Friday, August 5, 2022
CapitalPress.com 5
Subscribe to our weekly dairy or livestock email
newsletter at CapitalPress.com/newsletters
Dairy
Wildfire smoke takes
toll on milk production
Capital Press
Cows exposed to heavy
wildfire smoke produce sig-
nificantly less milk, with
reductions persisting for a
week after the air has cleared,
according to University of
Idaho researchers.
Amy Skibiel, Pedram
Rezamand and Ashly Ander-
son, all with university’s
Department of Animal, Vet-
erinary and Food Sciences,
published their findings in
the Journal of Dairy Sci-
ence’s June 15 edition. Data
for their paper was collected
during the summer of 2020
— an especially bad wildfire
year throughout Idaho.
“In the summer of 2020,
we had seven consecutive
days of wildfire smoke where
the levels were much higher
than (Environmental Protec-
tion Agency) standards for
human health. During that
time we found cows pro-
duced less milk,” Skibiel said
in a press release.
Specifically, milk produc-
tion dropped by 2.5 pounds
per cow for every 100 micro-
grams per cubic meter
increase in airborne particu-
lates due to smoke.
On the smokiest days,
particulate levels reached
about 300 micrograms per
cubic meter, resulting in a
daily loss of 7.5 pounds of
milk production per cow.
Dairy cows experienced
even steeper reductions in
milk production throughout
the week after the smoke had
dissipated.
“I think it was a cumu-
lative effect of exposure
across multiple days and no
reprieve,” Skibiel said.
Heat stress was not a fac-
tor in the milk reduction, as
2020 was a cool summer
Carol Ryan Dumas/Capital Press File
European milk production is down because of climate policies, public perception
and other issues, a dairy industry leader says.
Capital Press File
Cows exposed to heavy wildfire smoke produced less
milk, researchers have found.
and the temperature-humid-
ity index during the smoky
period wasn’t high enough to
affect production.
The researchers analyzed
immune cells in cows’ blood
and concluded the smoke
caused immune cells associ-
ated with infection and aller-
gic reactions to increase.
They also found higher car-
bon dioxide levels in the
blood of smoke-exposed
cows.
“I have a hypothesis that it
could potentially be reduced
lung function and impairing
gas exchange. Carbon diox-
ide is also a component of
smoke, so they’re breathing
in more of it,” Skibiel said.
The researchers also found
cows’ respiration rates rose
amid smoke exposure, fur-
ther increasing the volume of
carbon dioxide they breathed
in. In the milk of smoke-ex-
posed cows, they confirmed
a very slight reduction in pro-
tein content.
They studied a group of
dairy cows at the universi-
ty’s Dairy Center in Mos-
cow that calved in July,
collecting weekly blood
and milk samples, tracking
weight and recording body
condition scores.
During the summer
of 2021, which was also a
bad wildfire season, they
focused their smoke-inha-
lation research on calves.
White blood cell numbers of
heavy smoke-exposed calves
went down across the board
— possibly due to immune
cells migrating to the lungs, or
because calves don’t have fully
developed immune systems.
This summer, the research-
ers plan to evaluate the phys-
iological reasons behind
the immune cell population
changes in smoke-exposed
cows and calves. They’ll also
closely evaluate what’s occur-
ring in the animals’ lungs.
They plan to create particulate
matter in a controlled way this
season to monitor how rising
levels impact animal health.
Researchers from Ore-
gon State University, Wash-
ington State University and
University of California-Da-
vis recently joined the project,
conducting their own trials.
The researchers advise
dairy producers to limit the
exertion of their cows when
the air is smoky, keeping doors
on barns closed and using air
filters.
Washington dairy rep rips
Ecology’s embrace of buffers
By DON JENKINS
Capital Press
In proposed rules that will
apply to some dairies, the
Washington Department of
Ecology has embraced large
riparian buffers, drawing crit-
icism from the Washington
State Dairy Federation.
Buffers, or “riparian man-
agement zones,” would be
one of four ways for dairies
with CAFO permits to protect
water.
Federation policy direc-
tor Jay Gordon said no dairy
will choose land-consuming
buffers. He criticized Ecology
for endorsing an option that
he said has more political than
scientific support.
“It’s just this drumbeat to
keep pushing these big, dumb
buffers,” he said.
Only dairies or other con-
fined animal feeding opera-
tions where manure washed
or seeped into water must have
a CAFO permit. Currently, 24
operations have CAFO per-
mits. Permit terms add to reg-
ulations enforced by other
agencies, such as the state
Department of Agriculture.
Ecology is updating the terms.
To prevent polluted run-
off, CAFO permit holders can
build berms, maintain 35-foot-
wide strips of vegetation or not
Washington Department of Ecology
Cows feed at a Washington state dairy. The Department
of Ecology has proposed new terms for its CAFO permit.
apply manure within 100 feet
of water. Large buffers would
be a new fourth option.
“These riparian buffers are
a holistic approach to land
and water management,”
Ecology permit writer Chel-
sea Morris said Tuesday at a
public hearing.
“Not only are they meant to
treat and trap manure coming
from storm runoff, they also
provide wildlife habitat and
shade streams,” she said.
Gordon said CAFO per-
mits should stick to protect-
ing water, rather than seeking
to restore ecosystems. Buffers
would take up too much land,
particularly in Western Wash-
ington, for dairies to grow
enough feed for their cows, he
said.
“How do you dairy farm if
you do that?” he said. “It’s a
suicide pill for a dairy farm.”
Riparian buffers are polit-
ically charged. The Environ-
mental Protection Agency
has previously financed lob-
bying by tribes and envi-
ronmental groups to impose
100-foot buffers in Washing-
ton. EPA pulled its support in
2016 when its role in funding
“What’s Upstream” billboards
was publicized.
Gov. Jay Inslee this year
proposed mandatory buffers.
The bill would have autho-
rized buffers equal to the tall-
est trees in an area, making
buffers as wide as 250 feet a
possibility. The bill stalled, and
Inslee blamed indifference to
salmon.
GDT auction drops 5% again
By LEE MIELKE
For the Capital Press
on’t look to the
Global Dairy Trade
for any rallies just
yet. Tuesday’s weighted
average did a repeat of the
last event, dropping 5.0%,
the fourth decline in a row.
Again there were declines
in every product, led by
buttermilk powder, down
9.2%. Whole milk pow-
der was down 6.1%, after
dropping 5.1% on July 19,
and skim milk powder was
down 5.3%, after leading the
declines last time with an
8.6% drop.
D
DAIRY
MARKETS
Lee
Mielke
Butter was down 6.1%
and anhydrous milkfat was
off 1.4%. Cheddar was off
0.7%, after dropping 2.0%
on July 19.
StoneX Dairy Group says
the GDT 80% butterfat but-
ter price equates to $2.2987
per pound U.S., down 14.8
cents from the last event,
and compares to CME but-
ter, which closed Tuesday at
a pricy $3.0325.
GDT Cheddar, at
$2.1763, was down 1.2
cents, and compares to CME
block Cheddar at $1.8875.
GDT skim milk pow-
der averaged $1.5983 per
pound, down 8.4 cents.
Whole milk powder aver-
aged $1.6077, down a dime.
CME Grade A nonfat dry
milk closed Tuesday at
$1.6150 per pound.
Next Tuesday will be the
first GDT Pulse, an effort
with Fonterra to “enhance
liquidity in GDT,” accord-
ing to its website. It will
run the opposite weeks of
the normal event for 6 to 12
months and only offer Fon-
terra whole milk powder.
Regulation, public perception
crimping EU milk output
By CAROL RYAN DUMAS
Capital Press
Like most of the dairy
export regions in the world,
milk production in Europe
has been hindered by high
input costs. But other fac-
tors signal a more perma-
nent reduction in milk out-
put in the European Union.
Milk production in the
EU was down 1.6% year
over year in May, accord-
ing to the European Com-
mission. It was also down
1.4% year over year in
June, according to the
International Dairy Foods
Association.
“Input costs were already
an issue last year, but Rus-
sia’s war in Ukraine has
made the situation much
worse,” said Jukka Liki-
talo, secretary general of
Eucolait, which represents
European dairy traders and
processors.
Supply chain and labor
challenges and extreme
weather haven’t helped.
But other factors decreasing
milk production are more
structural, he said during the
latest “Dairy Download”
podcast.
“We are seeing farmers
leaving the industry and, in
many cases, the next gener-
ation is not really willing to
take over,” he said.
A lot of dairy farms are
also switching to crop pro-
duction, which tends to be a
bit more lucrative. Being a
dairy farmer is a tough 24/7
job and doesn’t even pay
that well, he said.
“And the rather negative
perception of dairy farming
is another growing problem
as the climate discussion
has become quite over-
heated or even toxic” in
some European countries,
he said.
A big game-changer has
been the new policy direc-
tion in Europe under the
“so-called Green Deal.” A
key part of that strategy is
to cut greenhouse gas emis-
sions by at least 55% by
2030 and become a car-
bon-neutral continent by
2050, he said.
“Some studies on the
farm-to-fork strategy (the
food policy component of
the Green Deal) estimate
that we could see declines
of EU milk output of around
10% in the next eight years
or so,” he said.
The effects of the strat-
egy are more prevalent in
western European coun-
tries, which are under strong
pressure from the public to
reduce emissions. It seems
to be particularly strong in
Germany and France, the
two main milk-producing
countries, he said.
“In addition to that,
you already see legislative
action happening in coun-
tries or areas with intensive
agricultural systems and
which also have high levels
of nitrate and phosphate in
the soil,” he said.
There’s definitely some
or even a lot of pushback
from the farming commu-
nity in particular. But he
thinks businesses have also
realized this is sort of the
direction things are going
and have started to adapt, he
said.
Inevitably, the lower milk
output is going to be reduc-
ing availability for exports,
and that’s already shown up
in trade performance so far
this year, he said.
“My guess would be that
European exporters will be
losing market share perma-
nently,” he said.
He also thinks there’ll be
a growing focus on cheese
and value-added ingredi-
ents, to the detriment of
commodity powders.
The question is to what
extent export markets will
be considered as secondary
in comparison to domestic
demand needs, he said.
“The slowdown in milk
output is a big concern for
sure,” he said.