Robot milking systems proving the way ahead for many herds

by NORMAN DUNN

Just how far robot milking has come in a single decade can be judged by the latest sales figures indicating that over 1500 robots are milking herds on farms worldwide. The Netherlands, where farmers are using more than 400 of these systems, remains in the lead with this technique.

While Lely maintains a market share of up to 80 per cent in some countries, claiming in November that its robot system milks "90,000 cows an average of three times per day in 20 different countries," every major milking equipment company has now admitted that this is the way ahead for many herds.

Some are even working on a second generation of milking robot. German-American manufacturer WestfaliaSurge says that it is turning to simpler, car-industry-type robots to reduce the cost of automatic milking systems. The result, to be launched within two years according to the company, and already christened LEONARDO II, will feature cows milked in a type of tandem parlour with one robot switching clusters between each two cows. The concept is still to be fully developed, but WestfaliaSurge claimed this winter that the system could give a line-up of paired stances for parallel throughput of 10 or even 20 cows at a time.

The simpler single milking point approach adopted by the Lely Astronaut remains the most successful system so far, though. Farmers I have interviewed say the robot has changed their lives, swapping the rigid regime of two or three set milkings daily to a much more leisurely routine. Modern electronics mean the former human milker is still in continuous touch with the action in the milking barn and is immediately warned by bleeper or mobile phone if anything goes wrong.

But the robot now means that other work can be carried out at the same time and that mealtimes on robot milking farms can become real family occasions, as in urban households at weekends.

Only someone who has actually witnessed automatic milking can appreciate just how quickly and quietly cows take to the system. Even with young, sometimes very nervous first-calvers, someone has to be in attendance to help shove the animal into milking position just once or twice in most cases. The rest is routine, with heifers often ending up much quieter animals than in many manually milked herds.

And performance? Well, let's take a look at the van Leeuwen herd which notched up the first 100,000 kg robotic-milked cow. This is a top breeding unit, but one where the cows are still grazed round the clock from April to October, coming in only for milking. Hans van Leeuwen admits that he and his family couldn't imagine working without the robot now -- especially as their top cows are giving between 50 and 60 kg daily, with milking for the high producers taking place as often as five times per day.

Even with older cows, such as the nine-lactation Harmke mentioned earlier, the much-feared cluster attachment problems with old, extended udders have proved largely non-existent. And laser identification of individual teat position has proved very reliable.

Kai Grannemann in north Germany is another pioneer in this respect, starting in 1997 with two robot systems for his 170-cow Holstein herd. Even after six months automatic milking, Kai was telling me that he and his wife Nadine spent an average of just 15 minutes per day each in the actual milking area adjusting or helping with a cow. The only drawback Kai could think of was that udders had to be kept well clipped because a hairy bag confused the teat-cup attachment laser system!

Kai once said to me that all he required to make the situation ideal was fully automatic mixing and rationing of TMR with individual feeding. Interestingly enough two companies, one of them from the Lely Astronaut concern, have chosen this year to announce developments in this direction. BF

Norman Dunn writes about European agriculture from Germany.

Farm subsidies start to slide in Europe

by NORMAN DUNN

This year could go down in history as the point when direct EU support payments to farmers began to crumble and 2003 will probably also see more government spending than ever before on nature protection, the environment and rural life in Europe.

Most member countries are now working on a program, first suggested by EU Agricultural Commissioners back in 2000, which aims to cut back on output-related farm subsidies and divert the cash into simply improving the countryside. That means everything from roads to wildlife reserves.

Germany started the ball rolling this Christmas by introducing a bill to reduce farm support by two per cent as of 2003. This reduction won't be a huge loss to most farmers. It could mean, for instance, that a wheat grower in northeastern Germany will get support of $204 per acre instead of $208.

And because the small family farm is still sacred -- at least in Germany -- those with less than 70 acres or so won't face any deductions in their annual acreage support. In fact, when you consider that the average farm size in the west of the country, which has 94 per cent of all farms, is only about 120 acres, then it's clear that only the big boys in the east of the country will even notice the proposed reduction.

But even the growers in this sector seem very relaxed about the scheme. "O.K., this is maybe the thin edge of the wedge," one arable farmer in eastern Germany told me. "But look at it this way: the program will mean lots of PR points at comparatively low cost for the farming industry.

"First of all, the new law will finally show the World Trade Organization that the EU is at least starting to cut back on direct support for farm production. Secondly, the non-farming public will be able to see that some farm support money -- paid for by their taxes -- is now going to help protect nature and the rural environment instead of simply improving individual farmer incomes."

Another reason European farmers are comparatively laid back about the latest support reduction ideas is that the saved cash is staying in the countryside. Of course, it will no longer be available to help crop and livestock production. But who's to say what new farm-based enterprises might be created to net a fair proportion of that free-swimming cash?

And we're not talking about peanuts here. Farm Minister Renate Kunäst reckons the two per cent farm support cut this year in Germany will bring in the equivalent of $81 million. Moreover, there's much more to come for the countryside because Brussels won't hand over the saved cash unless national governments match the money, Euro for Euro. This means that new support for improved environment protection and rural infrastructure will be over $160 million!

Too good to be true? Well, to be completely honest, there are already signs that the German government, for instance, is going to have very great difficulty in raising its half of the loot. Although you wouldn't think so by looking at BMW or Benz export figures, times are very hard on this side of the North Sea and it could well be that much of the potential savings will have to be forfeited.

But in the long term, all member countries have committed themselves to similar schemes which will lead to ever-greater reductions in direct farm support in Europe. For instance, EU Agricultural Commissioner Franz Fischler already plans a further deduction of from one to three per cent in farm support payments annually, starting in 2007. Again, most savings made are to go straight back into making the countryside a better place to visit, live or work in. Moreover, smaller family farms and even medium-sized holdings of up to 300 acres are probably going to be protected here.

There's a feeling that even these changes won't make the sort of waves they might have even a decade ago. The reason is a subtle change in thinking over here. Much more attention is being paid to getting returns from the market. A couple of examples of this philosophy from the last few months:

In France, 13,000 farmers blockaded 74 supermarket warehouses for 36 hours, demanding more realistic retail prices for their products. The growers stressed that this time around they weren't looking for more state support. They simply wanted to see a better wholesale/retail price structure established so that they could get more money straight from the market.

British farmers have also just negotiated the same sort of deal with supermarkets for dairy products, including cheese, and in Germany large-scale grain growers are calling on the EU to pay more attention to promoting exports instead of relying on expensive storage schemes and overseas dumping in its price politics.

Certainly, there's a very long way to go yet, but these are sure signs that the European farm market is getting a little more global every day. BF

Norman Dunn writes about European agriculture from Germany.

The European market for homegrown fuels may be warming up

by NORMAN DUNN

In Germany alone, biodiesel produced from oilseed rape has already captured 3.6 per cent of the market. But more than half the autos in the country run on gasoline and a tank mix with tax-free ethanol from wheat or beet for this fuel is attracting great interest.

A quick check in mid-February revealed four large organizations planning bioethenol fuel production plants.

Current estimates are that a 15 per cent tank mix for gasoline-powered autos in Germany would require the equivalent of six million tonnes of grain each year. However, experts are already warning farmers that this prospective market will never be a bonanza for wheat and beet growers. Only the lowest crop prices on the current scale could make ethanol competitive with imported petroleum -- at least at present-day gas station prices. The first German company to announce probable price scales for grain growers says it envisages paying the EU intervention rate -- the price applied when buying-up unsold grain as a "safety net" for the market -- plus a three per cent bonus as part of a complicated quota system for energy crop suppliers. Currently, intervention rates are nearly always below breakeven for crop growers.

But maybe the market will be better than this. Across the border in France, farmers have been growing wheat and beet for ethanol for some years now and demand has led to a slight upturn in expected prices there. A French grower I know in Picardy says he got the equivalent of $114 Cdn per tonne for his wheat from the local ethanol refinery this winter and $34 for his ethanol sugar beet. At this, the energy wheat was actually earning a little more than his feed wheat harvest and the energy beet price was up a couple of dollars on his lowest offer from the sugar factory.

But, in France, homegrown energy is produced under slightly different rules. The system there, which produced 118,000 tonnes of wheat and beet ethanol last year, was established over the last 10 years with considerable government support. Tank mixes with biofuel and conventional diesel or petrol are mandatory in some cases -- for rural bus fleets, for example -- and some tax is still levied on the biofuels.

Germany might have cut all taxes for biofuels this January (petroleum and environment taxes add 55 per cent or 91 cents to the price of a litre of super grade currently), but the government is offering no help in the establishment of refineries or for marketing support. And help is urgently needed here. Imported bioethenol from U.S. corn sells at just 60 cents a litre even with the current EU tariff of 15 cents a litre Brazilian ethanol from cane sugar is even lower priced. I have been told that European-produced bioethanol would have to sell at around 75 cents per litre to produce a return for everyone concerned.

Still, there seems to be a lot of faith in the future for homegrown European automotive fuel. Among the first announcing plans for new plants within the next three years is Europe's largest sugar beet processor, Südzucker, with a proposed investment of $130 million Cdn for two new plants.

Meanwhile, Europe's largest farm seed merchant, the Sauter Group, says it will invest the equivalent of $35 million in a grain-ethanol facility. Sauter still views supplying farmers as its main enterprise, but is becoming increasingly interested in processing the resultant crops for energy. Through subsidiary MBE, it is already the largest single producer of RME bio-diesel in Europe with a yearly output of 150,000 tonnes.

Another grain and seed supplier turning to energy production is Getreide AG, a company from Schleswig-Holstein which has just announced that it will open the first of four grain ethanol production plants in time for the 2006 harvest. Each plant is to have an annual capacity for 260,000 tonnes of wheat, barley, triticale and rye and produce around 100,000 tonnes of ethanol for fuel.

It must be said that European farmers tend to be fairly sceptical about such plans. After all, bioethanol production for fuel has been tried in several countries and been only partly successful through lack of long-term political support. This starts strong as a rule but usually fades away when fuel crises end and oil from the Middle East becomes cheaper.

Perhaps, this time around, the oil supply situation and more concerns about the global climate will ensure a little extra commitment for homegrown fuel and thus a better market for farmers growing energy crops. BF

Norman Dunn writes about European agriculture from Germany.

The long, winding road to obtain planning permission

by NORMAN DUNN

But things are getting out of hand in some countries. In Germany, for instance, there are plenty of cases of planning permission for a single hog barn taking two years in processing. While big units with more than 500 sows or 250 head of cattle have quite rightly to pass planning enquiries equal to those of industrial sites, the lawmakers are increasingly applying similar restrictions to quite small livestock businesses of as few as 50 milking cows and calves or 500 feeding hogs.

New planning laws in the above cases apply where there are less than 1.2 acres for every mature cow or equivalent. Because there are many specialist committees to convince before plans are given the green light, time can drag on and costs -- for legal representation, extra architect input, ground water tests and other environmental assessments -- can spiral. Recent press reports have mentioned sums as high as $17,000 Cdn for a single application.

Here's an example from Westphalia in Germany of how long and winding the road can be. Two years ago, a farmer applied for planning permission for a 1,050-hog, slatted-floor building on a green field site. The first plan was refused pretty quickly because the emissions and environment protection inspectors feared that exhaust air -- and therefore smell -- from the building could, when the winds were right, travel the 300 metres to the nearest domestic housing.

The building design was kept the same and shifted a bit further down the road. A few months later, permission was again refused. This time, a nature protection group pointed out that the proposed site was only 50 metres from nesting places of a protected bird species, the lapwing or crested plover. So once again the search was on for an alternative site.

But this farmer couldn't afford to move too far away from the second location, so he enquired what distance the building should be from a nesting site before it could win approval. None of the authorities could give a precise answer!

A kind of precedent was discovered by the local Chamber of Agriculture acting on behalf of the farmer. There were already laws governing the positioning of electricity-generating windmills at least 150 metres away from nesting sites. It was suggested that these be used as a guideline in this case.

The farmer and his lawyers got this reduced to 100 metres. After all, at just 10 metres to the roof ridge, the proposed barn was only one-third the height of a windmill and didn't even have moving rotors!

This was accepted but could only be implemented if the farmer swapped one of his fields with a neighbour's so that he could build his barn far enough away from both housing and lapwings.

Another catch? You bet! The ornithologists still claimed the hog barn would reduce the feeding room of the lapwings and so the farmer had to free part of an adjacent field as a future protected area for nesting birds, an area equal to the ground area of his new hog barn plus 2,000 square metres.

Joachim Spitz, an adviser who helps farmers in both northern Germany and Danish Jutland, points out that the attitude tends to be different in Denmark. "Perhaps because Denmark is an export-oriented country with most of its livestock products shipped abroad and earning valuable foreign exchange, planning permission requests from farmers are usually looked upon with more sympathy there in my experience," he commented.

"Above all, every local authority committee member seems to realize that time is important for farmers planning expansion or improved facilities."

Spitz admits that there are just as many rules and regulations in Denmark for planning permission in agricultural businesses. "The difference is that municipalities and environment protection organizations are in general willing to co-operate more, to meet at weekends, late at night or whenever, so long as a project is kept moving along."

And there are plenty of projects. More room is desperately needed on hog farms because of a massive swing towards loose housing of dry sows. Even with the same number of sows, efficient Danish producers also need more room nowadays because hogs produced per sow have soared from an average 22.3 in 1999 to just short of 28 in the best 25 per cent of herds now.

Spitz concludes with another good reason why Danish farmers are finding it easier to get these permissions. "On the whole, they are keeping one step ahead of official demands. For instance, there's been almost 100 per cent co-operation in voluntarily reducing feed protein levels and so dropping the pollution potential of manure and exhaust air."

As Spitz emphasises, getting in ahead with good anti-pollution ideas is helping to save an awful lot of stress when planning to build on Danish farms. BF

Norman Dunn writes about European agriculture from Germany.