A survey of Pennsylvania dairy farmers using (n = 77, PASTURE group) or not using (n = 70, CONFINED group) intensive grazing was conducted in November 1990. The questionnaire was mailed to 147 dairy farmers, of whom 64% responded. Final data analysis was performed on the 79 farms with <101 milking cows per farm. Some 58% of the PASTURE farmers had ≤5 yr experience with intensive grazing. Farms in the PASTURE group were smaller than those in the CONFINED group (87 vs 133 ha) and in 1990 had less area in forage crops (35.3 vs 53.0 ha), but a greater area in pasture (19.8 vs 15.3 ha). The average herd size on the PASTURE farms was 52 cows compared with 67 cows on the CONFINED farms. Milking cows spent 191 ± 5 d grazing on the PASTURE farms, compared with 110 ± 15 d on the CONFINED properties (P<.001). Average milk shipped in 1989 was 369 kg per cow less on the PASTURE farms than the CONFINED farms (7321 vs 7690 kg per cow). The 1990 DHIA rolling herd average was 365 kg per cow lower on the PASTURE farms than for the CONFINED herds (7655 vs 8020 kg per cow). Differences in milk production in both years were not significant and were about 680 kg per cow above the Pennsylvania state average. Indicators of herd health status and reproductive performance did not differ significantly between the two groups in 1990. Operating costs were lower ($78 per cow) in 1989 on the PASTURE farms than the CONFINED farms, but average feed costs for the two groups were similar ($617 vs $641 per cow). Variability in pasture yield, balancing cow rations when pastures were being grazed, and providing water to grazing animals were ranked as the most serious problems of pastures by the PASTURE dairy farmers. The highest problem rankings for the CONFINED group were insufficient pasture area, variability in pasture yield, and too few paddocks. The survey results highlight areas in which research is required and provide evidence that high levels of milk production in intensively grazed dairy herds can be obtained.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Parker et al. (1993) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched one closely related paper. Consider it for comparative context: