Skip to main content
ARS Home » Northeast Area » University Park, Pennsylvania » Pasture Systems & Watershed Management Research » Research » Publications at this Location » Publication #353790
Title: Dairy farm strategy distribution in Pennsylvania and implications to nutrient management

Author
item Holly, Michael
item Rotz, Clarence - Al
item Veith, Tameria - Tamie
item Kleinman, Peter

Submitted to: ASABE Annual International Meeting
Publication Type: Abstract Only
Publication Acceptance Date: 6/10/2018
Publication Date: 7/30/2018
Citation: Holly, M.A., Rotz, C.A., Veith, T.L., Kleinman, P.J. 2018. Dairy farm strategy distribution in Pennsylvania and implications to nutrient management. ASABE Annual International Meeting. P. 1.

Interpretive Summary: No interpretive summary is required for this Abstract. JLB.

Technical Abstract: The emergence of alternative dairy farm production strategies may have implications on the environmental impacts as well as profitability of dairy farms. This study characterized Pennsylvania dairy farm production of homegrown forages, herd management, purchased feeds, manure management and economics by farming strategy (confinement, semi-confinement, organic, Amish, and management intensive rotational grazing) and herd size using Agricultural Research Management Survey data. Confinement dairy farms had the greatest milk production per cow and the highest net farm return, 45% greater than the average Pennsylvania dairy farm. However, this strategy received the lowest net return per unit of milk, likely contributing to the reduction in the number of small confinement dairy farms from 2000 to 2010. Organic dairy producers received the greatest return per unit of milk (2 fold greater than the average PA dairy farm) along with a 56% increase in variable costs, due the elevated cost of organic concentrates, and 42% more labor than the average dairy farm. Amish dairy farms had 48% less cropland and pasture than average and as a result required 1.78 and 1.2 fold more purchased forage and concentrate feed mix. Farming strategy influenced cattle breed, homegrown feed type and quantity, and the amount of feed purchased. Selected housing and manure management were dependent on herd size with 41% of Pennsylvania dairy farms applying solid manure. Dairy farm size, and likely farming strategy, were influenced by geospatial location within the state. Farming strategy and size affect nutrient management through the quantity and type of feed purchased (N and P imports) and manure handling, which likely affects the pathway and magnitude of environmental losses. Baselines developed were simulated with the Integrated Farm System Model to estimate environmental losses from dairy farm sin Pennsylvania.