The Combine Fire Problem: Myth or Reality?
Project Examines Health Behaviors and Health Promotion Methods for Hmong Farming Families
Farm Workplace Injuries and the Bottom Line
Tasty Treats from Hmong Gardens
AgrAbility Innovation Awards Presented at 2003 Inventor’s Show
One More Reason to Clean Corn Before Storage
Nutrient Leaching from a Biofilter Bed After Artificial Precipitation
Cost of Cow Sprinkler System Check Valves Easily Recovered
What Do We Know About Stray Voltage?
Low Cost Housing for Lactating Cows
David W. Kammel, Wisconsin
Extension Engineer
Introduction
Low cost housing and feeding facilities can mean different things depending
on your perspective. As an agricultural engineer, my perspective is
typically system-based. The total system design is dependent on the
management plan. The system cost includes the capital cost of the facility,
supply costs, loss of animal performance, and the labor and management
cost of operating the system. Most owners want to invest in a system
that will be profitable and fit within their needs and farming philosophy.
It seems there are always trade-offs involved. In general the lowest
capital cost systems will have the highest annual costs. Capital is
often spent to decrease annual cost. In an economic analysis, it is
hoped that the partial budget shows that increased capital costs can
provide annual savings to pay for the improvements over the life of
the system. There may also be decreased labor costs and enhanced manageability.
I have tried to describe two “low cost” concepts that have
been employed to feed and house dairy cows. Although there is not time
in this short discussion to provide a total system cost analysis, the
information here could be used to determine the system costs for a particular
situation including the capital and annual costs.
Bedded pack housing seems to be one option some suggest may be a low
cost system. Loose housing allows the cow free access between the resting,
feeding, and water spaces. There is some advantage to separating these
spaces one from another to control manure deposition in specific areas,
which maintains cleaner cows. Where there is feed and water, there is
more manure accumulation compared to the resting space. Where there
is water, there is also the possibility of mud. So, it is beneficial
to have improved surfaces around the feed and water areas. The bedded
area does not require concrete since it provides a soft comfortable
resting surface, although concrete does make cleaning out the accumulated
manure pack a little easier. Consider the site carefully since ground
water could be contaminated as seepage moves down into the soil under
the pack
The bedded resting space should provide between 50-100 square feet
per cow depending on cow weight. A lying Holstein cow occupies approximately
25 square feet and needs almost twice that amount of space for lying
down or rising. 50 square feet per cow is minimal and will require larger
amounts of bedding to keep cows clean. It also will increase the total
height of the accumulated manure and bedding pack over time, which can
possibly restrict access to the pack as manure and bedding accumulates.
Allowing 100 square feet per cow may be excessive, requiring more building
space which increases capital cost. A design of 75 square feet per Holstein
cow and 60 square feet per Jersey cow seem to be common values for well-managed
systems. This provides enough space for the cow to rest and move among
other cows without causing injuries to lying cows. The bedded area should
be rectangular with a maximum depth or width of 36 feet from the feeding
alley to the back of the bedded area. Cows tend to lie around the perimeter
of the bedded space. The bedded surface can also be sloped down hill
from the rear to the front of the space, which tends to make the cows
all lie in the same orientation. Additional space for feeding and water
access must also be included in the overall system design. To manage
cow cleanliness, either the group size can be adjusted, or the quantity
of bedding used per day can be adjusted.
As the bedded area per cow decreases, the amount of bedding required
to keep the cows clean increases. Depending on cow weight, 15-25 pounds
of bedding per day per cow should be added to the pen every day to maintain
clean cows. Wood shavings, clean straw, corn fodder, and waste grass
hay are common bedding choices. Waste hay should be chopped before adding
to ease cleaning the pack. Depending on the cost of bedding, this can
cost $.25-$.50 per cow per day. The bedded pack is commonly used during
the winter housing period from December 1 through the end of March,
or approximately four months. In this situation, the bedded pack acts
as a manure storage system. It is common to clean out the pack at the
end of the winter housing season or at 3-4 month intervals if used continuously.
There are several other management decisions that can help maintain
clean cows. For small herds (30-40 cows), policing the bedded area daily
by removing manure patties can help maintain cleaner cows while minimizing
the amount of bedding required to keep the cows clean. Some data suggests
the amount of bedding needed to keep cows clean can be reduced by 50%
by policing the area. Daily removal of accumulated manure from adjacent
alleys near feed and water areas can also help maintain cleaner cows.
It is helpful to have an area designed to collect the scraped manure
temporarily.
Figure 1 shows two bedded pack barn arrangements in a building width
that can eventually be remodeled into a freestall barn with the addition
of concrete alleys, freestall platforms, and waterers. In either the
bedded pack or freestall pen layouts, a concrete alley is placed between
the feed platform and the resting area. The waterer for the bedded pack
arrangement is placed adjacent to the bedded resting space and should
have a barrier to prevent cows from accessing the waterer from the bedded
pack area. This reduces wet bedding and excessive manure accumulation
in the bedding around the watering site. Cows should only access the
waterer from the alley adjacent to the feed bunk.
In either layout, the alleys are usually scraped daily. The bedded space
can have a compacted stone base to save costs and is sized for the correct
number of cows which also matches the feeding space needed for the group.
The options for roofing over the area include roofing over the bedded
pack (33 feet wide), roofing over the bedded area and the cow alleys
(47 feet wide), or roofing over the entire housing and feeding area
(61 feet wide). Although the area per cow is increased with these options,
the ability to manage feeding is improved. Roofing the cow resting and
walking areas can also eliminate the need to handle the contaminated
manure from rainfall runoff events from unroofed cow confinement areas.
As can be seen in Figure 1, the freestall arrangement uses less space
per cow compared to a bedded pack system. That does not necessarily
mean the cost is lower for a freestall barn, but the cost comparison
between bedded pack and freestall arrangements for the same building
space should be looked at carefully to make a fair comparison for the
total system cost. In these cases there is approximately a 40 square
feet per cow lower space need for the freestall barn compared to the
bedded pack barn.
So which is the lower cost? One could argue that the bedded pack is lower cost because it would cost additional capital to add concrete alleys, stall dividers and mattresses to make it into a freestall barn. One could argue that the freestall barn is lower cost because of the additional capital cost of 40 square feet of building for the bedded pack arrangement. So it could come down to a comparison of the cost of the extra building (40 square feet/cow) compared to the cost/cow to convert the space to freestalls. The partial budget analysis should also include the annual cost for each system. In this case, the additional bedding cost for the bedded pack barn compared to a lower bedding cost for the freestall arrangement. I like to think that both options are possible and there is an opportunity to start with the bedded pack and that at some time in the future there is the opportunity to convert the building into a freestall barn, leaving the options open.
