WEBVTT 00:00:11.720 --> 00:00:15.060 Breaking free from the chains of the past Where 00:00:15.060 --> 00:00:18.820 truth moves faster than a Holstein calf No law 00:00:18.820 --> 00:00:21.660 waiting on some printed page We're charting new 00:00:21.660 --> 00:00:25.300 ground in the digital age From genomic codes 00:00:25.300 --> 00:00:29.120 to robot facts We cut through the noise, no hold 00:00:29.280 --> 00:00:32.460 them back not your daddy's dairy news tonight 00:00:32.460 --> 00:01:03.060 we're sparking Welcome to the Bullvine Podcast, 00:01:03.520 --> 00:01:05.980 the show where we cut through the noise and get 00:01:05.980 --> 00:01:09.159 straight to what matters in dairy. I'm your host 00:01:09.159 --> 00:01:11.840 from the Bullvine, and today we're diving into 00:01:11.840 --> 00:01:14.859 another hot topic shaping the future of our industry. 00:01:15.280 --> 00:01:18.760 Whether you're milking cows before sunrise, managing 00:01:18.760 --> 00:01:21.799 a progressive herd, or just passionate about 00:01:21.799 --> 00:01:24.219 all things dairy, you're in the right place. 00:01:24.620 --> 00:01:27.659 So grab your coffee or your favorite milkshake, 00:01:27.739 --> 00:01:31.230 and let's get started. Okay, picture this. There's 00:01:31.230 --> 00:01:33.750 a line item on your dairy farm that, according 00:01:33.750 --> 00:01:38.090 to one analysis, could be bleeding you $36 ,740 00:01:38.090 --> 00:01:42.090 every single year for every 200 cows you milk. 00:01:42.209 --> 00:01:44.870 Wow. And it's not just the cash going out. It 00:01:44.870 --> 00:01:46.969 might actually be hurting your butterfat tests. 00:01:47.170 --> 00:01:50.129 Sounds wild, right? Yeah. Especially when we've 00:01:50.129 --> 00:01:51.930 always thought of that expense as the engine 00:01:51.930 --> 00:01:55.069 driving cow visits in robotic systems. It absolutely 00:01:55.069 --> 00:01:57.090 flies in the face of conventional wisdom for 00:01:57.090 --> 00:01:59.469 robotic dairies. I mean, most people think pellets 00:01:59.469 --> 00:02:03.329 in the robot are non -negotiable. Right. But 00:02:03.329 --> 00:02:05.370 the Bullvine article we're deep diving into today 00:02:05.370 --> 00:02:07.689 presents some pretty compelling data that seriously 00:02:07.689 --> 00:02:10.409 challenges that assumption. It does. Welcome 00:02:10.409 --> 00:02:13.229 to the Deep Dive. Today, we're unpacking a specific 00:02:13.229 --> 00:02:17.389 article from www .thebullvine .com that takes 00:02:17.389 --> 00:02:19.729 a hard look at something many robotic dairy operators 00:02:19.729 --> 00:02:23.039 just accept. the cost and impact of feeding pellets 00:02:23.039 --> 00:02:25.080 in the robot. Yeah, our mission today is really 00:02:25.080 --> 00:02:27.139 to distill the core arguments from this Bullvine 00:02:27.139 --> 00:02:29.240 article. We'll look at the data, the real world 00:02:29.240 --> 00:02:31.419 examples they highlight, really dig into the 00:02:31.419 --> 00:02:33.479 crucial why, you know, the physiology behind 00:02:33.479 --> 00:02:35.740 the impact. We'll explore the non -negotiable 00:02:35.740 --> 00:02:38.099 steps for making this transition, look honestly 00:02:38.099 --> 00:02:40.360 at who this strategy isn't suited for, and hopefully 00:02:40.360 --> 00:02:42.520 leave you with practical takeaways you can immediately 00:02:42.520 --> 00:02:45.259 consider for your own farm. And the article frames 00:02:45.259 --> 00:02:48.860 robot pellets not just as a feed cost, but almost 00:02:48.860 --> 00:02:52.400 like, well, They call them the dairy industry's 00:02:52.400 --> 00:02:55.180 most expensive security blanket. A bit funny, 00:02:55.259 --> 00:02:58.240 but maybe true. Huh. Yeah, that's a good line. 00:02:58.400 --> 00:02:59.759 So we're going to talk through this like we're 00:02:59.759 --> 00:03:02.479 having coffee at the feed bunk, examining the 00:03:02.479 --> 00:03:05.340 numbers, the biology, and asking if cloning to 00:03:05.340 --> 00:03:07.120 that blanket is costing more than it's worth. 00:03:07.520 --> 00:03:09.639 And as you hinted, it's not just the direct cost. 00:03:09.780 --> 00:03:12.120 The article builds a strong case that the way 00:03:12.120 --> 00:03:15.080 cows consume pellets in the robot actively works 00:03:15.080 --> 00:03:17.620 against key performance indicators, particularly 00:03:17.620 --> 00:03:20.520 component percentages like butterfat. Okay, let's 00:03:20.520 --> 00:03:22.879 get right into that problem statement then. The 00:03:22.879 --> 00:03:25.240 main assertion from the Bullvine article is stark. 00:03:25.740 --> 00:03:28.919 Robot pellets are an expensive habit. We mentioned 00:03:28.919 --> 00:03:33.879 that $36 ,740 figure per 200 cows, which, you 00:03:33.879 --> 00:03:36.530 know, no matter your scale, Isn't pocket change. 00:03:36.669 --> 00:03:38.469 Not at all. Where does the bulk of that number 00:03:38.469 --> 00:03:40.969 come from? Well, the largest piece is the feed 00:03:40.969 --> 00:03:43.389 itself. The article cites research indicating 00:03:43.389 --> 00:03:47.310 robot pellets carry a premium of roughly $30 00:03:47.310 --> 00:03:51.370 .23 per pound compared to a well -balanced TMR. 00:03:52.150 --> 00:03:54.490 When you factor that into a typical feeding scenario 00:03:54.490 --> 00:03:57.289 for a 200 -cow herd, you're looking at roughly 00:03:57.289 --> 00:04:00.849 $31 ,500 annually just from the cost difference 00:04:00.849 --> 00:04:03.050 of the feed delivered in the robot versus feeding 00:04:03.050 --> 00:04:05.810 it in the bunk. So over 31 grand is just a direct 00:04:05.810 --> 00:04:09.210 premium on the feed. Wow. But the article says 00:04:09.210 --> 00:04:11.189 it's not just about paying more for pellets. 00:04:11.189 --> 00:04:12.949 It's also costing you on the milk check side. 00:04:13.289 --> 00:04:15.889 Exactly. That's the second major point. And arguably 00:04:15.889 --> 00:04:20.230 the more insidious cost is the potential harm 00:04:20.230 --> 00:04:23.129 to component percentages. The physiology section 00:04:23.129 --> 00:04:25.250 of the article makes a compelling case that feeding 00:04:25.250 --> 00:04:27.610 pellets in the robot can suppress butterfat levels. 00:04:27.870 --> 00:04:30.050 Okay, so the promise, if you follow the path 00:04:30.050 --> 00:04:32.230 laid out in the article and successfully move 00:04:32.230 --> 00:04:35.250 away from routine pellet feeding, is pretty significant 00:04:35.250 --> 00:04:37.990 then. slash that high feed cost, and potentially 00:04:37.990 --> 00:04:41.550 boost butterfat by 0 .2 to 0 .4%. Yeah, that's 00:04:41.550 --> 00:04:43.589 the potential gain. That's the route to serious 00:04:43.589 --> 00:04:45.970 profitability, the article describes. And importantly, 00:04:46.230 --> 00:04:48.050 they don't present this as just theory, right? 00:04:48.149 --> 00:04:50.470 The article is heavily supported by real -world 00:04:50.470 --> 00:04:52.509 farm examples, showing that producers are successfully 00:04:52.509 --> 00:04:54.370 implementing this approach and seeing these results. 00:04:54.589 --> 00:04:56.949 They really lean on the evidence. Like, take 00:04:56.949 --> 00:04:59.449 Heeg Bros in Wisconsin. The article points to 00:04:59.449 --> 00:05:02.689 their operation implying around 450 cows hitting 00:05:02.689 --> 00:05:06.319 impressive daily numbers. Over 48 kilograms of 00:05:06.319 --> 00:05:10.279 milk per cow and a 4 .55 % butterfat test. That's 00:05:10.279 --> 00:05:12.740 huge. And how many robot pellets are they feeding? 00:05:13.040 --> 00:05:16.079 Zero. None. See, that larger operation is a powerful 00:05:16.079 --> 00:05:18.639 illustration that high production and excellent 00:05:18.639 --> 00:05:21.459 components are achievable without pellets. But 00:05:21.459 --> 00:05:24.040 the article also includes smaller examples mentioned 00:05:24.040 --> 00:05:25.920 by the University of Gulf Extension showing it's 00:05:25.920 --> 00:05:28.600 not just for big herds. Right. Like that 41 cow 00:05:28.600 --> 00:05:31.420 operation in Ontario hitting 41 kilograms daily 00:05:31.420 --> 00:05:35.240 with three visits per cow. Or the 77 cow jersey 00:05:35.240 --> 00:05:38.379 herd at 22 kilogram daily with 2 .35 visits. 00:05:38.600 --> 00:05:41.000 Right. These farms are also operating successfully 00:05:41.000 --> 00:05:43.379 without relying on robot pellets as the primary 00:05:43.379 --> 00:05:45.819 motivator. These examples really prove it's a 00:05:45.819 --> 00:05:48.040 viable management strategy across different sizes 00:05:48.040 --> 00:05:50.939 and breeds. Combining that confirmed feed cost 00:05:50.939 --> 00:05:53.060 difference with the potential component upside, 00:05:53.180 --> 00:05:56.220 the economic argument moves from, you know, interesting 00:05:56.220 --> 00:06:00.339 theory to proven farm reality. Okay, let's get 00:06:00.339 --> 00:06:03.629 into the how. Why would not feeding pellets actually 00:06:03.629 --> 00:06:06.029 help butterfat? That seems counterintuitive. 00:06:06.209 --> 00:06:08.569 The article does a great job breaking down the 00:06:08.569 --> 00:06:11.769 physiology. It does. The core concept is something 00:06:11.769 --> 00:06:14.750 they call slug feeding. Basically, this is what 00:06:14.750 --> 00:06:17.250 happens when a cow stands in the robot and rapidly 00:06:17.250 --> 00:06:19.810 consumes a concentrated feed like pellets in 00:06:19.810 --> 00:06:22.519 a short burst. Like us wolfing down a quick snack 00:06:22.519 --> 00:06:24.959 versus eating a balanced meal slowly. Is that 00:06:24.959 --> 00:06:27.639 the idea? Exactly the analogy they use. That 00:06:27.639 --> 00:06:29.980 rapid intake of readily fermentable carbohydrates 00:06:29.980 --> 00:06:33.139 causes a sudden significant drop in rumen pH. 00:06:33.579 --> 00:06:36.220 The article references research like from UC 00:06:36.220 --> 00:06:38.839 Davis Veterinary Medicine explaining how these 00:06:38.839 --> 00:06:41.759 pH crashes cause a dramatic shift in the microbial 00:06:41.759 --> 00:06:44.060 populations within the rumen. And that microbial 00:06:44.060 --> 00:06:45.959 shift disrupts butterfat production. Is that 00:06:45.959 --> 00:06:48.720 the link? Precisely. The bacteria that thrive 00:06:48.720 --> 00:06:51.740 in a higher, more stable pH environment, those 00:06:51.740 --> 00:06:53.639 are the ones that efficiently digest fiber and 00:06:53.639 --> 00:06:56.220 produce acetate. And acetate is the primary building 00:06:56.220 --> 00:06:59.519 block for butterfat. So when pH drops, those 00:06:59.519 --> 00:07:01.939 beneficial fiber digesters are suppressed and 00:07:01.939 --> 00:07:04.160 you get a proliferation of acid -producing microbes 00:07:04.160 --> 00:07:07.629 instead. This also significantly increases the 00:07:07.629 --> 00:07:10.509 risk of sera subacute ruminal acidosis. Which 00:07:10.509 --> 00:07:12.310 is the last thing you want for herd health and 00:07:12.310 --> 00:07:14.970 production. Absolutely. The article, backing 00:07:14.970 --> 00:07:18.310 it with USDA ARS research, links this physiological 00:07:18.310 --> 00:07:22.290 reality directly to that observed 0 .2 -0 .4 00:07:22.290 --> 00:07:25.410 % butterfat increase seen on farms that successfully 00:07:25.410 --> 00:07:27.870 transition away from pellet slug feeding. It's 00:07:27.870 --> 00:07:30.430 not magic, it's just... Well, it's allowing basic 00:07:30.430 --> 00:07:32.149 rumen function to operate more consistently, 00:07:32.310 --> 00:07:37.110 supported by a steady intake of... And quantifying 00:07:37.110 --> 00:07:39.430 that butterfat increase really seals the deal 00:07:39.430 --> 00:07:44.089 economically. A 0 .20 -0 .4 % bump can add over 00:07:44.089 --> 00:07:47.410 $10 ,000 annually for a 200 -cow herd at current 00:07:47.410 --> 00:07:49.110 component prices. So you're not just cutting 00:07:49.110 --> 00:07:51.269 costs, you're enhancing revenue. It significantly 00:07:51.269 --> 00:07:55.100 strengthens the economic case. However... And 00:07:55.100 --> 00:07:58.040 this is a big however. The Bullvine article is 00:07:58.040 --> 00:08:00.939 brutally honest. This is not a simple switch. 00:08:01.139 --> 00:08:04.360 Right. They outline three absolutely critical 00:08:04.360 --> 00:08:06.819 things you must get right. And they note that 00:08:06.819 --> 00:08:09.639 many farms fail spectacularly on one or more 00:08:09.639 --> 00:08:11.399 of these pillars. OK, let's look at those non 00:08:11.399 --> 00:08:13.740 -negotiables. The first one sounds like it's 00:08:13.740 --> 00:08:17.120 literally cast in concrete. Pillar one. Pillar 00:08:17.120 --> 00:08:20.769 one. Barn layout is king. The article is unequivocal. 00:08:20.930 --> 00:08:23.290 You cannot just pull pellets in a free flow barn 00:08:23.290 --> 00:08:26.449 and expect success. It will fail. Hard. Really? 00:08:26.550 --> 00:08:29.370 Why so definitive? They cite Michigan State University 00:08:29.370 --> 00:08:32.370 research showing free flow barns need 3 .2 times 00:08:32.370 --> 00:08:34.590 more pellets than guided traffic systems just 00:08:34.590 --> 00:08:37.250 to maintain robot visits. Oh, three times more. 00:08:37.470 --> 00:08:39.370 Yeah. Because without the layout pushing them 00:08:39.370 --> 00:08:41.549 towards the robot, there's no motivation once 00:08:41.549 --> 00:08:43.850 the pellet reward is gone. Precisely. Guided 00:08:43.850 --> 00:08:46.169 flow systems are essential because they use gates 00:08:46.169 --> 00:08:48.879 and alleyways to direct cows. basically forcing 00:08:48.879 --> 00:08:50.899 them through the robot path as the most convenient 00:08:50.899 --> 00:08:53.139 way to access the feed bunk or return to their 00:08:53.139 --> 00:08:55.720 pens. So the layout becomes the incentive. Right. 00:08:56.000 --> 00:08:58.639 This structural guidance replaces the pellet 00:08:58.639 --> 00:09:00.820 incentive as the primary motivator for robot 00:09:00.820 --> 00:09:03.700 visits. The article specifies the key requirements. 00:09:04.190 --> 00:09:06.950 short return alleys back to feed, less than 75 00:09:06.950 --> 00:09:09.909 meters ideally, functional pre -selection gates, 00:09:10.129 --> 00:09:13.389 and absolutely zero ability for cows to backtrack 00:09:13.389 --> 00:09:15.850 around the robot. Even experienced farms like 00:09:15.850 --> 00:09:18.149 Heeg Bros had a learning curve on this, apparently. 00:09:18.850 --> 00:09:22.210 Kelly Hutchings from Delaval mentions their first 00:09:22.210 --> 00:09:24.830 group of cows trying to bypass the robots initially. 00:09:24.909 --> 00:09:27.710 It just underscores how the physical environment 00:09:27.710 --> 00:09:30.240 must support the behavior you want. It really 00:09:30.240 --> 00:09:32.559 highlights that your layout is the foundation. 00:09:32.860 --> 00:09:35.559 If that's not right, the rest won't matter. Pillar 00:09:35.559 --> 00:09:37.779 two is the one the article suggests trips up 00:09:37.779 --> 00:09:40.840 most farms. Ah, the legendary TMR quality. I 00:09:40.840 --> 00:09:43.259 had a feeling this was coming. Yes. The article 00:09:43.259 --> 00:09:46.200 is incredibly direct here. Your TMR must be freaking 00:09:46.200 --> 00:09:48.519 amazing and consistent. That's the quote. Freaking 00:09:48.519 --> 00:09:51.220 amazing. They describe it as requiring obsessive 00:09:51.220 --> 00:09:53.899 attention to details. Farms that succeed here 00:09:53.899 --> 00:09:56.559 are absolutely fanatical about their TMR. They 00:09:56.559 --> 00:09:59.379 even provide specific. non -negotiable parameters, 00:09:59.639 --> 00:10:01.940 right? Like numbers. They do. Pulling from sources 00:10:01.940 --> 00:10:04.960 like UW -Madison Dairy Science, we're talking 00:10:04.960 --> 00:10:07.820 physical consistency day -to -day with less than 00:10:07.820 --> 00:10:10.460 3 % variation. That means it looks and feels 00:10:10.460 --> 00:10:13.279 the same every single day. Less than 3 % variation. 00:10:13.340 --> 00:10:16.419 That's tight. It is minimum NDF digestibility 00:10:16.419 --> 00:10:20.039 of 65%, feed pushed up at least eight times daily, 00:10:20.299 --> 00:10:23.899 moisture levels kept tight between 46 -52 % to 00:10:23.899 --> 00:10:26.320 minimize sorting, daily variation in critical 00:10:26.320 --> 00:10:28.899 nutrients kept under 2%, and consistent particle 00:10:28.899 --> 00:10:31.399 length distribution with less than 5 % variation 00:10:31.399 --> 00:10:34.220 in key particle sizes. That level of consistency 00:10:34.220 --> 00:10:36.679 sounds incredibly challenging to achieve on a 00:10:36.679 --> 00:10:39.740 working farm, day in, day out. How are farms 00:10:39.740 --> 00:10:41.179 actually managing that? Well, that's where the 00:10:41.179 --> 00:10:43.019 obsessive attention comes in. It means rigorous 00:10:43.019 --> 00:10:45.519 feed delivery protocols, regular mixer wagon 00:10:45.519 --> 00:10:47.639 audits using tools like that UW -Madison one 00:10:47.639 --> 00:10:49.960 they mentioned, strict moisture checks on silages, 00:10:50.139 --> 00:10:52.639 monitoring particle separation at the bunk constantly. 00:10:52.700 --> 00:10:55.370 So it's constant vigilance. It really is. The 00:10:55.370 --> 00:10:57.549 article emphasizes that this isn't just about 00:10:57.549 --> 00:11:00.330 nutrition. It's about creating a physically consistent 00:11:00.330 --> 00:11:03.850 palatable feed that cows cannot easily sort. 00:11:03.950 --> 00:11:06.490 If your cows can pick through the TMR like a 00:11:06.490 --> 00:11:08.990 kid leaving vegetables on a dinner plate within 00:11:08.990 --> 00:11:11.289 an hour or two of it being delivered. Yeah. The 00:11:11.289 --> 00:11:13.710 article's blunt assessment is you're not ready 00:11:13.710 --> 00:11:16.950 for pellet free milking. Full stop. Ouch. That 00:11:16.950 --> 00:11:19.269 kid's dinner plate analogy really paints a picture, 00:11:19.330 --> 00:11:21.820 though. It does, and the sensitivity is real. 00:11:22.000 --> 00:11:24.240 There's a quote from Fred Van Lift that's eye 00:11:24.240 --> 00:11:26.860 -opening. Skip one push -up, you'll see 18 % 00:11:26.860 --> 00:11:30.360 fewer robot visits by dinner. 18 % fewer visits 00:11:30.360 --> 00:11:34.019 from missing one push -up. Wow. That shows how 00:11:34.019 --> 00:11:36.360 critical constant access to this consistent, 00:11:36.500 --> 00:11:39.299 unsorted TMR is, because it becomes the primary 00:11:39.299 --> 00:11:41.419 driver for the cow to spend time near the robot 00:11:41.419 --> 00:11:44.340 area. They do mention using palatability enhancers 00:11:44.340 --> 00:11:46.259 like molasses during the transition phase can 00:11:46.259 --> 00:11:48.500 be helpful, just to encourage that initial TMR 00:11:48.500 --> 00:11:50.940 consumption. Okay, so we need the right layout 00:11:50.940 --> 00:11:53.759 and absolutely perfect TMR. It was the third 00:11:53.759 --> 00:11:56.100 piece, pillar three. Pillar three is the shift 00:11:56.100 --> 00:12:00.299 in labor focus. And the article tackles the potentially 00:12:00.299 --> 00:12:03.259 uncomfortable reality here. This isn't necessarily 00:12:03.259 --> 00:12:05.500 less work, at least initially, it's different 00:12:05.500 --> 00:12:08.399 work. Ah. So you're trading one kind of work 00:12:08.399 --> 00:12:10.259 for another. Pretty much. You're shifting effort 00:12:10.259 --> 00:12:13.000 from managing complex pellet feeding tables in 00:12:13.000 --> 00:12:17.000 the robot software to intensive cow observation 00:12:17.000 --> 00:12:19.779 and fetch protocols. The article quantifies that, 00:12:19.840 --> 00:12:22.580 too, suggesting fetch labor might increase from 00:12:22.580 --> 00:12:26.299 around 1 .2 to maybe 1 .9 hours daily for a 200 00:12:26.299 --> 00:12:28.860 -cow herd. Yeah. That's an additional labor cost, 00:12:28.960 --> 00:12:33.220 right? Estimated around $8 ,760 annually based 00:12:33.220 --> 00:12:35.789 on some VitaPlus loyal data, they cited. It's 00:12:35.789 --> 00:12:37.409 important to acknowledge that cost, absolutely. 00:12:37.730 --> 00:12:40.110 But the article points out the net economic benefit 00:12:40.110 --> 00:12:42.730 from feed savings and component gains still far 00:12:42.730 --> 00:12:45.210 outweighs it. The crucial element here isn't 00:12:45.210 --> 00:12:47.409 just the time, it's the discipline. Discipline 00:12:47.409 --> 00:12:50.279 and fetching. Total discipline. Implementing 00:12:50.279 --> 00:12:53.080 absolutely strict, consistent fetch protocols 00:12:53.080 --> 00:12:56.179 like checking every cow over 10 hours since last 00:12:56.179 --> 00:12:58.419 milking and fetching them immediately with no 00:12:58.419 --> 00:13:02.159 exceptions ever is non -negotiable. The article 00:13:02.159 --> 00:13:04.179 warns that inconsistent fetching is one of the 00:13:04.179 --> 00:13:07.559 fastest ways to derail the entire system. Okay, 00:13:07.620 --> 00:13:10.360 for many farms, consistent labor and sticking 00:13:10.360 --> 00:13:13.419 to protocols are already huge challenges. How 00:13:13.419 --> 00:13:15.899 do farms successfully navigate that labor shift 00:13:15.899 --> 00:13:18.929 and ensure that discipline? Seems like a management 00:13:18.929 --> 00:13:21.009 hurdle. It is a significant management hurdle, 00:13:21.090 --> 00:13:23.309 and the article implies it requires serious buy 00:13:23.309 --> 00:13:26.269 -in and training for the whole team. The experience 00:13:26.269 --> 00:13:28.750 of Matt Strickland in California is illustrative 00:13:28.750 --> 00:13:31.529 here. He took a very gradual approach, phasing 00:13:31.529 --> 00:13:34.049 down pellets over an entire year. Oh, a year. 00:13:34.149 --> 00:13:36.629 Yeah, and even now, he still has about seven 00:13:36.629 --> 00:13:39.029 cows who receive a minimal pellet allocation 00:13:39.029 --> 00:13:41.169 because that's what works best for them individually. 00:13:41.509 --> 00:13:44.539 His perspective is key. I didn't invest in robots 00:13:44.539 --> 00:13:47.259 to feed my cows. I got the robots to milk my 00:13:47.259 --> 00:13:49.580 cows. That's a great quote. It shows patience 00:13:49.580 --> 00:13:51.799 pays off, and the goal isn't necessarily 100 00:13:51.799 --> 00:13:55.039 % zero pellets for every single cow, but finding 00:13:55.039 --> 00:13:57.600 the optimal allocation for each operation's specific 00:13:57.600 --> 00:14:00.519 conditions, as Dr. Bill Weiss from OSU suggests. 00:14:00.840 --> 00:14:03.039 It brings in that nuance. Yeah, that perspective 00:14:03.039 --> 00:14:05.039 from Dr. Weiss is important. It's about optimization, 00:14:05.299 --> 00:14:08.600 not just elimination for the sake of it. Okay, 00:14:08.679 --> 00:14:11.440 let's circle back to the dollars and cents. The 00:14:11.440 --> 00:14:13.379 article provides a summary of the math. Can you 00:14:13.379 --> 00:14:15.559 walk us through that? Sure. It basically confirms 00:14:15.559 --> 00:14:17.139 the significant economic difference we talked 00:14:17.139 --> 00:14:20.200 about. For that 200 -cow herd example, the estimated 00:14:20.200 --> 00:14:24.580 $36 ,740 net annual difference comes from roughly 00:14:24.580 --> 00:14:27.799 $3 ,500 in feed cost savings, offset by about 00:14:27.799 --> 00:14:31.600 $8 ,760 in increased fesh labor, plus over $10 00:14:31.600 --> 00:14:34.899 ,400 gained from just a 0 .2 % butterfat bump, 00:14:35.019 --> 00:14:38.220 and an estimated $3 ,600 saved on wasted robot 00:14:38.220 --> 00:14:40.799 feed. It really crystallizes where the savings 00:14:40.799 --> 00:14:42.539 and gains come from. And there was that Vita 00:14:42.539 --> 00:14:45.080 Plus Loyal survey cited in the article looking 00:14:45.080 --> 00:14:48.460 at 32 robotic herds. seemed to back up this counterintuitive 00:14:48.460 --> 00:14:51.519 idea, too. It did. That survey showed that high 00:14:51.519 --> 00:14:54.279 robot pellet costs actually hurt income over 00:14:54.279 --> 00:14:57.659 feed cost and even negatively impacted milk production 00:14:57.659 --> 00:15:00.279 per visit, which is not what you'd expect. No. 00:15:00.750 --> 00:15:02.990 What's particularly interesting is the survey 00:15:02.990 --> 00:15:05.289 found the herds with the highest income over 00:15:05.289 --> 00:15:08.169 feed cost were often either feeding very low 00:15:08.169 --> 00:15:11.870 cost pellets or focusing on nutrient dense PMRs 00:15:11.870 --> 00:15:14.789 with less reliance on the robot feeder. Exactly 00:15:14.789 --> 00:15:17.409 the nutritional shift this pellet free strategy 00:15:17.409 --> 00:15:20.350 achieves. So the data seems to be challenging 00:15:20.350 --> 00:15:22.669 the traditional thinking. It really does. It's 00:15:22.669 --> 00:15:25.149 powerful data suggesting the traditional approach 00:15:25.149 --> 00:15:27.850 isn't always the most profitable. It's a strong 00:15:27.850 --> 00:15:30.909 case, but. The article is balanced enough to 00:15:30.909 --> 00:15:33.169 say this isn't a magic bullet for everyone, right? 00:15:33.289 --> 00:15:35.590 Yeah. There are situations where maintaining 00:15:35.590 --> 00:15:38.610 pellets still makes sense. Absolutely. It stresses 00:15:38.610 --> 00:15:40.590 this isn't some ideological movement. It's a 00:15:40.590 --> 00:15:42.970 profitability strategy and it might not fit your 00:15:42.970 --> 00:15:45.610 specific farm. The article is clear on the scenarios 00:15:45.610 --> 00:15:48.190 where pellets might still be necessary or beneficial. 00:15:48.509 --> 00:15:50.490 Top of that list has to be the free flow barns 00:15:50.490 --> 00:15:53.399 we already mentioned. Unquestionably, the MSU 00:15:53.399 --> 00:15:56.039 research is pretty definitive. They need 3 .2 00:15:56.039 --> 00:15:59.720 times more pellets just to function. Trying to 00:15:59.720 --> 00:16:02.399 go pellet -free in a free -flow system is likely 00:16:02.399 --> 00:16:06.200 doomed to fail. Okay. What about those elite, 00:16:06.340 --> 00:16:09.460 high -genetic cows pushing the limits? Does it 00:16:09.460 --> 00:16:12.389 work for them? That's a key exception. The article 00:16:12.389 --> 00:16:14.970 includes perspectives from experts like Dr. Michael 00:16:14.970 --> 00:16:17.850 Overton at the University of Georgia. He argues 00:16:17.850 --> 00:16:20.529 that very high -producing, high -genetic merit 00:16:20.529 --> 00:16:23.509 herds might actually metabolically benefit from 00:16:23.509 --> 00:16:25.409 the targeted nutrient delivery pellets provided 00:16:25.409 --> 00:16:28.039 during milking. So for those top cows... the 00:16:28.039 --> 00:16:29.879 pellets might still be worth it. Potentially. 00:16:29.879 --> 00:16:32.220 For these animals, where every gram of energy 00:16:32.220 --> 00:16:34.340 counts, strategic, consistent pellet allocation 00:16:34.340 --> 00:16:36.200 might outweigh the potential room and disturbance 00:16:36.200 --> 00:16:39.000 risk, especially if the TMR quality is already 00:16:39.000 --> 00:16:41.500 absolutely top tier to begin with. And the article 00:16:41.500 --> 00:16:44.700 also mentions supporting transition cows, keeping 00:16:44.700 --> 00:16:47.379 pellets for them. Yes, drawing on insights from 00:16:47.379 --> 00:16:49.500 Dr. Steven LeBlanc at the University of Guelph. 00:16:49.600 --> 00:16:52.779 He highlights that fresh cows, particularly in 00:16:52.779 --> 00:16:55.419 the first 10 days or so postpartum, show measurable 00:16:55.419 --> 00:16:57.500 metabolic advantages from receiving supplemental 00:16:57.500 --> 00:17:00.840 energy via the robot. So a modest pellet allocation 00:17:00.840 --> 00:17:03.620 during that critical early lactation phase could 00:17:03.620 --> 00:17:05.980 still be beneficial. It brings us back to that 00:17:05.980 --> 00:17:08.740 point about optimal allocation versus total elimination 00:17:08.740 --> 00:17:12.039 for every single cow. Reinforcing that nuance 00:17:12.039 --> 00:17:14.900 is key based on the cow, the phase of lactation, 00:17:14.900 --> 00:17:17.220 and the farm setup. Exactly. It's not about a 00:17:17.220 --> 00:17:19.819 rigid rule, but about making data -driven decisions 00:17:19.819 --> 00:17:22.319 for your operation. And for those producers who 00:17:22.319 --> 00:17:23.839 look at the data and think this might be for 00:17:23.839 --> 00:17:26.440 them, the article lays out a practical, structured 00:17:26.440 --> 00:17:29.500 90 -day game plan. Okay, a 90 -day plan. Walk 00:17:29.500 --> 00:17:31.759 us through those first steps. Phase one. Phase 00:17:31.759 --> 00:17:34.039 one, reality check weeks one to four. Before 00:17:34.039 --> 00:17:37.000 changing anything, get data. Put pH sensors on 00:17:37.000 --> 00:17:39.359 about 10 % of your herd to establish a baseline 00:17:39.359 --> 00:17:42.299 for rumen health and stability. Audit your TMR 00:17:42.299 --> 00:17:45.059 consistency rigorously using a shaker box or 00:17:45.059 --> 00:17:47.279 similar tool. The article says if your day -to 00:17:47.279 --> 00:17:50.339 -day variation is over 5%, fix that first before 00:17:50.339 --> 00:17:52.980 even thinking about pulling pellets. Okay, TMR 00:17:52.980 --> 00:17:55.660 first. What else? Identify your pellet junkie. 00:17:55.799 --> 00:17:57.839 Cows those getting high amounts that will be 00:17:57.839 --> 00:18:00.240 hardest to transition. Double -check your guided 00:18:00.240 --> 00:18:02.440 traffic system is functioning perfectly, especially 00:18:02.440 --> 00:18:05.700 selection gates, and meticulously document your 00:18:05.700 --> 00:18:08.359 baseline production, component tests, and health 00:18:08.359 --> 00:18:11.180 metrics. Get your starting point clear. That 00:18:11.180 --> 00:18:14.039 initial phase sounds crucial for identifying 00:18:14.039 --> 00:18:16.119 roadblocks and assessing if you're even ready 00:18:16.119 --> 00:18:17.859 to try this. It is. It tells you whether you 00:18:17.859 --> 00:18:20.500 have fundamental TMR or rumen health issues to 00:18:20.500 --> 00:18:23.900 address first. Then, phase two, weeks 5 -12, 00:18:24.079 --> 00:18:26.680 is the wean. This is the actual transition phase. 00:18:26.920 --> 00:18:29.359 The tricky part. Right. Gradually reduce pellet 00:18:29.359 --> 00:18:31.900 allocations, aiming for about 5 % reduction per 00:18:31.900 --> 00:18:34.759 week. Consider using molasses or other palatability 00:18:34.759 --> 00:18:37.420 enhancers in the TMR during this phase to keep 00:18:37.420 --> 00:18:40.960 intake high. Daily pH checks are vital. If you 00:18:40.960 --> 00:18:43.279 see cows spending more than two hours below 5 00:18:43.279 --> 00:18:46.019 .8 pH consistently, you may need to slow down 00:18:46.019 --> 00:18:48.059 or reassess your TMR. And this is where that 00:18:48.059 --> 00:18:50.200 labor shift really kicks in, right? The fetching. 00:18:50.440 --> 00:18:53.259 Absolutely. You must implement strict, consistent 00:18:53.259 --> 00:18:56.299 fetch protocols. Every cow over 10 hours since 00:18:56.299 --> 00:18:58.619 last milking gets fetched, no exceptions, every 00:18:58.619 --> 00:19:01.299 time. Track incomplete milkings, kickoffs from 00:19:01.299 --> 00:19:03.660 the robot, and milk flow rates closely. These 00:19:03.660 --> 00:19:05.779 are your early warning signs. And critically, 00:19:05.960 --> 00:19:09.240 increase your TMR pushups by at least 25 % during 00:19:09.240 --> 00:19:11.960 this phase to ensure constant access. The article 00:19:11.960 --> 00:19:14.039 mentions this can be a year -long process like 00:19:14.039 --> 00:19:16.640 Matt Strickland's experience, but also that fresh 00:19:16.640 --> 00:19:20.380 cows adapt faster, maybe 40 % quicker. That flexibility 00:19:20.380 --> 00:19:22.119 is important. You could start with a smaller 00:19:22.119 --> 00:19:24.119 group or just your fresh cows to test the waters, 00:19:24.299 --> 00:19:27.140 you know. Then phase three, month four and beyond 00:19:27.140 --> 00:19:30.500 is show me the money. If the first two phases 00:19:30.500 --> 00:19:32.599 were executed with discipline, this is where 00:19:32.599 --> 00:19:34.799 you start seeing the results pay off. What metrics 00:19:34.799 --> 00:19:36.460 indicate success? What should you be looking 00:19:36.460 --> 00:19:40.259 for? Rumen pH stabilizing in that desired 6 .0, 00:19:40.339 --> 00:19:43.480 6 .5 range is a key indicator. You should see 00:19:43.480 --> 00:19:46.140 butterfat tests starting to lift, often by that 00:19:46.140 --> 00:19:48.759 0 .2 % mark around week 12. Fetch rates should 00:19:48.759 --> 00:19:51.220 be dropping significantly below 5 % of the herd 00:19:51.220 --> 00:19:53.880 by week 10, ideally, as cows habituate to the 00:19:53.880 --> 00:19:56.390 TMR motivation. Look for dramatically reduced 00:19:56.390 --> 00:19:58.849 feeds sorting at the bunk and more consistent 00:19:58.849 --> 00:20:01.630 manure. Your key performance indicators become 00:20:01.630 --> 00:20:04.990 robot visit frequency stabilizing above, say, 00:20:05.150 --> 00:20:09.009 2 .4 visits per cow daily, and those clear improvements 00:20:09.009 --> 00:20:11.269 in component percentages. And your management 00:20:11.269 --> 00:20:13.769 focus shifts permanently at this point. Absolutely. 00:20:14.069 --> 00:20:16.809 TMR quality and feed push -up frequency are no 00:20:16.809 --> 00:20:19.250 longer just important. They become your two most 00:20:19.250 --> 00:20:21.250 critical management points. They essentially 00:20:21.250 --> 00:20:24.029 replace the complexity of managing multiple robot 00:20:24.029 --> 00:20:26.609 feeds. tables. Now, the article also gives us 00:20:26.609 --> 00:20:28.809 a sense that this trend isn't just a North American 00:20:28.809 --> 00:20:31.190 phenomenon. It's happening elsewhere. That's 00:20:31.190 --> 00:20:33.710 right. The pellet -free or reduced pellet movement 00:20:33.710 --> 00:20:36.410 seems to be global, often driven by slightly 00:20:36.410 --> 00:20:38.990 different factors. In the Netherlands, for instance, 00:20:39.390 --> 00:20:41.990 Wageningen University research points to herds 00:20:41.990 --> 00:20:45.109 seeing 15 % lower vet costs post -transition, 00:20:45.289 --> 00:20:48.069 largely attributed to improved rumen health and 00:20:48.069 --> 00:20:50.549 reduced sera. And in Europe, environmental regulations 00:20:50.549 --> 00:20:53.029 are playing a role, too. They are. EU methane 00:20:53.029 --> 00:20:55.069 regulations link methane and methane. emissions 00:20:55.069 --> 00:20:58.289 to rumen health. Reduced sera translates to less 00:20:58.289 --> 00:21:00.609 methane, potentially saving European farmers 00:21:00.609 --> 00:21:03.569 around 120 hertz per cow annually in compliance 00:21:03.569 --> 00:21:06.069 costs alone. So it aligns environmental incentives 00:21:06.069 --> 00:21:09.369 with profitability. Interesting. What about New 00:21:09.369 --> 00:21:12.430 Zealand with its pasture systems? How does it 00:21:12.430 --> 00:21:14.759 apply there? Yeah, James Robertson, a farmer 00:21:14.759 --> 00:21:17.279 there, discussed implementing a seasonal hybrid 00:21:17.279 --> 00:21:19.759 model. They eliminate robot pellets entirely 00:21:19.759 --> 00:21:22.180 during peak grass -growing seasons, capturing 00:21:22.180 --> 00:21:25.220 a reported 17 % feed cost reduction in that period 00:21:25.220 --> 00:21:28.460 with no impact on production. It shows the adaptability 00:21:28.460 --> 00:21:31.259 of the core principle. Even in challenging climates 00:21:31.259 --> 00:21:33.420 like Israel, they're doing this. Apparently so. 00:21:33.640 --> 00:21:36.440 Despite significant heat stress, Farms there 00:21:36.440 --> 00:21:39.200 have successfully transitioned. Dr. Al Sarusi 00:21:39.200 --> 00:21:41.500 from the Agricultural Research Organization suggests 00:21:41.500 --> 00:21:43.700 that the stable rumen function achieved with 00:21:43.700 --> 00:21:46.240 consistent TMR feeding actually helps cows better 00:21:46.240 --> 00:21:48.400 cope with heat stress, adding another unexpected 00:21:48.400 --> 00:21:50.980 benefit. And looking ahead, is this changing 00:21:50.980 --> 00:21:52.920 the industry? Are equipment manufacturers thinking 00:21:52.920 --> 00:21:55.200 about this shift? The article hints strongly 00:21:55.200 --> 00:21:58.380 in this. Industry whispers suggest major robot 00:21:58.380 --> 00:22:01.099 manufacturers are starting to view pellet delivery 00:22:01.099 --> 00:22:04.220 as potentially an optional feature on future 00:22:04.220 --> 00:22:07.900 models rather than central to the design. Carlos 00:22:07.900 --> 00:22:10.779 Pereira from Lilly is quoted acknowledging that 00:22:10.779 --> 00:22:12.880 while their systems were designed with pellets 00:22:12.880 --> 00:22:15.599 in mind, they see farms succeeding without them. 00:22:15.740 --> 00:22:18.720 So they're adapting. It seems so, implying a 00:22:18.720 --> 00:22:20.839 shift towards potentially minimal allocation 00:22:20.839 --> 00:22:23.779 being optimal for some, rather than high rates 00:22:23.779 --> 00:22:26.079 being the default. That could definitely impact 00:22:26.079 --> 00:22:28.480 future robot installations, maybe lower costs 00:22:28.480 --> 00:22:31.539 or simplify things. It could. The article also 00:22:31.539 --> 00:22:33.599 notes the emergence of specialized consultants 00:22:33.599 --> 00:22:36.319 focusing on helping farms transition to these 00:22:36.319 --> 00:22:39.539 TMR -based motivation systems, indicating professional 00:22:39.539 --> 00:22:42.779 support is growing. And those regulatory drivers 00:22:42.779 --> 00:22:44.680 we mentioned in Europe could eventually influence 00:22:44.680 --> 00:22:47.769 practices elsewhere. you know? Yeah, makes sense. 00:22:47.950 --> 00:22:50.009 Okay, we've covered a lot of compelling points 00:22:50.009 --> 00:22:52.009 for reducing or eliminating pellets, but it's 00:22:52.009 --> 00:22:54.910 worth revisiting that nuance again. Not everyone 00:22:54.910 --> 00:22:57.049 agrees this is the universal best approach, right? 00:22:57.210 --> 00:22:59.089 That's an important point the article includes. 00:22:59.769 --> 00:23:02.650 Experts like Dr. Thomas Overton at Cornell still 00:23:02.650 --> 00:23:05.089 emphasize the potential value of targeted nutrient 00:23:05.089 --> 00:23:07.970 delivery via pellets, especially for those very 00:23:07.970 --> 00:23:10.950 high -producing early lactation animals. They 00:23:10.950 --> 00:23:13.089 argue it can provide metabolic support difficult 00:23:13.089 --> 00:23:15.769 to achieve solely through the TMR. So there's 00:23:15.769 --> 00:23:17.789 still a case for pellets in specific situations. 00:23:18.089 --> 00:23:20.950 Yes. And Dr. Bill Weiss at Ohio State Champions, 00:23:21.089 --> 00:23:23.309 that middle ground we touched on, he advocates 00:23:23.309 --> 00:23:25.650 for finding the optimal pellet allocation for 00:23:25.650 --> 00:23:28.589 each specific farm and set of cows rather than 00:23:28.589 --> 00:23:31.630 a strict all -or -nothing approach. These perspectives 00:23:31.630 --> 00:23:34.269 are valuable reminders that it's complex, and 00:23:34.269 --> 00:23:36.309 the decision really depends on your unique farm 00:23:36.309 --> 00:23:38.750 circumstances, genetics, and management capabilities. 00:23:39.230 --> 00:23:41.730 So wrapping all this up, the Bullvine article's 00:23:41.730 --> 00:23:44.130 conclusion for you, the listener, is pretty direct, 00:23:44.230 --> 00:23:46.750 isn't it? It is. The data from farms operating 00:23:46.750 --> 00:23:48.569 this way, from Wisconsin to the Netherlands, 00:23:48.789 --> 00:23:51.529 is mounting. The article presents it almost as 00:23:51.529 --> 00:23:53.849 essential profit physics. You essentially have 00:23:53.849 --> 00:23:56.650 a choice. Continue accepting that estimated $36 00:23:56.650 --> 00:24:01.549 ,740 annual cost per 200 cows for robot pellets. 00:24:01.630 --> 00:24:05.180 Which is a lot. It is. Or make the upfront investment 00:24:05.180 --> 00:24:07.519 in management discipline, which they estimate 00:24:07.519 --> 00:24:10.160 at roughly 120 hours of intensive training and 00:24:10.160 --> 00:24:13.140 oversight during the transition for a 200 cow 00:24:13.140 --> 00:24:16.079 herd for potentially significant perpetual savings 00:24:16.079 --> 00:24:18.200 and improved performance. And the article's core 00:24:18.200 --> 00:24:20.559 message seems to be that success hinges entirely 00:24:20.559 --> 00:24:23.099 on that management discipline, particularly around 00:24:23.099 --> 00:24:26.099 TMR quality and fetching. And that idea that 00:24:26.099 --> 00:24:29.380 cows don't miss what they never had when it comes 00:24:29.380 --> 00:24:31.539 to the pellet habit. It's a powerful thought 00:24:31.539 --> 00:24:34.339 and a key mindset shift, I think. The big takeaways 00:24:34.339 --> 00:24:37.000 are clear. The economic impact is potentially 00:24:37.000 --> 00:24:40.960 massive. That $36 ,740 net savings figure, driven 00:24:40.960 --> 00:24:44.019 by feed savings, offset slightly by labor, but 00:24:44.019 --> 00:24:47.359 boosted significantly by components. The technical 00:24:47.359 --> 00:24:50.119 requirements are strict. Guided flow is mandatory. 00:24:50.420 --> 00:24:52.579 TMR must be held to incredibly high specific 00:24:52.579 --> 00:24:54.980 standards with frequent push -ups. The physiological 00:24:54.980 --> 00:24:57.720 benefits are real. Stable room in pH, leading 00:24:57.720 --> 00:25:00.269 to potentially improved butterfat. And the implementation 00:25:00.269 --> 00:25:02.750 requires a structured plan. That 90 -day protocol 00:25:02.750 --> 00:25:05.069 is a roadmap, acknowledging the initial labor 00:25:05.069 --> 00:25:06.970 spike, but showing how fetch rates and components 00:25:06.970 --> 00:25:09.269 should improve over that period. And crucially, 00:25:09.430 --> 00:25:11.490 knowing when not to attempt it if you have a 00:25:11.490 --> 00:25:14.690 free -flow barn, cannot achieve or maintain amazing 00:25:14.690 --> 00:25:17.910 TMR consistency, or struggle with labor discipline, 00:25:18.089 --> 00:25:20.710 this probably isn't for you right now. Exactly. 00:25:20.930 --> 00:25:23.789 This deep dive really highlights that while challenging, 00:25:23.950 --> 00:25:26.890 rethinking routine robot pellet feeding presents 00:25:26.890 --> 00:25:29.430 a significant opportunity backed by solid data 00:25:29.430 --> 00:25:33.490 and an understanding of cow physiology. So based 00:25:33.490 --> 00:25:35.150 on everything in this Bullvine article, what 00:25:35.150 --> 00:25:37.349 are some immediate practical steps you listening 00:25:37.349 --> 00:25:39.490 can take? Yeah. The article leaves us with three 00:25:39.490 --> 00:25:42.150 things you can do starting, well, right now. 00:25:42.250 --> 00:25:45.839 Step one, today. Download that free UW -Madison 00:25:45.839 --> 00:25:47.920 Mixer Evaluation Toolkit the article mentions 00:25:47.920 --> 00:25:50.900 and audit your TMR consistency. Just find out 00:25:50.900 --> 00:25:52.599 where you stand. It's a good first step regardless. 00:25:53.119 --> 00:25:56.019 Step two, maybe this month. Select five cows, 00:25:56.180 --> 00:25:57.900 maybe average ones, maybe some high producers, 00:25:58.119 --> 00:26:00.680 and get some rumen pH monitoring probes in to 00:26:00.680 --> 00:26:02.960 see your baseline rumen health dynamics. Get 00:26:02.960 --> 00:26:05.859 some real numbers. And step three, perhaps this 00:26:05.859 --> 00:26:08.950 year. If those initial reality checks look good 00:26:08.950 --> 00:26:11.289 and your physical infrastructure and management 00:26:11.289 --> 00:26:14.329 foundation are solid, start planning a phased 00:26:14.329 --> 00:26:17.049 pellet reduction using the 90 -day protocol described 00:26:17.049 --> 00:26:19.890 in the article. But don't rush it. Take your 00:26:19.890 --> 00:26:23.130 time. Good advice. The Bullvine article leaves 00:26:23.130 --> 00:26:26.390 us with a provocative thought to chew on. The 00:26:26.390 --> 00:26:28.009 revolution's happening whether we like it or 00:26:28.009 --> 00:26:30.730 not. The question is, will you lead it or chase 00:26:30.730 --> 00:26:33.089 it? It definitely gives you a clear, data -backed 00:26:33.089 --> 00:26:35.289 direction if you choose to lead something to 00:26:35.289 --> 00:26:37.309 think about. We strongly encourage you to read 00:26:37.309 --> 00:26:41.950 the full article on www .thebullvine .com. It 00:26:41.950 --> 00:26:44.930 contains all the detailed charts, data, and expert 00:26:44.930 --> 00:26:47.009 quotes we discussed that really bring this whole 00:26:47.009 --> 00:26:49.210 topic to life. Absolutely worth the read. Thanks 00:26:49.210 --> 00:26:51.029 for joining us for this deep dive into robot 00:26:51.029 --> 00:26:52.789 feeding strategies. We'll catch you on the next 00:26:52.789 --> 00:26:55.490 one. That's a wrap for this episode of the Bullvine 00:26:55.490 --> 00:26:58.250 Podcast. Thanks for tuning in and being part 00:26:58.250 --> 00:27:01.490 of our forward -thinking dairy community. If 00:27:01.490 --> 00:27:04.049 you enjoyed today's discussion, don't forget 00:27:04.049 --> 00:27:07.309 to subscribe, leave us a review, and share the 00:27:07.309 --> 00:27:10.630 episode with your fellow dairy enthusiasts. Got 00:27:10.630 --> 00:27:13.230 a burning question or a topic you want us to 00:27:13.230 --> 00:27:16.369 tackle next? Drop us a line at The Bullvine. 00:27:16.549 --> 00:27:19.369 Until next time, keep challenging the status 00:27:19.369 --> 00:27:22.650 quo and striving for excellence. Because at The 00:27:22.650 --> 00:27:25.930 Bullvine, we're all about revolutionizing dairy 00:27:25.930 --> 00:27:27.970 one story at a time.