HALFUSERS STICK TO GUNS
HALFUSERS STICK TO GUNS
ALMOST half of producers using a forage additive use the same brand every year, the the UKASTA survey run in the last Forage Additive guide in farmers weekly (Nov 23, 2000) reveals.
Respondents were asked their opinions on forage additives, their benefits and what stock or forage performance enhancements they expect when using an additive.
Survey respondents farmed an average of 231ha (570 acres), spread throughout the UK. Of those, 52% keep dairy cattle, with an average herd of 122 cows, and 71% run beef cattle, with an average herd of 107. Almost half of the respondents kept sheep, with an average flock of 966, says UKASTA.
Almost all respondents – 95% – made grass silage, producing an average of 960t, while 29% grew an average of 658t of maize silage, and 24% grew whole-crop, producing an average of 426t.
Of the farmers surveyed, 38% always use an additive, 19% sometimes use an additive and 23% base their decision on weather conditions. Those producers who never use an additive accounted for 19% of respondents.
However, of those producers using an additive, 43% rarely change brands, while one-third of respondents changed brands every two to three years, and 14% changed brands every year.
The main reason surveyed farmers use an additive is to give more milk or meat from forage, followed closely by improving silage quality. Insuring against bad fermentation is also a popular reason for using an additive, as well as preventing aerobic spoilage and increasing animal intakes.
Choice of additive is based mainly on farm experience – which fits in with the high number of producers who stick with a brand year after year – and price. However, trial data – a selection tool recommended by many forage experts – also ranked highly as a method of choosing a good additive, alongside independent advice and the UKASTA Forage Additive Approval Scheme.
Despite price being a consideration, producers also recognised that forage additives could give a good return on investment. Two-thirds of respondents believed additives needed to return £2-3 for every £ spent.
But most recognised that additives do give performance benefits, with 48% of respondents expecting an additional 1 litre/cow/day when a forage additive was used, and 19% expecting an extra 2 litres/cow/day.
For beef cattle, 42% of respondents expected an additional 90g of liveweight gain/day from feeding silage treated with additive compared with untreated silage, while 28% believed cattle would gain an additional 45g/head/day.
UKASTAs Derek Ward, who runs the scheme, says these producer-expected levels of performance coincide with those set by UKASTAs Forage Additive Approval Scheme for membership.
"Overall, the benefits gained coincide with the categories in which approvals are awarded."
• Winner of the farmers weekly subscription awarded for survey respondents is Thomas Chalmers, Rigside, Lanark.
Of survey respondents, 42% expected an additional 90g/head/ day gain from treated silage.