What was supposed to be a unifying and empowering deregulation had become a tangled web without an obvious solution.
Breed societies said most dairy farmers did not know how much of their levy money had been spent without end so far.
Or that the once-envied, united NZ dairy genetics database and its valuable uses were being fragmented by DairyNZ and service providers.
The not-for-profit societies were also reluctant to commit to the next phase of the DIGAD build because of the ongoing uncertainties and the likelihood of substantial expenditure to secure their operational needs.
Jersey NZ corporate services manager Pam Goodin, who also represents the Ayrshire Association and the NZ Milking Shorthorn Association, said she feared market failure in the future when breed societies were unable to access all relevant herd recording and testing data.
That would occur when an animal breeding company or provider of in-line milk testing was not obliged to put its data into the national LIC database and breed societies did not have access to DIGAD.
Goodin said she was waiting for an acceptable commercial agreement between LIC and CRV Ambreed, the other big breeding company, to preserve the services breed societies relied on.
“We have been waiting for two years but still no agreement.
“We are also concerned that would only be a band-aid solution.
“The regulations setting up DIGAD allow for other certified data providers for herd testing and recording so the first time that happens we will have market failure again.”
The root of the issue lay in the corporatisation of the Dairy Board and Livestock Improvement Corporation (now LIC) and the often disputatious effort to re-establish the core database in industry-good ownership while enabling herd testing and animal breeding companies to commercially compete, devise and sell value-add services.
In 2009 a review committee headed by Professor Robert Anderson recommended the core database and the animal evaluation function be shifted from LIC to an industry-good body.
But it took four years for DairyNZ and LIC to reach a commercial agreement for that to happen.
A further three years and spending of $4.4 million brought DIGAD close to the end of phase two of a four-phase process.
Phase one was the transfer of animal data and phase two of animal evaluation models.
DairyNZ had said phase two would be complete in September, after which it would calculate breeding worth (BW) for all dairy cattle.
Phase three involved data flowing into DIGAD direct, rather than via LIC as a third party, from other certified herd testers like CRV.
Phase four was the breed societies having systems to access the data they needed once LIC did not hold data from all herds.
DIGAD was constructed with 46 core data fields to hold all the information required for animal evaluation and some industry-good research.
That core contained raw herd-testing results along with calving, mating and production data.
It included animal performance data provided by LIC and CRV Ambreed customers and data collected by breed societies related to traits other than production (TOP), such as farmer scores of temperament, milking speed and udder characteristics, which was held in the LIC database.
But the scope of modern genetics had become much wider than just the core fields and breeding worth indexes, which were not the same as breeding value indexes.
Breed societies had maintained commercial arrangements with LIC since the 1980s when they began contributing to the computerisation of all cattle records.
They also had supplementary contracts for services from CRV Ambreed and other AB companies.
Essential functions for breeding societies included pedigree registration, family trees, breeding values, within-breed rankings and sire-proving.
Goodin said the preferred structure for breed societies was that a suitable database be provided and maintained by DairyNZ, with a firewall between it and DIGAD.
“We believe that aligning ourselves with the industry-good body fits with our own philosophy as not-for-profit organisations.”
Pam Goodin
Jersey NZ
“Ideally, all our IT and IP would come across from LIC to DairyNZ.
“We believe that aligning ourselves with the industry-good body fits with our own philosophy as not-for-profit organisations.
“When it comes to TOP, members of breed societies outside the formal sire-proving schemes of the major AB companies provide almost 25% of all data on two-year-olds, being of considerable value to the dairy industry.
“We have a suite of services and programmes that we pay to operate through the LIC national database.
“Right now we would not want to invest heavily in changes that might be defunct at any time.
“Breed societies are going to incur cost whatever solution is found so we have to retain money for that purpose.
“One society did go ahead and make a change for the benefit of its members and it took two years to get the work done because the programmers are so tied up in the DIGAD transfer.”
Holstein Friesian NZ president Wendy Harker said implementation of the Anderson Report was dividing up the valuable resource, for which NZ was envied around the world.
“LIC owns the rights to the breeding worth of all females so we won’t have free access to the female information.”
Others in the industry said NZ was losing considerable time and reputation and that breeding companies in other countries were now well ahead in services.
Goodin agreed, saying breed societies had marked time for the past four or five years.
Goodin and Harker said they did not want to criticise the people working for DIGAD under NZ Animal Evaluation manager Jeremy Bryant, who had been very helpful.
The irony of the whole situation was that NZ dairy farmers owned both DairyNZ and LIC and there would be no winners from lengthy and costly court battles.
In response to the breed societies, Bryant wanted people in the industry to keep their eyes on the benefits DIGAD would bring.
Improved cow fertility, more efficient animals and a longer lifespan in the herd were some of the benefits unfolding from the latest developments in DIGAD and animal evaluation, he said.
“DIGAD has already been used to identify a better method of processing fertility data to increase the accuracy of fertility breeding values.
“As part of a Transforming the Dairy Value Chain Primary Growth Partnership, a group of common males and females have been established to estimate how closely feed conversion efficiency is linked to genetics.
“Selecting for feed conversion efficiency has the potential to add $5m to $10m worth of genetic gain.”
With phase two nearing completion, industry collaboration was playing a big part in ensuring the transition would be seamless from a dairy farmer’s perspective, given the complexity of the data and systems involved.
Bryant said the country’s dairy farmers were getting good value for their levy dollars invested and he was pleased with progress in the project.
The costs for the last two phases were dependent on a solution design which would be tackled after the animal evaluation transition.
However, services to farmers would not be affected because LIC would still provide them for breed societies and CRV.
Goodin said no agreement for security of services between the societies and LIC existed past the end of DIGAD phase two.
