The authors also found that dairy farmers are already clustering in the most comfortable areas for cows, such as the cool coastal counties of Washington state.
Clustering? Seen any cattle drives on the Interstates lately? Somehow the idea that farming chooses the best location for the crop they produce, be it animal or vegetable, seems to be a revelation to them.
By that logic, we could also say: The authors also found that grape growers and wineries are already clustering in the most comfortable areas for grapes, such as the cool coastal counties of California.
Got milk? Climate change means stressed cows in southern U.S. may have less
By Nancy Gohring, UW
“Cows are happy in parts of Northern California and not in Florida” is a good way to sum up the findings of new research from the University of Washington, said Yoram Bauman, best known as the “stand-up economist.”
Bauman and colleagues found that the decline in milk production due to climate change will vary across the U.S., since there are significant differences in humidity and how much the temperature swings between night and day across the country. For instance, the humidity and hot nights make the Southeast the most unfriendly place in the country for dairy cows.
Their study combined high-resolution climate data and county-level dairy industry data with a method for figuring out how weather affects milk production. The result is a more detailed report than previous studies and includes a county-by-county assessment — that will be available to farmers — of the impact climate change will have on Holstein milk production in the U.S. through 2080.
Bauman, who contributed to the research while teaching for the UW’s Program on the Environment and is now a fellow at the Sightline Institute, will present the findings during this week’s Conference on Climate Change, held on the UW campus.
Scientists and the dairy industry have long known about and studied the impact of heat stress on cows’ milk production.
“Using U.S. Department of Agriculture statistics, if you look at milk production in the Southeast versus the Northwest, it’s very different,” said Guillaume Mauger, a postdoctoral researcher in the UW’s Climate Impacts Group and co-author of the paper. “It’s reasonable to assume that some of that is due to the inhospitable environment for cows in the Southeast.”
Previous research into how climate affects cow milk production in the U.S. was either limited in geographic scope or was too simplistic, ignoring the impact of humidity, for instance.
But by using detailed climate data covering night and day across the entire country, the researchers made some interesting discoveries. For instance, in Tillamook, Ore., where the climate is humid and the nighttime temperature doesn’t change much, milk production begins to drop at a much lower temperature than in the dry Arizona climate. Tillamook cows become less productive starting at around 15 C, or 59 F, while those in Maricopa, Ariz., start making less milk at around 25 C, or 77 F. In humid Okeechobee, Fla., cows become less productive at about the same temperature but losses increase at a much faster rate than in Arizona.
Fortunately for cows in Tillamook, however, the temperature there doesn’t stray upward often and so actual milk losses are negligible, the researchers said. In Maricopa, the mean daily losses in summer, when the temperature soars, reach nearly 50 percent.
The authors also found that dairy farmers are already clustering in the most comfortable areas for cows, such as the cool coastal counties of Washington state.
But the outlook isn’t good for areas across the southern U.S. where cows are already less productive in the heat of the summer.
“Perhaps most significantly, those regions that are currently experiencing the greatest losses are also the most susceptible: they are projected to be impacted the most by climate change,” the researchers wrote in the paper.
Still, there’s a notable silver lining in the report. While the researchers project that dairy production averaged across the U.S. will be about 6 percent lower in the 2080s than at the start of the century, other factors are likely to actually boost milk production even more.
“Management practices and breeding are on track to double milk production in Holsteins in the next 30 or 50 years,” Mauger said. “So while a 6 percent drop is not negligible, it’s small compared to other positive influences.”
The research could be valuable to farmers looking to evaluate the cost and effectiveness of methods for keeping cows cool. “You can pick up dairy cows and truck them elsewhere,” said Bauman, who noted that ranchers looking to expand could make decisions based on climate.
The researchers plan to make the data freely available so that farmers can look up their counties and find how the climate may affect their cows.
Other co-authors are Eric Salathé, an assistant professor at UW Bothell and member of the UW’s Climate Impacts Group, and Tamilee Nennich of Purdue University.
The researchers hope next to look at the impact climate has on other barnyard animals, such as pigs, and other effects, such as mortality rate, that rising temperature might have on cows.
The Conference on Climate Change is put on by publisher Common Ground and will take place in the UW’s William H. Gates School of Law building on Thursday and Friday.
###
Doing a little searching, I come to a different conclusion. The cows seem happy all over:
I wonder if the “stand-up economist.” bothered to read/cite the USDA report The Changing Landscape of U.S. Milk Production and it’s impact on the green coffee and creamer industry ?
As the graph below shows, even though the southeast lost regional share (as did many regions) according to the above graph, milk production per cow in the southeast was up significantly.
Yeah, it must be climate change.
As one of the co-authors of this paper, please allow me to respond to a few comments:
Mr Watts: Your USDA link is broken, but I found the study elsewhere (http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/sb-statistical-bulletin/sb978.aspx) and confess that I don’t understand the relevance. More generally, I’m not sure why you’re so upset with our paper. After all, I think one of the main conclusions comes from this quote from one of my co-authors in the article on our paper: “Management practices and breeding are on track to double milk production in Holsteins in the next 30 or 50 years,” Mauger said. “So while a 6 percent drop is not negligible, it’s small compared to other positive influences.”
Richard Tol (@RichardTol) writes “One sided study: There are also places where it is too cold for cows.” If you read our paper you will find that we address this point: “We note that our estimates do not account for some of the indirect impacts of heat stress, such as reduced reproductive efficiency or availability of food and water, or for factors unrelated to climate that may influence milk production. In addition, our estimates do not include milk losses from temperatures that are too cold rather than too hot. Although such losses would be reduced in a warming climate, Kadzere et al. (2002, based on Hamada, 1971) estimate that the lower critical temperature for cows producing 30 kg of milk per day is between -37 and -16 degrees C. Cold stress therefore has a relatively small impact on dairy production in the conterminous US.”
To the commenters who think dairy operations in the Southeast don’t need to worry about heat and humidity: What you’re saying runs counter to the existing dairy science literature: St Pierre et al. (2003), West (2003), West et al. (2003). The West papers are especially recommended because JW West is (or at least was) in the Animal and Dairy Sciences Department at the University of Georgia.
To everyone: Look, part of the reason we did this research was a report by Hayhoe et al (2004) which estimated end-of-century losses in California’s main dairy-producing counties to be as much as 22% under a high emissions scenario. Our results for California were considerably lower. You might draw all sorts of conclusions from this result if you insist on looking at it from a political/spin perspective, but the conclusion that I draw is that our results were driven by our analysis. We took a dairy model (St Pierre et al. 2003) and combined it with climate modeling, and the results we got suggested that climate impacts on dairy production will be “measurable, but modest.”
PS. Yes I do perform stand-up comedy about economics (http://www.standupeconomist.com), but I also have a PhD in economics. This study was from the serious side of my life; comedy about cows was done much better than I ever could by Gary Larson’s “The Far Side” 🙂
Regards,
Yoram Bauman
Did the study account for the EPA harrassment on dairy farmers everywhere in the states?
I and several members of my family worked on a dairy farm in our youth. Great educational benefits not to mention building body strength and endurance. Dairy farms firmly instill that work ethic that starts before daylight and end after nightfall; 24X7 * 52 weeks, every year.
That dairy farm and every nearby dairy farm that I knew in my youth are gone. Suburban houses stand in their stead. Funny thing about dairy farms, they’re prime development property anywhere they’re near a town or city. Add to the farmers burden, tax issues, debts, USDA regulations, EPA regulations (always increasing in complexity and requirements), never a vacation, and the temptation to sell gets overwhelming when the farmer passes on.
Dairy farms used to be established near the towns and cities, because refrigeration adds to the costs. Now milk producers are/have scaled up and distance to the city isn’t the concern it used to be.
Another study that decided results and then sought for details that allowed them to find and validate their own ideas by ignoring all other impacts and complications.
Maybe the fact that federal dairy subsidies are based on the distance one lives from Eau Claire, Wisconsin, might have something to do with this as well. The further from Eau Claire, the more subsidies you get. It’s why California (2000+miles) is now a dairy capital of the country, despite the fact that you have to bring in hay, food, and even water by the truckload to support the cows. Last I saw, California dairy farmers are receiving nearly $3 a gallon in milk subsidies, meaning they can produce a $2.80 gallon of milk at a loss and still turn a profit from their government check. In the meantime, my home town in Wisconsin went from 50,000 head of dairy cattle in 1970 to about 12,000 in 1990, with dozens of farms that had been in families for 5 or more generations being put up for auction, since California farmers had brought the price per gallon for raw milk down to sub $1 range.
There is nothing natural about the distribution or production of dairy cattle in America any more. It is a wholly man-influenced process.
Years ago many primary industries were located around markets owing to the transportation and storage costs of the products (von Thunen theory). Although modern transport and storage has changed this to some extent, these factors still do play a role in marketing. I would like to see a correlation between regional human population changes and the migration of diaries to the left coast. Wisconsin still is the “dairy state”, an industry based on nearby Chicago, Rockford, Milwaukee, the Twin Cities etc. Value-added products such as cheese can have a wider market distribution. These factors, combined with the urban sprawl eating up the landscape probably account for much of the observed movement. Having grown up on a diary farm, I can assure you that a couple of degrees in temperature change won’t phase a cow.
Anthony,
“Clustering? Seen any cattle drives on the Interstates lately? Somehow the idea that farming chooses the best location for the crop they produce, be it animal or vegetable, seems to be a revelation to them”
“Best location”, not always, Wyoming has lots of beef cattle, way more than it does people, while it’s cold in winter, hot in summer, pretty much a high desert, rugged and prone to extremes of weather and pretty distant from just about anywhere as far as shipping is concerned (except for the Nebraska feed lots). We do have lots of grass, ……………sometimes. Tradition and where folks originally settled keeps the cattle business going here. Texas, I am told, raises more beef cattle than any other state, milder climate and plenty of land. Florida is probably the most per acre of available land. These fit your model much better.
R2DTOO says:
July 12, 2012 at 11:56 am
“Having grown up on a diary farm, I can assure you that a couple of degrees in temperature change won’t phase a cow.”
QOTW? 🙂
I think Anthony missed the boat on this one.
Rather than take pot shots of this paper, it would have served readers better to focus on the Conference going on today and tomorrow here in Seattle. If Dave is made ill by this paper, he’ll be puking over his keyboard after taking a look at the program for the 2-day event sponsored by UW.
It isn’t a science conference, its a conference for social engineering.
I’ve noticed an increasing tendency to want to blast any comment, press release or paper that makes reference to climate change, whether or not it is really important. Sure we all have grown tired of seeing climate change tied to everything, but as long as government is funding it, researchers are going to try to link their research to it. That’s just the system. I don’t see this particular paper being about climate. It looks to me like a paper on regional differences in milk production.
The conference on the other hand is ripe for ridicule. I couldn’t get beyond the first page of the program without filling with disgust. Not a single science topic. Makes me wonder if I’m wasting my time being involved in science education. I’d hate to see students I’ve helped to foster an interest in science and math and create the desire to go on to college end up exposed to crap such as is being presented at this conference.
Many questions arise:
Were all these cows from the same herd book?
Did the lesser volumes have higher or lower milk fat?
Were the cows separated by age groups?
Were these really Holstein or Holstein-Frisian?
What percentage of Holstein and what percentage Frisian ancestry?
What was the diet of the herd in each region?
This study will probably lead to injuries in milk farmers as they fall off their milking stools laughing.
Yoram and colleagues should be encouraged to take all of their wealth and start a porcine milking operation in Eilot. Being academic economists they can probably make a good business case for it. What a bunch of green bovine drizzle.
Yoram, I’m curious. How many test cows did you use in this study? How many actual measurements did you take of milk output — at various temperatures at the locations cited in your study?
How did your actual measurements compare with the other papers you cited?
“Cows are happy in parts of Northern California and not in Florida” is a good way to sum up the findings of new research from the University of Washington, said Yoram Bauman, best known as the “stand-up economist.”
Really? Florida is the third largest cattle producing state east of the Mississippi. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it, Bauman. Of course, I know better than to expect more from government funded science.
After I read Yoram’s reply, especially the last two paragraphs, I was overwhelmed by feeling of sadness and tragedy.
Pamela Gray says:
July 12, 2012 at 9:03 am
This is absolutely the most inane piece of research I have ever seen. It completely follows the expected kind of research that comes from those who believe themselves to be ever so much more intelligent and benevolent than the humans they think they are duty bound to save.
===============================================================
Oh, I’m not so sure. Wasn’t there a study awhile back about those Brits dumping milk down the drain was contributing to the dreaded “Green Monster Gas Emissions”? They say they’ll be fewer happy cows and therefore less milk produced by 2080. Maybe this is Mama Nature’s attempt to keep Gaia happy?
(But I do wonder how Hansen knew of this study back in the ’80’s.)
So this research would be from the alternate universe where India doesn’t produce 50000 tonnes of cow milk a year?
Good point, but India produced 127 million tonnes of milk this year. More than any other country.
http://www.nddb.org/English/Statistics/Pages/Milk-Production.aspx
“Gail Combs says:
July 12, 2012 at 8:51 am
More correlated with regulations and idiotic scare mongering.
Different breeds of livestock are adapted to different climate conditions. The USA has mostly Northern European breeds. I doubt the Brahman cattle developed here in the USA from those imported from India has any problems with heat link And then there are the zebu cattle also of India used to develop the Brahman. They are thought to be the oldest breed of cattle and are true miniatures. http://www.zebucows.com/about_zebu_cattle.htm“>Zebu
If these guy really believed their own hype they would be pushing for regulations shielding small farms preserving heritage breeds.”
Exactly Gail.
In South Africa they’ve found that Jersey cows are more heat tolerate than Holstein-Friesians.
There’s cattle breeds that are more heat resistant. Hey they wouldn’t have cattle stations in the harsh outback of Australia. Mainly Brahman’s and Santa Gertrudis which are the favored breeds.
It’s another AGW/CC beatup. More Bull than fact. 😉
When I was a young girl, it was my job to milk the cows to feed the barn cats. Barn cats were essential parts of varmit control. After they got their fill, the adults would take over. At our own farm/ranch, we had a 4900 sq ft barn originally built in 1883, added to in 1910, and then again, some decade or two after that. The barn had three dairies, all demonstrating the different practices and types of milk cows used through the years. Even the head stalls changed in size, growing quit large by the time the dairy operation moved to its last and newest location and mechanized with “modern” methods. By the mid 70’s the valley no longer produced fresh milk products for even local consumption. To be sure, someone somewhere was getting subsidies for the milk products we had to ship in. Products the valley used to ship out. The regulations and subsidies could not have been for the purpose of lowering the cost of milk products in this far place. Somebody outside the valley was getting rich while dairy businesses closed all over this tiny valley. The milk cost the same to consumers but had to be much more expensive to ship to us. hmmmm.
The whole argument is – ah – well, downright ignorant. Dairy takes irrigated pasture or green forage for best production levels, Dairies in Nevada, eastern Oregon, and most of the Central Valley in California use flood irrigation or sprinklers to keep pastures green. In coastal regions that are subject to fogs and support temperate rain forests, there is far less irrigation costs. The issue is economics, not cow comfort.
More illegitimate appropriation of any and every statistical trend that can be misconstrued as evidence of AGW. File under Circular, not for Recycling.
Eyeballing, even at the worst the decline looks like about 2-3 percent per degree C. Using IPCC overestimate we are fussing about a blip in production over a period of a century. FAIL
Here’s a concise read on the subject, mentioning improved weather, relaxed environmental regulations and other factors. Considerations in the Dairy Relocation Decision
Another consideration is access to less expensive labor. Some monster dairy operations have been set up in New Mexico and Texas recently to take advantage of immigrant labor prices.
As far as hot weather, I consult to LaLa Grupo in Torreon, MX. Fantastic region for dairy production, and LaLa is now moving into US markets (they bought the Borden’s brand name).
ddpalmer says:
July 12, 2012 at 4:55 am
“of the impact climate change will have on Holstein milk production”
“And just where did the Holstein breed originate? Well the Netherlands, which happens to have a climate like the cool coastal counties of Washington state rather than the hotter temperatures of the southern United States. So maybe the issue is with the breed studied and maybe another breed (or a new breed) of dairy cow would be happy and produce just fine in the hotter climates.”
I concur.
All breeds of dairy cattle into the USA came from somewhere colder than the lower tier states. Unless you know someone brave enough to milk Brahmas. This paper is complete milkcow sh!t.
http://www.ansi.okstate.edu/breeds/cattle/
¡Las vacas de Torreón, Mexico!
http://s1043.photobucket.com/albums/b439/cstack3/?action=view¤t=DSCN0330.jpg
These are some healthy, happy & productive Holsteins producing high-quality fluid milk for LaLa Grupo. Those folks run excellent facilities! The way they run these stalls, their milk would actually come close to USDA “organic” without any problem. When I told management, they took note of that. Look for LaLa in your American dairy case, we have it all over Chicago now (LaLa’s American offices are in Dallas).
Torreón would not qualify as a “cool coastal” area, but the cows really don’t give a flop. I think they are enjoying the warm breeze. If climate change brings this type of weather to Wisconsin, fluid milk output will rise.
“Tim Clark says:
July 13, 2012 at 7:32 am
“ddpalmer says:
July 12, 2012 at 4:55 am
“of the impact climate change will have on Holstein milk production”
“And just where did the Holstein breed originate? Well the Netherlands, which happens to have a climate like the cool coastal counties of Washington state rather than the hotter temperatures of the southern United States. So maybe the issue is with the breed studied and maybe another breed (or a new breed) of dairy cow would be happy and produce just fine in the hotter climates.”
And an interesting fact about holstein-friesians.
The best heat tolerant bred Holsteins-Friesians are the ones from the USA, Israel and NZ and they’re also considered the best of their type!.
Did these students consider the species of cattle? The best milk needs lush grass. If you want milk you farm a species that gives a lot of milk per unit of food intake, like Jersey/Guernsey for the creamiest milk, but if you want the best beef you use a species that gives the highest meat quantity. There is not a single species that gives both. Even crosses cannot give both.
@ur momisugly Phillip Bradley
Meant 50 million as about 55% of the production is buffalo milk.
Shows you shouldn’t try and type long rows of 0’s on a mobile when in an airport check in line….