Langford Farm Blog – latest news from the farm

Hello I’m Lesley Innes, the farm facilitator for Cheshire’s monitor farms – both dairy at Clive Hall Farm, and beef and sheep here at John Gate’s Langford Farm.

I work for Reaseheath College organising the monitor farm meetings where both farms have seen benefits in taking part in the project. Farmers have put a huge amount of time and enthusiasm into the meetings and activities held so far. Plans for future activity and other updates from Langford, benefitting both the farm and the wider farming community, will appear in my posts below.

Please contact me at Reaseheath College on 01270 625 131 ext 308 for further information on how you can join in…

Farmers should focus on what their customers want and gear their systems accordingly. Combining this approach with attention to detail in feeding to growth and finishing targets provides a road to profitability.

This was the message from an open meeting held at John and Rachel Gate’s Langford Farm, Lostock Green in Cheshire. The farm is a Livestock Northwest Beef and Sheep Monitor Farm, supported by the RDPE Programme and Reaseheath College.

Set clear targets
Peter Kennedy of Dunbia, the meat processor and wholesaler, told the meeting what their customers are looking for and how this dictates what they require from their farmer suppliers.

He said: “The priorities for our customers are safe meat products, with high and consistent quality and from known production standards. This means that we need to drive certainty into the production process, and this is achieved through measurement at both the processor and farmer levels in the food chain.

“For cattle, we are looking ideally for a 280 to 380 kg finished animal which is class 2 or 3 in fat, with confirmation at E or UR, although O+ is also useful.”

He also explained how fat class in lambs affects processing, “At class 4L we will lose 3.0 kg in fat during processing, but this is reduced to 1.5 kg at class 2L and to only 0.7 kg at class 2.

“The effect of the recession has been that consumers want cheaper forequarter cuts rather than more expensive hindquarter meat, but despite this we urge farmers to focus on hitting weight, fat and confirmation targets. The best way to achieve this is to measure what you are doing and respond to feedback from processors.”

Measure and feed to a plan
Once farmers have set their targets for finished stock and are monitoring progress, feeding should be planned to produce meat efficiently. According to Mike Mortimer of Mortimer Feeds in Macclesfield, Cheshire, “This means knowing the quality and cost of feed, as well as how efficiently it is used.”

For beef breeds you should be in the range of 5.5 to 6.5 kg dry matter of feed for every 1 kg of liveweight gain, and every day it takes 11 MJ of energy to maintain every 100 kg of animal (for example, 22 MJ for a 200 kg animal) plus 47 MJ to put on 1 kg of liveweight. So if you need your 200 kg animal to put on 1kg per day to reach your finishing targets, then you need to feed 69 MJ.

Mike went on to explain how feed conversion efficiency impacts on costs and therefore profitability. “A standard silage plus barley finishing diet will cost about £200/tonne dry matter to feed. If your feed efficiency is 6.5 kg feed to get 1kg liveweight gain, then it’ll cost you £390 to put on 300 kg of liveweight.

“By greater attention to detail in silage making and feeding, getting that feed conversion down to 5.5 kg feed dry matter for every kg gain will reduce the feed cost to £330 – and that £60 can have a big impact on profitability.”

Get close to your customer
The Monitor Farmer, John Gate, sells three finished heifers and 15 lambs every week to local Littlers Butchers in Northwich. Darren Shepherd, who buys from John, told the meeting, “The lamb price has been a bit too strong for our housewives, who are buying more chicken as a result., But consistent high quality is important in maintaining customer loyalty, so we need the same narrow band of quality as the big processors and wholesalers, and we need that standard 52 weeks of the year.

“We have a close relationship with John and that is invaluable, he knows what we want and the door is open to our feedback.” For beef, Darren sees an optimistic future, “We think that beef prices can remain quite high as our shopping customers have got used to them being at that level.”

So, different customers want similar high and consistent quality, but they also want to be close to farmers who are setting their targets for finishing, measuring progress and delivering results. If this can be done with efficient feeding, then profitability can be maximised.

Beef and Sheep Monitor Farm open discussion meeting:
The Full Circle of Meat Production ‘Beef and lamb production – 15th September

“Maximise your profit by understanding your customer’ – Full Details>>

Beef and Sheep Monitor Farm Discussion Group – members farm visits 21st September.

The day will include two visits to discussion group member’s farms, firstly to Gore Farm, (Alan Percival and family) followed by an afternoon visit to Winterbottom Farm (Dave and Kath Norcott). The day will allow members of the discussion group to become more familiar with other’s farms and businesses which will help to enhance discussions at future discussion group meetings.
Full details available from Lesley

An update discussion meeting on data collection to establish the cost of production was held at Langford this month.

The meeting, led by Howard Hughes and James Turner (Harvey Hughes Ltd), discussed the farm business account findings so far.

Five members of the steering group have also opted to go through the same process in order to discuss and compare within the group. Farm business data will be collected in order to establish the following points:

• Past three years audited accounts (08-09, 09-10, and 10-11), a schedule of livestock sales for 10-11, and a current record of land use and livestock numbers for each farm.

• Monthly management accounts from each farm. These will show income and expenditure on a monthly basis under the same headings as the audited accounts (feed, fertiliser, fuel etc.). Where possible, costs will be split down to sheep and cattle (if both are present on the farm).

• From these figures, analysis of gross output per hectare, gross output per £100 of labour/power/machinery, and pence per kilo of meat produced will be calculated (although pence per kg might not be accurate until there is a bigger bank of information to use).

A brief report will be produced for each farm showing the respective figures, and a meeting held to analyse this further. During the group meetings more specific information will be discussed (e.g. Gross Output per £100 of labour, power and machinery across all six farms).

MAKING the most efficient use of the nutrient value of slurry is directly linked to the way it’s applied. Getting it wrong can mean losing up to 65% of its nitrogen value – and that’s a very costly mistake.

That was the message given to farmers at the latest beef and sheep monitor farm meeting held at John Gate’s Langford Farm, where four systems of slurry application were evaluated – splash-plate, dribble-bar, trailing shoe and injection.

The current cost of nitrogen fertiliser is around £300 a tonne, while the value of slurry – before spreading – is around £15/ha (£6/acre).

But depending on the mode of application, the real “cash” value of slurry is at the point of spread – a value that can vary significantly ranging from a minimal 5% loss using an injection system to around 50% loss when using a splash-plate.

“The method of slurry application has a huge impact on how much of its nutrient value you actually deliver to the land – and it will directly affect how much money you save on bought-in bagged fertiliser,” said Fred Percival of Cheshire-based slurry consultants and equipment manufacturers Spreadwise.

“It’s important to remember that if you can smell the fertiliser when you’re spreading it, the operation is costing you money because ammonia going into the atmosphere means nitrogen is being lost. The aim is to achieve the minimum loss of nutrient value between the slurry store and the field.

“Slurry being sprayed into the air when it’s being applied by a vacuum tanker is losing at least 50% of its nutrient value. Surface spreading may be the cheapest way of getting slurry on to the land, but it also creates the most expensive level of financial loss in terms of wasting the nutrients that should be made available to the grass,” he added.

Slurry trial at Langford Farm

The trial at Langford Farm saw around 3000 gallons an acre (34,000 litres/ha) applied to grass fields that had been “bared” by overwintering sheep. The consistency of the slurry was “thick” at around 8% dry matter and it delivered 1.1kg nitrogen per m/3 and 1.75kg m/3 phosphate.

Surface Spread

Slurry that was surface spread using a splash plate was estimated to have lost 50% of its nutrient value – primarily because the slurry was “thrown into the air” and its cash value as a fertiliser was severely reduced, Fred Percival told farmers at the monitor farm meeting. The value of the nutrient delivered was estimated at £7.50/ha (£3 /acre).

Dribble Bar and Trailing Shoe Results

The second and third areas of evaluation in the trial used dribble-bar and trailing-shoe methods of application. Both delivered the slurry more efficiently and showed an improvement in nutrient retention compared with the splash-plate system.

Both the dribble-bar and the trailing-shoe applied an estimated nutrient value of £12/ha (4.80/acre).

“The dribble-bar, simply because it’s not throwing slurry into the air as the splash-plate did, achieves a much greater reduction in nitrogen losses. Compared with 50% of nutrient loss when applying slurry using a splash-plate, the dribble bar loss is around 20%. That can mean saving £4.50/ha (£1.80/ acre) of nutrient value simply by using a more efficient method of application,” said Fred Percival.

Commenting on the “thickness” of slurry, farmers were told that the application of “thick” slurry with a high dry matter of around 8% – and which contains small-sized solid particles within it – can kill lines of grass where it’s applied using a dribble-bar or trailing-shoe.

“The slurry we used in this trial had an unusually high dry matter of 8%. Slurry in-store would normally be around 4-5%,” said Fred.

Slurry Injection Results – the most efficient by far but do your sums first!

The land at Langford Farm that had been treated by slurry injection saw just a 5% loss of the slurry’s nutrient value and was estimated to have delivered £14.25/ha (5.70/acre) in fertiliser cash terms to the grassland – by far the highest in the trial.

“Injecting slurry is by far the most efficient in terms of ensuring the maximum amount of the slurry’s nutrients are applied to the land – but if you’re using a contractor you need to do your sums carefully. A contractor won’t cover the same amount of ground using an injection system compared with a dribble-bar.

“An injection system will deliver 16-17,000 gallons an hour compared with a dribble-bar at 20-25,000 gallons an hour. And contractors’ charges are higher for injection application,” said Fred Percival.

And there were added benefits gained by the physical process of slurry injection. “The ground is opened up and oxygen can get into the soil. Grass needs oxygen at both ends and getting it into the soil structure via the injection slot that’s four to six inches deep is a big bonus of this system of application.”

Cost

Comparing estimated costs of applicators using an umbilical system showed the splash-plate method (10m width) cost £1500 compared with the dribble-bar (12m width) at £14,250 and the trailing-shoe (8m width) at £14,000. The injection system (5m-6m width) was the most expensive at £17,500.

Wear and tear

The cost of replacing wearing parts was reckoned to be almost “nil” for splash-plate systems compared with dribble-bar and trailing-shoe at £1.25/ha and £2.50/ha respectively as an on-going cost. Replacing wearing parts on an injection system was estimated to be around £5/ha.

Grass growth and quality will continue to be monitored and the %DM of each trial area of application will be calculated prior to cutting for silage. An update on the results will follow at a later date.

Anaerobic digestion offers dual opportunities for livestock producers

A project to evaluate anaerobic digestion at Reaseheath College could provide valuable information for farmers considering renewable energy production from farm waste, Sam Grundy told visitors to Langford Farm.

The system handles cow slurry from the herd’s 250 cows and through its anaerobic digestion will produce 10% of the college’s power requirements.

“This is a very exciting time for renewable energy produced on-farm and we hope the system at Reaseheath will play an important role in the on-going evaluation of farm generated power. There are lots of questions to be answered and that’s what this project is about, but we anticipate that savings as much as £9000 a year could be made on nitrogen expenditure by using the digestate,” said Sam.

Dan Galloway has recently joined the college to oversee the anaerobic digestion project and is excited at the prospects for the use of “digestate”.

This is the substance that remains after the slurry has been subjected to the process of anaerobic digestion and it will supplement man-made fertilizers due to its enhanced nutrient value compared to raw slurry.

The enhanced nutrient value of the digestate has further implications when choosing the optimum method and time of application, as discussed by Fred Percival.

“We’ll be looking at trials to fully evaluate the nutrient value of the digestate which will be available to us in both a liquid and solid state. The decision to keep the high yielders inside all-year-round will provide a constant supply of slurry to feed the digestor.”

Further information is available from Lesley Innes, Monitor Farm Facilitator, based at Reaseheath College. Tel: 01270 625 131 ext 308

BEEF and sheep farmers must focus on profit not productivity.

That was the key message from farmer Robert Parker, speaking at the RDPE Northwest Livestock Programme Monitor Farm Open Day held at Langford Farm in Cheshire earlier this month.

Robert, who took part in a similar Monitor Farm scheme in Scotland, told the 40-strong crowd at John and Rachael Gate’s Langford Farm in Northwich that having a strategy for profit rather than being focused on “topping the mart” was the most important lesson he’d learnt from being a monitor farmer.

“Focussing on productivity can lead to a situation where your calves achieve top prices but herd performance is poor with low calving percentage and high replacement rates,” Robert explained.

“What that means is that you are getting good prices but have a high cost base, so you are actually worse off.”

Having had his previous system challenged by the local farmers in his monitor farm group, Robert reviewed his business and realised that having the right stock for the farm and management system was the key to achieving better profits. And so he set about developing a long-term strategy to achieve this.

“It is important to get back to basics,” Robert suggested. “Look at everything on your farm, question everything and then you can use this to develop your own strategy.”

Robert also explained how valuable he feels the monitor farm concept is to local farming communities. “When I was a monitor farmer we tapped into the expertise available and conducted blood and soil samples and began to keep more records. We discovered that we had a fluke problem that we knew nothing about and so we put in place a control programme.”

Knowing rather than assuming

But it was not only Robert that benefited from this discovery. “We discussed the fluke issue at the next group meeting and it turned out that few local farmers had ever tested for it – they had simply assumed it wasn’t a problem. Following that meeting they went away and realised that it was also a problem on their farms and so put control plans in place.”

And it is examples like this that Robert believes demonstrate that being involved in a Monitor Farm scheme has a much wider impact than just your own farm. “All the farmers in our group were able to benefit from the expertise available and really drive the agenda and decide on the direction we wanted to go in,” he explained. “It really did benefit the whole farming community.”

His position as a Monitor Farmer also helped give Robert the confidence to apply for a Nuffield Scholarship and he visited Argentina, Uruguay and Australia to study their beef production methods. This led him to conclude that most producers in these countries were using just two breeds of cattle – either Aberdeen Angus or Hereford (or a cross between the two) to run simple low cost systems with high returns.

“The focus seemed to be on low cost systems that were managed in a simple way with the focus on producing one calf per cow per year,” Robert said. “This got me thinking and when I got home I changed my approach away from dairy x continentals and now use Angus and Hereford cross cows. We also changed from an all year around calving system to calving in a 12 week period, which has made the workload a lot easier.”

This change in approach appears to being paying dividends. Since joining the Monitor Farm scheme Robert has doubled his farm profits and is now able to spend more time away from the farm. “We have a ten year plan and we are now into year six of that. But it takes at least 4 or 5 years to start to see the benefits so you have to keep at it.”

Gaining knowledge is certainly something that Livestock NW monitor farmer and host John Gates is keen to do.

Once Robert had spoken John, accompanied by Darrell Irwin of Willows Vet Group, led a farm walk to give visitors the opportunity to see first hand some of the changes and issues under discussion with the business group at Langford Farm.

And John’s farm has some unique issues to contend with. Sitting within Cheshire’s brine fields, John has to have a derogation from his landlord to even put in a new fence post as the pipe work associated with brine extraction sits buried under the land.

This pipe work causes other problems too. Occasional brine bursts kill off hedgerows and grass and evidence of this is clear as you walk around the farm. Undeterred, John farms the 160 ha farm and runs 130 suckler cows (Herefords crossed with a British Blonde bull) and more than 500 mule ewes.

Like Robert, John has been making the most of the technical expertise available via the RDPE Livestock NW Monitor Farm programme and soil sampling was one of the first things John did after becoming a Monitor Farm.

“Every field was sampled and lime was used on targeted fields to balance the pH.” John told the group. N, P or K fertiliser was also applied to relevant fields according to the results.

Fencing is another area that has seen improvements. Carefully thought out fencing means the land is now much more versatile and is being used more efficiently.

In terms of his cattle, John has identified several key areas he wants to look at with his Monitor Farm group.

Key Areas

These include increasing the weight of animals produced from grass and dentifying any health issues or metabolic deficiencies and exploring alternative methods of winter-feeding his suckler cows. So far the herd has been blood tested and the team are waiting on the lab results to develop a suitable vaccination strategy.

During the walk Robert was able to share his experiences with John and offer up advice that worked for him such as fertility testing bulls, keeping bulls separate and focussing on maternal traits when choosing sires.

John explained how his Monitor Farm group is currently discussing options for weighing and monitoring the herd to allow more comparison and benchmarking to take place – something strongly advocated by Robert.

And although it is early days, John seems confident that participating in the programme will bring significant benefits.

“Using the technical experts available via the scheme will allow us to focus on our own circumstances at Langford Farm and develop a system and strategy for profit that works for us,” he concluded.

“What’s more, by sharing this journey with the other farmers in the business group, other farmers can get new information and challenge their own thinking, which will hopefully deliver benefits to a much wider cross section of the local farming community.”

For further information about the next meeting planned at Langford, or about the RDPE Northwest Livestock Programme in Cheshire, please contact Lesley Innes on 01270 625131 ext. 308, or email lesleyi@reaseheath.ac.uk

To book your place at Langford Farm’s open day, CLICK HERE to go to the event pages of this website.

Langford’s vaccination and biosecurity strategy

January’s business group meeting, led by farm vet Darell Irwin (Willows Vet Group) discussed the results of Langford Farm’s cattle blood tests taken early in January.

Testing for BVD, lEPTO, IBR and Johnes, the aim of the meeting was to establish a vaccination and bio security strategy for Langford Farm.
With guidance from Darrell, the group decided the following for best practice:

- BVD: Resample any positive cattle, cull if PI. Vaccinate all heifers and calves. Blood sample all replacements.
- Lepto: Vaccinate. Monitor number of abortions
- IBR: Monitor number of abortions / respiratory signs / vaccinate before housing.
- Johnes: Any cows not in calf will be tested for Johnes.

Other agenda items included: young stock – whether to sell as stores or finish given the current cost of barley; cattle condition scoring results; scanning results and predicted calving pattern of the Langford herd.

OCTOBER’S Business Group meeting held at Langford Farm saw a good attendance as monitor farm vet Darrell Irwin (Willows vet Group) led the discussion on topical infectious diseases; Johnes, IBR, Lepto and BVD.

The objective of the meeting was to ascertain, the cost and performance implications associated with the diseases and the options available to control any potential current issues.

It was agreed to blood test all bovines for Johnes, IBR, Lepto and BVD, in addition the mineral status of the animals will also be checked, this testing will be carried out in the next two months.

Once test results have been analysed the discussion group will meet mid January to discuss potential solutions to any issues found, and establish an effective vaccination program. The group will also devise bio security measures and operating procedures for new stock/movements and quarantine.

Further updates will follow…

Lesley

THE Cheshire Farms Competition ‘sheep flock’ category first, second and third places were awarded to three of Cheshire’s Beef and Sheep Monitor Farm steering group members! Matthew Bagley (Reaseheath College Flock Manager), Dave Norcott and Mark Shimwell, congratulations to all!

The Cheshire Farms Competition is one of the longest running, industry judged competitions in England.

Ian Garnett, Chairman of Cheshire Farms Competition said: “Success at our competition is regarded with tremendous respect. Winners must display extremely high levels of animal husbandry and stock management, combined with a keen eye for detail. You must also show sound business skills evidenced by commercial figures showing a healthy enterprise with a good annual return.”

“We were very impressed with Reaseheath’s entry, particularly as the college has never won before, and there were particularly high standards and increased entries in the sheep flock category.”

Matthew Bagley said: “The Cheshire Farms Competition was set up and is judged by farmers and is extremely well respected within the industry.

“A first prize in this competition, on our first entry, means that the way we manage this flock is regarded as top class. It confirms that our students are learning best practice and that they are then taking that knowledge and expertise back into the industry when they take up employment.”

Having three of the top sheep flocks actively involved with the beef and sheep steering group stands, Langford monitor farm is in good stead for achieving the aims and goals of the project.

THE ‘Open Discussion Meeting’ at Langford Farm on July 20th saw another good turnout – which just highlights farmer interest and enthusiasm for maximising productivity from grassland.

Speaker Dr Liz Genever (grassland specialist and beef and sheep scientist, EBLEX) spoke encouragingly about Langford’s current grassland productivity given the extremely dry June and July as well as the additional challenges John faces with several fields.

These challenges included: shallow pipe work (therefore aeration is not possible) sporadic brine bursts which affect productivity of grazing/crops and fields just out of long term stewardship (therefore carrying a weed burden).

Liz discussed the pros and cons of various ryegrass and clover types and highlighted how important it is to understand the performance characteristics of grass/clover types on your farm and to ensure they are compatible with your soil types.

Second speaker Rod Bonshor (General Manager, Oliver Seeds) gave an overview of the re-seeding plan for Langford Farm and re-seeding to suit your soil type for maximum yield and return on investment

Following the presentations the group went out to carry out a field analysis on one of John’s permanent pastures with shallow pipe work.

The group looked at the type and level of compaction, soil type, ground cover, root depth, weed cover/type etc. Following this discussion John, Liz and Rod led the group to several fields which varied in crop/grass type, ley, history to discuss performance and what John’s plans were for each.

Grass growth cages had been placed on the farm a feww weeks before the meeting to monitor three field types at Langford to establish current grassland productivity.

Liz highlighted that the permanent pasture and newly re-seeded areas showed double the grass growth of the parklands. She highlighted the importance of recording grass growth rates with reference to stocking rates to enable optimum cattle and sheep grazing.

Summarising the afternoon, Liz highlighted Langford’s potential monitoring opportunities identified by the group in relation to production which included: the cost of production/value of forage for both first and second cut; lamb finishing LWG per acre value; the nutrient value of slurry and the grass growth ‘Grass Watch’ assessment being carried out in association with EBLEX.

The open discussion meeting concluded with supper and further chat on the day’s topics.

by Farm Facilitator Lesley Innes
(Reaseheath College Tel: 01270 625131 ext 308 / mob: 07788 721 943)

FOLLOWING a very positive ‘Open Discussion Meeting’ following the advice of Lesley Stubbings, data collection has begun in order to establish the true productivity of Langford Farm.

Weighing lambs and Faecal Egg Counts

A number of John Gate’s lambs have been weighed to calculate the daily live weight gain (DLWG); subsequent re-weighing of the same lambs will allow continuous monitoring of their growth rate and therefore productivity.

In addition, both lamb and ewe faecal samples have been analysed for faecal egg counts (FEC) to establish current worm burden and species, results showed that drenching both lambs and ewes were necessary to control worm burden. Further FEC analysis will follow to monitor the effects of drenching.

Grass Cages
Grass cages have now been set up to monitor grass growth; these have been placed in three field types; permanent pasture, newly re-seeded and the parklands. This will establish current grassland productivity. The grass growth data collected will be analysed and then discussed with Dr Liz Genever (EBLEX beef and sheep scientist) at Langford Farm’s next Open discussion Group Meeting on the 20th of July.

Langford Farm Focus areas and details are shown below;
• Physical performance of cattle and sheep – setting targets for 2010/11
• Health priorities; ewe and lamb fluke, FEC, worming program, monitor DLWG
• Reduction in lamb losses; monitor when losses happen to pinpoint reasons/solutions
• Grassland and forage performance; soil structure and analysis, nutrient management, sward composition, grazing management
• On-farm bio-security- and controlling the risk

If you are interested in attending, or would like more information on any of the above, please contact Lesley Innes Facilitator, RDPE Livestock Northwest, Reaseheath College Tel: 01270 625131 ext 308 and mobile 07788 721 943 Email: lesleyi@reaseheath.ac.uk