Combining Restricted Grazing and Nitrification Inhibitors to Reduce Nitrogen Leaching on New Zealand Dairy Farms.

Intensification of pastoral dairy systems often means more nitrogen (N) leaching. A number of mitigation strategies have been proposed to reduce or reverse this trend. The main strategies focus on reducing the urinary N load onto pastures or reducing the rate of nitrification once the urine has been deposited. Restricted grazing is an example of the former and the use of nitrification inhibitors an example of the latter. A relevant concern is the cost effectiveness of these strategies, independently and jointly. To address this concern, we employed a modeling approach to estimate N leaching with and without the use of these mitigation options from a typical grazing dairy farm in New Zealand. Three restricted grazing options were modeled with and without a nitrification inhibitor (dicyandiamide, DCD) and the results were compared with a baseline farm (no restricted grazing, no inhibitor). Applying DCD twice a year, closely following the cows after an autumn and winter grazing round, has the potential to reduce annualized and farm-scale N leaching by ∼12%, whereas restricted grazing had leaching reductions ranging from 23 to 32%, depending on the timing of restricted grazing. Combining the two strategies resulted in leaching reductions of 31 to 40%. The abatement cost per kilogram of N leaching reduction was NZ$50 with DCD, NZ$32 to 37 for restricted grazing, and NZ$40 to 46 when the two were combined. For the range analyzed, all treatments indicated similar cost per percentage unit of mitigated N leaching, demonstrating that restricted grazing and nitrification inhibitors can be effective when used concurrently.

Assessing the production and economic benefits from preventing cows grazing on wet soils in New Zealand.

BACKGROUND: Intensive grazing by cattle on wet pasture can have a negative effect on soil physical quality and future pasture production. On a North Otago dairy farm in New Zealand, experimental plots were monitored for four years to assess whether preventing cow grazing of wet pastures during the milking season would improve soil structure and pasture production compared with unrestricted access to pastures. The DairyNZ Whole Farm Model was used to scale up results to a farm system level and ascertain the cost benefit of deferred grazing management. RESULTS: Soils under deferred grazing management had significantly higher total porosity, yet no significant improvement in macroporosity (values ranging between 0.112 and 0.146 m(3) m(-3) ). Annual pasture production did not differ between the control and deferred grazing treatments, averaging 17.0 ± 3.8 and 17.9 ± 4.1 t DM ha(-1) year(-1) respectively (P > 0.05). Furthermore, whole farm modelling indicated that farm operating profit was reduced by NZ$1683 ha(-1) year(-1) (four-year average) under deferred grazing management. CONCLUSION: Deferring dairy cow grazing from wet Pallic soils in North Otago was effective in improving soil structure (measured as total soil porosity), yet did not lead to a significant increase in pasture production. Whole farm modelling indicated no economic benefit of removing cows from wet soils during the milking season. © 2016 Society of Chemical Industry.

An integral assessment of the impact of diet and manure management on whole-farm greenhouse gas and nitrogen emissions in dairy cattle production systems using process-based models.

Feed management decisions are crucial in mitigating greenhouse gas (GHG) and nitrogen (N) emissions from ruminant farming systems. However, assessing the downstream impact of diet on emissions in dairy production systems is complex, due to the multifunctional relationships between a variety of distinct but interconnected sources such as animals, housing, manure storage, and soil. Therefore, there is a need for an integral assessment of the direct and indirect GHG and N emissions that considers the underlying processes of carbon (C), N and their drivers within the system. Here we show the relevance of using a cascade of process-based (PB) models, such as Dutch Tier 3 and (Manure)-DNDC (Denitrification-Decomposition) models, for capturing the downstream influence of diet on whole-farm emissions in two contrasting case study dairy farms: a confinement system in Germany and a pasture-based system in New Zealand. Considerable variation was found in emissions on a per hectare and per head basis, and across different farm components and categories of animals. Moreover, the confinement system had a farm C emission of 1.01 kg CO2-eq kg-1 fat and protein corrected milk (FPCM), and a farm N emission of 0.0300 kg N kg-1 FPCM. In contrast, the pasture-based system had a lower farm C and N emission averaging 0.82 kg CO2-eq kg-1 FPCM and 0.006 kg N kg-1 FPCM, respectively over the 4-year period. The results demonstrate how inputs and outputs could be made compatible and exchangeable across the PB models for quantifying dietary effects on whole-farm GHG and N emissions.

Cost-effective mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions from different dairy systems in the Waikato region of New Zealand.

The New Zealand dairy industry produces approximately 17% of this country's total greenhouse gas emissions (GHG-e) and it is also this nation's largest export industry. The industry needs to reduce GHG-e under proposed policy directives and for ongoing market security. Given these pressures, there is the need to identify cost-effective management strategies to reduce on-farm GHG-e. The objective of this study was to investigate how the management of dairy farms in the Waikato region of New Zealand could change to minimise the abatement costs associated with GHG-e mitigation. Three typical farm systems importing low (less than 10%), medium (10-20%), and high (more than 20%) amounts of supplement are modelled using a non-linear optimisation model. A reduction in nitrogen fertiliser application was the production factor that changed the most to achieve the cap in all of the simulated systems, followed by a reduction in stocking rate. With the prices used in this study, decreasing farming intensity by reducing nitrogen fertiliser by 21-42% and stocking rate by 8-10% represented a cost of $68-$119/ha and a production reduction of 54-117 kg MS/ha for the three systems studied. Improving reproductive performance proved to be effective in reducing GHG-e, allowing for fewer replacement cows to be supported. However, it did not have a significant effect on profit when emissions were unconstrained. Nitrification inhibitors and stand-off pads were not identified as useful mitigation options, given their high cost relative to de-intensification.

Benefits and Trade-Offs of Dairy System Changes Aimed at Reducing Nitrate Leaching.

Between 2011 and 2016, small-scale farm trials were run across three dairy regions of New Zealand (Waikato, Canterbury, Otago) to compare the performance of typical regional farm systems with farm systems implementing a combination of mitigation options most suitable to the region. The trials ran for at least three consecutive years with detailed recording of milk production and input costs. Nitrate leaching per hectare of the milking platform (where lactating cows are kept) was estimated using either measurements (suction cups), models, or soil mineral nitrogen measurements. Post-trial, detailed farm information was used in the New Zealand greenhouse gas inventory methodology to calculate the emissions from all sources; dairy platform, dairy support land used for wintering non-lactating cows (where applicable) and replacement stock, and imported supplements. Nitrate leaching was also estimated for the support land and growing of supplements imported from off-farm using the same methods as for the platform. Operating profit (NZ$/ha/year), nitrate leaching (kg N/ha/year), and greenhouse gas emissions (t CO2-equivalent/ha/year) were all expressed per hectare of milking platform to enable comparisons across regions. Nitrate leaching mitigations adopted in lower-input (less purchased feed and nitrogen fertiliser) farm systems reduced leaching by 22 to 30 per cent, and greenhouse gas emissions by between nine and 24 per cent. The exception was the wintering barn system in Otago, where nitrate leaching was reduced by 45 per cent, but greenhouse gas emissions were unchanged due to greater manure storage and handling. Important drivers of a lower environmental footprint are reducing nitrogen fertiliser and purchased feed. Their effect is to reduce feed flow through the herd and drive down both greenhouse gas emissions and nitrate leaching. Emission reductions in the lower-input systems of Waikato and Canterbury came at an average loss of profit of approximately NZ$100/t CO2-equivalent (three to five per cent of industry-average profit per hectare).

The Effects of System Changes in Grazed Dairy Farmlet Trials on Greenhouse Gas Emissions.

An important challenge facing the New Zealand (NZ) dairy industry is development of production systems that can maintain or increase production and profitability, while reducing impacts on receiving environments including water and air. Using research 'farmlets' in Waikato, Canterbury, and Otago (32⁻200 animals per herd), we assessed if system changes aimed at reducing nitrate leaching can also reduce total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (methane and nitrous oxide) and emissions intensity (kg GHG per unit of product) by comparing current and potential 'improved' dairy systems. Annual average GHG emissions for each system were estimated for three or four years using calculations based on the New Zealand Agricultural Inventory Methodology, but included key farmlet-specific emission factors determined from regional experiments. Total annual GHG footprints ranged between 10,800 kg and 20,600 kg CO2e/ha, with emissions strongly related to the amount of feed eaten. Methane (CH4) represented 75% to 84% of the total GHG footprint across all modelled systems, with enteric CH4 from lactating cows grazing pasture being the major source. Excreta deposition onto paddocks was the largest source of nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions, representing 7⁻12% of the total GHG footprint for all systems. When total emissions were represented on an intensity basis, 'improved' systems are predicted to generally result in lower emissions intensity. The 'improved' systems had lower GHG footprints than the 'current' system, except for one of the 'improved' systems in Canterbury, which had a higher stocking rate. The lower feed supplies and associated lower stocking rates of the 'improved' systems were the key drivers of lower total GHG emissions in all three regions. 'Improved' systems designed to reduced N leaching generally also reduced GHG emissions.

Screening for diets that reduce urinary nitrogen excretion and methane emissions while maintaining or increasing production by dairy cows.

Farmers face complex decisions at the time to feed animals, trying to achieve production goals while contemplating social and environmental constraints. Our purpose was to facilitate such decision making for pastoral dairy farmers, aiming to reduce urinary N (UN) and methane emissions (CH4), while maintaining or increasing milk production (MP). There is a number of feeds the farmers can choose from and combine. We used 50 feeds (forages and grains) combined systematically in different proportions producing 11,526 binary diets. Diets were screened, using an a posteriori approach and a Pareto front (PF) analysis of model (Molly) outputs. The objective was to identify combinations with the best possible compromise (i.e. frontier) between UN, CH4, and MP. Using high MP and low UN as objective functions, PF included 10, 14, 12 and 50 diets, for non-lactating, early-, mid- and late-lactation periods, with cereals and beets featuring strongly. Using the same objective functions, but including ryegrass as dietary base PF included 2, 4, 8 and 4 diets for those periods. Therefore, from a wide range of diets, farmers could choose from few feeds combined into binary diets to reduce UN while maintaining or increasing MP. If the intention is maintaining pasture-based systems, there are fewer suitable options. Reducing UN will simply require dilution of N supplied by pasture by supplementing low N conserved forages. The results also evidence the risk of pollution swapping, reaching the frontier means arriving at a point where trade-off decisions need to be made. Any further reduction in UN implies an increment in CH4, or reduction in CH4 emissions increases UN. There is no perfect diet to optimize all objectives simultaneously; but if the current diet is not in the frontier some options can offset pollution swapping. The choice is with the farmers and conditioned by their context.