Dairy Sheep Symposium - the Department of Animal Sciences ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

THE WISCONSIN SHEEP DAIRY COOPERATIVE – PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE Daniel P. Guertin Wisconsin Sheep Dairy Cooperative Strum, Wisconsin The sheep dairy industry in the upper Midwest began in the mid 1980s with a small group of Minnesota and Wisconsin sheep producers who began supplying sheep milk to a small cheese plant (LaPaysanne) in east central Minnesota that specialized in sheep milk cheeses. By the early 1990s, a second cheese plant (Bass Lake Cheese Factory) in northwestern Wisconsin had also began producing specialty cheeses from sheep milk. During these early days, sheep milk was sold as a food product and did not fall under the MN and WI requirements for milk. By the mid 1990s, sheep milk was reclassified as milk and became subject to the stricter state dairy regulations. Through the mid-1990s, all milk sales were direct sales from the farmers to the cheese plants. Each cheese plant was responsible for inspecting, licensing, and paying the individual farmers who they bought milk from. This led to a very management intensive situation for the cheese plants that required licensing and re-licensing of farms each time the individual farms shipped milk to a different cheese plant. This situation was complicated by the extremely volatile market for domestically produced sheep milk cheeses which led to alternating periods of high demand for sheep milk followed by periods of no demand for sheep milk. The volatility of the sheep cheese market and milk supply led to the demise of La Paysanne in 1995. In 1996, a third cheese plant (Montchevre), located in southwestern WI, expressed an interest in sheep milk. They indicated, however, that they were only interested in working with a single supply source for sheep milk that would handle all of the licensing, annual inspections, monthly milk sampling, inventory management and payment to individual farmers. This request led to a meeting in the spring of 1996 of existing and potential sheep dairy producers in the Midwest and the subsequent formation of a steering committee to determine the feasibility of establishing a sheep dairy cooperative. By September of 1997, the WSDC had been formed and registered as a cooperative in the state of WI. During the 1996 and 1997 milking seasons, the WSDC functioned as a Producer Agent for Montchevre. This meant that the co-op functioned under the dairy plant license of the cheese processor and performed all of the required inspections, testing and payments to individual farmers. In the spring of 1998, the WSDC became licensed as a Dairy Plant in the State of Wisconsin. This provided autonomy for the cooperative and allowed the co-op to begin marketing milk to additional customers. The original goals of WSDC were to: 1) market sheep milk produced by its members, 2) establish a stable market for sheep milk, 3) establish a stable supply of sheep milk and 4) provide the highest quality sheep milk available. In 1998, the WSDC received a grant from the State of Wisconsin’s Agricultural Development and Diversification Program to develop marketing strategies for the co-op. As part of this effort, and with the help of the University of Wisconsin Center for Cooperatives, the WSDC established a Three-Year Strategic Plan that incorporated the original goals of the cooperative.
The key points to this plan were: Year 1 - establish new markets for sheep milk - establish quality program to insure excellent quality milk - build infrastructure, management of inventory & transportation Year 2 - continue to build programs begun in Year 1 - seek partnership and joint venture opportunities - begin development of ‘Branded Product(s)’ Year 3 - continue to build on programs begun during Years 1 & 2 - introduce ‘Branded Product(s)’ to the marketplace The philosophy behind these goals is depicted in the figure below. We planned to build the base of the cooperative on milk sales. These sales would then provide operating income that would allow us to pursue partnerships and joint ventures. Revenues from these pursuits would then provide the funding needed to develop and market a branded product(s). At each step up the pyramid, the cooperative would take on higher levels of risk and, at the same time, realize greater profit per pound of milk as we added more value to the milk. Risk Branded Profit Products Partnerships Joint Ventures Milk Sales The co-op has met and continues to pursue all objectives related to milk sales and establishment of the infrastructure needed to support it. The following chart shows milk sales through the co-op over the last 6 years. As you can see, annual increases in sales have been very strong.
Page 1 and 2: Proceedings of the 7 th Great Lakes
Page 3 and 4: ORGANIZING COMMITTEE 7 TH GREAT LAK
Page 5 and 6: Thursday, November 1 Noon Registrat
Page 7 and 8: SPEAKERS Dr. Juan-José Arranz, Dpt
Page 9 and 10: Table of Contents (continued) Lates
Page 11 and 12: eeding and were created to have hig
Page 13 and 14: Disease in the U.K. and subsequentl
Page 15 and 16: sheep production conditions in Wisc
Page 17 and 18: Pinelli, F., P. A. Oltenacu, G. Ian
Page 19 and 20: Bucket milking and elevated platfor
Page 21 and 22: Throughputs in different parlors No
Page 23 and 24: 1 - Stand up as straight as possibl
Page 25 and 26: Roques J.L.. 1997. Traite des brebi
Page 27 and 28: Grade B milk quality is as follows:
Page 29 and 30: (c) Not Applicable (d) At least 10
Page 31 and 32: TOILET AND WATER SUPPLY 7. Toilet (
Page 33 and 34: (c) Drugs and medicinals shall be l
Page 35 and 36: FARMSTEAD CHEESE AND MARKETING Stev
Page 37 and 38: 5. Cheese is delivered in person, w
Page 39: to participate with us, we are enga
Page 43 and 44: Milk is supplied in two major forms
Page 45 and 46: MANAGEMENT OF A DAIRY SHEEP OPERATI
Page 47 and 48: 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 Chart 1: Mi
Page 49 and 50: Facilities and Equipment The requir
Page 51 and 52: from the ewes at 12 to 24 hours of
Page 53 and 54: COMPARISON OF EAST FRIESIAN AND LAC
Page 55 and 56: two-year-olds in 2001. East Friesia
Page 57 and 58: Reproduction. Table 4 compares the
Page 59 and 60: six ewes were sired by Lacaune ram
Page 61 and 62: FACTORS AFFECTING THE QUALITY OF EW
Page 63 and 64: Sheep Genetic factors breed and gen
Page 65 and 66: Genetic factors The breed and genot
Page 67 and 68: Physiological factors affecting she
Page 69 and 70: Management factors affecting the qu
Page 71 and 72: sheep with one peak of milk ejectio
Page 73 and 74: An important aspect of dietary fibr
Page 75 and 76: References Alais C. (1974). Science
Page 77 and 78: Bufano G., Dario C. and Laudadio V.
Page 79 and 80: Cowan R.T., Robinson J.J., McHattie
Page 81 and 82: Folman Y., Volcani R. and Eyal E. (
Page 83 and 84: Kalantzopoulos G. (1994). Influence
Page 85 and 86: McHattie I., Fraser C., Thompson J.
Page 87 and 88: Peart J.N. (1970). The influence of
Page 89 and 90: Ranieri M.S. (1993). La variazione
Page 91 and 92:
Treacher T.T. (1970). Effects of nu
Page 93 and 94:
EVALUATION OF SENSORY AND CHEMICAL
Page 95 and 96:
ing, the cheeses were brined for 18
Page 97 and 98:
The FFA concentrations generally in
Page 99 and 100:
Table 1. Composition of pasteurized
Page 101:
Table 6. Body and texture scores 1
Page 104 and 105:
Present Development of Selection Sc
Page 106 and 107:
Breed Usage in Europe Crossbreeding
Page 108 and 109:
nearly 1. As a consequence this cha
Page 110 and 111:
Table 5. Repeatabilities and phenot
Page 112 and 113:
percentage is not expected to resul
Page 114 and 115:
Improved AI technique Artificial in
Page 116 and 117:
Identifying major genes or QTL rela
Page 118 and 119:
Figure 5. Half-sib families and QTL
Page 120 and 121:
In the case of cheese the problem i
Page 122 and 123:
Emanuelson, U., Danell, B., Philips
Page 124 and 125:
Rothschild, M. F., Soller, M. (1997
Page 126 and 127:
teat placement in dairy ewes (Fern
Page 128 and 129:
that of the average milking time. M
Page 130 and 131:
1988) and active expulsion of fat f
Page 132 and 133:
References Barillet, F., and F. Boc
Page 134 and 135:
Table 1. Least squares means ± SEM
Page 136 and 137:
Table 3. Simulation of parlor throu
Page 138 and 139:
EFFECT OF REDUCING THE FREQUENCY OF
Page 140 and 141:
Individual ewe milk production (mor
Page 142 and 143:
dimanche soir sur les brebis de rac
Page 144 and 145:
A B A Morning milk yield, kg B Adj.
Page 146 and 147:
Background and History: Most sheep
Page 148 and 149:
Percent 100 80 60 40 20 0 87 Effect
Page 150 and 151:
Fall Lambing Percentage 100 90 80 7
Page 152 and 153:
THE EFFECT OF GROWTH RATE ON MAMMAR
Page 154 and 155:
After puberty, the mammary gland re
Page 156 and 157:
Many trials have examined the mamma
Page 158 and 159:
From these results the authors conc
Page 160 and 161:
Onset of Puberty and Reproductive P
Page 162 and 163:
Similarly, calves, heifers, and cow
Page 164 and 165:
McCann, M. A., Goode, L., Harvey, R
Page 166 and 167:
DISCUSSION Stability of Frozen Raw
Page 168 and 169:
analyzed for titratable acidity, sy
Page 170:
411-416. Wendorff, W.L. 1998. Updat
Page 175 and 176:
Recent Outbreaks involving Cheddar
Page 177 and 178:
testing on raw milk at the farm. Th
Page 179 and 180:
THE AUSTRALIAN SHEEP DAIRY INDUSTRY
Page 181 and 182:
The University of Western Australia
Page 183 and 184:
Heterosis did not seem to intervene
Page 185 and 186:
Lambs The problem of weaning lambs
Page 187 and 188:
GROUP BREEDING SCHEME: A FEASIBLE S
Page 189 and 190:
Where: h = square root of heritabil
Page 191 and 192:
Second step. All members enroll in
Page 193 and 194:
The structure and movement of anima
Page 195 and 196:
CAN THE OVARY INFLUENCE MILK PRODUC
Page 197 and 198:
dividing the amount of milk obtaine
Page 199 and 200:
the CL there were significant diffe
Page 201 and 202:
etween milkings. Finally, this woul
Page 203 and 204:
Table 1. Least squares means ± SEM
Page 205 and 206:
A Daily milk yield (kg) A B Milk fl
Page 207 and 208:
Progesterone (ng/ml) 8 6 4 2 0 CLY:
Page 209 and 210:
milk volume within the cistern (Mar
Page 211 and 212:
Results Treatment milk yield increa
Page 213 and 214:
Reports in dairy cattle concerning
Page 215 and 216:
Muir, D.D., D.S. Horne, A.J.R. Law,
Page 217 and 218:
Milk yield (kg) 1.4 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6
Page 219 and 220:
A Milk protein (%) A A Milk protein
Page 221 and 222:
TAPPE FARM TOUR Jon & Kris Tappe, T
Page 223:
a little special attention every da
show all

Dairy Sheep Symposium - the Department of Animal Sciences ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?