Dairy Farming

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/59595/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Dairy giants Murray Goulburn and Fonterra played a dangerous game of chicken by hanging onto high milk prices despite the global dairy market volatility.
Even though both cooperatives are shifting responsibility to each other for the fall in milk prices, which is pushing dairy farmers to the brink, they are both at fault for their race to the bottom. Now both will have to work hard to win back the trust of farmers.
The two companies, both cooperatives (although Fonterra has most of its members in New Zealand) compete head-to-head for farmer suppliers in Australia.
Fonterra is the world’s largest dairy exporter accounting for about 40 percent of global dairy trade and is the fourth largest dairy company behind Nestle, Danone and Lactalis with an annual gross revenue of A$17.61 billion, and 1200 suppliers in Victoria, Tasmania and South Australia. By contrast Murray Goulburn has annual sales revenues of A$2.87 billion, 9 percent of the global trade market and has 2500 suppliers in Victoria and Tasmania.
Since 2005, when Fonterra purchased Bonlac the two companies have fought for suppliers in Australia and grown their respective businesses to meet increasing global demand for dairy product. Their resulting pricing models to farmers were assured while dairy prices continued to rise. Farmers accepted claw back provisions - it was never thought that they would be invoked - and the companies accepted loose contractual obligations to supply. The competitive environment that ensued, from which dairy farmers benefited meant that neither company was able to hold the mantle of market leader for long.
The game of chicken was on as early as August, 2015 when Fonterra began reducing its advance payments to New Zealand dairy farmers). Throughout the following eight months Murray Goulburn and Fonterra steadfastly sat behind their respective wheels committed to hanging tough. Much was at stake.
For both cooperatives a reduction in advance payments to their suppliers in March, or earlier would have saved them considerable reputational risk, and in many cases reduced the exposure of dairy farmers to financial failure. Instead they chose not to swerve, but to hang tough, failing to ignore the significant decline in global prices, for which they both appeared oblivious.
While Murray Goulburn swerved first by lowering the milk solid price, they did so far too late. Fonterra swerved last, but by then the events in the international market had raced past the game – leaving both companies’ suppliers stranded with the over-payment problem from which they now suffer. Recklessly both cooperatives thought they could run the gauntlet with global dairy. That they actually did so for eight months is testimony to the merits of market competition.
Where to now for the two beleaguered companies and suffering dairy farmers? The benchmark for corporate behaviour and accepting responsibility for ‘bad’ outcomes was set by Johnson &amp; Johnson in 1982.
The handling of the Tylenol crisis, where a series of poisoning deaths resulted from drug tampering, set the standard for corporate ethics against which all other subsequent behaviours can be compared. Johnson &amp; Johnson took responsibility, took action and set about the recovery – despite not being responsible for the tampering of their product on shop shelves in Chicago.
It will be through remedial behaviour by each of the dairy giants over the next months that these cooperatives will re-cement their relationships with suppliers, as they both try to win over farmers and gain disproportionate market share at the others’ expense. The outcome both cooperatives have been seeking since Fonterra’s market entry in 2005.
Fonterra have reiterated the view that they warned farmers that the price paid did not reflect the collapse in global dairy prices yet appear to have left the responsibility to them to manage.
Worse, Fonterra’s CEO, Theo Speirings, has now defended the price cuton the grounds that their strategy is to repatriate profit for the benefit of their New Zealand shareholders. This overlooks that the majority that of tradeable shares are held by Australian superannuation funds and that Fonterra’s Australian suppliers had to be subsidising their New Zealand counterparts. How else do you explain the 30% increase in farm gate price on this side of the Tasman?
By contrast Murray Goulburn’s behaviour, especially that towards their suppliers, appears far more conciliatory. Murray Goulburn has been transparent about resignations from the board and management; open about reorganisation and appointment of their interim CEO, David Mallinson; and, shared with suppliers the prioritisation of effort.
They have now offered suppliers a Milk Supply Support Package designed to spread the impact of lower milk payments across the next three years. This package sits on the cooperative’s balance sheet - where it should - with no need to take on individual loans at supplier level.
Whether or not either company can emulate the recovery of Johnson &amp; Johnson remains to be seen, but it is reasonable to expect considerable energy, effort and enterprise being expended by them in the months that follow.
Telling evidence will be reflected in market share in 12 months.
This piece has been altered since publication to correct Fonterra’s annual gross revenue, which is $A17.61 billion and Murray Goulburn’s annual sales revenue, which is $A2.87 billion.
James Lockhart is senior lecturer, School of Management, Massey University and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/james-lockhart-265538" target="_blank">here</a>.
Danny Dinghy is professor of Dairy Production Systems, Massey University and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/danny-donaghy-265818" target="_blank">here</a>.
Hamish Gow is professor of Agribusiness, Massey University and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/hamish-gow-265539" target="_blank">here</a>. 
 
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

Murray Goulburn and Fonterra are playing chicken with dairy farmers

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/57114/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
The Australian dairy farming industry is in a state of crisis. Cheap dairy products and fluctuations in both the domestic and global markets have taken a financial toll on farmers. Consumers have rallied to help struggling dairy producers.
But this is only half the problem. The true cost of dairy is also paid by dairy cows and the environment.
<h2>Welfare problems</h2>
Despite the idyllic image of outdoor farming, several industry practices negatively affect dairy cows. To meet production demands, dairy cows are subject to a continuous cycle of impregnation, induced calving and milking.
Tail-docking and horn removal are routinely performed without pain relief. Lameness is another major animal welfare problem, often the result of environmental pressures, such as tracks, herd size and handling. The average lifespan of a dairy cow is six to seven years, whereas generally cows can live for 20 to 25 years.
One of the most controversial issues is young “bobby” calves. A bobby calf is a newborn calf, less than 30 days old, who has been purposely separated from their mother. Immediately after separation, cow and calf call out and search for each other.
Most bobby calves are slaughtered within the first week of their life. Handling and transport pose added problems for young calves who have not developed herding behaviours, are vulnerable to stress, and are forced to go without their mother’s milk. Each year, 450,000 bobby calves are slaughtered.
Advocacy groups frequently uncover the routine abuse of bobby calves in Australian abattoirs and challenge the dairy industry to do something about it.
Yet aside from the wider ethical questions over the use and exploitation of animals, farmers are not legally doing anything wrong. This is because the treatment of animals operates in a legal context where animals are considered absolute property.
What’s more, farm animals are exempt from the provisions of anti-cruelty legislation. Codes of practice are practically useless, because they promote low welfare standards and are unenforceable.
<h2>The environmental impact</h2>
As well as systematic welfare problems, livestock farming is, both directly and indirectly, one of the most ecologically harmful human activities. The Australian livestock sector is worth A$17 billion and dairy cattle farming is a A$4.2 billion industry.
In Australia, livestock farming accounts for 10 percent to 16 percent of greenhouse gas emissions, with dairy farms contributing 19 percent of this, or 3 percent of total emissions. Methane emissions, from digestion and manure, and nitrous oxide from livestock are significant contributors. Globally, the livestock sector is responsible for more greenhouse gases than the world’s transport.
Livestock production accounts for 70 percent of all agricultural land, including the land used to grow crops to feed these animals. Animal agriculture is a key factor in land degradation, deforestation, water stress, pollution, and loss of biodiversity.
Livestock farming will also be affected by climate change, particularly changes in temperature and water. The quantity and quality of pasture and forage crops will also be affected. Diseases may increase due to fluctuating weather and climate.
<h2>Emissions can be reduced</h2>
Just as the energy sector is attempting to transition to low-carbon energy sources to tackle climate change, the agricultural sector needs to transition to an ethical and sustainable alternative.
From the current crisis, there are several opportunities for farmers to seize. Large transitions are possible in land use, production, output and profitability.
Places such as Gippsland in Victoria, which currently produces 19% of Australia’s dairy, have the opportunity for agricultural development based on apples and brassicas, such as broccoli, kale, cauliflower, cabbage, turnip and mustard. Some of these crops are already popular in the region. As a result of climate change and increasing temperatures, some areas will be more suitable than others.
While still in the stages of research, perennial grain crops – which store more carbon, maintain better soil and water quality, and manage nutrients better than annuals – have the potential to contribute to sustainable agriculture. New land uses could also include carbon plantings, biofuels and bioenergy crops. Investing into further research for alternatives to livestock farming is needed.
Some have argued that livestock emissions can be technically mitigated by modifying animal feed, better managing pastures, carbon sequestration and manure storage.
<h2>Welfare issues remain</h2>
But technical mitigation does not address the endemic animal welfare problems in the livestock industry.
Consumer demand is one of the most powerful strategies to combat animal welfare and environmental problems. Research shows that we must reduce food waste and losses in the supply chain and change our diets toward less resource-intensive diets, such as a plant-based diets. Doing so would cut emissions by two-thirds and save lives. It’s possible to eliminate animal suffering and reduce carbon emissions by reducing and replacing livestock production and consumption.
Alternatives to dairy milk include soy and almond milk. Soy milk is nutritionally comparable to dairy milk and has a significantly smaller environmental footprint.
Policy initiatives also need to address these issues. The Food and Agriculture Organization’s Livestock’s Long Shadow report recommends a policy approach that correctly prices natural resources to reflect the full environmental costs and to end damaging subsidies. In the interim, higher taxes on meat and other livestock products will be necessary to improve public health and combat climate change.
Denmark, for instance, is considering proposals raise the tax on meat, after its ethics council concluded that “climate change is an ethical problem”.
Governments everywhere need to have a transitional plan for livestock producers and workers – one that helps to cultivate the ethical and sustainable agricultural endeavours of the future.
Gonzalo N Villanueva is PhD Candidate, School of Historical and Philosophical Studies, University of Melbourne and author for The Conversation. He can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/gonzalo-n-villanueva-14280" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

Dairy farmers are being ‘milked dry’, but let’s remember the real cost of milk

<html><body>
There had been limited rural sales activity in South West Victoria, according to Herron Todd White’s December 2016 report.
The property advisory firm says it was against the backdrop of above usual winter rain and the market for cattle and sheep continuing at high prices.
But there had been limited sales activity when spring is traditionally the busy marketing period for farms.
Agents report the stock of property put to the open market is down on previous years for spring.
The farms in a wetter than usual state and therefore considered not appropriate to market and the increased farm income from continued strong prices for beef cattle and sheep have influenced the reluctance to offer farms to the market.
But the valuation firm noted the market's albeit limited activity "indicates values have firmed."
Grazing property was best summarised as seeing a small number of sales matched by the demand from usually corporate buyers.
"Several large name holdings that are well developed including good infrastructure have recently sold after strong competition from prospective purchasers.
"These properties generally comprise an area in the order of 2,000 to 5,000 hectares and usually attract local buyers.
There is limited stock," the report advised.
The valuers inquiry was stronger where the property is a sound, productive, ready to go farm without need for capital works to improve.
"From this local buyer pool a limited number of sales have occurred for grazing farms ranging in area from approximately 40 to 200 hectares.
"The property which is well developed is more readily saleable compared to a property requiring improvement which is slow to sell unless the price reflects the state of the property."
As a broad benchmark, the value of grazing land is in the range of $7,000 to $8,650 per hectare (ex buildings).
HTW detected recent sales for broad acre grazing property through the Hamilton district pointing to a lesser difference in value compared to similar type properties through the Hawkesdale district.
It also advised, "not surprisingly", the dairy farm market has almost gone into hibernation.
It noted the November auction listing of a 400 acre/162 hectare <a href="https://landmarkharcourts.com.au/Property/647169/LTO3954/326-Cresent-Road" target="_blank">dairy farm at Simpson</a> through Landmark Harcourts Timboon.
It sold for $1,709,000, having been listed on and off over recent years with initial $6300 per acre hopes, then $5000 per acre expectations.
There was also a December offering of a 370 acre <a href="https://www.realestate.com.au/property-dairy-vic-princetown-7866946" target="_blank">dairy farm at Princetown</a> which remains for sale at $4800 per acre.
The district's rainfall was noted as making a big difference in South West Victoria.
"Full reservoirs and flooding to many regions in Echuca saw many worried about water damage to crops rather than turning the mowers into paddocks.
This resulted in significant demand in most districts with the main exception being irrigated properties which were held back mainly by price cuts in the dairy industry and challenges in the horticultural sector.
This has resulted in a significant shift upward in underlying land prices, particularly in the Mallee where modern farming techniques are boosting confidence of producers that a yield is possible even with below average rainfall with good management," HTW advised.
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

Limited spring 2016 rural sales activity in South West Victoria: HTW

<html><body>
Harvey Norman has appointed Elders to sell its Coomboona dairies operation in Victoria.
<a href="https://www.realestate.com.au/property-dairy-vic-coomboona-7975514" target="_blank">Coomboona Dairies</a> is being marketed as one of Australia's most advanced dairy aggregations, "recognised for its modern purpose-built infrastructure and premium quality milking herd."
It has utilised some of the world's highest profile registered Holstein genetics. Situated in the renowned Goulburn Valley region, Coomboona Dairies comprises 1,816 hectares, north west of Shepparton in Victoria.
It is currently milking in the vicinity of 2,500 Holstein cows.
<img src="https://res.cloudinary.com/dz9xllyip/image/fetch/c_scale,w_580,q_auto:good/https://s3-ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/po.images/2018/7/9/cattle2.jpg" alt="">
The dairy boasts annual milk production in excess of 30 million litres.
The aggregation is offered as a whole or in two contiguous parcels being Coomboona Dairies, 1,356 hectares and Glen Goulburn, with 460 hectares.
Offers are due August 16.
Harvey Norman bought a 49.9 per cent of Coomboona Holdings in 2015 for $34 million, with partnership difficulties soon emerging.
</body></html>

Harvey Norman list Coomboona Dairies

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
The supermarket giant Woolworths this week broke ranks and announced it was going to stop selling A$1 per litre milk. It will now charge A$1.10, or <a href="https://www.woolworthsgroup.com.au/page/media/Press_Releases/woolworths-to-transition-out-of-1-per-litre-fresh-milk-in-support-of-a-more-sustainable-australian-dairy-industry/" target="_blank">A$2.20 for two litres</a>.
Chief executive Brad Banducci made it clear that there was <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2019-02-18/woolworths-will-stop-selling-%241-per-litre-milk/10820954" target="_blank">more to the decision</a> than straightforward economics:
"We’ve heard the outlook will continue to be extremely tough for dairy farmers… This is affecting milk production and farm viability, which is devastating for farmers and the regional communities in which they live."
The Labor Party has been threatening to impose <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2019-02-20/labor-to-set-milk-floor-price-if-elected-in-2019/10827322" target="_blank">a minimum farm-gate price</a>.
Will what Woolworths is doing help farmers? Only a bit.
Milk prices are internationally set
The so-called “milk wars” began on Australia Day 2011 when Coles announced it was <a href="https://theconversation.com/milk-wars-pointing-the-finger-at-coles-and-woolworths-529" target="_blank">cutting milk prices to A$1 a litre</a>.
Woolworths and Aldi followed suit.
The milk market does not just consist of dairy farmers, supermarkets and customers. There are also the processors – companies such as the ASX-listed Murray Goulburn, Parmalat, Lion and Fonterra – that stand between farmers and supermarkets. Then there is the international market for dairy products like butter, cheese and milk powder.
The biggest determinant of farm gate prices in Australia is not what the major supermarkets do, but world dairy prices.
The <a href="http://www.agriculture.gov.au/ag-farm-food/meat-wool-dairy/dairy#the-dairy-levy" target="_blank">Department of Agriculture</a> says 37% of Australian milk production is exported.
Add to that the roughly 35% that goes into locally consumed butter, cheese and milk powder that is subject to competition from imports. You can quickly see the prices of nearly three-quarters of the milk produced in Australia are set globally.
<a href="https://www.businessinsider.com.au/milk-price-debate-australia-2016-5" target="_blank">Dairy Australia</a> has a higher estimate. Because even fresh milk is subject to foreign competition, it believes 90% of the annual movement in farm-gate prices comes from changes in international prices.
Those changes are beyond the effective control of Australian farmers and regulators.
Many of them are the result of changes in the exchange rate.
International prices are generally set in US dollars. That means a rising Australian dollar can cut the return to Australian farmers, while a falling Australian dollar can enhance it.
Processors get the cream
It is tempting to think an increase in retail prices, like the Woolworths 10 cents, would help farmers. But it normally wouldn’t, much.
Someone between the cow and the customer would get the 10 cents, but not necessarily the farmer.
When the <a href="https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/1395_Dairy%20inquiry%20final%20report.pdf" target="_blank">Australian Competition and Consumer Commission</a> examined the dairy industry last year it:
<ul>
<li>did not obtain any evidence that supermarket pricing, including $1 per litre milk, has a direct impact on farm-gate prices</li>
<li>Further, farmers’ lack of bargaining power means they are unlikely to benefit from an increase in the retail (or wholesale) prices of private label milk or other dairy products</li>
<li>Even if processors were to receive higher wholesale prices from sales to supermarkets, this does not mean the processors will pay farmers any more than they have to.</li>
</ul>
This time it will be different. Woolworths says “every cent of the increase will end up with Australian dairy farmers”. The processors <a href="https://www.woolworthsgroup.com.au/page/media/Press_Releases/woolworths-to-transition-out-of-1-per-litre-fresh-milk-in-support-of-a-more-sustainable-australian-dairy-industry/" target="_blank">have guaranteed it</a>.
Normally there would be no guarantee that an increase in the wholesale price would flow through to farmers. The processors could pocket it, and the inefficient ones could use it to stay in business, to the long-term detriment of customers.
Consumers are at one end of the line…
Banducci said Woolworths was “acutely aware of the budgetary pressures facing many of our customers and have not taken this decision lightly”.
He is right to recognise it will hurt customers.
It won’t, mind you, hurt customers who buy branded milk like a2 – <a href="https://a2milk.com.au/our-farms/?gclid=CjwKCAiAkrTjBRAoEiwAXpf9CcIT_IidGCd1H_yQd3TGWwoUIFISo770LtzmvP_EZ7Nw_NN0APGSMRoCzbsQAvD_BwE" target="_blank">whose marketing success under chief executive Jayne Hrdlicka</a> has pushed the value of the company to <a href="https://www.afr.com/business/retail/fmcg/a2-milk-posts-record-firsthalf-results-upgrades-guidance-20190219-h1bh1g" target="_blank">A$10 billion</a>, making it bigger than Lendlease, Medibank Private, the AMP and Coca-Cola Amatil. Not bad for a company that didn’t exist at the turn of the century.
Instead it will hurt customers who can afford it the least. For a typical family of four with <a href="https://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/4364.0.55.012%7E2011-12%7EMain%20Features%7EMilk,%20yoghurt,%20cheese%20and%20alternatives%7E17" target="_blank">average milk consumption</a>, the extra 10 cents a litre works out at about A$40 a year.
…and farmers at the other
Dairy farming is difficult, and much of Australia is less than ideally suited to it. Farmers have to contend with volatile prices, drought and isolation.
They are the least powerful players in the “value chain” that runs from cows to customers via importers, processors and supermarkets.
Neither government intervention nor higher retail prices can do much to help them.
Richard Holden, Professor of Economics, UNSW
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/vital-signs-why-more-expensive-milk-wont-help-farmers-much-112145" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Why more expensive milk won’t help farmers much: Richard Holden

<html><body>
The NSW Government has today followed through on one of its election promises, appointing the State’s very first Fresh Milk and Dairy Advocate. 
Minister for Agriculture Adam Marshall today announced Ian Zandstra would serve as NSW Fresh Milk and Dairy Advocate. 
Marshall said the Advocate would play a key role in helping to grow a stronger, more profitable dairy industry in NSW.  
“I’m absolutely delighted to announce Ian Zandstra will serve as our State’s first Fresh Milk and Dairy Advocate,” Marshall said. 
“Ian has a wealth of experience and is highly regarded across industry so is in a wonderful position to hit the ground running in this important role.  
“The Advocate will champion dairy in NSW by providing advice to both government and industry on how we can better support our producers and create more value across the entire supply chain. 
“There’s no doubt the NSW dairy industry has faced some serious challenges in recent years but I’m confident this role will provide the support our producers need and help ensure NSW remains a fresh milk State.” 
Zanstra said: “I’m absolutely honoured to be appointed to this role and look forward to working with industry and government to build a stronger dairy supply chain in NSW. 
“My first priority is to establish an industry Advisory Panel, which will play a key role in identifying immediate and necessary actions for the sector and shaping advice to the Government.” 
Parliamentary Secretary for Agriculture Michael Johnsen said he looked forward to working with Zanstra to build a stronger, more resilient dairy industry. 
“Mr Zandstra is a champion of industry and his appointment will come as great news to dairy producers across NSW,” Johnsen said.  
The Advocate will help provide a united voice for industry, deliver clear advice to Government and help drive profitability across the industry supply chain. 
They will also assist in the delivery of a Dairy Action Plan and a ‘buy local fresh milk’ campaign. 
 
</body></html>

Dairy Farming

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Dairy Farming

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News