Milk Price III

kevthegaff

Floki wrote:

Not arguing with you kev but did you not post one time that you bought marginal land next door to your own and you reclaimed and reseeded it? Just wondering if true would you make the same decision again (A) to buy and (B) to reclaim and reseed?

Ya I still would buy it as it solved a few problems for one of my own field! If choice again I would be slow to invest in marginal land and set up and move shop☺

alps

Farmer Ed wrote: »

Research from UCDs smart grass project has shown a reduction in up to 90% in carbon emissions by using mixed species swards vs monoculture grass in sheep production. Also reduced the worm counts and lambs finished quicker.

So just ask yourself one question? Why is this research not getting the attention it deserves? Surely there is real potential here??

Oh and by the way it promises to greatly reduce fertilizer inputs while maintaining production.

So now take a look at who stands to lose? Certainly not the farmer or the environment! So why the milk reluctance??

Do vested interests control or research in this country? Who really controls it?

I thought methane emissions were the bugbear of the ruminant animal....why did this trial measure carbon?

Farmer Ed

alps wrote: »

Farmer Ed wrote: »

Research from UCDs smart grass project has shown a reduction in up to 90% in carbon emissions by using mixed species swards vs monoculture grass in sheep production. Also reduced the worm counts and lambs finished quicker.

So just ask yourself one question? Why is this research not getting the attention it deserves? Surely there is real potential here??

Oh and by the way it promises to greatly reduce fertilizer inputs while maintaining production.

So now take a look at who stands to lose? Certainly not the farmer or the environment! So why the milk reluctance??

Do vested interests control or research in this country? Who really controls it?

I thought methane emissions were the bugbear of the ruminant animal....why did this trial measure carbon?

Sorry my apologizes it measured total emissions. The reduction from carbon I suspect came mainly from the reduced fertilizer inputs in the mixed species pastures. A quick Google search will find you references to the study. But its almost being kept a secret. Wonder why?

yosemitesam1

Farmer Ed wrote: »

Research from UCDs smart grass project has shown a reduction in up to 90% in carbon emissions by using mixed species swards vs monoculture grass in sheep production. Also reduced the worm counts and lambs finished quicker.

So just ask yourself one question? Why is this research not getting the attention it deserves? Surely there is real potential here??

Oh and by the way it promises to greatly reduce fertilizer inputs while maintaining production.

So now take a look at who stands to lose? Certainly not the farmer or the environment! So why the milk reluctance??

Do vested interests control or research in this country? Who really controls it?

I think that 90% reduction was on nitrous oxide emissions due to no artificial n being applied. That's 10% of the country's total emissions before taking into account the energy needed to make fert and extra carbon sequestration...

Edit. Nitrous oxide emission reductions are more important than methane in the long run as the temperature change potential is circa 400 times co2 compared to 4 for methane

Farmer Ed

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

Farmer Ed wrote: »

Research from UCDs smart grass project has shown a reduction in up to 90% in carbon emissions by using mixed species swards vs monoculture grass in sheep production. Also reduced the worm counts and lambs finished quicker.

So just ask yourself one question? Why is this research not getting the attention it deserves? Surely there is real potential here??

Oh and by the way it promises to greatly reduce fertilizer inputs while maintaining production.

So now take a look at who stands to lose? Certainly not the farmer or the environment! So why the milk reluctance??

Do vested interests control or research in this country? Who really controls it?

I think that 90% reduction was on nitrous oxide emissions due to no artificial n being applied. That's 10% of the country's total emissions before taking into account the energy needed to make fert and extra carbon sequestration...

Edit. Nitrous oxide emission reductions are more important than methane in the long run as the temperature change potential is circa 400 times co2 compared to 4 for methane

I'm pretty sure there was a reduction in methane also? and yes there was some N used but a lot less on the mixed species to get the same results. I must check again. Just remember the heading in the indo saying 90% reduction in emissions. Either way a positive story if it can put more money in farmers pockets and make us more sustainable at the same time.

Floki

kevthegaff wrote: »

Ya I still would buy it as it solved a few problems for one of my own field! If choice again I would be slow to invest in marginal land and set up and move shop☺

Personally I wouldn't have no qualms about reclaiming land. Lord knows I had to do it here.

This selling up and moving shop is not easy either especially where relations are involved. Often tell the folks here the rational thing to do is to sell up and move for a bigger place somewhere in the midlands.
Land is making from 15 to 25k an acre here and everyone around are fulltime farmers mad to farm. If the Blackstairs wasn't in commonage it would have been reclaimed with track diggers and stone crushers by now such is the want and hunger for land here.:pac:

Farmer Ed

yosemitesam1 wrote: »

I think that 90% reduction was on nitrous oxide emissions due to no artificial n being applied. That's 10% of the country's total emissions before taking into account the energy needed to make fert and extra carbon sequestration...

Edit. Nitrous oxide emission reductions are more important than methane in the long run as the temperature change potential is circa 400 times co2 compared to 4 for methane

Just found that article from the Indo again and yes you are 100% correct. The calculation is done on nitrous oxide alone. My Mistake I thought all emissions were measured. Would appear no measurement has been done for other gasses or polutants. But the striking thing is that this reduction was achieved while also improving productivity for the farmer.
Good for the farmer and not so good for the fertilizer industry? https://www.independent.ie/business/farming/sheep/new-grass-trials-show-a-potential-90-reduction-in-ghg-emissions-36054164.html

Buford T. Justice XIX

Mod note:Alright, folks, can we return to milk price again, please?

Thanks,

Buford T. Justice

Farmer Ed

Buford T. Justice V wrote: »

Mod note:Alright, folks, can we return to milk price again, please?

Thanks,

Buford T. Justice

Sorry it was just someone brought up the point of how milk production is likely to come under environmental pressure.

jaymla627

Glanbia are after dropping 1.5 pence of milk from Jan 1st in the U.K, following muller who pulled the same early in the week, wonder how long we'll escape here before they start dropping

Buford T. Justice XIX

Dairy prices halt fall at GDT auction

Butter down 11.1%, cheddar down bt 3.9 but overall prices up 0.4%



https://www.farmersjournal.ie/dairy-prices-halt-fall-at-gdt-auction-329358

Wildsurfer

CEO of Dairygold is forecasting a 30cent base Milk price for start of next year based on the price achievable for current basket of goods, and will struggle to keep out of the twenties. A big increase in production in Europe in final quarter of '17 has seen consumer sentiment turn and butter market is nosediving. He sees Brexit(our main outlet for cheddar) and sustainability(preventing a rise in cow numbers) the major concerns in the coming years.

Farmer Ed

Wildsurfer wrote: »

CEO of Dairygold is forecasting a 30cent base Milk price for start of next year based on the price achievable for current basket of goods, and will struggle to keep out of the twenties. A big increase in production in Europe in final quarter of '17 has seen consumer sentiment turn and butter market is nosediving. He sees Brexit(our main outlet for cheddar) and sustainability(preventing a rise in cow numbers) the major concerns in the coming years.

Did he forget to mention he that there is a state of the art pollution problem that will also need to be paid for over the coming years? Plus the cheese plant is pretty restricted in the type of cheese it can make. Fine if he has a market for big lumps of cheddar and milk powder. But no option to diversify and respond to market trends. All the eggs in baskets that right now are not looking too sturdy and worse still the baskets aren't even paid for!

Wildsurfer

Farmer Ed wrote: »

Did he forget to mention he that there is a state of the art pollution problem that will also need to be paid for over the coming years? Plus the cheese plant is pretty restricted in the type of cheese it can make. Fine if he has a market for big lumps of cheddar and milk powder. But no option to diversify and respond to market trends. All the eggs in baskets that right now are not looking too sturdy and worse still the baskets aren't even paid for!

Nope but the board were high 5ing each other again for all the facilities 'they've' built to be able to process our extra Milk without acknowledging that we the suppliers are the ones who are paying for it!

Water John

Ah watch out for the next build. the latest tech and products on the block. That's what the Board were researching on their recent USA tour.
The mugginsis left at home had to deal with Ophelia, and no generator.

Farmer Ed

Water John wrote: »

Ah watch out for the next build. the latest tech and products on the block. That's what the Board were researching on their recent USA tour.
The mugginsis left at home had to deal with Ophelia, and no generator.

Well the met office did say Ophelia was caused by a lot of hot air being generated somewhere in the general direction of the USA.

Hmmm?

Gawddawggonnit

Seems Bel (Laughing Cow) are after announcing a base (3.2pr & 3.8 bf) milk price of 35cpl for all of 2018 plus another 2cpl for gmo free milk...

Crappy enough price?

Mooooo

Gawddawggonnit wrote: »

Seems Bel (Laughing Cow) are after announcing a base (3.2pr & 3.8 bf) milk price of 35cpl for all of 2018 plus another 2cpl for gmo free milk...

Crappy enough price?

Does price improve with solids ?

Gawddawggonnit

Mooooo wrote: »

Does price improve with solids ?

Same as your pricing structure.

alps

Gawddawggonnit wrote: »

Seems Bel (Laughing Cow) are after announcing a base (3.2pr & 3.8 bf) milk price of 35cpl for all of 2018 plus another 2cpl for gmo free milk...

Crappy enough price?

Fellas would bite the hand off you here for that...

And I'd go GMO free fro 2c

Gawddawggonnit

alps wrote: »

Fellas would bite the hand off you here for that...

And I'd go GMO free fro 2c

I am gmo free and I don’t get a cent for it!

I reckon that my crowd will drop price for Jan. If I averaged over 30cpl for next year I’d consider it a good return.

K.G.

alps wrote: »

Fellas would bite the hand off you here for that...

And I'd go GMO free fro 2c

Where would you get ration and the mill be prepared to operate a non gm line.not doubting but not aufait with regs following it

Mooooo

K.G. wrote: »

Where would you get ration and the mill be prepared to operate a non gm line.not doubting but not aufait with regs following it

Was thinking the same, wont be as straight forward for us as soya maize grain etc all imported

Water John

Something in the back of my head says, check with Drinagh Coop. Think this conversation, came up before.

Gawddawggonnit

Mooooo wrote: »

Was thinking the same, wont be as straight forward for us as soya maize grain etc all imported

French maize and soya is non gmo.
If imported from the Americas its more than likely gmo.

Mooooo

Gawddawggonnit wrote: »

French maize and soya is non gmo.
If imported from the Americas its more than likely gmo.

Is much of it sent our way do you know? I assume for a mill to certify gmo free it would have to have permanently seperate handling facilities

jaymla627

Mooooo wrote: »

Is much of it sent our way do you know? I assume for a mill to certify gmo free it would have to have permanently seperate handling facilities

Different trailers too to prevent any contamination, given what bulk blowers cost gm free feed would cost a fortune unless a huge swath of lads signed up to go gm free

Farmer Ed

Well if the Germans and the British can supply their farmers with GMO free grain. It seams a bit strange that the Irish can't do it. Would suspect it wouldn't do any harm to Irish grain price either. Origin green won't do us much good if we end up the only country in Europe without a supply of GM free milk.

A neighbor of mine had a board bia inspection last week and passed. But one of the things to improve was the milk should be stored at between 2 and 4c. The milk tank was reading 1.9c. In all fairness not alone is that inspector uneducated in his job but he must also be lacking a fair bit of basic cop on!

Gawddawggonnit

Mooooo wrote: »

Is much of it sent our way do you know? I assume for a mill to certify gmo free it would have to have permanently seperate handling facilities

French maize does make its way to Irish ports but more often than not it’s the inferior quality grain maize from the Americas that’s preferred due to price.

French soya wouldn’t be imported either because of higher price.

Timmaay

Let's say a typical 90 cow herd is on 600kg/yr, and supplying 500kl of milk. The 2c/l non GMO bonus would be worth 10k, and divide this by the 54 tons of nuts needed for the yr, 185e. A standard nut is 250, add the 185e to this, 435e. That's your non GMO nut breakeven price, but it wouldn't be worth your while unless the nut was coming in at 350 tops.