Victoria and Tas- mania, recorded lower rates of feeding concentrates and grain than other states, where an estimated 75 per cent and 85 per cent of farms, respectively, indicated that they used this practice.

DAIRY INDUSTRY

For the industry as a whole, the average quantity of grain and purchased concentrates used per farm was estimated at 47 tonnes of purchased concentrates and 62 tonnes of grain in 1995-96.

Lifting milk production was the primary reason for feeding grain and concentrates for almost half of all dairy farms in 1995-96 (figure D). Of the remaining farms, the majority indicated that the primary reason for feeding grain concentrates was to fill gaps in pasture supply.

4.2 Fodder conservation In 1995-96, an estimated 78 per cent of hay cut on Australian dairy farms was stored in round bales (table 2). This figure is higher than the level recorded in 1991-92, when around 55 per cent of hay was stored in round bales. The average quantity of hay cut for round bales in 1995-96 is estimated to have been 89 tonnes per farm, compared with the estimated average quantity of hay cut for small and big square hales of around 20 and 5 tonnes per farm respectively.

It is estimated that an average of 98 tonnes of silage was cut on Australian dairy farms in 1995-96, which is considerably higher than the average of 53 tonnes in 1991-92. Over two-thirds of the silage cut in 1995-96 had been wilted and over half had been placed in bulk storage. The main reasons for conserving fodder in 1995-96 were 'normal practice' and 'to boost offseason production'. Both 'pasture control' and 'expectations of drought' were estimated as being less important reasons for conserving fodder.

DAIRY INDUSTRY

4.3 Soil testing, fertiliser use and drainage

Soil testing is an important management tool on Australian dairy farms. Reflecting this importance, an estimated 78 per cent of Australian dairy farms in 1995-96 were estimated to have had soil tests conducted (table 3). This compares with an estimated 59 per cent of farms in 1991-92. The proportion of dairy farms that have changed their fertiliser management following soil testing was estimated to be 52 per cent in 1995-96, compared with 42 per cent in 1991- 92.

Since 1991-92, expenditure on fertilisers by Australian dairy farmers had risen in real terms by around 78 per cent to average $12 700 per farm in 1995-96. With dairy farmers having increased their use of fertilisers significantly over recent years, the importance of advice on fertiliser application is likely to have also risen. Since 1991-92, representatives of fertiliser companies have increased in importance as a source of advice for dairy farmers on fertiliser application (figure E).

As a source of advice on fertiliser use, private consultants were estimated in 1995-96 to have been almost as important as state departments of agriculture.

Around 76 per cent of all farms were estimated to have conducted routine pasture renovation in 1995-96, which is considerably higher than the 59 per cent recorded in 1991-92. This again reflects the need for dairy farmers to improve their productivity by maximising pasture availability with improved management.

In 1995-96 an estimated 19 per cent of farms indicated that their farm required drainage work, which is similar to the levels recorded in previous years. The

DAIRY ZND USTRY

proportion of dairy farms in 1995-96 with drainage improvement work having been carried out over the past three years is estimated to have been 40 per cent of all farms. In 1991-92 this proportion was only around 25 per cent.

4.4 Management advice and herd management In both 1991-92 and 1993-94 the proportion of farms using computers in their farm enterprise was around 15 per cent (table 4). In 1995-96 this figure was considerably higher, with an estimated 31 per cent of all dairy farms using computers. The primary uses of computers in dairy farm management include the keeping of records on breeding performance and milk production, and for budgeting and financial purposes (figure F). Of those farms that did not use computers in their farm enterprise in 1995-96, availability of time, age and cost were the major factors limiting their adoption. The reduced importance of cost in 1995-96 as a prohibitive factor reflects the general reduction in the cost of computers over recent years (table 23) and the increased availability of suitable packages.

Herd recording is an important management tool used on Australian dairy farms, providing valuable information on the genetic merit of their herds and the individual somatic cell count, which is analysed as an indicator of sub- clinical mastitis in individual cows. Recent ABARE research (Short, Gleeson, Abdalla and Tielu 1996) indicated that herd recording has generated significant benefits to the Victorian dairy industry.

In 1995-96, an estimated 65 per cent of dairy farms practised herd recording, compared to an estimated 55 per cent of farms in 1991-92. The higher proportion of farms undertaking herd recording in 1995-96 reflects, in part, the development of technologies that reduce the cost of conducting herd recording.

Milkpmduction recordr

Budgering andfinancial records

Pastudcmp and i m ~ a f i o n records

Micmchip rags for livesrock

DAIRY INDUSTRY

4.5 Herd breeding

An estimated 82 per cent of dairy farms practiced artificial insemination (AI) in 1995-96 (table 5). Of these over 80 per cent were estimated to make their sire selection on the basis of a combination of production, type and price. In 1995-96, the mating of dairy cows with beef bulls was estimated to average 15 cows per farm, with Western Australian farms averaging around 32 cows mated to beef bulls.

The use of both embryo transplants and synchronised oestrus by the Australian dairy industry has remained low in all states.

In 1995-96, around a third of all dairy farms reported the use of induced calving as a management technique. Importantly, the use of induced calving is estimated to have varied significantly between states. For example, while induced calving was not reported on daily farms in New South Wales, around half of dairy farms in Victoria and Tasmania are estimated to have adopted this practice in 1995-96.

An estimated 98 per cent of all dairy farms bred their own replacement heifers in 1995-96.

4.6 Herd health Defined mastitis control programs were used by an estimated 84 per cent of dairy farms in 1995-96 (table 6). This compares with an estimated 54 per cent and 70 per cent of all dairy farmers in 1991-92 and 1993-94 respectively. The majority of these plans included teat dippinglspraying and dry cow treatment and over half included cell counts on individual cows. . The most common dairy cow diseases in 1995-96 were milk fever and cliAca1 mastitis, both with nearly 12 cases of each per farm. In 1991-92 the number of cases for each of these diseases averaged 8 cows per farm.

4.7 Milking shed and equipment The herringbone swingover is the most common type of milking shed used on Australian dairy farms in 1995-96, constituting approximately 52 per cent of all shed types at the national level (table 7). The proportion of farms with 45 degree and 90 degree herringbone dairies in 1995-96 is estimated to be 30 per cent and 29 per cent respectively.

DAIRY INDUSTRY

An estimated 7 per cent of all dairy farms operated a rotary milking shed in 1995-96, compared to only 2 per cent of dairies in 1991-92. This trend is indica- tive of both the need for farms to increase their productivity by increasing the number of cows milked per operator and of the changing structure of the industry as outlined in the introduction.

Refrigerated direct expansion bulk milk vats are the most common type of milk vat used on Australian dairy farms, with an estimated 99 per cent of farms using this type of vat in 1995-96. Over half of all fanns were estimated to use a vat with a capacity of between 1500 and 2500 litres. Vats under 1500 litres accounted for 33 per cent of vats in 1995-96, whereas in 1991-92 this figure was around 49 per cent. This again reflects the changing structure of the industry and possibly changes in the operation of dairy factories.

Annual performance testing of milking machines is carried out on an estimated 76 per cent of farms (table 8), markedly higher than the 56 per cent recorded in 1991-92. Biennial tests were carried out on an estimated 14 per cent of all farms in 1995-96, while 12 per cent of farms recorded no performance testing of milking machines.

The most common method of effluent disposal on Australian dairy farms is runoff into paddock, with an estimated 39 per cent of farms using this method in 1995-96:~his is considerably lower than the 54 per cent using this method in 1991-92.

4.8 Milking shed productivity and number of cows milked Rotary dairies continue to be the most labour efficient type of milking sheds used on Australian dairy farms, both in terms of estimated cows milked per

DAIRY ZND USTRY

hour (154) and estimated cows milked per operator (155) (table 9). Hemng- bone dairy operational rates were generally estimated to be only about half as labour efficient as rotary dairies, with the results at the national level being an estimated 59 cows milked per hour and 88 cows miked per operator (figure G).

In 1995-96 an estimated 48 per cent of Australian dairy farmers had a five year plan in relation to cow numbers, production per cow or total milk production, unchanged from the 1993-94 result.

4.9 Change of technologies or practices Farmers were also questioned on their intentions to change technologies and on the factors limiting their ability to change (tables 22 and 23).

The 1995-96 results indicate that the need or willingness of dairy farmers to change their dairy shed and equipment was greater than for any other aspect of their farm enterprise. The proportion of dairy farms wanting to change their dairy shed was estimated to be 41 per cent, while 34 per cent of farms indicated a desire to change their dairy equipment. Of those wishing to change their shed or equipment approximately 66 per cent of them listed cost as the main prohibitive factor.

The proportion of farms indicating a desire to renovate or resow their pastures is estimated to have been 26 per cent in 1995-96. While 29 per cent of farms wanted to increase their fertiliser usage.

Overall, for the various aspects discussed (which also included dairy equipment, feeding of concentrates, intensive grazing, fodder conservation, soil testing, pasture renovation, increased fertiliser use, drainage, farm computers, herd breeding and herd health), most indicated no desire to change. However, for those who wanted to make changes, cost was given as the main reason for not upgrading their facilities or changing their management practices.

DAIRY INDUSTRY

5. Likely impact of technological change on the Australian dairy industry

The international competitiveness of the Australian dairy industry and the pres- sures for structural change are important issues confronting Australian dairy farmers. Technological change has an important influence on both of these outcomes, by creating opportunities for producers to improve their profitability by adopting better'farm management practices and investing in more labour efficient capital. For most farms, higher production and the cost savings generated by technical progress are important for their long term viability. For the industry as a whole, further improvements in farm productivity, depending on developments in competing countries, result in a greater ability of the industry to compete in the international marketplace.

However, the ability of farmers to fully realise these potential gains is con- strained by a broad range of factors (table 23). Financial considerations have been identified as a major factor limiting the ability of farmers to upgrade their facilities and change their farm management practices.

Technological change is only one factor of many which affects the efficiency and structure of the Australian dairy industry. Other factors include the adoption of better farm management practices, investment in new capital, move- ments in the prices paid for inputs, the level and type of government assistance, climate variability and changes in industry structure.

The influence of these factors on farm profitability is complex and dynamic. Some of these variables may influence both unit costs of production and the producer price. For example, inappropriate farm management practices are likely to result in higher costs of production than otherwise and, in some cases, a reduction in the quality of milk, and hence the price received for the milk produced. Other factors, such as severe drought, have both a temporary and permanent effect on costs of production. Drought has an immediate effect on costs of production arising from the need to acquire relatively high cost supplementary fodder. The way in which farmers react to the possibility of drought also influences costs of production - for example, idle capacity in the form of conservative stocking rates, extra irrigation water result in costs of production being higher than otherwise.

The adoption of better farm management practices is likely to increase, to a varying degree, the productive capacity of all dairy farms, regardless of farm size and the type of milking shed technology used. Further analysis using

DAIRY ZND USTRY

ABARE survey data could provide an indication of the characteristics of farms that chose to adoot uarticular technoloeies. This analvsis will lead to a better - understanding o i t i e adoption process, which is likely to assist industry in developing effective strategies for managing the adoption of available technologies.

In the absence of significant price falls, the application of improved management techniques is likely to lead to a higher level of profitability for all farms,, thereby reducing, at least temporarily, the pressure for structural adjustment. Importantly, the improvement in farm profitability is not likely to be the same for all type of farms. Recent ABARE research has found that smaller farms have made lower productivity gains than larger farms (Knopke, Strappazzon and Mullen 1995). This finding may reflect, in part, that smaller farms are late adopters of new technologies, compared with larger farms.

The development of more labour efficient capital provides individual farms with the opportunity to reduce their production costs by using more capital- intensive production techniques. As a result, these farms may be able to improve their profitability, depending on the availability of land and other resources.

5.1 Relationship between the type of milking shed used and milking herd size

As shown in table 9, there are marked differences in the productivity of milk shed labour between farms using different types of milking sheds. For example, the average productivity of milk shed labour for farms with rotary dairies in Australia was estimated in 1996 to be 154 cows milked Der hour. This figure - is significantly higher than the average labour productiviG of farms using herringbone and walkthrough dairies. which were estimated in 1996 to be 59 cows " and 35 cows per hour, respectively. Furthermore, the rate of improvement in labour productivity over the past five years has been substantially higher for rotary dairies than for other types of milking sheds.

The relationship between the number of cows milked per farm and the type of milking shed, as illustrated in figure H, indicates that the optimal scale of operation is likely to be higher for farms with rotary dairies. When compared with 1991-92, the distribution of milking herd size for farms with rotary dairies shifted toward larger farms in 1995-96. In contrast, the distribution of milking herd size for farms with herringbone dairies, and to a lesser extent farms with walk through dairies, has diminished. The shift in the distribution of farms with rotary dairies toward larger milking herds is likely to reflect the greater capacity of these dairies to cope with milking larger herds. This is consistent

DAIRY INDUSTRY

H Distribution of dairy farm size, by milking shed type

800

600 1 1 9 9 1 - 9 2

K 1 1995.96 - P 3 400 .- E 'g 200 U

no. Rotary Herringbone Walkthrough

Source: ABARE (1997).

with the marked improvement in labour efficiency of rotary dairies since 1992 (see figure G).

DAIRY ZND USTRY

Appendix A: Reliability of estimates

Sampling errors Only a small number out of the total number of dairy farms is used to produce survey estimates. The differences between these estimates and those that would have been obtained if information had been collected from all dairy farms are called sampling errors.

The more farms there are in the sample, the lower the sampling error is likely to be. So regional estimates are likely to have greater sampling errors than state estimates, and state estimates,are likely to have greater sampling errors than national estimates.

To give a guide to the reliability of estimates, estimates of sampling errors have been calculated. These estimated errors, expressed as a percentage and termed 'relative standard errors', are given next to each estimate in parentheses.

In general, the smaller the relative standard error, the more reliable the estimate. Note, however, that numerically small estimates tend to have large relative standard errors.

Example of use of relative standard errors To obtain the standard error from the relative standard error, multiply the relative standard error by the survey estimate and divide by 100. There is roughly a two in three chance that a survey estimate is within one standard error of the 'census value' (the value which would have been obtained if all farms in the target populatidn had been surveyed). There is roughly a nineteen in twenty chance that a survey estimate is within two standard errors of the census value.

For example, if average number of cows per farm is estimated to be 150 with a relative standard error of 6 per cent, the standard error for this estimate is 9. In other words, there is a two in three chance that the estimate of the average number of cows per farm is in the range 141 to 159.

DAIRY ZND USTRY

Nonsampling errors The values obtained in a survey are affected by errors other than those relating directly to the sampling procedure. For example, it might not be possible to contact certain types of farms or the respondent may provide inaccurate information.

ABARE's experience in conducting surveys of rural industries has resulted in procedures designed to minimise nonsampling errors. However, when drawing inferences from estimates derived from sample surveys, users of survey data should bear in mind that both sampling and nonsampling errors do occur.

Sample weighting The estimates in this report are calculated by weighting the data from each sample farm and then using these weighted data to calculate population estimates. ABARE constructs sample weights by combining data on the total number of dairy establishments and total production for dairy outputs, obtained from and based on the Australian Bureau of Statistics annual Agricultural Census, with the corresponding numbers and dairy production of the f m s in the dairy survey sample.

since output varies from farm to farm sample weights usually differ for each farm interviewed. Typically, larger farms have smaller weights and smaller farms have larger weights, reflecting the small number of large farms and larger number of small farms in the population.

DAIRY INDUSTRY

References

ADC (Australian Dairy Corporation) 1997,

DRDC 1996, Dairy Research in Progress, Melbourne.

ABARE 1997, Australian Farm Surveys Report 1997, Canberra.

Knopke, P., Strappazzon, L. and Mullen, J. 1995, 'Total factor productivity growth on Australian broadacre farms', Australian Commodities, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 487-97.

Short, C., Gleeson, T., Abdalla, A. and Tielu, A. 1997, Herd recording's economic contribution to the Victorian dairy industry, ABARE report, Canberra.

I Feeding regimes Percentage of fa- or average per farm -

New South Wales Victoria

1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Area used -by milking herd ha 89.1 96.5 112.3 (10) 85.2 84.7 100.6 (6) -dry cows or other enterprise ha 115.8 95.6 195.0 (25) 43.9 54.9 72.1 (14) - unproductive ha 11.7 10.9 10.1 (19) 5.3 6.1 7.3 (23) Total farm area ha 216.6 203.0 317.3 (15) 134.4 145.7 180.1 (6)

Intensive grazing system used - none % 2 2 0 (0) 9 9 10 (34) -small paddock % 6 11 10 (38) 33 30 29 (17) - strip grazing % 91 87 86 (5) 51 57 58 (9) -other system % 1 0 3 (64) 7 2 3 (44)

Farms assessing pasture for quantity and quality of available feed a % 26 56 61 (12) 11 76 77 (7)

Queensland

1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96

.

Western Australia

1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96

Farms feeding concentrates or grain % 98 95 99 (1)

Quantity used - self mixed concentrates t 33.9 13.8 16.7 (38) -purchased concentrates t 46.4 72.0 73.4 (15) - grain t 58.1 60.0 55.6 (19) - byproducts eg.brewers grain t 3.7 12.3 35.8 (38)

Primary reason for feeding concentrates grain etc. -lift milk production % 57 58 73 (8) - performance feeding % 6 5 7 (46) -seasonal incentives % 12 18 10 (43) -fill supply gaps % 23 13 8 (42) - zero grazingtother reasons % * 1 1 (95)

I 7 Continued I 1

South Australia Tasmania Australia

1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Area used -by milking herd ha 97.3 114.5 107.4 (11) 92.9 91.9 95.4 (12) 91.2 93.6 106.6 (4) -d iy cows or other enterprise ha 86.5 106.7 206.6 (16) 56.9 59.1 112.6 (26) 72.0 83.0 11 1.5 (9) - unproductive ha 7.3 8.7 6.4 (19) 17.2 14.9 22.7 (33) 8.1 8.3 9.7 (IS)

Total farm area ha 191.1 229.9 320.4 (11) 167 165.9 230.7 (15) 171.3 184.9 227.8 (5)

Intensive grazing system used -none % 62 17 11 (45) 0 0 0 (0) 10 8 10 (24)

-small paddock 9a 18 40 30 (26) 54 48 35 (25) 27 28 26 (13) -strip grazing % 20 27 53 (15) 46 52 64 (14) 59 61 61 (6)

-other system % 0 16 6 (53) 0 0 l(105) 4 3 3 (30)

Farms assessing pasture for quantity and quality of available feed a 90 11 57 71 (11) 32 57 94 (4) 13 67 7 2 0 )

Farms feeding concentrates or grain % 80 94 97 (2) 54 61 85 (12) 79 85 85 (3)

Quantity used -self mixed concentrates t 0 39.3 6.1'(66\ 0 0 0.0 - - - -

-purchased concentrates t 17.7 11.2 57.5;24; 24.1 29.3 43.5(28) - grain t 69.6 82.8 95.8 (21) 3.0 7.4 11.8 (41) - byproducts eg.brewers grain t 2.3 10.4 19.4 (95) 3.0 0 0.0 (0)

Primary reason for feeding concentrates grain etc. -lift milk production % 65 45 53(19) 5 * 2 (64) 43 44 47 (6) -performance feeding 90 0 0 6 (63) 0 0 0 (0) 5 2 3 (34) - seasonal incentives % 0 2 6 (99) 14 15 15 (41) 5 9 6 (30) -fill supply gaps % 11 26 8 (47) 35 44 56 (21) 23 25 23 (12) -zero grazinglother reasons % 4 21 24 (34) 0 2 12(48) 3 5 5 (23)

a Includes visual assessment in 1993-94 and 1995-96. *Percentage less than 0.5.

2 Fodder conservation Percentage of farms or average per farm a

New South Wales Victoria Queensland Western Australia

1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Quantity of hay cut - small bales t 35.4 42.0 38 (20) 36.5 17.5 15.5 (34) 23.0 10.8 23.8 (44) 35.3 19.8 10.2 (45) -big bales (square) t 0 11.8 5.9 (73) 15.6 2.4 3.8 (46) 0.6 0 0 0 8.9 5.3 (77) -round bales t 10.1 22.1 33.8 (35) 59.5 69.7 108.4 (12) 12.6 15.9 13.6 (46) 208.7 236.0 298.4 (9)

Silage cut and stored -wilted in bulk storage t 5.0 26.9 48.3 (41) 11.9 17.4 16.4 (67) 3.3 41.4 21.9 (90) 221.2 133.5 132.1 (33) -wilted wrapped t 8.5 12.1 46.2 (20) 12.5 29.2 31.8 (38) 7.7 21.9 14.1 (45) 1.8 65.1 122.4 (25) -normal in bulk storage t 13.3 26.1 40.6(54) 15.2 5.5 13.4(72) 23.5 43.9 8.9(93) 2.3 16.3 43.9(48) - normal wrapped t 0.4 1.2 10.2(105) 3.8 2.0 4.4 (58) 3.3 0 12.9 (63) 3.2 0 0.5 (86)

Purchased hay or silage % 62 44 37 (19) 49 47 47 (14) 65 67 64 (14) 22 41 23 (28)

Reason cut or purchased hay or silage b -normal practice % 52 69 69 (9) 96 78 85 (5) 47 69 84 (6) 97 92 89 (6) -boost offseason production % 49 52 48 (15) 59 46 28 (17) 6 39 71 (10) 65 41 54 (13) -drought measure % 63 57 41 (15) 36 15 14 (27) 70 79 67 (14) 17 6 11 (39) - for sale % 6 4 O(106) 4 4 2 (92) 8 6 5 (79) 0 2 2 (62) -pasture control measure % 12 13 7 (45) 57 50 28 (17) 6 18 32 (23) 36 9 18 (29) - other reason % 3 2 3 (82) 19 15 19 (26) 1 0 6 (85) 0 0 4 (56)

Fertiliser advice provided by -company rep % 9 14 32 (19) 27 49 54 (12) 14 18 18 (40) 43 65 68 (11) -consultant % 6 7 5 (51) 9 9 15(27) 2 4 9 (45) 0 2 7 (58) - Dept of agriculture % 44 28 23 (27) 9 9 l(1ol) 40 50 51 (16) 35 9 7 (45) - other sources 90 1 1 3 (68) 8 4 8 (41) 3 8 5 (77) 4 6 5 (78)

Continued 0

2 South Australia Tasmania Australia

1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Quantity of hay cut -small bales t 39.3 29.4 25.1 (36) 20.7 20.0 17.4 (49) 33.7 21.1 20.4 (18) -big bales (square) t 0 7.9 10.2 (93) 1.5 8.5 16.5 (62) 8.8 4.4 4.8 (31) -round bales t 86.1 108.5 101.3 (21) 73.6 77.6 76.2 (34) 52.6 65.1 89.0 (9)

Silage cut and stored -wilted in bulk storage t 24.0 16.6 28.2 (45) 122.0 88.7 168.7 (35) 23.4 30.2 34.8 (24) -wilted wrapped t 1.2 4.5 8.5 (67) 44.1 41.6 55.3 (59) 11.8 26.3 34.4 (21) -normal in bulk storage t 6.8 1.1 43 (80) 2.7 19.0 59.8 (62) 14.4 14.2 22.1 (33) -normal wrapped t 6.3 13.1 9.6 (62) 0 16.0 5.5(131) 3.1 3.1 6.6 (36)

Purchased hay or silage % 41 51 68 (13) 44 44 47 (25) 52 49 48 (9)

Reason cut or purchased hay or silage a -normal practice % 75 81 83 (lo) 90 95 100 81 77 83 (3) -boost offseason production % 36 25 33 (27) 64 51 77 (12) 49 45 40 (8) -drought measure % 4 10 25 (37) 0 9 8(107) 41 28 25 (11) -for sale % 0 5 2 (99) 0 1 5 (91) 4 4 2 (54) -pasture control measure % 3 14 13 (36) 22 29 44 (24) 37 35 25 (12) -other reason % 0 1 0 24 0 0 13 9 12(24)

Fertiliser advice provided by -company rep % 49 52 55 (18) 38 29 38 (27) 25 40 46 (9) -consultant % 1 2 7 (55) 7 4 20 (69) 7 7 12 (21) - Dept of agriculture % 19 16 24 (35) 33 53 27 (27) 21 20 14 (12) -other sources % 1 7 l(101) 7 0 4 (97) 5 4 6 (322)

a Percentage average of the estimated population represented by sample farms for which response to questions on daky technology was obtained. b Since more than one reason may be given by farmers, figures may add to more than LOO per cent.

3 Soil testing and drainage Percentage of farms or average per farm a

New South Wales

1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96

Never had soil test % 39 49 38 (19)

Year of first soil test -before 1970 % 7 2 4 (5s) - 1970 to 1979 % 8 16 17 (33) - 1980 to 1989 % 39 26 31 (18) - 1990 and later % 7 7 11 (32)

After soil test, changed fertiliser management % 35 35 49 ( IS )

Routinely renovate pasture % 85 96 92 (4)

Year commenced routinely renovating or resowing pastures

-before 1970 % 37 29 25 (19) - 1970 to 1979 % 17 32 29 (23) - 1980 to 1989 % 30 33 32 (22) - 1990 and later % 1 2 6 (51)

Area pasture renovated or sown ha 23.3 25.3 22.7 (12)

Farm drainage situation - fully drained natural % 57 80 77 (6) -fully drained with improvement% 36 15 17 (29) -requires drainage work % 7 5 6 (60)

Farms with drainage improvement work in last three years % 23 14 19 (18)

Area drained in the last three years -open drains ha 9.9 8.1 10.6 (61) -other ha 0 21.3 29.6 (25)

Victoria

1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96

47 29 22 (26)

Queensland

1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96

Western Australia

1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96

19 18 13 (42)

19.7 44.9 37.9 (36) 0.7 77.6 66.2 (25)

Continued 0


1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Never had soil test % 31 22 13(52) 15 14 11(99 ) 41 29 22 (17)

Year of first soil test -before 1970 % 11 8 14 (43) 0 0 5 (81) 5 6 7 (23) - 1970 to 1979 % 8 10 7 (71) 12 8 13 (47) 9 9 12 (19) - 1980 to 1989 % 48 48 32 (23) 69 65 37 (23) 35 37 31 (13) - 1990 and later % 2 12 33 (29) 4 13 35 (39) 10 19 28 (12)

After soil test, changed feniliser management % 51 49 65 (13) 79 75 69 (18) 42 45 52 (8)

Routinely renovate pasture % 61 75 85 (7) 69 63 70 (lo) 59 72 76 (4)

Year commenced routinely renovating or resowing pastures

-before 1970 % 17 18 27 (34) 2 9 7 (64) 12 18 22 (16) - 1970 to 1979 % 20 23 16 (34) 20 13 12 (80) 12 16 14 (15) - 1980 to 1989 % 21 28 27 (29) 43 35 25 (42) 28 25 19 (17) - 1990 and later % 3 6 16 (53) 4 6 28 (45) 7 12 22 (14)

Area pasture renovated or sown ha 9.6 13.3 11.5 (28) 8.9 6.4 9.7 (20) 9.4 12.0 12.6 (10)

Farm drainage situation -fully drained natural % 78 91 82 (6) 54 55 59 (22) -fully drained with improvement% 14 6 16 (28) 25 19 11 (81) -requires drainage work % 8 3 1 (98) 21 26 30 (32)

Farms with drainage improvement work in last three years % 19 10 23 (35) 42 41 39 (31)

Area drained in the last three years -open drains ha 4.1 1.2 2.6 (41) 12.6 14.0 23.6 (44) 8.5 14.9 15.2 (21) -other ha 1.8 11.5 25.4 (34) 0.8 53.8 62.3 (31) 0.3 45.8 53.3 (11)

a Percentagdavemge of the estimated population represented by sample farms for which response to questions on dairy technology was obtained.

4 Management advice and herd management Percentage of farms or average per fann a


1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Never had soil test % 39 49 38 (19) 47 29 22 (26) 40 19 17 (49) 19 18 13 (42)

Number of times obtained advice from b -dairy company no. 1 2 (19) 2 2 (21) 2 3 (40) 1 2 (14) -private consultant no. 0 1 (38) 1 2 (28) 0 2 (49) 1 l ( 5 1 )

-agriculture dept no. 3 3 (26) 1 2 (24) 3 4 (22) 3 4 (41) - fe~iiliser/chemical company rep no. 1 1 (19) 1 1 (19) 1 1 (21) 1 1 (13) -other sources no. 0' 0 (38) 0 1 (41) 1 0 (50) 3 1 (65)

Total number of times farmers obtained advice no. 5 6 4 6

Participated in discussion groups - never % 44 48 40 (18) 60 58 44 (15) 42 29 32 (33) 46 59 30 (21) - before 1980 % 13 10 10 (33) 15 9 7 (38) 13 6 13 (56) 6 6 12 (38) - 1980 onwards % 43 42 50 (IS) 25 33 49 (14) 45 65 55 (21) 48 35 59 (12)

Number of times farmers attended discussion groups no. 4 3 4 (16) 3 3 5 (16) 3 4 4 (30) 2 2 4 (18)

Number of fanners attending discusson groups no. 1236 996 119 (13) 2773 2927 3119 (14) 1160 1137 913 (21) 266 173 263 (12)

Farmers considered advice helped farm profit % 74 72 57 (13) 53 53 52 (12) 39 60 69 (15) 64 72 57 (10)

Farmers using computers % 12 18 39 (18) 17 16 31 (16) 8 10. 14 (40) 11 24 44 (17)

Conrinued 0

4 South Australia Tasmania Queenslaud Australia

1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Computer used for c -breeding records % 11 16 29(23) 14 14 2 4 ~ 0 ) 8 6 9 (32) 7 17 31 (23)

-milk production records % 10 16 36 (20) 13 13 23 (20) 8 6 8 (37) 6 19 33 (22) - pasture/crop/irrigation records % 0 1 6 (51) 2 2 4 (57) 1 2 2 (94) 0 2 1 (94) - budgetinglfinancial etc. % 6 14 35 (20) 14 10 22 (22) 8 . 9 12 (so) 10 18 29 (22) -microchip tags for livestock % 0 * 2 (73) 0 0 1 (72) 1 2 l(100) 0 2 2 (67) -other uses % 0 * 1 (59) 1 0 1 (90) 0 0 0 0 3 2 (73)

Farms thatdonot weighcows % 100 97 91 (5) 92 52 88 (4) 100 97 95 (2) 91 96 96 (3)

Farms that do not condition score cows % 88 92 83 (IS) 75 65 60 (lo) 100 85 95 (2) 90 83 86 (6)

Farms not herd recording % 57 49 46 (IS) 44 37 37 (IS) 49 39 28 (26) 23 18 17 (33)

Year commenced herd recording - before 1980 % 14 22 22 (24) 20 25 19 (23) 15 11 15 (42) 37 32 24 (21) -between 1980 and 1989 % 22 24 23 (22) 28 30 23 (23) 33 36 44 (23) 30 35 43 (14) - 1990 onwards % 7 5 9 (38) 8 8 21 (22) 3 14 14 (50) 10 15 16 (32)

Continued 0


1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Number of times obtained advice from b -dairy company no. 1 2 (28) 1 2 (54) 1 2 (12) -private consultant no. 0 2 (27) 0 1 (73) 1 1 (20) -agriculture dept no. 4 4 (77) 1 1 (39) 2 2 (15)

- fe~tiliser/chemical company rep no. 1 2 (22) 0 2 (33) 1 l ( 9 ) -other sources no. 3 0 (38) 0 0 (70) 1 l(31)

Total number of times fanners obtained advice

no. 4 5 5

Participated in discussion groups - never % 53 42 28 (29) 52 38 35 (35) 53 50 47 (8) -before 1980 % 15 17 lO(50) 8 0 9 (89) 14 9 8(20) - 1980 onwards % 32 41 63 (14) 40 62 57 (18) 33 41 46 (8)

Number of times fanners attended discussion groups no. 2 4 4(38) 4 5 3 (19) 3 3 4 (10)

Number of farmers attending discusson groups no. 334 493 472 (16) 329 484 440 (17) 6098 6210 6326 (8)

Fanners considered advice helped fann profit % 53 58 53 (18) 67 62 55 (19) 56 58 55 (7)

Fanners using computers % 20 19 32 (26) 27 20 37 (26) 15 16 31(11)

Conrinued 0

4 Con'inued


1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Computer used for c -breeding records % 19 16 31 (29) 18 10 22 (31) 13 13 24 (13) -milk production records % 16 18 29 (31) 12 9 21 (43) 12 13 23 (13) - pasture/crop/irrigation records % 3 2 7 (61) 1 * 7 (64) 1 1 4 (35) - budgetinglfinancial etc. % 14 17 28 (31) 14 16 21 (31) 12 11 23 (14) - microchip tags for livestock % 3 3 0 0 0 0 1 * 1 (48) - other uses % 6 1 6 (55) 1 2 3(102) 1 * 1 (46)

Farms that do not weighcows % 100 95 89 (15) 89 89 79 (8) 94 94 89 (3)

Farms that do not condition score cows % 67 84 71 (8) 64 68 41 (32) 80 73 68 (6)

Farms not herd recording % 31 20 14 (61) 46 46 30 (50) 45 38 35 (36)

Year commenced herd recording -before 1980 % 33 30 31 (25) 34 39 41 (34) 21 24 21 (14)

-between 1980 and 1989 % 18 31 27(30) 13 15 18(36) 26 29 26 (16) - 1990 onwards % 18 19 29(32) 7 0 11 (66) 8 9 18(16)

a Percentagelaverage of the estimated population represented by sample farms for which response to questions on dairy technology was obtained. b Since more than one source of advice may be given by f m e n , figures may add to more than 100 per cent. c Since a computer may be used for more than one purpose, figures may add to more than the percentage of farmen using computen.

< Herd breeding Percentage of f a n s or average per fann


1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Western Australia

1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96

26 28 20 (21) AI not used %

Commenced using AI -before 1980 % - between 1980 and 1989 % - 1990 onwards %

Select A1 bulls for -production only a % -type only a % -price only % -production, type and price %

Cows calved -to A1 no. -mated to dairy bulls no. - mated to beef bulls no.

Embryo transplants not used %

Do not used synchronised oestrus by -injection % - CIDR B %

Induced calving not practised %

Commenced induced calving -before 1980 % -between 1980 and 1989 % - 1990 onwards % Cows induced no.

Purchased replacements % Bred own replacements %

Average age at which heifers calve b months

5

%


1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

A1 not used % 43 21 9 ( 4 ) 14 11 21(69) 27 20 18 (15)

Commenced using A1 -before 1980 % 33 46 54 (17) 50 45 37 (36) 37 38 34 (11) -between 1980 and 1989 % 16 16 22 (23) 36 43 36 (16) 32 30 29 (12) - 1990 onwards % 8 17 16(52) 0 1 6(102) 4 12 19 (16)

Select A1 bulls for -production only a % 42 9 10 (75) 28 0 5 (73) 34 13 9 (23) -type only a % 4 5(l02) 0 6 (69) 1 4 (34) -price only % 0 5 2 (89) . 8 4 0 2 1 2 (70) -production, type and price % 15 61 75 (12) 50 85 68 (22) 37 65 67 (5)

Cows calved - toAI no. 43 61 66 (11) 63 74 86 (15) 56 66 83 (5) -mated to dairy bulls no. 35 28 40 (17) 31 35 54 (18) 39 40 50 (7) -mated to beef bulls no. 12 8 12 (22) 20 24 24 (29) 22 17 15 (12)

Embryo transplants not used % 93 90 91 (5) 92 85 85 (8) 95 95 94 (2)

Do not used synchronised oesms by -injection % 87 82 87 (6) 91 81 79 (8) 88 85 81 (3) - CIDR B % 93 91 90 (5) 88 93 92 (6) 97 93 90 (2)

Induced calving not practised % 93 95 90 (4) 30 38 53 (25) 70 64 66 ( 5 )

Commenced induced calving -before 1980 % 0 0 0 5 6 4 (96) 3 6 4 (47)

- between 1980 and 1989 % 6 2 - 7 (42) 51 43 34 (37) 19 15 13 (21) - 1990 onwards % 1 3 3 (71) 14 13 10 (52) 8 15 16 (18)

Cows induced no. 2 1 l(42) 10 10 15(26) 5 6 8 (12)

Purchased replacements % 0 2 4 (83) 0 0 0 7 2 2 (84) Bred own replacements % 100 98 97 (3) 100 100 100 93 98 98 (2)

Average age at which heifers calve b months 28 27 26 (4) 24 24 25 (1) 26 26 25 (2)

a Production and t y p combined in one category in 1992. b Average for those farms that bred own replacement heifers. * Average number per farm less than 0.5.

I 6 Herd health Percentage of fannr or average per j a m - New South Wales Victoria Queensland Western Australia

1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 I H e 3 health program devised by

- self % 79 81 83 (5) 90 91 87 (5) 86 71 75 (9) 89 88 78 (7)

I Defined mastitis control program used

--, ~- ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~

-dry cows treated no. 42 46 6 8 ( b ) 36 64 91 (9j 25 17 38(17) 52 43 7 7 ~ 1 ) -other control % 13 5 2(98) 9 15 8 (39) 43 9 25 (35) 29 26 2 (69)

\*I

Mastitis control program commenced -before 1980 % 10 21 28 (26) 13 14 7 (33) 22 24 23 (43) 27 33 31 (20) -between 1980 and 1989 % 40 35 39 (20) 27 38 40 (13) 41 49 39 (28) 37 32 40 (19)

Mastitis control plan using -cell count on individual cows % 41 45 73 (11) 29 47 47 (13) 44 51 61 (15) 66 61 74 (10) -teat dippinglspray ing % 53 50 73(12) 34 59 71 (9) 35 51 63(15) 66 48 72~10) - drv cow treatment % 60 72 86 (5) 43 64 77 (81 59 58 78(10) 61 62 81 (8)

1 - 1990 onwards

Farms vaccinating for leptospirosis, by stock type a

-heifers % 50 61 66 (9) 55 58 55 (11) 66 55 59 (17) 47 33 48 (17) -milkers % 47 55 61(10) 54 47 44(13) 66 48 48(18) 34 28 35(20) -dry cows % 46 55 61 (LO) 48 45 44 (14) 66 49 46 (20) 32 26 34 (21)

Cases per fann in dairy herd of -grass tetany no. * * 0.4 (30) 1 1 1.8(20) * * 0.1 (40) 1 1 1 (33) -milk fever no. 5 7 7.7 (24) 9 11 14.9 (10) 2 4 3.7 (16) 11 9 10 (13) - leptospirosis no. 3 * 0 (85) * 0 0.1(103) * 0 0.1 (94) * * 0 -clinical mastitis no. 6 6 9.7 (18) 8 9 12.6 (9) 6 6 9.2 (19) 14 13 14 (lo) -bloat no. 2 3 1.2 (31) 6 3 1.7 (21) 1 1 0.4 (49) 1 6 2 (48) - abortion no. 2 1 1.5 (19) 1 1 2.0 (19) 2 2 3.3 (20) 2 2 2(11)

Continued 6

South Australia Tasmania

1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Herd health program devised by -self % 89 74 78 (10) 79 92 89 (6, - vet -other

Defined mastitis control program used

Mastitis control plan using -cell count on individual cows % 51 70 78 (11) 33 46 64 (24) - teat dippinglspraying % 35 65 78 (12) 73 72 84 (7) -dry cow treatment % 57 71 81 (11) 78 74 96 (4) - drv cows treated no. 33 41 54 (13) 74 79 100 (13) -other control % 29 7 2(111) 19 10 14 (52)

Mastitus control program commenced -before 1980 % 16 21 25 (35) 38 35 15 (50) -between 1980 and 1989 % 46 48 37 (22) 40 35 37 (26) -~~ ~~~~ -. ~ ~~

- 1990 onwards 70 7 7 25 (2% 0 4 45 (24;

Farms vaccinating for leptospirosis, by stock type a

-heifers % 17 31 40(22) 51 54 70(22) -milkers % 17 30 38 (23) 51 52 78 (12) -dry cows % 17 30 38 (23) 51 52 63 (21)

Australia

Cases per farm in dairy herd of . -grass tetany no. 1 * 2.8 (86) 1 1 3.5 (71) 1 1 1.5 (19) -milk fever no. 10 6 9.3 (16) 5 5 11.0 (34) 8 9 11.6(8) - leptospirosis no. * 0. o(103) * 0 0.3(102) * 0 0.1 (69) -clinical mastitis no. 7 6 7.7 (IS) 13 7 15.3 (20) 8 8 11.7 (7) -bloat no. 1 2 0.5 (34) 12 2 5.5 (47) 4 3 1.6 (16) -ahortion no. 1 2 2.1 (17) 2 3 3.0 (16) 2 2 2.1 (11)

a As more than one stock type may be vaccinated a( one time, figure may add to more than 100 per cent. * Average number per farm less than 0.5.

Victoria

1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96

-

7 Milking shed and bulk vat Percentage of farms

Western Australia

1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96

%

New South Wales

1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96

Types of milking shed -walk through single % 7 4 2 (72) -walk through double % 41 47 37 (18) -herringbone swingover % 28 33 42 (18) -herringbone double high % 21 10 13(34) - herringbone double low % 2 3 5 (50) - rotary % 1 3 3 (56) Herringbone angle - 45 degrees % 38 31 35(18) - 60 degrees 9% 6 4 4 (61) - 70 degrees % 0 0 2(106) - 80 degrees % 4 5 12(38) - 90 degrees % 3 6 8 (52)

Milk cooled prior to bulk vat % 34 48 53 (11) Bulk vats a -refrigerated direct expansion % 100 97 96 (3) - refrigerated offpeak % * 3 4 (62) -insulated only % 0 0 Refrigerated direct expansion vats built - before 1960 % 0 2 l(lO8) - 1960 to 1969 % 35 39 26 (22) - 1970 to 1979 % 57 35 44 (15) - 1980 to 1989 % 9 13 1 l (39) - 1990 on % 3 11 20 (24) Vat capacity a - under 1500 litres % 32 41 41 (19) - 1500 and under 2500 litres % 65 48 41 (17) - 2500 and under 4500 litres % 14 13 16 (33) - 4500 litres and over % 2 10 18 (25)

I South Australia Tasmania Australia

1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Types of milking shed -walk through single -walk through double - herringbone swingover -herringbone double high -herringbone double low -rotary Herringbone angle - 45 degrees - 60 decrees - 70 degrees - 80 degrees - 90 degrees

Milk cooled prior to bulk vat Bulk vats a -refrigerated direct expansion -refrigerated offpeak - insulated only Refrigerated dlr. expansion vats built -before 1960 % 1 0 2 (98) 0 0 17 (82) - 1960 to 1969 % 40 28 27 (30) 26 25 20 (47) - 1970 to 1979 % 53 58 54 (18) 55 54 57 (27) - 1980 to 1989 % . 16 20 25 (35) 30 23 18 i34j 19 - 1990 on a % * 5 10 (46) 2 7 9 (50) 2 Vat capacity a -under 1500 litres % 59 44 36 (26) 35 45 56 (22) 49 - 1500and under 2500litres % 46 53 70 (12) 60 58 51 (28) 5 1 - 2500 and under 4500 litres % 9 13 10 (37) 30 36 23 (36) 19 - 4500 litres and over % 3 7 11 (22) 6 10 12(36) 3 a Percentage may sum to more than 100 as some farms had more than one bulk vat. * Percentage less than 0.5.

8 Milking shed equipment Percentage of farms . New South Wales Victoria Queensland Western Australia

1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Automatic cup removers used % 25 25 27 (19) 25 10 6 (36) 13 7 6 (42) 4 23 24 (23)

Type of bail feeders used - none % 9 12 11(46) 9 23 23 (21) 40 12 13 (50) 5 10 5(58) -manual % 59 41 44 (17) 59 39 21 (20) 32 57 49 (21) 67 35 38 (21) - mechanised % 32 47 45(17) 32 36 57(10) 28 31 37(26) 27 51 50(16) - computerised % 0 0 1 (75) 0 2 l(ll4) 0 0 l(1W) 1 4 10 (39)

Performance testing of milking machine - none % 15 34 21(33) 15 7 7(45) 23 24 1700) 38 11 9(53) - annual % 65 50 64(12) 65 74 81 (5) 54 50 71(13) 41 74 84 (6) -biennial % 20 16 17 (30) 20 19 14 (28) 23 26 12 (39) 21 15 8 (43)

Third line machine washing -none % 36 42 25 (24) 36 28 24 (22) 32 45 54 (17) 28 16 7 (60) -manual % 40 41 54 (13) 40 59 66 (9) 51 45 29 (28) 62 56 77 (8) -fully automatic % 24 17 24 (24) 24 13 10 (31) 17 10 18 (38) 10 28 16 (31)

Effluent disposal -runoff into paddock % 74 58 43 (17) 74 35 29 (16) 46 68 69 (14) 78 55 46 (18) -pump and spray 90 14 21 32 (21) 14 12 10 (33) 16 20 14 (49) 10 10 10 (41) -one pond system 9% 4 6 13 (36) 4 36 37 (15) 28 6 15 (SO) 8 19 22 (25) -two pond system % 5 7 10 (39) 5 15 20 (19) 7 0 0 0 7 4 (42) -mechanical removal % 3 6 4 (SO) 3 1 3 (75) 1 6 0 4 6 12 (52) -other % 0 2 ~ ( I w ) 0 1 1 (93) 2 0 2(106) 0 3 9 (64)

Dairy yard backup gate used % 12 16 20 (27) 12 47 49 (12) 39 17 18 (30) 14 60 56 (13)

Continued 0


1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Automatic cup removers used % 17 25 20 (31) 4 7 4 (96) 14 13 10 (15)

Type of bail feeders used - none % 8 17 24 (37) 50 35 40 (34) 28 20 20(15) -manual % 52 45 39 (25) 43 40 32 (38) 43 42 30 (lo) - mechanised % 40 38 36 (20) 7 25 28 (28) 29 37 49 (7) - computerised % 0 0 1 (98) 0 0 0 0 1 1 (40)

Performance testing of milking machine -none % 35 17 23 (41) 0 0 1 7 (82) 23 13 12 (21) -annual % 43 65 64 (15) 92 97 74 (20) 56 69 76 (4) -biennial % 22 18 14 (55) 8 3 9 (54) 21 18 14 (18)

Third line machine washing -none % 46 35 39 (21) 17 7 28 (42) 32 31 29 (12) -manual % 52 50 85 (18) 82 84 59 (21) 53 55 58 (6) -fully automatic % 2 15 15 (35) 1 9 13 (32) 15 14 14 (16)

Effluent disposal -runoff into paddock % 40 60 43 (20) 30 16 37 (31) 54 44 39 (9)

-pump and spray % 26 5 6 (68) 28 40 22 (33) 16 15 14 (17) -one pond system % 12 20 20(24) 14 7 7(48) 19 24 27 (13) -two pond system % 8 8 27 (32) 25 30 25 (33) 7 12 16 (IS)

- mechanical removal % 11 0 2(111) 0 0 3(100) 2 3 3 (46) -other % 3 7 3 (75) 3 7 6(138) 2 2 2 (46)

Dairy yard backup gate used % 55 37 45 (18) 71 45 54 (20) 35 38 40 (9)

9 Milking shed productivity and numbers of cows milked Percentage offarms or average per farm


1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Cows milked per hour a -walkthrough c h 29 32 37 (6) 42 36 42(18) 27 26 25(12) 0 16 21(20) -herringbone c/hr 46 57 56 (7) 58 60 62 (4) 42 46 46 (14) 47 47 54 (6) -rotary c h 123 163 177 (17) 127 124 150 (lo) na 113 167 na 136 174 (24)

Cows milked per operator a - walkthrough no. 44 46 52 (10) 80 55 50 (20) 32 34 32 (10) 0 32 35 (3) -herringbone no. 62 68 71 (9) 74 84 99 (5) 48 55 59 (9) 76 76 74 (5) -rotary no. 110 122 137 (15) 139 137 156 (12) ' na 88 83 na 136 150 (23)

Cows milked for at least 3 months in 1995-96

no. 124 (7) 168 (3) 94 (5) 134 (5)


no. 129 (7) 174 (3) 97 (5 ) 135 (5)

Farms with a 5 year plan 9% 43 48 (15) 48 49 (11) 68 42 (26) 48 43 (18)

If 5 year plan exists, number of cows milked at completion of plan

no. 136 170 (12) 182 235 (4) 93 145 (14) 146 154 (7)

Conrinued 0

9 Continued


1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Cows milked per hour a -walkthrough c h 22 32 34 (9) 35 38 0 32 32 35 (8) -herringbone c h 50 51 48 ( 8 ) 58 62 68 (8 ) 54 58 59 (3) -rotary c h na 135 123 (8) 192 212 199 (4) 124 131 154 (8 )

Cows milked per operatora -walkthrough no. 33 40 46 (16) 54 75 0 47 46 45 ( 9 ) -herringbone no. 87 82 80 (8) 74 83 91 (91 70 79 88 (4) -rotary no. na 166 147 (12) 167 204 226 ( 8 ) 132 133 155 ( 1 0 )


no. 117 (5) 161 (7) 122 147 ( 2 )


no. 119 ( 5 ) 164 ( 8 ) 124 152 ( 2 )

Farms with a 5 year plan % 39 37 (21) 20 65 (19) 48 48 (8)

If 5 year plan exists, number of cows milked at completion of plan

no. 148 202 (9) 204 207 (12) 158 211 (3)

a lncludcs cleanup time etc. na Not available, insufficient respondents.

10 Feeding regimes -New South Wales Percentage offarms or average per farm

Northern CentraVSouthern Riverina (repion 11) (region 12) (region 13) New South Wales

1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Area used -by milking herd ha 54.4 73.4 97.5 (16) 102.7 110.8 112.7 (13) 173 117.3 99.5 (21) 89.1 96.5 105.3 (9) -dry cows or other enterprise ha 94.4 58.8 111.3 (36) 139.1 134.2 187.9 (36) 96.4 66.2 355.3 (56) 115.8 95.6 177.8 (25) -unproductive ha 19.6 5.3 8.5 (45) 6.5 13.7 10.1 (22) 2.9 18.9 15.2 (23) 11.7 10.9 10.1 (19)

Total farm area ha 168.4 137.4 217.3 (23) 248.3 258.7 310.6 (22) 272.3 202.4 470.0 (39) 216.6 203.0 293.2 (15)

Intensive grazing system used - none % O O O * 0 0 22 12 0 2 2 0 -small paddock % 5 10 ~ ( I I I ) 0 2 5 (40) 41 54 46 (57) 6 11 9 (39) -strip grazing % 95 91 91 (6) 100 98 93 (3) 32 28 54(48) 91 87 88 (5) -other system % 0 0 5 (79) 0 0 1 (75) 5 3 0 1 0 2 (70)

Farms assessing pasture for quantity and quality of available feed a % 46 85 42 (29) 15 32 60 (17) 0 52 100 26 56 58 (12)

Farms feeding concentrates or grain % 100 100 100 () 97 94 100 () 100 85 93 (8) 98 95 99 (1)

Quantity used -self mixed concentrates t 10.6 7.6 4.9(111) 55 21.6 19.6 (54) 33 4.0 23.9 (60) 33.9 13.8 14.4 (41)

-purchased concentrates t 51.1 108.6 85.5 (19) 48.6 51.0 65.8 (22) 15.2 31.4 18.9 (80) 46.4 72.0 68.0 (14)

- grain t 24.3 9.9 27.4 (46) 84 96.2 68.7 (23) 80.3 84.8 48.7 (39) 58.1 60.0 50.5 (19)

- byproducts eg. brewers grain t 8.5 0 15.8(113) 0.1 25.8 58.9 (43) 0.1 0 0.1 (78) 3.7 12.3 35.5 (40)

Primary reason for feeding concentrates, grains, etc b -lift milk production % 52 84 93 (6) 73 37 59(18) 18 51 6 0 ~ 5 ) 57 58 72 (9) - performance feeding % 10 6 5 (87) 2 6 5 (83) 8 2 13(90) 6 6 6(51) - seasonal incentives % 0 0 0 0 10 35 19(47) 69 12 13(150) 12 18 11(45) -fill supply gaps % 38 10 2(lW 12 15 16 (45) 5 14 7(169) 23 13 9 (41) -zero grazinglother reasons % 0 0 0 0 * 1 2(104) 0 6 o(119) * 1 1 (98)

a Indudes visual assessment in 1 9 9 4 Since more than one reason may be given by fanners, figures may add to more than 100 per cent. * Percentage less than 0.5.

I 1 1 Fodder ronsen.tion, soil testing and drainage - New South Wales Percennage of farms or average per fann I Northern CentraVSnuthern Riverina (region 11) (region 12) (region 13) New South Wales

1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Total hay cut t 5.6 22.4 19.7 (63) 66.0 105.5 94.2 (20) 119.6 138.5 129.9 (38) 45.5 75.8 69.7 (17)

I Total silage cut t 16.9 42.5 116.7 (35) 34.2 81.5 119.8 (34) 37.9 86.6 136.8(87) 27.2 66.4 120.6 (24) 1 ( Purchased hay or silage % 71 40 26 (48) 60 51 47 (23) 33 29 31 (74) 62 44 37 (21) 1

Reason cut or purchased hay or silage a - normal practice % 36 59 82 (14) 60 73 61 (8) 84 83 57 (45) 52 69 68 (8) -boost offseason production % 40 45 66 (20) 46 57 32 (30) 100 49 48 (44) 49 52 47 (16) -drought mearure % 60 56 37 (32, 73 67 45 (23) 33 19 15 (70) 63 57 38 (18)

1 Never had soil test % 27 66 54 (24) 46 37 32 (33) 61 43 37 (60) 39 49 41 (19) 1

Q

After soil test, changed fertiliser management % 37 24 33 (40) 33 43 55 (20) 31 38 58 (40) 35 35 47 (17)

-. - - -. . . . . . . - -. . . . -for sale % O O O 7 7 o(132) 22 4 0 () 6 4 O(132)

-pasture control measure % 14 0 l(111) 12 25 12 (56) 0 5 0 () 12 13 7 (52) -other reason % 4 0 7005) 3 3 O(125) 0 7 2(207) 3 2 3(94)

1 Routinely renovate pasture % 99 100 100 81 100 96 (4) 41 66 48~6) 85 96 92 (4)

Areapasturerenovatedorsown ha 25.7 31.1 22.1 (19) 22.1 20.9 21.9 (20) 18.9 23.4 12.9 (30) 23.3 25.3 20.9(13)

Farm drainage situation -fully drained natural % 49 94 95 ( 5 ) 75 86 82 (11) 0 7 3 (79) 57 80 78 (6) -fully drained withimprovement % 51 6 5 (86) 19 10 13 (59) 56 66 66 (37) 36 15 16 (31) -requires drainage work % O O O 6 4 6 (99) 44 27 31 (78) 7 5 6 (62)

Farms with drainage improvement in last 3 years % 26 9 ~(III) 5 2 14 (55) 91 77 94 (I) 23 14 18 (21)

a Since more than one reason may be given by farmen, figures may add to more than 100 per cent

I

12 Herd breeding and health - New South Wales Percentage offarms or average perfarm

Northern CentraVSouthern Riverina (region 11) (region 12) (region 13) New South Wales

1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

A1 not used % 12 3 6 (93) 19 11 17 (50) 47 21 70 (24) 19 9 19 (27)

Select A1 hulls for -production only a % 39 21 31(45) 15 20 7(59) 29 17 0 27 20 16 (37) -type only a % 0 0 14 (73) 0 0 2 (96) 0 0 0 0 0 6 (64) -price only - % O O O 0 0 0 16 5 10 (97) 2 1 1 (97) -production, type and price % 49 76 49 (30) 66 69 74 (12) 8 58 20 (68) 54 70 58 (13)

Cows calved -to A1 no. 48 57 61 (15) 68 85 84 (13) 46 90 54 (54) 57 74 72 (lo) -mated to dairy hulls no. 20 27 22 (39) 33 33 42 (21) 56 42 80 (27) 29 32 38 (16) -mated to beef bulls no. 14 8 14 (32) 15 9 6 (36) 5 26 10 (66) 13 11 9 (23)

Bred own replacements % 100 100 100 95 100 100 100 100 100 97 100 100

Age at which heifers calve b month 30 32 29 (2) 29 29 28 (2) 26 25 26 (3) 29 30 28 (2)

Herd health program devised by -self % 93 95 92 (6) 68 69 77(10) 64 80 96 (2) 79 81 85 (5) -vet % 6 5 7 (77) 26 23 20 (36) 36 11 4 (52) 18 14 13 (32)

- Dept of agriculture/other % 1 0 1 n s 6 8 4 (70) 0 9 0 3 5 2 (59)

Contrnued 0

1 2 Northern CentraVSouthern Riverina (region 11) (region 12) (region 13) New South Wales

1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Defined mastitis control program used % 61 72 100 71 79 89 (7) 59 78 92 (9) 66 76 94 (3)

Defined mastitis control program using' -cell count on individual cows % 44 33 74 (19) 39 51 70 (IS) 37 64 69 (13) 41 45 71 (11) -teat dippingtspraying % 45 48 76 (19) 61 47 61 (20) 48 71 92 (9) 53 50 70 (12) -dry cow treatment % 48 64 92 (9) 71 79 79 (7) 59 68 92 (9) 60 72 85 (5) - dry cow treated no. 30 23 46 (24) 57 60 64 (13) 23 72 96 (37) 42 46 61 (12) - other control 7 6 2 1 0 0 8 6 0 8 14 12(98) 13 5 l(98)

Farms vaccinating for leptospirosis, by stock type e

-heifers % 58 60 72 (18) 40 60 65 (9) 68 68 53 (26) 50 61 66 (9) -milkers % 47 60 68 (19) 43 49 59 (11) 68 68 53 (26) 47 55 62 (10)

-dry cows % 47 60 68 (19) 43 49 59 (11) 57 67 53 (26) 46 55 62 (10)

Cases per f a m dairy herd of - grass tetany no. * * 0 * * 1 (36) 2 1 1 (35) * * 0 (29) -milk fever no. 2 4 9 (49) 7 9 7 (21) 4 12 7 (22) 5 7 7 (24) - leptospirosis no. * * 0 0 5 0 0 (85) 2 * 0 3 * 0 (85) -clinical rnastitis no. 4 6 7 (35) 7 5 ' 9 (27) 8 11 18(35) 6 6 9(18) -bloat no. 2 1 0 (62) 1 4 1 (38) 1 3 2(79) 2 3 l(31) -abortion no. 1 1 1 (33) 2 2 2 (26) 2 2 2 (24) 2 1 1 (18)

a Production and type combined in one category in 1992 b Average for those farms where breed own replacement heifers. c As more than one stock type may be vaccinated at one time, figures may add to more than 100 per cent * Average number per farm less than 0.5.

113 Milking shed, bulk vat and equipment - New South Wales Percentage of farms or average per farm

Type of milking shed a -walk through single - walk through double -herringbone swingover -herringbone double high -herringbone double low -rotary

b 1 Milk cooled prior to bulk vat

Northern (region 11)

1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96

CentraVSouthern (region 12)

1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96

Riverina (region 13) New South Wales

1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

( Automatic cup removers used % 28 22 23 (29) 26 28 35 (26) 6 19 9 (68) 25 25 27 (19) 1

6;

Performance testing of milking machines -none % 10 43 20 (61) 17 36 24 (39) 34 3 10 (97) 15 35 21 (32) -annual % 74 49 70 (19) 64 45 56 (19) 27 73 75 (30) 65 50 64 (12) -biennial % 16 8 10 (71) 19 20 23 (33) 39 25 15(135) 20 16 17 (31)

Vat capacity a -under 1500 litres % 38 50 43 (32) 26 36 37 (27) 32 30 48 (46) 32 41 41 (19) - 1500 and under2500 litres % 71 50 53 (26) 61 44 36 (25) 59 57 27 (59) 65 48 41 (17) - 2500 and under4500 litres % 4 8 8(102) 21 15 20 (32) 23 24 23 (95) 14 13 16 (33) - 4500 litres and over % 0 5 11 (55) 3 12 23(31) 0 22 19(53) 2 10 18(24)

13 Continued

Northern CentraYSouthern Riverina (region 11) (region 12) (region 13) New South Wales

1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Third line machine washing -none % 37 48 26 (46) 29 42 29 (24) 67 21 3 (81) 36 42 24 (23) -manual % 49 39 52 (25) 39 40 46 (22) 5 55 91 (13) 40 41 54 (13) -fully automatic % 14 13 22 (44) 32 19 30 (29) 28 24 6[191) 24 17 24 (24)

Effluent disposal a -run off into paddock % 85 63 41 (34) 66 53 51 (19) 68 60 18 (61) 74 58 43 (17) -pump and spray % 10 28 48 (29) 17 16 24 (31) 14 11 16 (70) 14 21 32 (20) -one pond system % 1 6 lO(721 8 4 9 (57) 5 14 37 (54) 4 6 13 (35) -two pond system % 0 3 2(105) 7 9 11 (48) 13 16 29 (76) 5 ' 7 10 (39) -mechanical removal % 4 0 0 2 13 7(50) 0 0 0 3 6 4 (50) -other % 0 0 4 2(100) 0 0 2 l(l00)

Motorised or rolling yard backup gate used % 1 3 3 (80) 11 19 26 (29) 58 52 38 (70) 12 16 20 (27)

a Percentages may sum to more than 100 as some farms had more than one bulk vat.

14 Milking shedproductivity and numbers of cows milked - New South Wales Percentage of farm oraverage per farm

Northern CentraUSouthern Riverina (region 11) (region 12) (region 13) New South Wales

1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Cows milked per hour a -walkthrough c/hr 30 32 36 (lo) 31 30 36.3 (7) 13 42 50 29 32 37 (6) -herringbone c/hr 45 47 52 (5) 49 62 57.6 (9) 45 61 58(22) 46 57 56 (6)

-rotary c/hr 0 0 0 0 200 166 181.4(15) 100 156 160(33) 123 163 177(16)

Cows milked per operator a -walkthrough no. 44 37 45 (17) 49 59 56 (12) 17 57 75 44 46 52 (lo) -herringbone no. 58 54 58 (8) 64 72 82 (7) 81 84 71(37) 62 68 71 (8)

-rotary no. 0 0 0 (1 133 131 139 (18) 100 100 128 (6) 110 122 137 (15)

Cows milked for at least 3 months in 1995-96 no. 96 (6) 142 (10) 140 (18) 124 (7)

Cows milked for at least 3 months in 1996-97 no. 97 (61 146 (lo) 157 (16) 129 (7)

Farms with a 5 year plan 90 52 (29) 43.1 (21) 57 (39) 48 (15)

If 5 year plan exists, number of cows milked for at least 3 months in 1995-96 no. 98 127 163 117

If 5 year plan exists, number of cows 98 153 234 milked at completion of plan no. 136

a Includes cleanup time etc.

15 Management advice and herd management - New South Wales Percentage offarms or average per farm


1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Number of times obtained advice from a -dairy company no. 0 1 (51) 2 2 (24) 1 3 (29) 1 2 (19) -private consultant no. 0 O(78) 0 1 (42) 2 l(112) 0 1 (38) -agriculture dept no. 2 4 (43) 3 1 (25) 4 3 (39) 3 3 (26) - fertiliser/chemical company rep no. 1 1 (37) 1 1 (26) 1 3 (36) 1 1 (19) -other sources no. 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0

Total number of times farmers obtained advice no. 5 6 6 5

Participated in discussion groups - never % 36 71 46 (28) 53 30 32 (31) 33 38 54.2 (35) 44 48 40 (18) -before 1980 % 22 3 11 (54) 6 13 12 (41) 10 20 0 o 13 10 10 (33) - 1980 onwards % 42 26 43 (31) 41 58 56 (17) 57 42 45 (42) 43 42 5 0 (15)

Number of times farmers attended discussion groups no. 4 2 3 (30) 4 4 4 (22) 3 3 3 (45) 4 3 3 (17)

Number of fanners attending discusson groups no. 523 234 360 (25) 440 669 645 (15) 140 131 114 (42) 1236 996 1119 (13)

Fanners considered advice helped farm profit % 78 74 50 (27) 67 70 64 (14) 84 77 46 (42) 74 72 57 (13)

Conrinued on next page 0

15 Northern CentraVSouthern Riverina (region 11) (region 12) (region 13) New South Wales

1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Farmers using computers % 11 20 36.8 (32) 11 16 39.1 (24) 16 12 47.7 (56) 12 18 39.3 (18)

Computer used forb -breeding records % 10 20 22 (47) 11 14 32 (27) 16 10 38 (70) 11 16 29 (23) -milk production records % 11 20 31 (37) 10 16 38 (25) 6 3 37 (70) 10 16 36 (20) -pasture/crop/imgationrecords% 0 0 2(105) * 1 lO(55) 0 0 0 0 1 6 (SO) - budgetingfinancial etc. % 7 18 34 (34) 4 11 34 (27) 10 11 40 (67) 6 14 35 (21) -microchip tags for livestock % 0 0 0 1 1 3 (73) 0 0 0 0 * . 17 (73) -other uses % O O O 0 * 0 0 0 4 (59) 0 * 0 (59)

Farms not herd recording % 52 66 60 (20) 61 40 41 (24) 54 24 23 (49) 57 49 46 (15)

Year commenced herd recording -before 1980 % 9 12 24(42) 18 29 23(31) 16 22 ll(64) 14 22 22(24) -between 1980 and 1989 % 27 20 12 (61) 21 26 26 (32) 10 27 42 (29) 22 24 23 (23) - 1990 onwards % 12 3 3(109) 1 5 10 (53) 19 27 23 (65) 7 5 9 (38)

a Since more than one source of advice may be given by farmen, figures may add up to more than 100 per cent. b Since a computer may be used for more than one purpose, figures may add to more than the percentage of farmen using camputen. * Percentage less than 0.5.

Feeding regimes - Victoria Percentage of farms or average per farm I WesternSouth GMID Gippsland

(region 21) (region 22) (region 23) Victoria

1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Area used -by milking herd ha 102.7 117.1 94.1 (23) -dry cows or other enterprise ha 53.8 57.9 78.1 (18) -unproductive ha 5.2 4.1 2.7 (25) Total farm area ha 161.7 179.1 174.9 (11)

'Intensive' grazing system used -none % 15 14 28 (43) -small paddock % 44 50 32 (35) -strip grazing a % 39 36 38 (19) - other system % 2 0 2(112)

Farmers assessing pasture for quantity and quality of available feed b % 20 49 82 (22)

Farms feeding concentrates or grain% 62 67 30 (61)

Quantity used - self mixed concentrates t 0 16.7 0.0 1.3 2.1 1.8(125) 0.1 0 0.0 0.5 4.5 0.6(125) -purchased concentrates t 24.6 25.5 19.7(100) 39.2 37.2 46.4 (29) 13.7 18.9 43.0 (48) 23.9 28.2 36.4 (22)

-grain t 17 40.8 28.0 (85) 24.2 57.5 56.0 (39) 14.6 38.6 39.5 (43) 27.8 47.2 60.3 (17) - byproducts eg. brewers grain t 0 0 0.0 1.3 5.2 0.0 3.5 1.1 7.3 (79) 3.0 2.4 1.9 (77)

Primary reason for feeding concentrates grain etc a - lift milk production % 24 36 6(109) 26 39 59 (16) 35 24 29 (41) 29 35 34 (14)

-performance feeding % O O O 7 0 0 5 0 8 (78) 4 0 2 (78) -seasonal incentives 7 0 1 2 0 0 1 0 0 16 19 (58) 2 8 6 (52) - fill supply gaps % 34 29 25 (71) 21 20 8 (68) 21 30 35 (29) 29 31 31 (15) -zero grazinglother reasons % 3 0 0 11 14 5(67) 2 3 0 5 5 2 (67)

a Since more than one reason may be given by farmers, figuns may add to mare than 100 per cent. b Includes visual assessment in 1993-94 and 1995-96.

I 17 Fodder conservation, soil testing and drainage - Victoria Percentage of farms or average per farm

WesternSouth GMID Gippsland (region 21) (region 22) (region 23) Victoria

1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Total hay cut t 129.5 155.0 160.1 (19) 106.4 79.3 106.3 (24) 100.5 68.4 113.5 (16) 111.6 89.6 127.8 (10)

Total silage cut t 36.2 57.3 68.7 (86) 31.4 22.7 58.1 (51) 47.0 76.5 81.1 (54) 43.3 54.1 66.0 (29)

Purchased hay or silage % 17 26 35 (48) 56 73 62 (19) 59 41 40 (34) 49 47 47 (14)

Reason cut or purchased hay or silage a -normal practice % 100 100 67 (18) 97 65 82 (11) 97 79 100 (0) 96 78 85 (5) -boost offseason production % 55 26 11 (85) 67 46 16 (31) 51 43 47 (27) 59 46 28 (17) -drought measure % 7 3 28 (52) 18 13 4 (88) 70 22 8 (73) 36 15 14 (27) -for sale % 13 6 3(189) 0 4 5(105) 0 0 0 (0) 4 4 2 (92) -pasture control measure % 75 77 66 (27) 50 29 8 (71) 57 58 19 (44) 57 50 28 (18) - other reason % 27 31 35 (38) 13 8 14 (63) 19 28 18 (58) 19 15 19 (26)

Never had soil test % 30 42 51 (44) 66 43 24 (45) 56 5 8 (74) 47 29 22 (26)

After soil test, changed fertiliser management % 45 21 39 (48) 21 30 57 (20) 38 66 59 (18) 38 45 52 (12)

Routinely renovate pasture % 68 87 62 (22) 57 69 67 (17) 28 61 83 (10) 54 67 72 (7)

Area pasture renovated or sown ha 4.7 5.7 12.7 (59) 7.5 10.3 9.6 (27) 1.5 4.6 4.7 (32) 5.3 6.7 8.2 (20)

Farm drainage situation - fully drained natural % 10 12 6 (93) 54 14 7 (79) 57 73 52 (24) 46 39 26 (18) -fully drained with improvement% 52 63 49 (48) 27 72 76 (11) 25 19 41 (30) 30 41 51 (12) - requires drainage work % 38 25 44 (53) 19 14 17 (36) 18 8 7 (73) 24 20 24 (23)

Farms with drainage improvement in last 3 years % 33 40 34 (60) 41 68 68 (16) 20 22 57 (22) 29 39 51 (12)

a Since more than one reason may be given by farmers, figures may add to more than 100 per cent.

18 Herd breeding and health - Victoria Percentage of farms or average per farm

WesternSouth GMID Gippsland (region 21) (region 22) (region 23) . Victoria

1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

A1 not used % 13 35 41.3 (69) 20 19 5(105) 37 16 25 (48) 28 20 16.9 (2s)

Select A1 bulls for -production only a % 45 6 7.2(115) 24 15 0 26 3 3(103) 30 12 4.3 (55) -type only a % 0 0 2 0 0 9 (71) 2 1 3.8 (51) -price only % 0 0 18.8(80) 7 0 0 0 * 0 0 3.3 (80) -production, type and price % 42 59 32.7 (44) 49 64 95 (5) 37 81 64 (20) 42 67 71.7 (6)

Cows calved - to A1 no. 57 78 74 (26) 76 79 105 (8) 43 44 66 (20) 60 68 93 (7) -mated to dairy bulls no. 52 61 58 (50) 34 39 43 (18) 55 70 84 (14) 45 48 59 (10) - mated to beef bulls no. 25 18 18 (76) 26 16 14 (29) 29 20 12 (44) 30 19 15 (19)

Bred own replacements % 90 88 81.9 (22) 86 100 100 93 100 100 90 97 97 (3)

Age at which heifers calve b months 25 22 20 (21) 24 24 24 (2) . 25 25 25 (3) 25 24 24 (3)

Herd health program devised by -self % 99 93 79 (22) 83 86 86 (10) 92 99 95 (5) 90 91 87 (5) -vet % 1 7 21 (86) 12 12 14 (59) 7 0 0 8 7 12 (38)

- other % O O O 5 2 0 1 1 5(104) 2 2 l(104) Connnued 0

18 WesternSouth GMID Gippsland


1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Defined mastitis control program used % 40 43 60(40) 72 69 80(12) 18 79 88 (8) 43 66 80 (7)

Defined mastitis control program using -cell count on individual cows % 21 26 18 (69) 49 58 56 (22) 18 53 45 (26) 29 47 47 (13)

- teat dippinghpraying % 40 43 60 (40) 44 55 80 (12) 18 73 68 (13) 34 59 71 (9) -dry cow treatment % 40 43 60(40) 72 66 80(12) 18 79 8l(12) 43 64 77 (8) -dry cows treated no. 36 65 77 (36) 54 56 77 (18) 11 88 106 (14) 36 64 91 (9) - other control % 20 29 7 (86) 0 10 10 (70) 13 2 0 9 15 8 (39)

Farms vaccinating for leptospirosis by stock type c

-heifers % 39 47 32 (42) 64 71 68 (18) 60 65 49 (25) 55 58 55 (11)

- milkers % 28 32 10(105) 74 58 61 (21) 60 37 42 (24) 54 47 44 (13)

-dry cows % 13 17 8(119) 61 55 54 (23) 60 53 49 (25) 48 45 44 (14)

Cases per farm in dairy herd of -grass tetany no. 1 1 3 (41) 1 1 (37) 1 1 2(51) 1 1 2(20) * -milk fever no. 13 16 18 (23) 10 16 14 (16) 6 6 11 (23) 9 11 15 (10)

- leptospirosis no. 0 0 0 0 0 O(103) 0 0 0 * 0 o(103)

-clinical mastitis no. 10 11 13 (27) 8 8 13 (15) 7 10 12 (23) 8 9 13 (10)

-bloat no. 15 1 1 (81) 5 5 2 (29) 1 3 l(50) 6 3 2(21) -abortion no. 1 1 2 (19) 2 2 2 (36) 1 2 1 (33) 1 1 2 (19)

a Production and type combined in one category in 1992. b Average for those f m s where breed own replacement heifen. c As more than one stock type m y be wcclnated at one time. figures may add to more than 100 per cent. 'Percentage less than 0.5.

19 Milking shed, bulk vat and equipment - Victoria Percentage of farms

WesternSouth GMID Gippsland (mgion 21) (region 22) (region 23) Victoria

1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Type of milking shed a - walk through single 9 6 0 0 0 0 6 0 (0) 9 6 5 (97) 2 3 1 (97) -walk through double % 0 0 19 (so) 0 5 0 (0) 20 . 4 14 (71) 5 10 9 (47)

-herringbone swingover % 72 89 65 (23) 38 53 71 (15) 41 55 44 (28) 49 54 60 (10) -herringbone double high % 11 4 8 (77) 42 19 20 (51) 16 30 22 (48) 26 20 17 (28) -herringbone double low % 12 8 4(149) 18 15 2(103) 9 2 11 (66) 15 9 6 (44) - rotary . % 14 7 9 (98) 2 2 8 (47) 8 9 11 (38) 5 4 10 (25)

Milk cooled prior to bulk vat % 91 100 100 73 73 76 (15) 61 78 71 (16) 72 77 83 (6)

Vat capacity a -under 1500 litres % 35 11 . ' 6(l38) 49 35 22 (44) 57 10 27 (46) 50 24 23 (23) - 1500 and under2500 litres % 76 77 55 (15) 31 58 67 (17) 51 66 53 (21) 48 62 57 (10) -2500and under4500 litres % 14 12 28 (38) 31 24 27 (42) 12 32 34 (34) 23 26 31 (18) - 4500 lives and over % 2 22 18 (38) 5 4 27 (34) 3 4 ll(47) 3 9 21(18)

Automatic cup removers used % 6 3 0 (0) 23 16 7 (51) 4 3 3(101) 13 10 6 (36)

Performance testing of milking machines - none % 10 12 0 39 12 14 (61) 14 3 8 (56) 23 7 7 (45) - annual % 86 55 94 (7) 44 72 71(15) 42 89 92 (6) 54 74 81 (5) -biennial % 4 33 6(n4) 17 16 16(57) 4 4 8 5(102) 23 19 14(28)

Conrinued 0



1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Third line machine washing -none % 33 16 37 (36) 42 32 19 (50) 14 18 24 (42) 32 28 24 (22) -manual % 59 72 59 (21) 26 54 75 (14) 81 65 62 (20) 51 59 66 (9 ) -fully automatic % 8 12 4(118) 32 14 6(101) 8 1 7 14 (51) 17 13 10 (32)

Effluent disposal a -runoff into paddock % 47 66 69 (8) 34 21 12 (63) 65 33 35 (35) 46 35 29 (16) -pump and spray % 3 3 2 0 8 16 12 (65) 11 12 12 (51) 16 12 10 (32)

-one pond system % 17 11 21 (15) 51 49 62 (20) 14 35 23 (48) 28 36 37 (15) -two pond system % 11 24 13 (66) 0 10 9 (67) 10 21 25 (36) 7 15 20 (19) - mechanical removal % 0 0 O ( 0 ) 0 3 7 (96) 0 0 0 1 1 3 (75) -other % 0 0 O ( 0 ) 7 4 0 (0) 0 2 4 (93) 2 1 1 (93)

Motorised or rolling yard backup gate used % 59 49 25 (so) 50 52 47 (27) 15 37 47 (24) 39 47 49 (12)

a Percentages may sum to more than100 as some farms had more than one daiy or bulk vat.

20 Milking shed productivity and numbers of cows milked - Victoria Percentage of farms or average perfarm

WesternSouth GMID Gippsland (region 21) (region 22) (region 23) Victoria

1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Cows milked per hour a -walkthrough c h r 0 0 26.7 0 34 0 41 55 55.2 (16) 42 36 41.9 (18) -herringbone c h 54 68 56.1 (13) 56 60 62.9 (8) 58 54 61.6 (9) 58 60 62.2 (5) -rotary c h r 152 114 118 (21) 143 182 164.6 (17) 102 90 154.2 (Is) 127 121 150.4 (10)

Cows milked per operator a -walkthrough no. 0 0 40 0 40 0 80 80 63 (29) 80 55 50 (20) -herringbone no. 80 85 103 (11) 70 185 93 (8) 76 84 98 (13) 74 84 99 (5) -rotary no. 123 104 124 (25) 141 177 137 (26) 167 129 180 (22) 139 137 156 (12) .



F m s with a 5 year plan % 61 37.6 (40) 46 46 (23) 59 55.7 (14) 48 49.2 (11)

If 5 year plan exists, number of cows milked for at least 3 months in 1993-94 no. 147 147 (37) 143 101 (24) 145 134 (18) 143 116 (12)

If 5 year plan exists, number of cows milked at completion of plan no. 196 196 (IS) 196 196 (7) 172 172 (12) 182 182 (6)

a Includes cleanup hme etc.

121 Management advice and herd management - Victoria Percentage of farms or average per farm

! WesternSouth (region 21) .

1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96

Number of times obtained advice from a -daily company no. 38 1 2 (78) -private consultant no. 17 1 1 (47) -agriculture dept no. 48 0 1 (56) -fertiliser/chemical companyrep no. 56 1 1 (31) - other sources no. 45 1 1 (96)

Total number of times farmers obtained advice

Participated in discussion groups -never % 66 8 8 ( 4 ) -before 1980 % 2 1 0 - 1980 onwards % 32 11 (51)

Number of times fanners attended discussion groups no. 2 1 (85)

Number of farmers attending discusson groups no. 386 166 (51)

Farmers considered advice helped farm profit 90 3 6 30(104)

GMID Gippsland (region 22) (region 23) Victoria

1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Continued 0



1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Farmers using computers % 20 10(11l) 19 20 37 (30) 1 4 38 (23) 17 16 31 (17)

Computer used forb -breeding records % 19 5 (4) 18 16 30 (35) 0 3 26 (35) 17 14 24 (20) -milk production records % 19 3 (52) 15 16 35 (31) 0 3 24 (37) 15 13 23 (20) - pasture/crop/krigation records % 0 2 (69) 5 4 5(123) 0 0 0 2 2 4 (58) - budgetinglfinancial etc. % * 8(137) 14 13 25 (41) 1 4 20 (42) 17 10 22 (22) -microchip tags for livestock % 0 0 0 0 2(104) 0 0 0 0 0 1 (72) -other uses % 0 0 1 0 3 (90) 0 0 0 * 0 1 (90)

Farms not herd recording % 48 60 (67) 34 25 26 (40) 52 33 37 (33) 44 37 37 (IS)

Year commenced herd recording -before 1980 % 3 5(115) 37 33 30 (34) 20 10 17 (32) 23 24 19 (23) - 1980 to 1989 and 1989 % 35 23 (46) 23 32 22 (46) 27 51 33 (37) 26 31 23 (23) - 1990 onwards % 14 12(104) 6 10 21 (45) 8 7 12(59) 8 .8 21(22) a Since more than one source of advice may be given by fanners, figure may add to more than 100 per cent. b Since a computer may be used for more than one purpose, figures may add to more than the percentage of farmers using computers. .Percentage less than 0.5.

22 Dairy farms wanting to change technologies or practices Percentage of farms

Would like to change -dairy shed % - daily equipment % -feeding concentrates etc. % -intensive grazing management % - fodder conservation % -soil testing % -pasture renovation/resow % -increasing feniliser use % -drainage % -management advice % - fann computer To -herd breeding % -herd health %

Would like to change -dairy shed % -dairy equipment % -feeding concentrates etc. % -intensive grazing management % - fodder conservation % -soil testing % -pasture renovationlresow % -increasing fertiliser use 9% -drainage % -management advice % -farm computer % -herd breeding % -herd health %

New South Wales

South Australia

35 51 58 (16) 44 22 46 (19) 28 28 18 (36) 16 14 23 (29) 11 17 16 (41) 23 20 23 (38) 33 23 31 (26) 52 29 33 (28) 22 20 19 (43) 14 11 23(40) 29 19 45 (20) 29 13 26 (32)

7 2 16(42)

Victoria

Tasmania

45 31 (31) 22 22 (25) 38 31 (34) 3 14 (59)

21 13 (41) 21 7 (55) 15 16 (51) 30 22 (51) 25 31 (29) 3 3 (79)

42 14 (34)

8 11 (67)

2 7 (64)

Queensland Western Australia

Australia

39 38 41 (10) 30 28 34 (12) 23 25 17 (15) 13 17 14 (17) 14 19 15 (17) 14 18 17 (19) 21 18 26 (13) 29 34 29 (12) 19 22 25 (14)

9 7 5 (30) 29 30 28 (11) 15 9 12(24) 9 10 11 (21)

3 3 Factors limiting ability to change dairy shed and dairy equipment, and use of more fertiliser and computers J Percentage of farms I


1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96

Dairy shed - would like to change, but: -cost prohibitive % 25 26 20 (28) -time unavailable % 1 6 l(107) - labour unavailable/cost % 0 1 2 (97) -viability f d i n d u s t r y % 2 0 l(105) - age factor % 3 4 3 (66) - other factors % 9 2 4 (63)

Dairy machines -would like to change, but: -cost prohibitive % 20 22 18 (33) -time unavailable % 0 2 1 (97) - labour unavailablelcost % 0 1 2 (97) -viability farm/cost % 0 0 l(10.5) - age factor % 0 4 2(88) -other factors % 6 3 1 (97)

Increase fertiliser use - would like to change, but: -cost prohibitive % 24 18 21(23) -time unavailable % 0 0 0 - labour unavailable/cost % 0 0 0 -viability f d i n d u s t r y % 2 0 0 - age factor % 0 0 0 - other factors % 6 2 3 (79)

Farm computer - would like to change, but: -cost prohibitive % 10 7 8 (48) -time unavailable % 6 3 6 (45) - labour unavailable/cost % 0 0 1 (94) - viability farm/industry % 0 0 0 - age factor % 2 5 9 (52) -other factors % 10 3 6 ( 5 8 l

Queenslaud Western Australia

1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

I South Australia Tasmania Australia

I 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Dairy shed - would like to change, hut: -cost prohibitive

I % 23 39 42 (22) 17 37 17 (38) 25 21 27~13)

-time unavailable % 0 4 ~ ( I M ) 0 0 0 3 2 1 (67) - labour unavailable/cost % 0 0 0 1 1 1 (99) 1 4 1 (59) -viability f d i n d u s t r y % 3 3 13 (58) 3 2 0 2 2 3 (39) - age factor % 7 0 0 9 5 4 (97) 3 1 1 (59) - other factors % 2 5 2 (89) 2 0 8 (91) 5 8 8 (29)

Dairy machines - would like to change, but -cost prohibitive % 33 13 37 (25) 8 22 15 (38) 21 15 22 (15) -time unavailable % 0 0 l(104) 0 0 0 2 0 0 (73) -labour unavailable/cost % 0 0 3 (95) 0 0 0 0 2 1 (55) -viability f d c o s t % 0 0 5 (64) 4 0 0 1 1 2 (45) -age factor % 7 0 0 0 0 4 (97) 1 1 1 (73) - other factors % 4 9 0 0 0 3 (79) 5 9 7 (33)

Increase fertiliser use - would like to change, but -cost prohibitive % 42 20 32 (29) 48 28 19 (59) 22 16 2 0 ~ 5 ) -time unavailable % 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 (63) - labour unavailable/cost % 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 (80) - viability farmiindust 9~ 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 (76) -age factor % 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -other factors % 3 9 2 (89) 0 1 3 (79) 5 15 6 (27)

Fann computer - would like to change, but: -cost prohibitive % 13 4 9(46) 30 19 0 14 7 6(27) -time unavailable % 1 6 24 (36) 7 11 0 4 8 9 (19) - labour unavailable/cost % 0 0 3(107) 1 0 0 1 2 2 (59) - viability f d i n d u s t r y % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (94) -age factor % 7 0 2 (92) 5 0 6 (69) 4 2 6 (31) - other factors % 8 9 7 (46) 6 12 8 (50) 6 11 5 (28)

a Cows milked based on coopentor's estimate of the number of cows milked for 3 months or more. b Avenge number of cows milked per full time labour unit or equivilent. * Excluding some properties as not dl Queensland daiq faaories provide protein data.

- --

1 24 Productivity/e&iency ratios -Australiu Average per farm I New South Wales Victoria Queensland Western Australia

1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Cows milked a -per hectare used by

milking herd no. 1.1 1.2 1.1 (9) 1.5 1.6 1.7 (5) 0.8 0.8 0.8 (11) 0.8 0.8 0.9 (7) -per labour unit b no. 43 45 44 (7) 59 63 70 (4) 32 37 37 (6) 49' 51 51 (6)

Litres produced -per hectare (av. area operated) 1 1 801 2 328 1 863 (16) 3 519 3 863 3896 (6) 1 366 1 556 1 687 (12) 1 823 2 031 1 734 (IS) -per hectare used by milkers 1 4 362 5 116 4 994 (10) 5 596 6 764 6962 (5) 3 079 3 891 3 415 (13) 3 793 4 591 4 876 (7)

-per cow a 1 3 881 4 347 4 505 (3) 3 734 4 317 4173 (3) 3 788 4 758 4 298 ' (5) 5 046 5 422 5 537 (3) -per week of farm labour 1 3 182 3 721 3 790 (7) 4 263 5 217 5616 (5 ) 2 307 3 366 3 091 (7) 4 721 5 288 5 397 (6)

Total butterfat -per hectare used by

milking herd kg 173 203 191 (10) 248 294 299 (5) 122 156 135 (13) 148 179' 187 (7)

-per cow a kg 154 173 176 (3) 165 187 179 (2) 150 190 169 (4) 196 212 212 (3)

- perweek of fann labour kg 126 148 142 (8) 188 226 242 (5) 91 135 122 (7) 184 206 207 (6)

Total protein -per hectare used by

milking herd kg 143 165 154 (lo) 188 223 229 (5) * 125 * 123 . 101 (13) 122 147 147 (8)

-per cow a kg 127 140 141 (3) 125 142 137 (3) *100*156 127 (6) 162 174 167 (4)

-per week of farm labour kg 104 120 114 (8) 143 172 184 (5) * 61 * 115 92 (7) 151 170 163 (7)

I Milk receipts -per hectare used by

milking herd $ 1 506 1920 1922 (10) 1 392 1 957 2199 (5) 1083 1435 1407 (13) 1 185 1 566 1566 (7)

-per cow a $ 1341 1631 1765 (3) 929 1249 1318 (3) 1332 1755 1771 (5) 1576 1 849 1779 (3)

-per week of farm labour $ 1097 1 397 1428 (8) 1059 1 510 1774 (5) 811 1242 1 274 (6) 1474 1 803 1 734 (5)

I Total cash receipts -per hectare operated $ 724 950 805 (15) 1069 1199 1292 (6) 581 653 757 (11) 765 832 768 (13)

Conrinued 0


1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Cows milked a -per hectare used by

milking herd no. 0.9 0.9 1.1 (9) 1.2 1.4 1.7 (8) -per labour unit b no. 39 48 45 (6) 48 56 66 (7)

Litres produced -per hectare (av. area operated) 1 2 163 2 134 1 930 (13) 2 925 3 758 2 938 (17) -per hectare used by milkers 1 4 257 4 348 5 746 (9) 5 147 6 454 7 096 (8) -per cow a 1 4 884 4 961 5 258 (4) 4 297 4 549 4 208 (5) -per week of farm labour 1 3 666 4 565 4 513 (9) 3 995 4 937 5 343 (6)

Total butterfat -per hectare used by

milking herd kg 181 178 230 (lo) 223 282 309 (8) - per cow a kg 207 203 211 (4) 186 199 183 (4) -per week of farm labour kg 155 186 181 (9) 173 216 233 (6)

Total protein -per hectare used by milking herd kg 140 138 183 (lo) 168 216 233 (8)

-per cow a kg 160 158 167 (4) 140 152 138 (4) -per week of farm labour kg 120 145 144 (9) 130 165 175 (6)

Milk receipts -per hectare used by

milking herd $ 1 215 1 294 1 636 (lo) 1 082 1 609 2 051 (9) -per cow a $ 1 394 1 477 1497 (4) 903 1 134 1216 ( 5 ) -per week of farm labour $ 1046 1 359 1 285 (9) 839 1 231 1 544 (7)

rota1 cash receipts - oer hectare ooerated $ 722 732 662 (12) 869 1 158 1065 (15)

Australia

1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96

I Cows milked based on cwperator's estimate of the number of cows milked for 3 months or more. b Avenge number of cows milked per full time labour unit or equivilent. Excluding some properties as not all Queensland dairy factones provide protein data.

25 Productivity /efFciency ratios - New South Wales Average per farm


1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Cows milked a -perhectareusedhymilkingherdno. 1.5 1.2 1.0(14) 1.1 1.1 1.1(13) 0.6 1.3 1.4 (9) 1.1 1.2 1.1 (9) -per labour unit b no. 38 38 39.5 (9) 45 49 46.6 (9) 47 49 42.8 (16) 43 45 43.7 (6)

Litref produced -per hectare (av. area operated) 1 1 651 2 510 1941 (24) 1949 2 135 1 838 (23) 1 560 2 860 1 812 (41) 1801 2 328 1 863 (16) -per hectare used by milkers 1 5 092 4 722 4 250 (18) 4 687 5 219 5 262 (14) 2 460 5 613 5 943 (lo) 4 362 5 116 4 994 (lo)

-per cow a 13328 3829 4430 (7) 4211 4667 4603 (4) 4060 44044268 (4) 38814347 4505 (3) -per week of farm labour 12 435 2 814 3 364 (12) 3 682 4 354 4 127 (9) 3 642 4 118 3 515 (19) 3 182 3 721 3 790 (7)

Total butterfat -perhectareusedbymilkingherd kg 206 183 171(17) 184 207 207(14) 99 235 245(10) 173 203 199(1o) -per cows kg 135 149 178 (6) 165 185 181 (4) 163 184 176 (4) 154 173 179 (3) -per week of farm labour kg 99 109 135 (12) 144 173 163 (9) 146 172 145 (17) 126 148 151 (7)

Total protein -perhectareusedbymilkingherd kg 167 150 135 (17) 154 168 168 (14) 80 185 195 (lo) 143 165 160 (10) -per cowa kg 109 122 141 (7) 139 150 147 (4) 132 145 140 (4) 127 140 144 (3) -per week of farm labour kg 80 90 107(12) 121 140 132 (9) 119 136 115(17) 104 120 121 (7)

Milk receipts -per hectareused by milking herd $ 1 709 1 706 1 647 (17) 1 664 2 020 2 158 (14) 787 2 020 2 325 (lo) 1 506 1 920 2 003 (lo)

-per cow a $ 1 117 1383 1717 (7) 1495 1807 1888 (4) 1299 1585 1670 (4) 1341 1631 1807 (3) -per week of farm labour $ 817 1017 1304 (12) 1303 1685 1693 (9) 1 166 1482 1375 (18) 1097 1397 1520 (7)

Total cash receipts -per hectare operated $ 653 959 795 (23) 795 920 859 (22) 604 1071 750 (41) 724 950 826 (15)

a Cows milked based on cwpemr's estimate of the number of caws milked for 3 months or more, b Average number of cows milked per full time labow unit or equivalent.

2 6 /efficiency rial - Wctoria Average per farm

WesternSouth GMID Gippsland (region 21) (region 22) (region 23) Victoria a

1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 1991 1993 1995 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96 -92 -94 -96

Cows milked b -perhectareusedbymilkingbenl no. 1.3 1.3 1.6 (14) 2.0 2.0 1.8 (n) 1.3 1.5 1.7 (7) 1.5 1.6 1.7 (5) -per labour unite no. 73 77 67(lo) 53 61 69 (7) 64 65 67 (6) 59 63 70 (4)

Litres produced -per hectare (av. area operated) 1 2 685 3 299 2 892 (19) 4 554 4 628 4 711 (15) 3 899 4 61 1 4 189 (11) 3 519 3 863 3 896 (6) -per hectare used by milkers 1 4 148 5 127 5 406 (12) 8 232 9 349 8 421 (12) 4 768 6 257 6 655 (9 ) 5 596 6 764 6 962 (5) -per cow b 1 3 118 3 849 3 459 (lo) 4 065 4 696 4 651 (5) 3 694 4 209 3 860 (6) 3 734 4 317 4 173 (3) -per week of'farm labour 14 357 5 709 4 454 (18) 4 163 5 504 6 174 (9) 4 507 5 230 4 952 (10) 4 263 5 217 5 616 (5)

Total butterfat -perhectareused by milkingherd kg 194 226 249 (13) 358 398 353 (12) 208 274 283 (9) 248 294 299 (5) -per cow b kg 146 169 159 (8) 177 200 195 (5) 161 184 164 (5) 165 187 179 (2) -per week of farm labour kg 203 251 205 (16) 181 234 259 (9) 196 229 210 (9) 188 226 242 (5)

Total protein -perhectareusedby milkingherd kg 150 172 184 (13) 270 305 273 (12) 157 207 216 (9) 188 223 229 (5) -per cowb kg 112 129 118 (9) 133 153 151 (5) 122 139 125 (5) 125 142 137 (3) -per week of farm labour kg 157 191 152(17) 136 180 200 (9) 148 173 161(10) 143 172 184 (5)

Milk receipts -per hectare used by milking herd $ 1 068 1 504 1 788 (12) 2 022 2 688 2 644 (12) 1 161 1 745 2 08 1 (9) 1 392 1 957 2 199 (5)

-per cow b $ 803 1 129 1 144 (lo) 999 1350 1460 (5) 899 1 174 1207 (6) 929 1249 1318 (3) -per week of farm labour $ 1 121 1 674 1 473 (18) 1 021 1 582 1 938 (9) 1 097 1 459 1 548 (10) 1 059 1 510 1 774 (5)

Total cash receipts - oer hectare ooerated $ 844 1021 1026 (15, 1285 1372 1475 (14) 1237 1467 1482 (6) 1069 1 199 1293 (6)

a The Vtnonm populruun md sample of7619 m d 134 resptct~vcly included im, ~n other ma such as rhe hl&Alll,lcr lrngauon Area mJ KE Vlsmna u hlch we nor covered by h e lhm regnuns shown b Cows rmlkcd h a d on cuup.r~lor'r csllmale uf ths number of cous mtlkej for 3 ,l~unlhs ur more c Avenge number of cons rmlked per full time labour unit or equivilent.

27 Receipts and costs, by state, 1993-94 and 1995-96 Average per farm


Unit 1993 1995 1993 1995 1993 1995 1993 1995 -94 -96 -94 -96 -94 -96 -94 -96

Estimated population no. 2 086 1 987 7 958 7 824 1879 1 852 838 460

Cash receipts Receipts -milk (excl. freight) $ 166 051 209 463 (8) 153 056 204245 (5) 141 883 159 082 (7) 202 460 238 680 (6) -dairy cattle $ 12464 12 150 (11) 13 159 11 861 (8) 12 028 10 480 (14) 21 910 19 505 (15) - sheep $ 185 281 (74) 177 185 (85) 0 0 1 140 588 (79) -beef cattle $ 13414 7230(25) 8 217 11 122 (53) 5 306 2 053 (26) 35 036 60 226 (15) -wool $ 552 1 228 (76) 103 82(107) 0 0 1 901 1 093 (96) -crops $ 1629 780 (60) 1 007 440 (83) 2 680 3 821 (44) 1 338 1964 (53)

Total cash weipts $ 201 163 248 652 (8) 180 596 232 480 (6) 168 450 181 946 (7) 269 610 329 101 (6)

Cash costs Purchases -beef cattle $ 2 860 875 (56) 1 852 5 877 (88) 206 49 (78) 3 851 9 714 (35)

-dairy cattle $ 3 767 2932 (33) 4 399 6039 (23) 4 824 4 740 (71) 4 852 2 112 (25) -hired labour $ 7513 13 661 (18) 3 777 4850 (19) 2 620 5 201 (27) 7453 8 695 (19) - fertiliser $ 7811 9953 (11) 7512 12834 (8) 7568 7694(23) 17391 22700(11) - fodder $ 31 742 49932 (lo) 17 176 30327 (lo) 39 691 45 286 (11) 33 683 47 054 (8) -crop and pasture chemicals $ 702 789 (33) 556 499 (24) 704 676 (26) 827 1371 (16)

-fuel, oil and grease $ 5020 7649(11) 5 084 5 289 (6) 5 652 6 131 (lo) 7 146 9 846 (7)

-repairs and maintenance $ 12 145 14 046 (12) 12 866 14963 (9) 11 554 14381 (13) 18517 21 954 (8)

-electricity $ 5 138 6540 (12) 3 458 3 810 (6) 4745 4 256 (12) 4279 4 817 (5) -dairy supplies $ 3444 4246(17) 3 024 4 100 (12) - 1083 1779 (32) 2 633 3 593 (11) -total materials $ 72 657 103 002 (8) 56 527 79 656 (6) 76 022 86 799 (8) 92 770 122 790 (6) -rates $ 2 859 4941 (lo) 6 015 8 238 (7) 2 028 1 871 (9) 8 597 8 884 (12) -milk levies $ 10 163 7 569 (9) 14 251 4 129 (17) 9 682 5 308 (9) 14 043 9 011 (6) -contracts $ 1364 2288 (23) 1 850 3 379 (15) 3 338 1 428 (29) 2 477 2 623 (21)

-

b

% Cd

2 b q @

2 -total services and contracts $ 31 825 38 261 (9) 36 363 34 414 (6) 29 785 25 251 (9) 51 137 48 721 (7)

-interest paid $ 7 873 14 096 (24) 12 165 19 317 (13) 10477 12 413 (20) 17 894 28 443 (IS)

Total cash costs $ 133 191 179 915 (9) 127 857 167020 (8) 124 823 137 003 (9) 183 809 224771 (7)

Continued 0


1993 1995 1993 1995 -94 -96 -94 -96

Estimated population no. 783 831 783 759

1 Cash meipts Receipts -milk (excl. freight) $ 156 144 174 349 (7) 146 147 195 701 (10) -sheep $ 238 736 (46) 492 604 (70) -beef cattle $ 4911 5914(38) 11 584 21 397 (44) -wool $ 511 1404(48) 269 166 (68) - crops $ 1 701 6 691 (37) 4 236 5 120 (39)

Australia

1993 1995 -94 -96

Total cash receipts $ 180 656 21 1 785 (6) 183 454 245 558 (9) 185 448 230709 (4)

Cash costs - total hired labour cost $ - fertiliser $ - fodder $ -crop and pasture chemicals $ -fuel, oil and grease $ -repairs and maintenance $ -total materials $ -dairy supplies $ -electricity $ -contracts $ - total services and contracts $ -interest paid $ - beef cattle purchases $ -dairy cattle purchases $

Total cash costs $

Source: ABARE (1997).

I 2 8 Receipts and costs, by region, 1995-96 Average per farm

Cash receipts -milk (excl. freight) -dairy cattle -beef cattle -sheep -wool -crops Total cash receipts

Cash costs (purchases) -beef cattle -dairy cattle . -hired labour - fertiliser -fodder -crop and pasture chemicals -fuel, oil and grease -repairs and maintenance -electricity -dairy supplies -total materials -rates -milk levies -contracts -total services and contracts -interest paid Total cash costs


Northern Central Riverina WesternSouth GMID Gippsland (region 11) (region 12) (region 13) (region 21) (region 22) (region 23)

To put all states on a comparable basis, total milk receipu are shown net of freight. and freight costs are excluded from cash costs

.29 Financial performance measures, by state, 1993-94 and 1995-96 Average perfarm


Unit 1993 1995 1993 1995 1993 1995 1993 1995 -94 e -96p -94e -96p -94 e -96p -94 e -96p

Components of investment return Total cash receipts $ 197516 248 652 180 432 232 480 170 489 181 950 269 610 329 100 (6) less total cash costs $ 127985 179915 126697 167020 127481 137000 183 809 224 770 (7)

Farm cash income $ 69 531 15 093 (22) 53 736 10 100 (21) 43 008 5 040 (86) 85 801 9 180 (39)

plusbuildupintradingstocks $ 7 307 18 41 1 (10) 11 359 18 433 (5) 2 027 15 564 (10) 9 546 33 410 (lo) less depreciation $ 13 682 43 719 (5) 13 643 39 502 (5) 12 567 44235 (5) 24423 45 760 (5) less operator and family labour $ 63 157 21 700 (34) 51 452 17 625 (30) 32 468 -9 821 (72) 70 924 34 340 (24)

Farm business profit

Profit at full equity $ 32 710 40 230 (2s) 30 456 42 600 (14) 2 730 . 3 667~91) 55 289 66 520 (13) Plus capital appreciation $ 39 327 16 980 (32) 7 532 19 460 (24) 19 659 19 7M) (73) 60 609 3 050(448) Profit at full equity, incl. capital appreciation $ 72 036 57 210 (21) 37 988 62 060 (14) 22 389 23 360 (73) 115 898 69 560 (19)

E m capital at 1 July $ 1 260 263 1 449 067 (8) 876 039 1 148 818 (7) 823 753 883 596 (12) 2 097 686 2 824 586 (7)

Rate of return excl. capital appreciation % 2.6 2.8 (22) 3.5 3.7 (13) 0.3 0.4(187) 2.6 2.4 (I I)

Rate of return incl. capital appreciation % 5.7 3.9 (19) 4.3 5.4 (14) 2.7 2.6 (71) 5.5 2.5 (20)

Real rate of return incl. capital appreciation % 3.9 2 (36) 2.5 3.5 (21) 0.9 0.7(254) 3.7 0.6 (86)

Continued 0

29 ''jltinued New South Wales Victoria Queensland Western Australia

Unit 1993 1995 1993 1995 1993 1995 1993 1995 -94 e -96p -94e -96p -94 e -96p -94 e -96p

Other financial items Net capital purchases $ 30 244 26 837 (37) 30 128 29 240 (38) 15 450 21 631 (40) 74 913 -1 1 639(320)

Fann capital at 30 June a $ 1 294 097 1 451 025 (8) 916 269 1 165 927 (8) 843 574 906 867 (12) 2 21 1 224 2 786 629 (7)

Total farm business opening debt b $ 75 648 129 698 (26) 131 893 191 153 (11) 110 273 99408 (21) 229437 299 583 (17)

Total fann business closing debt b $ 83 901 148 298 (20) 137 664 201 103 (12) 123 420 112 013 (22) 250 560' 287 778 (14)

Farm business equity at 30 June a $ 1 210 196 1 302 726 (8) 778 306 964 824 ( 8 ) 724 228 794 854 (13) 1 960 664 2 498 851 (7)

Farm business equity ratio at 30 June a % 93.5 89.8 (2) 84.9 82.8 (2) 85.9 87.6 (3) 88.7 89.7 (2)

Farmliquidassetsat 30Junea $ 37 721 40 598 (23) 18 277 39 218 (20) I6 120 32 214 (20) 38 680 84 107 (35)

Off-farm income b $ 7996 7954(24) 8728 8118(15) 3213 4914(21) 11721 11574(37) a Average per farm responding on debt. b Ayerage per responding farm. e Final estimate. p Preliminw estimafe. Nore: Figures in parentheses an relative standard erron, expressed as percentages of the estimates. Note that year to year changes in both sample and population afiect lk comparability of estimates between years.

2 9 Continued


Unit 1993 1995 1993 1995 1993 1995 -94 e -96p -94e - 9 6 ~ -94 e -96p

Components of investment return Total cash receipts $ 180 656 211 780 (6) 184 449 245 560 (9) 185 448 230 709 (4) less total cash costs $ 134 106 155 580 (8) 125 221 179 530 (lo) 130524 166771 (5)

Farm cash income $ 46550 56 210 (8) 59 227 66030 (15) 54 924 63 939 (5) plus buildup in trading stocks $ 5 954 8 420 (24) 19 3 18 9 820 (49) 9 355 9 990 (14) less depreciation $ 16781 20830 (7) 15040 18920(11) . 14 329 18720 (3) less operator and family labour $ 32 759 42 900 (6) 63 505 36 410 (9) 36332 41 000 (3) Farm business profit $ 2964 900(591) 0 20520 (38) 13 618 14 220 (24)

Profit at full equity $ 16 790 17 460 (32) 24 800 44 140 (22) 27 637 36 360 (11) Plus capital appreciation $ 17 345 22 820 (41) 29 467 34 530 (32) 17 621 19 620 (18) Profit at full equity, incl. capital appreciation $ 34 135 40280 (29) 68 129 78 760 (18) 45 258 55 980 (lo)

Farm capital at 1 July $ 808 250 948 650 (6) 710 014 1 065 407 (9) 957 523 1 195 971 (4)

Rate of return excl. capital appreciation % 2.1 1.8 (30) 5.4 4.1 (19) 2.9 3.0 (10)

Rate of return incl. capital appreciation % 4.2 4.2 (27) 9.6 7.4 (16) 4.7 4.7 (10)

Real rate of return incl. capital appreciation % 2.4 2.3 (49) 7.8 5.5 (22) 2.9 2.8 (17)

Continued 0

29 Continued


Unit 1993 1995 1993 1995 1993 1995 -94 e - 9 6 p -94e -96p -94 e - 9 6 p

Other financial items Net capital purchases $ 21 456 19 100 (26) 37 369 14540 (33) 29 71 1 25 070 (27)

Farm capital at 30 June a $ 973 270 (6) 1 116 620 (9) 997 609 1 213 730 ( 5 )

Total farm business opening debt b $ 93 543 141 202 (17) 11 1 783 214 409 (17) 120714 171 655 (8)

Total farm business closing debt b $ 108 514 145 100 (16) 132 433 219 930 (20) 129464 181860 (8)

Farm business equity at 30 June a $ 677 028 828 160 (6) 20 649 896 690 (10) 868 144 1031 870 (5)

Farm business equity ratio at 30 June a % 86.0 85.1 (3) 646 788 80.3 (4) 87.0 85.0(1)

Farm liquid assets at 30 June a $ 8711 35 320 (39) 21 099 24680 (38) 21 135 39 410 (13)

Off-farm income b $ 10606 12730 (21) 12 643 5910 (28) 8 326 7 980 (10)

a Average per fm responding on debt. b Average per responding farm. e Final estimate. p Preliminary estimate. Note: Figures in parentheses are relative standard emon, expressed as penentages of the estimates. Note that year to y w changes in bath sample and population affect the comparability of estimates between years.

30 Financialperfor'mance measures, 1995-96 Average per farm


Northern Central Riverina Western-south GMID Gippsland (region 11) (region 12) (region 13) (region 21) (region 22) (region 23)

Components of investment return Total cash receipts $ 174 828 (lo) 305 956 (11) 246 754 (22) 180 578 (19) 233 799 (8) 235 793 (6) less total cash costs $ 127 294 (12) 223 050 (11) 169 575 (30) 118 210 (19) 164786 (9) 186844 (7)

Farm cash income $ 47 534 (12) 82 905 (15) 77 178 (18) 62 368 (24) 69 012 (14) 48 949 (17) plus buildup in trading,stocks $ 9 553 (33) 21 801 (27) 5 498 (47) 3 488(144) 12 465 (19) 9 194 (66) less depreciation $ 13 324 (14) 22 407 (13) 18 095 (24) 17 298 (13) 18 786 (6) 13 296 (16) less operator and family labour $ 43 804 (8) 41 959 (7) 50 374 (10) 36 91 1 (18) 38 572 (8) 41 605 (6)

Farm business profit $ -40 40 341 (31) 14 208(117) 11 646(129) 24 120 (39) 3 242(214)

Profit at full equity $ 8 940 (81) 66 523 (25) 31 551 (67) 32 772 (63) 45 048 (24) 30 746 (33) Plus capital appreciation $ 7 223 (62) 25 066 (36) 14 715(152) 35 527 (53) 17 700 (40) 4 233 (80) Profit at full equity, incl. capital appreciation $ 16 162 (62) 91 588 (22) 46 265 (68) 68 299 (51) 62 748 (22) 34 979 (30)

I Farm capital at 1 July $ 876 219 (9) 1 999 840 (10) 1 017 719 (19) 1 075 293 (lo) 798 41 1 (8) 1 500 723 (20) 1 Rate of return excl. capital appreciation % 1 (79) 3.3 (23) 3.1 (57) 3.0 (55) 5.6 (23) 2.0 (25)

Rate of return incl. capital appreciation % 1.8 (60) 4.6 (20) 4.5 (53) 6.4 (44) 7.9 (23) 2.3 (27)

Real rate of return incl. capital appreciation % -0.1 ns 2.7 (34) 2.6 (90) 4.5 (63) 6 (30) 0.4(144)

Continued 0 I

30 New South Wales Victoria

Northern Central Riverina Western-south GMID Gippsland (region 11) (region 12) (region 13) (region 21) (region 22) (region 23)

Other financial items Net capital purchases $ -4 726(145) 30 700 (47) 107 050 (47) 3 896(120) 58 122 (42) 18 900047)

Farm capital at 30 June a $ 872 160 (9) 1 999 762 (11) 1 078 199 (13) 1 072 777 (12) 850 239 (9) 1 556 231 (21) Total farm business opening debt b $ 76 614 (23) 167 808 (34) 145 159 (48) 169 298 (25) 175 836 (22) 202 877 (24)

Change in debt over year $ 3 869(262) 16 741(110) 73 456 (68) -3 772(124) 10 26q109) 7 266~26)

Farm business equity at 30 June a $ 791 677 (9) 1 815 213 (11) 859 584 (14) 903 479 (11) 674403 (10) 1 353 354 (22)

Fann business equity ratio at 30 June a % 90.8 (2) 90.8 (3) 79.7 (3) 84.2 (3) 79.3 (5) 87 (2)

Farm liquid assets at 30 June a $ 31 822 (so) 54 382 (27) 11 927 (31) 74 744 (33) 32 15 1 (34) 11 545 (50)

Off-farm income b $ 7 353 (36) 9 774 (33) 2 785 (47) 12 555 (30) 7 583 (32) 3 689 (36)

a Average per farm responding on debt. b Average per responding farm. ns not supplied kcause exceeds 200. Note: Figures in parentheses are relative standard emn. expressed as percentages of the estimates. Note that year to year changes in both sample and population affect the comparability of estimates between years.

technology and farm management practices the...

Documents