3.2 Deer
3.2.1 Prioritisation of issues
For converting to organic deer farming, the major issue agreed by all workshop participants was how to control lungworm. This technical issue is likely to prevent many farmers from converting to an organic system, even if other factors, such as premiums were increased. The discussion on potential options for lungworm control highlighted that extensive deer operations have a greater range of options for tackling lungworm than intensive deer finishing systems. Some considered that in an extensive grazing system lungworm could be managed. For intensive systems a high stock density and more emphasis on single species grazing appear to constrain management options. Another important technical issue was the need to develop an alternative technique for velveting that does not require the use of drugs. Research on the use of compression acupuncture anaesthetics is well advanced, but questions remain about its effect on successive crops. One lingering view held by participants at the workshop was the perception that an organic system is less caring of animals and more vulnerable to pest outbreaks and extreme climatic events.
Better management of the land resource, watercourses, and indigenous vegetation would be needed in an organic system. Discussion on this reflected issues for the wider industry. Control of woody weeds again emerged as a very important issue in converting to organic production. The lack of organic certified processors is a potential limitation to growth, as is the current small supply base.
Information on market premiums was considered to be limited. The perception of many customers that deer and venison production is natural and therefore close to organic might suggest that organic venison would command only a small premium in the market place. Organic certification may therefore be useful in reinforcing the "natural" branding the product already enjoys.
In summary, the major issues for the deer sector are the control of lungworm, the need to develop an alternative method for velveting, and the ever-present issue of woody weed control. Once these issues are resolved, it is likely that the perceptions of the organic deer industry, and the industry infrastructure and supply issues will follow suit.
Constraints to conversion to organic deer production identified by the Focus Group are listed in Table 7.
Table 7 Constraints and their relative importance to conversion to organic deer production, as identified by the Focus Group, are listed below
| Issue | Comments | Rating1 |
| Technical | ||
| Long-term soil fertility/ biology of soils | Fertiliser/trace element options, DDT level | Many |
| Physical health of soil | Heightened concern for water/soil erosion e.g. deer and soil erosion, wallowing in stream beds, treading along fence lines, etc |
Few |
| Animal health | Lungworm control Others: Yersiniosis outbreaks, control of ticks, possum/Tb vector control |
All |
| Pests | Tb vectors | Few |
| Disease | Few | |
| Weeds | Woody weeds Herbaceous weed control, esp. nodding thistle and ragwort |
All |
| Genetics/adaptation | Genetic selection for disease control versus production Breed type, Fallow, Red, Elk. Are any more suitable? |
Many |
| Animal nutrition/ feed/ stock | Pasture quality control as a result of lower stocking rate Lack of grazers |
Few |
| Animal management | Velvet removal techniques What stocking ratio and overall intensive level is appropriate in an organic format given climatic changes? |
Few |
| Pasture seed | Availability, pasture options | Few |
| Skills and knowledge of manager | Lack of knowledge e.g. on interactions between fertilisers and soils, animal remedies and end products, pesticides and residues, so-called natural products and their effects | Few |
| Infrastructure and industry | ||
| Signals on premiums/market stability | What are the market premiums (especially in relation to carcass weight). Markets - tonnage available | Few |
| Standards | Validity of certification, integrity of system, testing of products to maintain standards, adherence by farmers to standards, sensible specifications | Few |
| Industry infrastructure and strategy | Certified processors and critical supply base | Many |
| Services | Certified meat processing, issues with booking organic kill space
especially in busy times. No advisory structure People and network, almost no practical farmer support system e.g. discussion groups |
Few |
| Perceptions on organics | Image that the system is less caring of animals and more vulnerable | All |
1
The words "All", "Many" and "Few" rank the importance of an issue in terms of the proportion of votes it received by the workshop members.3.2.2 South Island deer model
This model is representative of deer farms in Southland and South Otago. It is based on a farm running only deer and the base numbers are 520 mixed age breeding hinds with 120 rising 2-year hinds (Tables 8 and 9). Seventy of the rising 2-year hinds are retained as breeding herd replacements. A herd of 90 mixed age stags is run for velvet production. Progeny from the breeding hinds that are not required as replacements in the breeding or velvet herds are sold for slaughter. Most are slaughtered at 10-18 months with final culling of replacements at the two-year-old stage. Not all rising 2-year hinds are mated. The model is based on running predominantly red hinds in the breeding herd.
Table 8 Model in summary 1999/2000
| Effective area | 180 | ha | |||
| Stock wintered: | |||||
| Breeding hinds | 640 |
R1yr stags | 230 |
||
| R1yr hinds | 230 |
R2yr stags | 55 |
||
| Total stock units opening | 2,115 |
su | R3yr+ stags | 100 |
|
| Closing stock units | 2,136 |
su |
Table 9 Key parameters of the Model
| 1998/99 | 1999/2000 | 2000/01f* | |
| Fawning % | 86 |
85 |
85 |
| Velvet (kg/stag) | |||
| Farm average (incl. regrowth and yearling velvet) | 1.14 |
1.16 |
1.22 |
| MA | 3.2 |
3.3 |
3.3 |
| 3-year-old | 2.6 |
2.7 |
2.7 |
| 2-year-old | 1.4 |
1.5 |
1.5 |
| Carcass weights (kg) | |||
| Cull MA hinds | 50 |
52 |
52 |
| Cull 2-year-old hinds | 51 |
52 |
52 |
| Cull MA stags | 92 |
92 |
92 |
| 2-year-old stags | 65 |
65 |
65 |
| Yearling stags | 56 |
56 |
56 |
| Gross farm revenue ($) | 161,338 |
216,759 |
247,617 |
| Cash farm surplus ($) | 51,738 |
107,159 |
132,377 |
| Net trading profit ($) | 48,018 |
109,659 |
113,537 |
* Forecast at May 2000
The South Island deer model (MAF, 2000) was used as the base on which to examine the financial implication of addressing the major constraints to organic venison and velvet production. The assumptions and changes made in stock policy, production levels and timing of supply are considered in the next section.
3.2.3 Assumptions for conversion to organic production
In the construction of the organic South Island deer farm system, changes and assumptions were made to accommodate the constraints identified by the focus group including:
Stock management
- Effective area: a quarantine area is required which reduces the effective grazing area by 2.8 percent (5 ha).
- Stocking rate is reduced from 11.86 to 9 su/ha. This lessens stress on stock and results in better animal health, growth and social behaviour, etc.
- Levels of venison production remain the same because of the lower stocking that reduces stress on stock giving better animal health, growth and social behaviour, etc. on the organic system.
- Reproductive performance is the same, as are the numbers of culls and deaths.
- In the organic system calves will be weaned later (May/June), compared with 75 percent weaned pre-rut in the MAF base system.
- A high proportion of adult stock aids animal health. Velvet production per head will be similar given the same feed level per head. The effect of compression acupuncture on subsequent velvet growth may be a factor that needs to be considered.
- Velveting will be carried out on organic properties based on non-chemical antler removal e.g. compression acupuncture anaesthetics.
- Slaughter dates maybe slightly later in the organic system, but have no effect on price.
- Grazing of outside stock: 100 cattle from another farm must be grazed for six months to control pasture surplus and maintain feed quality on the organic system (100 cattle for six months. 180 days @ 0.7 kg lwg/day = 126 kg lwt. Carcass wgt = 65.5 kg @ $3:00/kg).
- Less work involved with animal health. More work associated with controlling pasture, controlling weeds, and monitoring.
- Stock purchases: organic producers will want to source stock that is suitable for this system. As there is a small pool breeding for organic production, the costs may increase. Stock may also come from further away.
- No difference was made in the percentage of stock or product produced to BIO-GRO or CERTENZ specification. There is a small difference in the cost of the certification systems.
Agronomic management
- Conserved feed: more supplements are made to control surpluses.
- Fertiliser: the chemical fertiliser used in the MAF base system will be replaced with RPR and elemental sulphur. Trace elements will be the same if reason their for use is shown. Liquid fertilisers will be used. More monitoring and testing will be needed to keep soil health up. Slightly less lime used. No change in costs.
- Pasture management as a result of the lower stocking rate will require more mechanical topping to maintain pasture quality.
- Organic deer farms are likely to have more shade and shelter trees.
- Organic forage and grain supplements are not easily purchased so will need to be made on the farm.
These changes, along with the cost structure listed in Table 10, have been incorporated into the organic deer model.
Table 10 Assumptions for conversion to organic production
| Category | Reasons for change | MAF base |
Organic |
| Wages | Less work involved with animal health. More work associated with controlling pasture, controlling weeds, monitoring | $3,600 pa |
$4,320 (> 20%) |
| Animal health | Cost will decrease for medicines but Tb testing and pregnancy testing remains. Fewer animals in total to treat | $4.24/su |
$2.97/su (< 30%) |
| Electricity | No difference anticipated | $1700 |
$1700 or $1.10/su |
| Feed | Hay and silage costs could increase due to controlling surpluses mechanically rather than using animals to clean out paddocks | $5.82/su |
$6.40/su |
| Any imported feeds would be 60-90 percent organic These may be up to 50 percent more expensive | $0.59/su |
$0.81/su |
|
| Grazing off-farm would not fit the certification criteria. This would be replaced by purchased feed | $0.69/su |
$0.90/su |
|
| Total feed costs. | $7.10/su |
$8.11/su |
|
| Fertiliser | Current rates are 250 kg/ha 0-9-0, some DAP plus 40 kg of nitrogen per ha. This will be replaced with RPR and elemental sulphur. Trace elements will be the same if reason for use is shown. Liquid fertilisers will be used | $108/ha $8.88/su |
$107/ha |
| Seeds | Organic seeds may need to be sourced. Mixes will have a higher proportion of more expensive species like tall fescue | $11/ha |
$28/ha |
| Freight | This will need to be done by a certified carrier which may be more expensive | $1.48/su |
$1.50 /su |
| Weed and pest | Less spent on chemicals | $1700 |
$1000 |
| Tax | This is the amount payable on current years income | As calculated |
As calculated |
| Levy | BIOGRO has a 0.5 percent additional levy to use their label | Nil |
$872 |
| Administration | No additional admin. for MAF base model CERTENZ = $800 to $1200 per
annum |
No change |
Same as conventional plus $1,000 |
| Consultancy | More time spent getting advice, attending field days, joining organisations, Internet, more monitoring of feed budgets, soils and animal health | $450 |
$600 |
The organic system sells $31,800 of velvet. If a non-chemical, ethical method of removing velvet is not found or it is banned on philosophical grounds, this also changes the analysis. Velveting stags would be replaced with hinds, and breeding stags only would be run.
3.2.4 Financial outcomes from the organic model
The financial results (Table 11) are based on the changes discussed above and the costs reported in Table 9.
Based on changes to the MAF base model and in the absence of grazing, the organic systems cash farm surplus is reduced by $228/ha. The reduced stocking rate drives this, rather than a drop in per head performance. A number of costs are the same even though stock numbers are reduced. These include wages, electricity, re-grassing, rates, sundry, repairs and maintenance, and administration. To maintain pasture quality in the organic system, however, additional grazing must be included in the spring and summer to maintain the viability of the systems. If the value of grazing is included then the organic system returns improve by $109/ha.
Grazing is based on using young cattle (yearlings). Venison price per kg under an organic system would need to be an additional $2.11/kg (a 29 percent premium) to achieve the same value as the MAF model venison sales. This provides an indication of the premium required by the organic system in the absence of grazing income to generate the same gross farm income generated by the MAF base model. If grazing is included in the income of the organic system, the premium required drops to $1.03/kg (a 14 percent premium).
Velvet would need to be an additional $17.25/kg (a premium of 20 percent) to achieve the same value of velvet sales.
This is a guide only, as each farm needs to do its own analysis of returns under an organic system.
The additional costs between BIOGRO and CERTENZ are insignificant and the production is assumed to be the same.
Reducing the stocking rate will reduce stress not only on the animals but also on the operator. Time originally spent on administering animal health may now be taken up in non-chemical ways of reducing weeds.
No account is taken of the expected environmental improvement under an organic system resulting from the lower stocking rate and the lower levels of chemical use. Existing organic farmers also appear to have a greater goodwill factor from the wider population that organics is a "better" way to farm.
Table 11 Key financial indicators of the MAF base and organic models
| MAF base model | Organic policy | ||
| Effective area (ha) | 180 | 175 | |
| Stocking rate (su/ha) | 11.8 | 9 | |
| Total stock units | 2,136 | 1,624 | |
| Calving (%) | 85 | 85 | |
| Velvet price ($) | 86 | 86 | |
| Venison price ($) | 7.16 | 7.16 | |
| Total venison sold (kg) | 29,004 | 21,867 | |
| Total velvet sold (kg) | 444 | 370 | |
| Gross farm income ($) | 233,426 | 178,484 | |
| Farm working expenses ($) | 92,523 | 90,790 | |
| Cash farm surplus ($) | 140,903 | 87,694 | |
| Cash farm surplus/su ($) | 66 | 54 | |
| Cash farm surplus/ha ($) | 729 | 501 | |
| Cash farm surplus with grazing surplus/ha ($) | 729 | 610 | |
Contact for Enquiries
Kay Brown
Sector Performance Policy
MAF Policy
Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry
PO Box 2526
Wellington
NEW ZEALAND
Phone: +64 4 894 0695
Fax: +64 4 4 894 0746
Contact this person

