Monday, September 28, 2009 8:12 PM by: Anonymous
I am a small, 60 cow dairy. But these farms you are calling factory farms, are almost always owned by families - maybe instead of supporting 1 family - they support 2 or 3, and offer jobs to others, but they are still family owned farms. It is just consiladition that has occured in ag for decades. The economy has pushed us this direction - currently, I look at my operation and say if I was milking 20-30 more cows I'd probably be breaking even... that's how it is on many dairies - milk more cows to divide the debt over more cows and more income. The dairy industry is hard to make money in - and the economy has forced us to get bigger dairies in order to make ends meet. 15 years ago, my family milked 30 cows, now we are at 60, and by the end of next year we will probably hit close to 70. We are still a small farm, but no matter how you look it at, we will have nearly tripled our size in 15 years. Most dairies have grown much faster, I'd admit that. But 98% of dairies are family owned farms. Stop spreading around the false evil that is already hurting our industry - stop helping PETA.

Monday, September 28, 2009 3:42 PM by: Hannah B.
Iam not a dairy farmer but my dad was 15 years ago.I do agree on one thing and that is greed is the cause of the milk collapse.Greed from the food Corp. and milk coops but also the farmer. Why cant farmers be happy with paying the bills and make a good living? When milk goes up The larg dairys-Factory farms start getting more cows expanding and so on, then down goes milk again. Some say its America capitalism is good, but when I see and most of the hard working Americans see small buisness and small farmers dairy,hogs and so on forced out Iam not so sure that is what America needs. You see it in the small towns, alot look like gohst towns because the big walmarts make it imposible to compete.The sad thing is I dont see things changing. My dad told me before he past that this would happen, he also said if America falls it will be from within, greed and a Godless people will take us down.

Monday, September 28, 2009 1:01 PM by: Anonymous
Most dairymen recognize that 98% of all dairy farms are family operations and only 2% or even less than that are factory farms.

Sunday, September 27, 2009 10:12 AM by: Anonymous
whack it.

Friday, September 25, 2009 8:42 PM by: Anonymous
Some times I think the dairy industry is all about ME,MYSELF AND I !

Friday, September 25, 2009 1:56 PM by: Anonymous
I love eating puss. Yum! Drop the limit! Drop it in steps 750 to 600 for 3 month, 600 to 500 for 3 months, 500 to 400 for 3 months. Hold it at 400,000 - the world standard.

Friday, September 25, 2009 7:39 AM by: Anonymous
They want a better tasting product that has a longer shelf-life... that's what low SCC does. Don't call someone a moron when you can't even write a coherent message.

Thursday, September 24, 2009 9:51 PM by: Anonymous
JAD,it's time for a new blog entry. With World Dairy Expo fast approaching, perhaps you could write about the importance of registered livestock and the show ring to the dairy industry.

Thursday, September 24, 2009 1:53 PM by: Anonymous
How about: Everyone is a terrible farmer and should do everyone a favor and quit milking?

Thursday, September 24, 2009 12:51 PM by: Anonymous
Sounds good to me.

Wednesday, September 23, 2009 11:57 PM by: Anonymous
11:24, I milk well over 500 cows sith a scc of 204,000 but I dont have the self-rightousness to pass judgement on others' suitability to milk cows.

Wednesday, September 23, 2009 8:42 PM by: Anonymous
I don't see how your truck driver could affect your cell count - maybe fat test, or other tests - but cell count could be hard to do. The situation is this: The global standard of SCC is 400,000, yet the US continues to lag behind with our limit being 750,000. We pride ourselves in making the highest quality milk (and products) here in the US, yet our standards are poor compared to others. The other part of this situation is milk price. Currently, the milk price is devasting and there is too much supply in the market. Removing high SCC milk will remove supply and boost prices. More than 10% of milk produced in this country is over 400,000 SCC. Lets do what is right - lower the standard.

Wednesday, September 23, 2009 11:42 AM by: Anonymous
His comment about having a cell count 'ALWAYS' above 500,000 isn't exactly helping the industry. Shipping poor quality milk isn't exactly appealing to our customers. It also plays right into the hands of PETA - who claim that milk is puss. They have their "got puss?" campaign compared to our "got milk?" campaign. Maybe we should wise up a little and raise our standards - the rest of the world did.

Tuesday, September 22, 2009 7:57 PM by: Anonymous
"ken, your right. age dont have anything to do with it. all of my cows are in there 1st and 2nd lactation and my scc is always over 500,000." Are you proud of that?

Monday, September 21, 2009 2:29 PM by: Anonymous
There are different reasons for high scc. The Jersey breed tends towards higher scc, certain Holstein bulls have daughters with higher counts, we have old cows with really low counts and some first calf heifers with high counts. I understand dairies in southern US have a tough time keeping cell counts down in the summer. The bottom line is we need to not point fingers at each other and do the best jobs we can managing our cows. And lowering the count to 500,000 would be a good thing for the industry. The last time it was lowered, we culled several cows that needed to go for scc, more teat end damage than anything else.

Sunday, September 20, 2009 6:50 PM by: Anonymous
ken, your right. age dont have anything to do with it. all of my cows are in there 1st and 2nd lactation and my scc is always over 500,000.

Sunday, September 20, 2009 11:06 AM by: Anonymous
Cows that are stressed are higher SCC because their immune system doesn't function up to par to keep mastitis causing organisms out. Age is the same thing, and they also are older and have had more time and lactations to get exposed. All you have to do is manage the cows right. I have been in herds with 100,000 SCC with old cows. In fact, some herds that do a really good job with SCC have a lot of older cows - because they didn't have to cull as aggressively due to less mastitis cases. Lowering SCC will push alot of cows out right away, afterwards it may not help with supply as much so, but its still help with current crisis and we will be shipping a better product.

Saturday, September 19, 2009 11:00 PM by: ill dairymen
4:52 you are a moron not only racist and they arent low paid I do get out from behind my desk I'll bet you milk 60 cows and have a scc of 500000 and are milking because that is what you have always done

Saturday, September 19, 2009 1:47 PM by: Troy L
4:52, Your racist comments are disgusting. Thanks for the guys with the intelligent comments about sub-clin mast. If you were a respectable honest dairyman you would know that 4:52. Lower the count to 400000. NMPF does not want it since they represent plants whom get the same make-allowance for all milk hi count or lo count. If you cant keep milk under 300k I question youre ability to properly manage cattle. My co-op has been 300k for 20+ years with no producers lost. Lowering the limit will help with export and be apositive PR point for marketers.

Saturday, September 19, 2009 10:16 AM by: James
Is this a subject to pass time or is this being opposed because people think this will save our farms from this crisis?Let me ask this, If we raise scc higher like to a million(just for the sake of discusion) does that mean more people will stay in buisness or want to get in? NO!! You cant make it pencil out now and expanding your herd or keeping high scc cows around wont pencil out either.

Saturday, September 19, 2009 7:56 AM by: Anonymous
Dewey - lets at least lower it to 600,000. I think 750,000 is a little much. Most co-ops, not all, already deduct there anyhow. And I don't think we'd loose any premium if the limit is still around 600,000.

Friday, September 18, 2009 7:32 PM by: Anonymous
4:52, you don't know what mastitis is. Look up the definition of subclinicial MASTITIS - it is mastitis, high SCC, with no flakes or discoloration - the milk appears normal but is still mastitis.

Friday, September 18, 2009 4:52 PM by: Anonymous
You dont know much about dairy a higher scc does not mean mastitis. We have had high cell count cows with no mastitis. Try milking cows for real. Let the low paid mexicans have a day off and get out from behind your desk and you may learn a little.

Friday, September 18, 2009 1:17 PM by: Anonymous
Somehow I don't believe that. Why would mastitis yield more cheese? Cows with 300-350,000 have mastitis - anything above 200 is mastitis. Also, why do co-ops/processors pay a premium for low SCC if it doesn't yield more cheese? Something seems fishy...

Friday, September 18, 2009 12:53 PM by: Anonymous
CWT is a joke. Just another committee to use farmers money so it creates more jobs for industry people who like to figure out how to spend farmers money for them.

Friday, September 18, 2009 11:51 AM by: Dewey Thom
First off samples here in Wisconsin are taken at every pickup. Mine are taken 30 or 31 times a month, but only one of those is sent to the state for a state sample which determines your cell count and bacteria for the month as far as the federal rules go. This one sample determines if you are in compliance with the current federal bacteria and cell count rule. I'm pretty sure after doing a little research that your state is no different. Only one of those samples is sent to the state for a state check of compliance. If that sample is higher than federal rules allow you are put on a watch list. Have your name put on that list 3 out of 5 months in a row and your sent a warning letter from the state. When that happens they inform you that if 4 out of 5 samples submited to the state come in above federal standards your producer license will be pulled until you have a sample submited to the state that is under legal limits and so on, you get the point this is how it works for every state not just Wisconsin. 10% of milk produced = 10% of bulk tanks???? 10% of milk produced is 10% of any milk from any cow anywhere not just 10% of the tanks. I would be willing to bet you have or have had a cow in your herd with a cell count over 400,000. Are you going to cull her because of this??? Probally not if your herds average is 200,000. I know I wouldn't and I'm pretty sure no one else would either, not unless she had other issues. This is why lowering the standards will do little if nothing to cut production. You appear to me to have one agenda here and its not qualty, its not consumer image, its not anything except to cut production to raise the price for yourself. I am here to tell you this won't work. Cwt didn't work either. Without cwt the cows would have left anyway and probally more of them.

Friday, September 18, 2009 10:13 AM by: Anonymous
lowering scc should be done. but what about having the same solids requirements as california. it would increase the health value of milk. a better product and better value for consumers. this would put a serious dent in powder supply.

Thursday, September 17, 2009 11:48 PM by: Dewey Thom
I should probally read my posts a couple of times before pressing the enter key. First I should make one thing clear, I am not against lowering the cell count limits, for reasons others have pointed out from healthy cows to our very own image in the consumers eyes. I am concerned with some posters ideas of quality premiums from their coop/processor. I would take dollars over a few cents if it were a reality. You speak of 10% of the cows being above 400,000 cell count, that also means 90% are under that figure. If that is the case a lot of those higher cell count cows will not be culled for cell count reasons. The reason I say this is they simply blend out in your tank with the other 90% of good cows. Yes, smaller herds will have a harder time blending out higher cell count cows and I agree that one cow could cause you to go over the limit. Here in Wisconsin we have one state sample a month, ONE, and you could easily have a cow cause your cell count to spike on that very day they take the state sample causing you to be over the limit for the entire month. They should take a monthly average not just a single sample for the entire month if they lower it. This would give you a chance to correct the problem without it costing you your producer license. I also agree that some cows will end up going to slaughter whether you are large or small, but only some and really by that I mean only a few. Hoards Dairyman magazine, September 10,2009 page 556 lists the U.S. national cell count average 2008 at just over 250,000. It also indicates that the trend over the course of the last 5 years has been downward in cell counts here in the U.S. It also indicates that the UK and NZ (where cell count levels are currently at 400,000 or less) has had rising average cell counts over the course of the last 10 years. NZ is soon to pass the US up on the national cell count scale and the UK is not that far behind. The reason for this is in a large part deteriorating profitablity in these countries. Maybe the same thing will happen here in the US with our current milk prices in the bottoms. Maybe if we had a profitable milk price like 2007 and 2008 cell counts could go even lower. Currently we are trending lower here in the US and the national average is now just over 250,000. This is why I just don't see that many cows being removed from the US herd by lowering cell count standards. Since I see things this way I really don't think lowering cell count standards will lower US milk output, therefore I see producers who currently receive quality premiums lossing them if we lower standards. I also don't see dollars or a dollar added onto my milk check because of reduced supplies due to lower cell count rules. This is the reason I fight so hard for .20 or .30 cents, it maybe the only thing we as dairymen receive over and above our normal milk price and it does add up especially in low price times like now. Would I take the dollar or dollars, you bet, in a heartbeat, any of us would but I just don't see lowering cell counts with the idea of raising milk prices when the national average stands now at just above 250,000.

Thursday, September 17, 2009 8:39 PM by: Anonymous
I am the one that believes lowering SCC will reduce supply. I agree with dewey as well on the fact that co-ops have failed us - I never disagreed with you there. But, reducing SCC limit will increase culling - the cows will be replaced, but the replacements would have entered the milking string regardless of whether the high SCC cows were culled or not - since of that, it will actually reduce expansions - herds will have lower internal growth rates due to higher culling rates. Only small dairies will actually take the time to use quarter milkers - big dairies won't waste their labor it, especially when their objective is to push cows through the parlor as fast and efficiently as possible. Dewey - you seem so concerned about a 20 cent or 30 cent premium. You keep worring about losing a couple cents, I want to gain at least a dollar, or dollars. More than 10% of milk shipped is above 400,000 SCC, It took 3% oversupply to cut the milk price in half - what would it do to milk price if we cut supply by 10%. Dollars gained, I'm not worried about a 20 or 30 cent premium, if I can get dollars more per cwt. Oh and by the way, if it wasn't for CWT, we would be +2% year-over-year production rigt now. Instead of being even with last year, we would be way over last year's production. It is not CWT's fault that we had a cool summer allowing for more milk per cow.

Thursday, September 17, 2009 8:11 PM by: Dewey Thom
What BST free assessment? My COOP is BST free and I have never even received any compensation for it. Oh and by the way if your COOP sells your milk to another processor (like so many do)then in reality the processor is paying your premium. If they process your milk themselves then you can truly say your coop pays the premium. As for cutting milk production by cell count redutions, I have to wonder, wasn't that suppose to happen with the CWT herd buyout? Wasn't it suppose to happen with low milk prices?? Seems to me that right now we have fewer cows and just as much milk if not more than last year. Do you think that lowering cell counts will change that? I don't. Why? Because most dairy farmers are resourceful little you no whats. Are they going to cull high cell count cows and leave those stalls empty? Probally not . Most will cull and refill with replacements that seem to be plentyful now that the Canadian border is open. Some will use quarter milkers to milk high cell count quarters out on high cell count cows, therefore leaving the other 3 good quarters to go to the milk tanker. Not much production lost there. I mean it, lets get real here. Do you really think this would cut production by 10% if at all when everything else that has happened in the last year that really should have cut production and put a large dent in it and ?????DIDN'T. Do you really think that this is going to change. Farmers like you and myself are very creative in what we do to make a living. I don't think anyone who milks cows or just plain farms in general is any differnt. If you cull a high cell count cow you are going to put another one back in her place. Why? Milk prices are low and you need every drop to make it, which is why low prices and CWT herd retiremnts haven't helped. This won't either. Until we actually control milk production or should I say control the price we receive for our milk nothing will change. You seem to be very proud that your COOP PAYS FOR IT, maybe you should ask your COOP how comne they don't work together with other COOPS to market YOUR milk for a higher price. They (COOPS) control the majority of the milk in this country and yet they can't seem to get there acts together to do anything and yet that is EXACTLY WHAT THEY WERE DESIGNED TO DO.Funny how that works, isn't it. All this happens while we sit around and try to think up ways that are going to cut production to raise our pay price and don't and end up shooting ourselves in the foot in the process. All the while this is going on our good friends at Deans Foods and Kraft are buying milk from where? Can you guess? Our Coops and have had record profits last year with $20.00/ 100#s milk and even higher profits this year with $10.00/100#s milk and all the while our lovely COOPS are standing around scratching there you know what trying to figure out how they can make more money for themselves and not necessarily the producers who belong to them. I don't mean to be so negative here but nothing has worked to boost prices yet except for demand picking back up. Our COOPS do nothing to change the situation and really have little incentive to do so. We should fire every manager at every COOP in this country and start over. When Deans and others like them come along asking to purchase milk and pretending like they don't really need it, tell them to stick their order where the sun doesn't shine until they are willing to pay a better price for it. When they (Deans) do pay the higher asking price our new COOP managers would actually pass this along to their producer members and not invest it someplace like the ---oh I don't know --stock market??? Or maybe invest it in someplace like??? Deans foods ???It is this kind of crap that has given COOPs a bad name. They should work for us but they don't. Deans Foods is just a example but I do know several COOPS that invest your money (like it or not it is your money) into the stock market and don't pass the profits on to you, they just keep reinvesting it which should eventually payoff,right? Until the stockmarket crashes and guess what YOU LOOSE. Or they reinvest into new facilities or buy out another coop or something to keep themselves growing and all the while it is your money that they use and you get little if any return. They operate it like it's a buisness, not a COOP. This is one thing we as producers should really address. We own them (the COOPS) make them work the way that they should. I for one am and other producers are listening. Maybe you will to. Maybe not.

Thursday, September 17, 2009 3:05 PM by: Anonymous
Yet, my bst-free assessment is headed back up again. It dropped 5-10 cents, and now gained about 3-4 cents of it back - even though less are using it. Also, I think the reduction in supply by removing high SCC milk (above 400,000) will increase milk prices much more than any loss we might see from reduced milk premiums. For instance, 10% or more of milk in this country is over 400,000 SCC - get rid of that milk and milk prices increase, significantly more than 20 or 30 cents per hundred.

Thursday, September 17, 2009 2:02 PM by: Dewey Thom
When I say processor, I'm refering to your coop. I see them reajusting the quality pay scales. I would say it is almost a given. My coop currently starts to deduct money for high cell counts (550,000) and higher and starts paying at (400,000) or less. I see these numbers being adjusted making it harder (lower cell counts IE 150,000 or less) to get the higher quality premiums and deductions stating at 300,000 or higher. My creamery has all ready indicated that this would be the case and I don't think it will take long for the others to follow. I guess what I am saying is this, if you currently receive .20 cents per 100#s quality premium for 200,000 cell count milk, it may take 125,000 cell count milk to receive the same premium under the new rules. You end up losing money. Why? Everybody has to conform to the new rules. When everybody conforms, yes milk production will go down, however the coops or processors or whoever will be paying nearly everyone a quality premium, that's a lot more quality premium money going out the door. Beleive it or not lowering cell counts could actually hurt the final pay price of those now currently receiving a nice quality premium. I also am currently looking for the article on how cell counts our down overseas. I do remember reading that their system was different than ours and that their numbers were actually no different than ours currently is.

Thursday, September 17, 2009 1:20 PM by: Anonymous
As far as I know, my co-op pays the premium, not the processor. Also, I don't see how you can count Somatic cells differently. With PI tests, as it was explained to me, varies because of different plate cultures - when they plate the milk to grow bacteria colonies. I think somatic cells are counted the same way, here and there.

Thursday, September 17, 2009 10:22 AM by: John Nye
Are scc's measured the same way across the pond as they are here? I have read that they are not using the same system as here and in reality our scc standards are already similar, just we are not comparing apples to apples. As for Mr. Allen, I know him very well. You are right he probably doesn't milk many cows himself but he works just as many hours as the rest of us and runs one of the finest dairy facilities in the state of Utah. A well respected man in these parts. Thanks, John Nye

Wednesday, September 16, 2009 10:02 PM by: red nec dairy guy
Hey:just a guy while there are many thiungs the dems talk about doing and dont get together and acually do, one thing I home they are serious about is the stand they have taken on large and vile violations of the sherman antitrust laws that the former administration(that turned me into a idependemopublican) pretended were not existant. I hope that we pour it to the violators and use any form of protectionism to limit outside dairy, beef, steel, produce, and any other import into this country we can! I am sick and tired of what I have seen happen to people in this country the last 15-20 years!!! Lower the scc,pi, standard plate and all change the pricing structure and do whatever you want but big companies will still buy your milk cheap unless the producers take control and set the price. how do you achieve that?? History can tell us the answer!!

Wednesday, September 16, 2009 3:11 PM by: Anonymous
Same standards ok, bether get a quota and all the other restrictions while you are at it.We want to be like them.

Wednesday, September 16, 2009 11:31 AM by: Big Time
To the guy that tried to insult Mr. Allen. Congratulations for milking your cows. I did not know that it is possible to farm computers? You called him a computer farmer. I actually milk cows too, so am I awesome like you?

Wednesday, September 16, 2009 11:20 AM by: Anonymous
More regulations? before you know you will get docked for to much fat in milk because America is to fat.

Wednesday, September 16, 2009 10:58 AM by: Anonymous
How many farmers are even using BST anymore? We don't know of many and hear that more and more are going off it because they can't afford it. Also in many areas, the co-ops won't take BST milk anymore.

Wednesday, September 16, 2009 10:56 AM by: bst free
I agree lets do something that we know works. I remeber that also when that BST plant shut down and BST was in shortage. prices jumped up.So lets get rid of BST. Let cows natrualy produce.We dont need more regulations, inforce the ones we have. The way it is now most people already cull high cell cows because they want a premium.

Wednesday, September 16, 2009 10:43 AM by: Anonymous
Why should we pay freight for products we ship out? We pay freight on everything we bring in, feed, etc. Processors should pay freight for products they bring in.

Wednesday, September 16, 2009 10:01 AM by: Anonymous
Farmers should be paid much more for high quality and pay no hauling. We have heard from co-op leaders that the processors don't pay for the quality, the co-ops do. Processors should be paying for the quality and hauling for farmers. Instead they get a make allowance to be sure they have a profit. Things are backwards!

Wednesday, September 16, 2009 9:53 AM by: Ohio moomoo
I think lowering the SCC is one step closer to putting dairies (in general, animal businesses) out of business. Is quality really that much of an issue? What happens if we have a bad mastitis outbreak, I get my load rejected and lose that load and money from it? Quite frankly, right now I can't afford that. Anyway, those cows would be treated quickly to avoid high SCC and for health issues (the cows'). Let's not be too quick to keep pushing things through to law. We already have enough regulations to keep up with. Be very careful. As others have commented, there are premiums in place for those who do stay under the limit right now. Leave things be and the market will correct itself in time.

Tuesday, September 15, 2009 10:14 PM by: Anonymous
Low SCC increases milk production per cow yes... but it increases culling by getting rid of high cell count cows. So it helps reduce supply more than anything. Also - Jim D. articles are not 'stirring the pot' - he simply passing on an idea that has been brought up before by other organizations during this downturn. It is a good idea.

Tuesday, September 15, 2009 7:24 PM by: Anonymous
how is this going to help lower scc increases milk output!!!!! at least that is what everyone says.

Tuesday, September 15, 2009 7:07 PM by: Duane
To anonymous; Your wife works off the farm so let the price drop to ten dollars? The business should support itself! Keep a seperate set of books for the farm and see what you think then.

Tuesday, September 15, 2009 6:29 PM by: Matty Jo
Milk quality. To the one who milks 4000 cows, do you use BST. This is much worse for consumers than a high scc. MAYBE WE SHOULD GET RID OF ALL DAIRYS WHO USE BST. CONSUMERS DONT WANT BST MILK AND THAT IS BACKED BY PROOF.HEY LETS GET RID OF HERDS WITH HIGH CELL COUNTS BUT WHILE WE ARE AT IT LETS GET RID OF THE ONES PUMPING COWS FULL OF BST AS WELL

Tuesday, September 15, 2009 6:22 PM by: Harmon
Maybe If producers got paid enough for their milk maybe they could afford more modern facilaties.

Tuesday, September 15, 2009 6:09 PM by: Anonymous
Oh wow this the solution lower scc and our troubles are over. I dont buy it. Factory farms are the reason.To much greed. Lets get rid of the small dairy and grow the factory farms

Tuesday, September 15, 2009 5:37 PM by: Big Time
SCC counts are the measure of stress in a herd. Those herds with SCC counts over 400,000 just aren't doing a good job. Like it or not! Lets have happy cows!

Tuesday, September 15, 2009 5:04 PM by: Anonymous
Exactly why you guys are in the mess you're in. You all can't agree on anything. And this Dickrell dude just keeps stirring the pot, did you ever consider he may be a blogger paid by the processors and food companies, (your mortal enemies), to keep you guys all shook up ???

Tuesday, September 15, 2009 4:42 PM by: JB
I don't see a single down side to this, save for allowing those guys who can't control mastitis to keep their bad habits. I don't care if the consumer doesn't know about SCC - our product will be better, it will result in a higher price due to increased culling or dumping of milk, and it will get us in line with the rest of the world. We routinely keep SCC under 250,000 on a 5000 cow herd in the southwest. If it can be done here during the summer, it can be done anywhere.

Tuesday, September 15, 2009 3:54 PM by: Anonymous
Mr Dick Allen....that many cows 3 times a day....i doubt you milk any cows at all....i milk 60 cows twice a day...every day and have not missed a milking in over 18 years....talk to me when you are a true dairyman...and not a computer farmer

Tuesday, September 15, 2009 3:37 PM by: Amy
To mr. King Lower cell counts are a plus but most dairy farmers I know already cull high cell count cows so they can get a bonus on premium.We have enough regulation on our milk quality,programs are already in place to encourage getting rid of high cell count cows.What Program? The simple bonus you get on your check for low cell count.Before you know they will want to get rid of the cows that fart to much...oh wait they are doing that

Tuesday, September 15, 2009 3:32 PM by: Anonymous
It has nothing to do with the consumer, that is right. It has everything to do with less milk on the market and less low quality milk. It is the right thing to do people!

Tuesday, September 15, 2009 2:24 PM by: Anonymous
cell counts on a single cow can vary 200 to 300 thousand depending on weather and other conditions...this is just another way to get producers to kill cows..this has nothing to do with the consumer...most city people dont even know what a cell count is..its just the processer wanting a way to pay less for milk,..when will dairy farmers wake up and stick together?...its just like BST..thats was not the consumer..it was just a way to make us produce less milk...but most still use it ans just say we dont...

Tuesday, September 15, 2009 1:14 PM by: Anonymous
I for one have no problem with the way things are...we milk 60 cows in Kentucky..Aug pay price with the bonus we get was a little over 14.00...i owe nothing....my wife works outside the home,and i can sell milk for 10.00 and get by....i say let the price fall till the weak are gone..and the market will correct itself...

Tuesday, September 15, 2009 1:11 PM by: Anonymous
This is not a bad idea. It would force sloppy operators to get rid of cows that have high scc counts. In the long run it would help keep cull rates up so cow numbers stay down.

Tuesday, September 15, 2009 1:08 PM by: Dick Kimball (mass)
I don't think the first two poeple to respond got the point Jim. We milk 600 and enjoy a .60/cwt bonus for keeping cells under 200,000. I think if everyone culled their high cell cow, including us, there would be a 2-3 percent reduction in supply real quick plus a reduction in health cost per cow WOW double benefits.

Tuesday, September 15, 2009 12:17 PM by: Anonymous
what real good would this do? i am really getting tired of people not directly affected telling dairy farmers what they should be doing.