Author
JOHNSON, L - WASHINGTON STATE UNIV. | |
HARRISON, J - WASHINGTON STATE UNIV. | |
SCHAGER, W - WASHINGTON STATE UNIV. | |
CHEN, S - WASHINGTON STATE UNIV. | |
STOCKLE, C - WASHINGTON STATE UNIV. | |
Rotz, Clarence - Al | |
HOISINGTON, F - DARI-TECH SERVICES |
Submitted to: International Symposium on Animal Production
Publication Type: Abstract Only Publication Acceptance Date: 4/15/2001 Publication Date: 10/3/2001 Citation: JOHNSON, L.M., HARRISON, J.H., SCHAGER, W., CHEN, S., STOCKLE, C., ROTZ, C.A., HOISINGTON, F. EVALUATION OF WHOLE FARM ECONOMICS AND NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT PRACTICES ON WASHINGTON STATE DAIRY FARMS USING A COMPUTER SIMULATION MODEL (DAFOSYM). INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON ANIMAL PRODUCTION. P. 7. 2001. Interpretive Summary: Technical Abstract: Environmental issues have become more of a concern in recent years and nutrient management regulation for dairies is being established within the United States. Current legislation is in place in Washington State that requires all dairy operations to have a nutrient management plan that is approved and certified by December 31, 2003. Many of the changes that will lbe required for dairies to be in compliance with nutrient management regulations will be an additional cost. Therefore, it would be beneficial to evaluate how a new management practice would affect the economics and nutrient balance of the whole farm prior to adoption of the practice. A dynamic computer simulation model (DAFOSYM - Dairy forage System Model) has been developed to take a comprehensive approach in evaluating whole farm economics and nutrient losses. Four dairies throughout Washington State were selected to evaluate how current management strategies affected the long-term profitability and nutrient balance. Inputs into DAFOSYM include information about crops produced, tillage, harvest, and feed storage information, animal production and manure handling information, and whole farm economic parameters. The small dairy was not profitable, however it had the lowest input of N and animal density. Farm 4 imported all feedstuffs, including forages, and had the least amount of acres. Therefore, it had the highest animal density and greatest amount of nutrients imported onto the farm. |