You are here

Projects

Weaners-store vs finishing

Robert was contemplating selling his weaners as store weaners, as a feature of his annual system. Robert, along with his Advance Party group investigated the cost of creating more feed vs the return from finishing the weaners.

The Advance Party identified that feed quality and quantity was the key opportunity for Robert. Either grow more feed or reduce feed demand. More feed was especially required at key times of the year when weaners needed finishing and hinds were lactating.
 

Tactics/Actions: 

The Group offered these suggestions to help achieve this:

1.Improving brassica yield
Improving brassica yield might be a good way to improve fawning covers. Around 6% of the farm is grown in brassica, half of the crop is able to be second cropped.
Only 3% of the farm is re grassed - although much of the flats have been done in the last 10 years.
Yields 8-10 tonne DM/ha.

a.        Fodder Beet was suggested, however:
- it is expensive to grow and might not result in good yields - high risk
- that will mean only 2% is re grassed per annum
- Should Robert direct drill? - this would conserve the top soil in the top of the profile
- Experience of group indicates better yield on clay soils
- Lower risk of insect damage when resown in grass

 

2.      Nitrogen on the hill country

But does it stack up, compared to selling weaners?

 

Store vs finshing weaners comparison

$3.1/kilo * 50kg =

$155

$155 per animal vs $326 finishing =

$195 margin

Spiker $18 per head (half boys only) =

$18 margin

Total

$213 margin

Expenses

 

Animal Health

$17 animal

Net margin

$172

 

Time frame

1 April – 15 February

= 320 days

Amount of feed eaten

2.6 kg/head/day

= 832 kg DM/animal total

 $172 margin / 832 = Margin per kg DM $0.21c/kg DM

Expenses

Urea cost

$0.17 c/kg DM

Applied (10:1 response)

 

The group were in agreement that Robert needed to grow more feed to achieve a better weaner result, and generally the profit from finishing weaners is good - so hanging on to them and feeding them better is advised. The Advance Party also thought growing them on one mum was a better opportunity than post weaning.

 

Outcome/Results:

Preliminary results

  •  Roberts use of Ammo 31 at 100kg/ha grew an extra 480kgDM/ha of feed over 40 hectares = total 19200 kgDM.
  •  The Nitrogen response was 15:1 (ignoring Sulphur contribution)

Costs are still being established, but either way results will be better than previously expected.

Positives

  •  Robert is surprised and impressed at the response of using this product on hill country
  • The response has reduced the feed pressure on the flat country
  • Lactating hinds have more feed in front of them
  • Early results appear to show a better margin than expected
  • Easier way of growing feed compared to the alternative crop establishment options
  • The response will mean hinds stay in the better fawning country for longer
  • The sulphur appears to have given the clover a good boost.

Possible issues

The poor season may alter some of our predicted outcomes  

 

Ammo 31 trial on robert leggs southland

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The response is quite evident in the square trial plot shown above. A tarpolan was covering the area with low grass growth during the fertiliser application.

 

Grass before fertiliser application

Pasture before fertiliser application

treated sward with Ammo 31 clover good nb 2

This picture shows the difference between the plots. The treatment plot developed clover where it was typically scarce, adding feed and long term quantity.