Milk Price III

Wildsurfer

Farmer Ed wrote: »

That is pretty much how it is in every co op and its also the legal requirement that milk for processing should be less than 400K scc. Now I suspect it would be very unlikely in this day and age that a full load of milk collected in one truck from a number of farms would exceed 400K. I suppose the question I was asking is for most products if it doesn't really matter too much from the point of view of the quality of the end product if the milk has a scc of 50K or 350K, why a bonus/penalty for being under 200K is so important? Ok I understand there are products that are an exception to that rule, but those products are generally the exception rather than the rule. An yes I do totally get that it is in the farmer's best interest to have sccs sub 200k anyway. But that really is more an issue for the farmer rather than the co op.

Would I be considered paranoid to suggest that setting the bar low enough does give the purchaser the opportunity of quoting a milk price that in reality all milk may not qualify for all of the time?

Also there seems to be a general misconception that Danone processes raw milk directly from farms. That is actually not the case. Danone buy in mostly demineralized whey, skim and other protein sources from a number of processors. True they only buy this in during the grazing season because they want it coming from grass fed milk. But while I am sure in theory it may be possible to trace this back to to a group of farms who supplied the milk that made that batch of cheese or butter or whatever the protein source was the byproduct off. Tracing any one tin or batch of baby food back to any one particular farm on the basis that farm had a scc of under 200k would be impossible. While I have come across Co Ops collecting milk from herds with cows freshly calved in the winter to supply liquid milk. I am not aware of processors collecting milk separately for the purpose of making products whose byproducts would be destined for Danone. That certainly is news to me and would sound like a very complex process.

I do know of a farmer in the Kilcorney area who ended up having to pay for a truck load of milk in the fall of the year having failed a antibiotic test. He swears blind he had not used antibiotics in months! To add insult to injury he subsequently found out that another farmer had also failed an antibiotic test in the same load of milk and he also had to pay for the load of milk! I can't remember for sure and I can't confirm this and I must ask him the next time I am talking to him. But from memory I am pretty sure he found out the load wasn't even dumped having being paid for on the double You probably know who I am talking about and you can ask him yourself if you don't believe me. Needless to say he is no longer supplying the same co op.

And 9/11 was an inside job....

Buckmickley

Positive antibiotics tests have to be reported to the department so there's no way the load wouldn't be dumped
More than one farmer on a route paying for the full cost of the load is also unlikely as this is usually paid for out of the farmers public liability cover

The insurance company would request confirmation from the department and divide liability if there's more than one culprit
The dairy often deals directly with the insurance company for reasons of confidentiality as they don't want you to know that there were multiple culprits

The PL insurance does not cover the substantial fine but does cover the dumping cost haulage etc that the dairy has along with the value lost to them of the milk thrown out

I looked into all this last year when considering insuring separately the content of my tank and this is what I was told happens

whelan2

I had antibiotic milk in 2008, hungover brother put dry cow tubes in the wrong cow, I was fined 45cpl- liquid milk price on february milk at the time- was with hibernian insurance which covered my milk as well as the tank load. Another point of note is that it was the lorry driver who rang me not the dairies to tell me load was positive

Farmer Ed

whelan2 wrote: »

I had antibiotic milk in 2008, hungover brother put dry cow tubes in the wrong cow, I was fined 45cpl- liquid milk price on february milk at the time- was with hibernian insurance which covered my milk as well as the tank load. Another point of note is that it was the lorry driver who rang me not the dairies to tell me load was positive

Yes the insurance did cover it in my friends case also. But he swears blind he hadn't used anything for months. Possibly the other farmer in the load had. I'd be surprised if Alps doesn't know who I am talking about. He freely tells that story and is not the type of person who would imagine something like that.

I did hear somewhere but never had any experience of it, that bad grain can grow penicillin if it ferments. Apparently cases like that have happened.

Farmer Ed

Wildsurfer wrote: »

And 9/11 was an inside job....

That sounds to me like a bit of a conspiracy theory to be honest.

Buford T. Justice XIX

Buckmickley wrote: »

Positive antibiotics tests have to be reported to the department so there's no way the load wouldn't be dumped
More than one farmer on a route paying for the full cost of the load is also unlikely as this is usually paid for out of the farmers public liability cover

The insurance company would request confirmation from the department and divide liability if there's more than one culprit
The dairy often deals directly with the insurance company for reasons of confidentiality as they don't want you to know that there were multiple culprits

The PL insurance does not cover the substantial fine but does cover the dumping cost haulage etc that the dairy has along with the value lost to them of the milk thrown out

I looked into all this last year when considering insuring separately the content of my tank and this is what I was told happens

I think a farmer is covered by insurance for the first time it happens but it doesn't cover him after that.

whelan2

Any word on an increase for the May milk price?

Mooooo

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

I think a farmer is covered by insurance for the first time it happens but it doesn't cover him after that.

I think with fbd it's 3 years after before cover will be given again . Mould in maize can give a fail test

Buford T. Justice XIX

Mooooo wrote: »

I think with fbd it's 3 years after before cover will be given again . Mould in maize can give a fail test

I failed a test a few years ago, last collection before drying off. I thought there was a cow more milking than should be so I carried a sample to be tested and it passed. The tank failed the test on delivery as the one hour test carried out isn't as good as the 3 hour test but because I had carried out a test, I was only fined my own milk price.

The manager was telling me that I could only fail the test once so it's good to know you can get covered again.

Isn't there some products like milk powder for milk replacer that can use the inhibitor milk? It's been a good while since I worked in a drier but I remember the end of the drier cycle was used for drying inhibitor milk which was bagged separately and sold off at a discount to the clear milk.

Buckmickley

FBD did not inform me of any restrictions and there's nothing in the small print about it so I'm dubvious of restrictions

Of course if it's an FRS lads fault the FRS insurance pays which is usually also FBD

There'll be no Glanbia milk price rise as that would force the big lads to be paying back their gap too soon and prior to the start of the ability to give notices on the MSA's

My phone had typed MRSA's ,which is probably a better description tbh

mahoney_j

If you've axpositive test in arrabawn that isn't collected they'll pay u 10 cent a litre to dump it in slurry tank,I got caught once like this ,never chance sending in antibiotic milk

Farmer Ed

mahoney_j wrote: »

If you've axpositive test in arrabawn that isn't collected they'll pay u 10 cent a litre to dump it in slurry tank,I got caught once like this ,never chance sending in antibiotic milk

Yes I think that is the case in other co ops as well. But obviously that is if you are aware there might be a problem and you test the milk before it leaves the farm. That is why they now recommend that farmers have a snap test kit on farm just in case a problem might arise.

mahoney_j

Farmer Ed wrote: »

Yes I think that is the case in other co ops as well. But obviously that is if you are aware there might be a problem and you test the milk before it leaves the farm. That is why they now recommend that farmers have a snap test kit on farm just in case a problem might arise.

Snap test not 100% ,an indicator yes ,the 3 hour test is what dictates pass or fail

Farmer Ed

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

I failed a test a few years ago, last collection before drying off. I thought there was a cow more milking than should be so I carried a sample to be tested and it passed. The tank failed the test on delivery as the one hour test carried out isn't as good as the 3 hour test but because I had carried out a test, I was only fined my own milk price.

The manager was telling me that I could only fail the test once so it's good to know you can get covered again.

Isn't there some products like milk powder for milk replacer that can use the inhibitor milk? It's been a good while since I worked in a drier but I remember the end of the drier cycle was used for drying inhibitor milk which was bagged separately and sold off at a discount to the clear milk.

I remember years ago a driver telling me that when the chocolate crumb plant was in mallow anything half dodgy could still be used there. Not sure is it the same nowadays. But I guess there is a legal limit for everything so theoretically no matter how bad milk is, if diluted with enough good milk it probably would not be detected.

Farmer Ed

http://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/the-case-for-a-rise-in-milk-prices-is-rock-solid/?utm_content=buffer358ac&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Let's hope he is reading this correctly. Would be a welcome bonus. He makes a valid point about most of the powder in storage being out of date for human consumption at this point anyway. Obviously it must have a shelve life.

whelan2

Any word on Lakelands May price?

jaymla627

whelan2 wrote: »

Any word on Lakelands May price?

Was chatting milk advisor yesterday and was nearly sure glanbia would have a rise for may milk

Buford T. Justice XIX

jaymla627 wrote: »

Was chatting milk advisor yesterday and was nearly sure glanbia would have a rise for may milk

A cent this month and the same next month for Kerry was doing the rounds here over the weekend.

Buckmickley

Gap lads in Glanbia are already paying back a cent from the 'advanced' payment last year so if it's 32 this month they'll only get 30

If they were with Strathroy last year they'd have got that extra 2 cent and no paying back

Couldn't move of course due to the MRSA

whelan2

Buckmickley wrote: »

Gap lads in Glanbia are already paying back a cent from the 'advanced' payment last year so if it's 32 this month they'll only get 30

If they were with Strathroy last year they'd have got that extra 2 cent and no paying back

Couldn't move of course due to the MRSA

Was that not their choice to take part in the Gap scheme, although if Glanbia had been paying a fair milk price they wouldnt have needed the gap scheme at all.

whelan2

Glanbis up price by 1cpl to 32cpl

whelan2

whelan2 wrote: »

Glanbis up price by 1cpl to 32cpl

While I am glad of the increase, do ye think it could have been more?

wiggy123

Are dairy farmers making a profit? at present--when all is added up! or is the calf / cull prices the bonus!

Keepgrowing

Buckmickley wrote: »

Gap lads in Glanbia are already paying back a cent from the 'advanced' payment last year so if it's 32 this month they'll only get 30

If they were with Strathroy last year they'd have got that extra 2 cent and no paying back

Couldn't move of course due to the MRSA

Gap was optional and was a loan nothing more or less.

We have to take your word on Strathroy price We hear lots about it but I've not seen it written anywhere. It's a real shame as it'd surely put pressure on the other milk buyers and give people considering moving an idea of what to expect

Mooooo

wiggy123 wrote: »

Are dairy farmers making a profit? at present--when all is added up! or is the calf / cull prices the bonus!

Depends on ones costs, at a base of 32 most should, however much it is depends on the individual farm. Milk is our main output for most, calves culls can help but unlikely to make or break.

Farmer Ed

Keepgrowing wrote: »

Gap was optional and was a loan nothing more or less.

We have to take your word on Strathroy price We hear lots about it but I've not seen it written anywhere. It's a real shame as it'd surely put pressure on the other milk buyers and give people considering moving an idea of what to expect

Going to money lenders could be described as optional too. But I guess its amazing what people might do if their stuck in a difficult situation.

In fairness it is rare to come across a Strathroy supplier who is unhappy about making the move. Surely that says something? Also a very poor reflection on other processors who are suppose to be abiding by the co op ethos but who feel the need tie suppliers down with long contracts. One thing about purchasers like Strathroy , if a supplier is not happy they are free to move to a different purchaser and yet Strathroy continues to expand its supplier base.
Surely that speaks volumes?

Buckmickley

Keepgrowing wrote: »

Gap was optional and was a loan nothing more or less.

We have to take your word on Strathroy price We hear lots about it but I've not seen it written anywhere. It's a real shame as it'd surely put pressure on the other milk buyers and give people considering moving an idea of what to expect

They're informally canvassing around my area probably because they've a few trucks on the road here already
I've seen statements and compared yes
I'm expecting some people to move whilst others stay and praise the effect of the competitions threat

I think it did put pressure on Glanbia and was principally why they introduced an msa
It's going to put pressure on them again in the next year without a doubt as the MSA's come up for renewal and no harm either
That's my point

mahoney_j

Buckmickley wrote: »

They're informally canvassing around my area probably because they've a few trucks on the road here already
I've seen statements and compared yes
I'm expecting some people to move whilst others stay and praise the effect of the competitions threat

I think it did put pressure on Glanbia and was principally why they introduced an msa
It's going to put pressure on them again in the next year without a doubt as the MSA's come up for renewal and no harm either
That's my point

They they frighten every other processor into bringing out an msa as well ????.ive one signed with mine and absolutely no issue with it ,guaranteed I have an outlet for my milk

Buckmickley

mahoney_j wrote: »

Did they frighten every other processor into bringing out an msa as well ????.

They frightened ICOS yes,without a doubt

Water John

Lets be clear. The problem is long term MSAs.
No problem with an agreement that gives some certainty. Not sure why any Coop member should need a long term one.
I have no problem supporting an annual MSA. Remember this gives some certainty to the Coop/processor that the farmer will supply for the year. The farmer is already assured on his side, simply by being a member.