Status
After a Resolution has been Carried, the next step involves consideration of the Resolution from the Lactanet Board of Directors. This typically takes place during the summer in conjunction with the Boards regular meeting.The status of each Resolution will be posted by October 31st, to provide an update, further consideration or any action taken by the Board at that time. The status on past or present resolutions may change from time-to-time.
2024 Carried Resolutions
2023 Carried Resolutions
Genetics
Whereas…
Whereas Lactanet’s genetics services are funded by breed associations and artificial insemination centers.
Whereas the main users of the Lactanet site are Canadian breeders.
Whereas they require quick access to their data.
Whereas the ease of use of the Lactanet site should have a beneficial effect on the number of visits to the site by Canadian producers.
Therefore…
Therefore, it is proposed that the list of offspring of an animal be, by default, the list of its Canadian offspring and optionally its international offspring.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Alphonse Pittet | Saint-Tite, Quebec |
| 1st Supporter | Élyse Gendron | St-Polycarpe, Quebec |
| 2nd Supporter | Pascal Martin | Sainte-Cécile de Milton, Quebec |
| 3rd Supporter | Louis St-Aubin | St-Clet, Quebec |
| 4th Supporter | Julie Duchesne | St-Narcisse, Quebec |
The Board has endorsed this resolution and changes to the Lactanet website have been completed.
Whereas…
Whereas the composite index system for major type traits is not perfect.
Whereas the composite system allows bulls to benefit from bonuses in their indexes, by possessing a quality in a defect of the breed.
Whereas the composite system inflicts penalties on bulls for having a common defect with the breed.
Whereas modifying the genetic indices with bonuses and penalties completely distorts the understanding of the individual.
Whereas modifying a genetic index to help a breed out of genetic tendencies (straight legs, short teats, taller stature) is not the only way Lactanet has.
Whereas modifying a genetic index to help a breed get out of genetic tendencies (straight legs, short teats, tall stature) makes some breeders feel like they are being mothered by Lactanet.
Whereas some breeders feel bereaved following the disappearance of linear indices in the major criteria; a benchmark from field data that allowed them to better cross their animals, (including exhibition).
Whereas some A.I. centers have already followed suit to carry out so-called composite matings, by mating males and females with the desirable traits together and thus get a maximum of bonuses to fictitiously boost the proof of their young bulls.
Whereas this will lead to the next way of getting bulls that are over-evaluated.
Whereas current breed defects (straight legs, short teats, tall stature) originated from breeders who only mated the best animals together based on total indexes (TPI, LPI, PRO$, CONF) regardless of inbreeding or to conformation criteria and not to the breeding choices of breeders-selectors.
Therefore…
Therefore, it is proposed to ask Lactanet to make the linear indexes of the major type traits available for consultation by the user somewhere on their site (new column, separate tab, etc.)
It will never be asked to abolish the composite indexes, but it would be interesting for any breeder to be able to compare, if he wishes, the two types of indexes for the major type traits for the same bull for example. We thought that presenting in this way is very possible. This is in the spirit of consultation and comparison of major indexes. All with the aim of making the best purchase first, and to mate our animals even better. Raising a heifer costs over $4000 today with inflation, it is better to know more than not enough before making our purchases and our inseminations.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Reno Desaulniers | Amos, Quebec |
| 1st Supporter | Yanick Sylvain | Launey, Quebec |
| 2nd Supporter | Fabien Beaudoin | Palmarolle, Quebec |
| 3rd Supporter | Jacques Gravel | Amos, Quebec |
| 4th Supporter | Jonathan Ten-Have | Landrienne, Quebec |
The Genetic Evaluation Board has been asked to review this resolution and make appropriate recommendations to the Lactanet Board of Directors.
Whereas…
Whereas the Relative Breeding Value (RBV) for the trait MILKING SPEED is based on subjective evaluations, without direct measurement, made in first lactation.
Whereas the person doing the subjective assessment is not always a person who does the milking, and therefore not able to offer a fair assessment.
Whereas acow can be evaluated with a fast milking speed (desirable) because her milk production is low and conversely, a cow can be evaluated with a slow milking speed (undesirable) because her milk production is high.
Whereas genetic selection based on the RBV for MILKING SPEED, mostly on young bulls with a genomic evaluation, offers disappointing and inconsistent results for this trait in the barns.
Whereas withrobotic milking systems, the amount of milk and/or fat per minute from each cow influences the economic performance of the herd.
Whereas with these systems, productive and fast milking cows are preferred.
Whereas many milking systems offer accurate milking speed data from which it is possible to calculate a produced amount of milk and/or fat per minute for all milkings of each animal.
Therefore…
Therefore, it isproposed that Lactanet develop a new genetic index based on objective milking system data, measuring the ability of cows to give a high milk yield quickly that would be expressed as a Relative Breeding Value (RBV), based on a calculation of the amount of fat produced per minute of milking. This new index would set aside any subjective evaluation and replace the current index.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Stéphanie Beauchemin | Ste-Anne-De-La-Pérade, Quebec |
| 1st Supporter | Patrick Allen | St-Anselme, Quebec |
| 2nd Supporter | Jonathan Lampron | Ste-Séraphine, Quebec |
| 3rd Supporter | Béatrice Le May | Sainte-Croix-De-Lotbinière, Quebec |
| 4th Supporter | Jonathan Giguère | Ham-Nord, Quebec |
Lactanet has anticipated this evolution for a number of years and has initiated actions to be able to accomplish this objective in the future. The concept is fully supported by Lactanet but will require significant effort and time to accumulate the required data from robotic systems and modify the current genetic evaluation system accordingly.
Milk Recording
Whereas…
Whereas when using the Lactanet site for identifying animals, the lack of Herd Management numbers can make finding animals tricky.
Whereas using Lactanet’s mobile app should provide better links to the animal’s genetic evaluation summary page on the web site.
Therefore…
Therefore, it is proposed that Lactanet add Herd Management numbers to the animals in their system for display on the web site.
Further be it resolved that the Lactanet Mobile App direct customers to the animal’s genetics profile page on the Lactanet web site with easy access to the other pages.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Lindsay Greenough | Greenfield, Nova Scotia |
| 1st Supporter | Scott Macdonald | Sussex, New Brunswick |
| 2nd Supporter | Peter Sinclair | Goshen, Nova Scotia |
| 3rd Supporter | Andrew Hornbrook | Sussex, New Brunswick |
| 4th Supporter | Ben Roy | Kentville, Nova Scotia |
Website changes will be implemented to address this Herd Management Number concern once the best option has been identified – with consideration of cost and functionality. Further, changes to the mobile app to address the related genetic profile functionality issue have been completed.
Whereas…
Whereas more and more purebred animals show a coat with white spots.
Whereas an “OCS” white spot must be recorded in the herdbook without affecting the purity of an animal.
Whereas many breeders fail to provide such information.
Whereas the mode of transmission is not clearly defined.
Therefore…
Therefore, it is proposed that, at the time of milk recording, the identification of “OCS” is added to the animal’s information and that an annual statistical follow-up is made.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Dave Labrie | St-Cyprien, Quebec |
| 1st Supporter | Josée Charron | Verchères, Quebec |
| 2nd Supporter | Isabelle Dupré | St-Germain de Grantham, Quebec |
| 3rd Supporter | Étienne Boivin-Côté | St-Gédéon, Quebec |
| 4th Supporter | Mikhaël Daigle | St-Ferdinand, Quebec |
Note: OCS refers to Off Colour Spot and this code is used by some breed associations to identify animals with white or off-colour markings that are not representative of the breed characteristics in terms of coat colour and/or pattern. Often the off colour spot is found on the underside of the belly or the animal has a white core in the tail switch. When observed, OCS must be reported to the breed association at the time of application for herdbook registration or if develops after registered. For some breeds, reporting OCS may affect the animal’s eligible level of purity for herdbook registration.
This a breed association requirement and not within the normal scope of Lactanet activities. With consideration of the uncertain support and other corporate/industry priorities, no further action will be taken on this resolution.
Whereas…
Whereas a large portion of the Colour Breed breeders have mixed herds and small populations of some breeds.
Whereas having herd averages published is great publicity for the smaller breeds and important data for people to see.
Whereas Breed associations such as Ayrshire Canada recognize herd averages with as few as five completed records while Lactanet requires ten.
Therefore…
Therefore, be it resolved that Lactanet recognize herd averages with as few as five completed records in their annual reports.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Lindsay Greenough | Greenfield, Nova Scotia |
| 1st Supporter | Scott Macdonald | Sussex, New Brunswick |
| 2nd Supporter | Peter Sinclair | Goshen, Nova Scotia |
| 3rd Supporter | Andrew Hornbrook | Sussex, New Brunswick |
| 4th Supporter | Ben Roy | Kentville, Nova Scotia |
Note: For official annual herd averages, Lactanet requires a minimum of ten completed lactations for Holstein, Jersey and Ayrshire breeds and a minimum of five completed lactations is used for Brown Swiss, Canadienne, Guernsey and Milking Shorthorn.
This resolution was tied at voting. No action will be taken at this time given uncertain support for this proposed change.
2022 Carried Resolutions
Genetics
Whereas…
Whereas the COMPASS program is a great tool to assist Canadian dairy breeders and;
Whereas the current program provides a list of bulls and a herd inventory but not a mating report and;
Whereas breeders must release their herd inventory to an artificial insemination company to get a mating report and;
Whereas all Ontario licensed dairy farms pay a check off to Lactanet’s subsidiary, Ontario DHI, and farms using milk recording services pay Lactanet for that service, yet those farms cannot access their data through Compass to generate their own mating report and;
Whereas breeders should have the choice to use their herd data to create mating reports without commercial bias and create such reports as frequently as they want without having to consult an artificial insemination company.
Therefore…
Therefore, be it resolved that COMPASS be designed to allow breeders, or their chosen advisors, to create a mating report based on their sire criteria and with consideration for inbreeding and haplotypes and that the mating recommendations can be sent to the Lactanet mobile application.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Catherine Agar | Salford, Ontario |
| 1st Supporter | Dylan Stewardson | Thedford, Ontario |
| 2nd Supporter | Matt Dann | Palmerston, Ontario |
| 3rd Supporter | Adam Vervoort | Peterborough, Ontario |
| 4th Supporter | Jim Stanton | Ilderton, Ontario |
Staff have been directed to consider this resolution in conjunction with the ongoing development of changes resulting from approved resolutions from 2021 related to enhancements of the Compass tool and the management of mating decisions to control the impact of genetic recessives and inbreeding. Within this scope, the Board emphasizes that COMPASS is not intended to become a mating program but may assist customers assessing the genetic impact of possible matings.
Whereas…
Whereas the raw production of animals is not published (except on an individual basis). Those raw data always seem to be modified before being published;
Whereas LPI and Pro$ do not always represent the actual ability of daughters to generate the optimum income earned from the milk volume and the components produced. (The true on-farm profitability);
Whereas the genetic indexes decrease as the animals get older and directly influence the value of those animals, even if they deliver very good performances as well as very good progeny.
Therefore…
Therefore it is proposed to ask Lactanet to develop an index that reflects the performances of the sires offered by insemination centres based exclusively on the raw data collected on farms (milk volume, components, classification). This would allow to compare the sires with one another according to the revenues generated by the production of their daughters, the latter being compared to their herd mates.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Jean-François Beaudoin | Sainte-Marguerite, Quebec |
| 1st Supporter | Vincent Roy | Saint-Isidore, Quebec |
| 2nd Supporter | Régis Boulet | Saint-Bernard, Quebec |
| 3rd Supporter | Anthony Breton Robert | Saint-Anselme, Quebec |
| 4th Supporter | Benoît Lafond | Guigues, Quebec |
This resolution will be directed to the Genetic Evaluation Board for their consideration. Once the GEB has identified the best approach to accomplish this objective, they will make a recommendation to the Lactanet Board of Directors for their consideration.
Whereas…
Whereas most people only look at a sire’s Genetic Evaluation Summary when purchasing semen or making breeding choices;
Whereas it is difficult to establish a link between the genetics of a sire and the linear evaluation (which corresponds to classification);
Whereas what is shown in a sire proof is the breed average, which is not necessarily the ideal;
Whereas the ideal of classification is well known, but the ideal of genetic traits is little known or unknown;
Whereas the real impact of genetic traits on an animal’s classification or conformation is little known or unknown;
Whereas the interpretation of a sire’s genetic index and the impact on the conformation of its daughters is complex.
Therefore…
Therefore, it is proposed to make the proof interpretation easier by including a link between the genetic figure of a sire’s type traits and the classification result expected from his daughters (linear evaluation). To include the expected classification result compared to the proof average.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Reno Desaulniers | Amos, Quebec |
| 1st Supporter | Julie Duchesne | Saint-Narcisse, Quebec |
| 2nd Supporter | Hans Broenimaan | Sainte-Perpétue, Quebec |
| 3rd Supporter | Alphonse Pittet | Saint-Tite, Quebec |
| 4th Supporter | Louis St-Aubin | Saint-Clet, Quebec |
This resolution will be directed to the Genetic Evaluation Board for their consideration. Once the GEB has identified the best approach to accomplish this objective, they will make a recommendation to the Lactanet Board of Directors for their consideration.
Attendu que…
Attendu que les difficultés rencontrées par les éleveurs Ayrshire dans le suivi du gène récessif AM (Arthrogrypose Multiplexe);
Attendu que les déclarations faites par les éleveurs lors des contrôles laitiers n’ont pas de suivi.
En conséquence…
En conséquence il est proposé que Lactanet mette en place un processus ou un outil de déclaration des anomalies des veaux et des naissances observées par les producteurs de lait; qu’il procède à l’analyse régulière de ces déclarations et qu’il s’assure que les processus de déclaration comprennent un suivi avec Ayrshire Canada.
| Nom | Lieu | |
|---|---|---|
| Proposeur | François Beaudry | Granby, Québec |
| 1er appuyeur | Jessie Rioux | Saint-Clément, Québec |
| 2e appuyeur | Eleanor Robinson | Osgoode, Ontario |
| 3e appuyeur | Marie-Ellen Trueman | Saskville, Nouveau-Brunswick |
| 4e appuyeur | Oliver Balme | Cobble Hill, Colombie-Britannique |
Staff have been directed to assess options for the collection of data related to calf abnormalities and propose recommendations for consideration by the Board of Directors during the next business year. In addition, the DairyGen Council priorities for research funding includes the development and implementation of DNA-based tools to manage the impact of genetic abnormalities in dairy cattle breeds in Canada.
Whereas…
Whereas there is a surplus of solids non-fat (SNF) currently produced compared to the market demand;
Whereas the predictions are asking us to target a solid non-fat/fat (SNF/F) ratio around 2.00;
Whereas to reach such a ratio, the Holstein must continue to increase its fat production and more specifically its deviation;
Whereas the fat deviation (%) is a high heritability trait and that it is therefore possible to make an efficient genetic selection for this trait;
Whereas the importance of being proactive in order to adapt our selection indexes (for example LPI and Pro$) with the aim of maximizing the use of our milk and therefore our revenues.
Therefore…
Therefore it is proposed to review the current selection tools in order to accelerate the fat deviation genetic improvement and obtain a SNF/F ratio that is better adapted to the industry.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Martin Grégoire | Saint-Esprit, Quebec |
| 1st Supporter | Alphonse Pittet | Saint-Tite, Quebec |
| 2nd Supporter | Julie Duchesne | Saint-Narcisse, Quebec |
| 3rd Supporter | Hans Broenimaan | Sainte-Perpétue, Quebec |
| 4th Supporter | Louis St-Aubin | Saint-Clet, Quebec |
This resolution will be directed to the Genetic Evaluation Board for their consideration. Once the GEB has identified the best approach to accomplish this objective, they will make a recommendation to the Lactanet Board of Directors for their consideration.
Milk Recording
Whereas…
Whereas more and more cows have another calving within the same year;
Whereas they are penalized because they are dried off before 305 days;
Whereas lactation persistency is a beautiful and great quality in our cows that helps increase the profitability of our herds.
Therefore…
Therefore, it is proposed that the BCA of cows dried off between 280 and 305 days in milk be calculated based on the 305-day projected yields at the time of dry off and that the BCA of cows who reach a lactation of 305 days be adjusted upwards when it is higher than the BCA based on the projected yields.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Éric Laliberté | Honfleur, Quebec |
| 1st Supporter | François Laliberté | Honfleur, Quebec |
| 2nd Supporter | Christian Talbot | Armagh, Quebec |
| 3rd Supporter | Christian Bussières | Saint-Henri, Quebec |
| 4th Supporter | Vincent Audet | Honfleur, Quebec |
This resolution will be considered in conjunction with the ongoing development of changes resulting from similar resolutions approved in 2021 related to the calculation of BCA values for cows dried off between 280 and 305 days in milk. Such changes are expected to be developed simultaneously to the expanded publication of lactation records with implementation expected in 2023.
Whereas…
Whereas some of the data that best reflect a cow’s profitability are her production per day of life;
Whereas the type of herd management applied on the farm can impact BCAs (dry period before 305 DIM, extended lactation).
Therefore…
Therefore it is proposed that the results of the accumulation of Milk, Fat and Protein per day of life be official publishable information on the same level as BCAs.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Julie Duchesne | Saint-Narcisse, Quebec |
| 1st Supporter | Benjamin Nieuwenhof | Sainte-Agnès-de-Dundee, Quebec |
| 2nd Supporter | Alphonse Pittet | Saint-Tite, Quebec |
| 3rd Supporter | Hans Broenimaan | Sainte-Perpétue, Quebec |
| 4th Supporter | Louis St-Aubin | Saint-Clet, Quebec |
Staff have been directed to assess how this information can be added to existing data related to published lactation records. Although this review may be linked to the current initiative related to changes for publishable lactations, any development is only likely after implementation of the current initiative.
2021 Carried Resolutions
Genetics
Whereas …
Whereas the Compass program is a great foundation to assist Canadian dairy breeders and;
Whereas giving breeders the flexibility of customizing their breeding program would be a huge benefit to the program and;
Whereas the current program only offers a list of bulls for the herd and not for individual cows, creating an extra step for producers and;
Whereas breeders are becoming increasingly focused on the benefit of A2 milk
Therefore …
Therefore, be it resolved that Holstein Canada and Lactanet complete a sixth module and add functionality to the Compass software to customize an index, make a mating program recommendation, sort bulls for the A2 gene and identify matings that could result in undesirable haplotypes.
Reference information provided by Lactanet:
Compass currently includes all available A2 gene test results at Holstein Canada or Lactanet and allows for filtering and sorting of bulls as well as females in the herd. The development of a customized index tool and/or a mating program is very costly to develop and both services are already widely provided by various A.I. companies doing business in Canada.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Lindsay Greenough | Greenfield, Nova Scotia |
| 1st Supporter | Roy Etheridge | Fredericton, New Brunswick |
| 2nd Supporter | Ben Roy | Wolfville, Nova Scotia |
| 3rd Supporter | Jason VanderLinden | Brierly Brook, Nova Scotia |
| 4th Supporter | Scott MacDonald | St. John, New Brunswick |
A customized index is already planned for phase ii of COMPASS development but no timeframe has been determined and funding has not yet been established. Mating advice is not intended to be part of COMPASS as this duplicates and competes with existing producer systems available via Semex and other AI customers of Lactanet. An option for sorting sires by their A2 genotype and/or haplotype carrier status is already available in COMPASS and on the Lactanet website. However, consideration will be given to the integration of a haplotype management tool within the existing Lactanet inbreeding calculator. (also linked to proposed action for Inbreeding Calculator resolution).
Whereas …
Whereas the genetic data present on Compass are the most updated source of information available to users.
Whereas the Compass tool is presently not as popular as expected.
Whereas the data retrieval from the herd inventory is done only in PDF which does not allow for the users to analyze the data, but only to consult them.
Therefore …
Therefore, it is requested that Lactanet collaborate with Holstein Canada so that the tables generated in the “Herd Genetics” section of Compass can be exported in an Excel document rather than a PDF in order for the users to make their own analysis of the generated data.
Reference information provided by Lactanet:
A total of 1,800 producers have created their Compass account and 500 are actively using it on a regular basis. Various Compass features were developed to allow users to sort and filter their own data without requiring data extraction.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Pier-Luc Tardif | Ste-Hénédine, Quebec |
| 1st Supporter | Anthony Breton-Robert | St-Anselme, Quebec |
| 2nd Supporter | Régis Boulet | St-Bernard, Quebec |
| 3rd Supporter | Vincent Roy | St-Isidore, Quebec |
| 4th Supporter | Mathieu Bisson | Ste-Marie, Quebec |
We will examine the development of a feature within COMPASS that would allow the herd owner (based on an authorization process) to extract genetic evaluation data for their own animals in a file-friendly format in addition to the current pdf report feature. This approach would also address an issue raised in the Sharing of Genetic Indexes Resolution.
Whereas …
Whereas, the intensive use of genomics has led us to use lesser genetic diversity in our matings; and,
Whereas, the best sires available are often related due to a common use of bull sires between A.I. units; and,
Wherea,s some less exploited bloodlines no longer have the possibility of showing their genetic potential because of suggestive selection;
Therefore …
Therefore, it is moved that Lactanet try to find a solution in order to value the animals having genetic diversity in the breed.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Olivier Leclerc, St-Patrice, QC, | St-Patrice, Quebec |
| 1st Supporter | Jean-Pierre Breton, St-Patrice, QC, | St-Patrice, Quebec |
| 2nd Supporter | Philippe Dion | St-Narcisse, Quebec |
| 3rd Supporter | Sébastien Saindon | St-Alexandre-de-Kamouraska, Quebec |
| 4th Supporter | Vincent Roy | St-Isidore, Quebec |
This resolution has been referred to the GEB for consideration and includes the potential tools to monitor and control the impact of inbreeding.
Whereas…
Whereas (In the majority of cases), producers pay to have their animal genomic tested.
Whereas the genomic results bring a lot of information on an animal and can increase its value.
Whereas the best time to sell a bull is when he is ready for service and that generally happens after the age of 1.
Whereas we presently do not have access to the updated genomic results of our bulls between the age of 1 and 3.
Therefore…
Therefore, we ask that Lactanet (CDN) continue to calculate and to make available to breeders the updated genomic results of bulls beyond the age of 1.
Reference information provided by Lactanet:
This issue has been considered and supported, in principle, by the GEB and the Lactanet Board. A process to implement this recommendation still needs to be prioritized and established that also recognizes the existing fee structure applicable to A.I. bulls for which fees must be paid prior to 12 months of age.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Antony Boutin | Saint-Georges, Quebec |
| 1st Supporter | Armand Leclerc | Sainte-Claire, Quebec |
| 2nd Supporter | Sarah Poulin | Saint-Georges, Quebec |
| 3rd Supporter | Francois Vermette | Saint-Gervais, Quebec |
| 4th Supporter | Eric Bélanger | Saint-Victor, Quebec |
The current 12-month age limit for the distribution of unofficial genomic evaluations to bull owners and the genomic evaluation nominating organization will be extended to 18 months for bulls born in Canada, effective the December 2021 genetic evaluation release.
Whereas…
Whereas the haplotypes can cause abortions during late pregnancy or mortality in young calves, and whereas each abortion/loss of a calf costs several months of production in addition to the sometime high value of the calf.
Whereas it is recommended by Lactanet to avoid matings with carrier parents.
Whereas breeders must know what bulls are carriers of haplotypes to avoid certain crossbreedings.
Whereas the information on haplotypes is 99% reliable and therefore valuable information for business decision-making.
Therefore…
Therefore, it is requested that the haplotypes be published on the main page of the Lactanet genetic evaluations and that it be added in the Lactanet code of ethics that artificial insemination units are required to publish the haplotypes with sire proofs.
Reference information provided by Lactanet:
Haplotype results are not the same as a gene test result (ex: A2, CVM, BLAD, etc.). The haplotype carrier probability calculations were developed by Lactanet (formerly CDN) as a service to help Canadian dairy producers. They are publicly available for all animals on their Pedigree page on the Lactanet (www.cdn.ca) website and are included on every animal with the Compass software.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Nicolas Lalande | St-Placide, Quebec |
| 1st Supporter | Sébastien Proulx | Mirabel, Quebec |
| 2nd Supporter | Vanessa Mondou | Mirabel, Quebec |
| 3rd Supporter | Pascal Martin | St-Clet, Quebec |
| 4th Supporter | Benoit Lafond | Guigues, Quebec |
Lactanet will develop a new pop-up box accessible from each animal’s Genetic Evaluation Summary page that will quickly display its status for various genetic conditions and known haplotypes.
Whereas…
Whereas the genetic data found in Compass are the most updated source of information available to users.
Whereas the Compass tool is presently not as popular as expected and a different function would help the tool stand out.
Whereas, according to the Lactanet data, inbreeding in the Holstein breed is 7.47%* and has increased by 0.25 in the last decade.
Whereas there is presently no tool for independent sire selection available on the market.
Therefore…
Therefore, it is requested that Lactanet collaborate with Holstein Canada so that the Lactanet inbreeding calculator is integrated into the Compass tool and that the calculation of inbreeding can be done quickly between a bull selected by the user in the “My sires” list and an individual or a group of individuals selected by the user in the herd inventory. The purpose of this addition would be to validate the inbreeding and the genetic indexes of the potential progeny, and not to suggest a mating.
Reference information provided by Lactanet:
A total of 1,800 producers have created their Compass account and 500 are actively using it on a regular basis. The management of inbreeding in a herd and/or breed is best done at the time of mating decisions. The Inbreeding Calculator is a frequently used feature of the Lactanet (www.cdn.ca) web site and was not integrated into Compass to avoid duplication. The “My Sires” feature in Compass was developed and added after the initial software launch in November 2019.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Pier-Luc Tardif | Ste-Hénédine, Quebec |
| 1st Supporter | Anthony Breton-Robert | St-Anselme, Quebec |
| 2nd Supporter | Régis Boulet | St-Bernard, Quebec |
| 3rd Supporter | Vincent Roy | St-Isidore, Quebec |
| 4th Supporter | Mathieu Bisson | Ste-Marie, Quebec |
An inbreeding calculator is currently available on the Lactanet website. As an option to avoid the duplication of website development and ongoing maintenance costs, we will explore the opportunity to redirect COMPASS users to the existing tool in a seamless manner.
Whereas…
Whereas Dairy producers pay for milk recording, pay for registration and classification, pay the A.I. units and pay for genomic testing, they are entitled to being able to use the data they produce and the indexes of their choice.
Whereas genetic data are the property of producers.
Whereas DGVs are a source of information that contribute to the estimation of genetic potential.
Whereas Lactanet has decided to withdraw DGVs without the approval of producers for whom this information is an additional tool for herd management.
Whereas Lactanet claims to be transparent in the information and ownership of data. Whereas the profitability of dairy farms is a growing challenge, the use of DGVs is an additional source of information that could assist in profitability.
Therefore…
Therefore, it is requested that Lactanet resume the publication of DGVs since producers never asked for its withdrawal.
Reference information provided by Lactanet:
Following consultation with various breeders and based on various analyses examining the potential benefits of DGV versus officially published genomic evaluations, the GEB recommended the discontinuation of DGV publication, which was implemented effective December 2019.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Antony Boutin | Saint-Georges, Quebec |
| 1st Supporter | Pierre-Yves Trembly | Jonquière, Quebec |
| 2nd Supporter | Jean-Francois Beaudoin | Sainte-Marguerite, Quebec |
| 3rd Supporter | Maxime Boutin | Saint-Georges, Quebec |
| 4th Supporter | Armand Leclerc | Sainte-Claire, Quebec |
This issue has been considered on multiple occasions by the CDN and Lactanet Boards. The original decision to support the recommendation of the Genetic Evaluation Board to discontinue the publication of DGV remains.
Whereas …
Whereas, Lactanet currently only publishes genomics from bulls under 3 years old if they are marketed by Lactanet member company. But many bulls are imported privately by farmers who pay money to provide Lactanet with information through milk testing and classification;
Therefore …
Therefore, be it resolved that Lactanet should publish all genomic information on males and females that is available to them.
Reference information provided by Lactanet:
Genomic evaluations for bulls become official once the associated genetic evaluation fee is paid, which is routinely done by all A.I. companies that are Lactanet customers. There is no existing policy preventing any bull for which semen is privately imported by farmers from having an official Canadian genomic evaluation once the associated fee is paid. All genotyped females automatically have a published official evaluation.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Stefan Gubelmann | Walton, Ontario |
| 1st Supporter | Brandon Cooper | Brownville, Ontario |
| 2nd Supporter | Dave Rousseau | Verchères, Quebec |
| 3rd Supporter | Fred Mathys | Wawanesa, Manitoba |
| 4th Supporter | Shirley Dortmans | Strathroy, Ontario |
All Canadian female genomic evaluations are published. All Canadian males have unofficial genomic information provided to the owner during the first 12 months. All males are eligible to have their information published publicly subject to the payment of the associated fees. The fees are used to fund the development and delivery of genetic and genomic evaluations. The current fee schedule will be reviewed during the upcoming year with consideration of the resolution and the ability to fund ongoing genetic evaluations, however, there is no commitment that the review will result in changes to the current policy.
Whereas…
Whereas the withdrawal of the DGV deprives breeders and people involved in genetic selection of a precious tool.
Whereas the parent average is available on the index reports of different countries (United States, Germany, Switzerland, etc.).
Whereas it would be easier to get an overview of the impact of genomics and the transmission potential of the animals by making a comparison between the genomic index and the parent average.
Therefore…
Therefore, it is requested that Lactanet publish the parent average for all traits and each genomic tested animal on the genomic reports sent to breeders as well as on the Lactanet Genetic Evaluation Summaries.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Pascal Martin | Ste-Cécile-de-Milton, Quebec |
| 1st Supporter | Benoit Lafond | Guiges, Quebec |
| 2nd Supporter | Julie Duchesne | St-Narcisse, Quebec |
| 3rd Supporter | Stéphane Alary | Luskville, Quebec |
| 4th Supporter | Louis St-Aubin | St-Clet, Quebec |
It is important that each animal have only one genetic evaluation value published for each trait, publishing both Parent Averages and the official GPA values if therefore not desired. As a solution, Lactanet will be introducing a new animal page on its website that visually displays the impact of genomics on the animal’s genetic evaluation and associated Reliability value for LPI, Pro$ and several key traits. This new page will be available starting December 2021 for all genotyped females that are born in Canada or known to be Canadian owned.
Whereas …
Whereas, the milk producers pay to produce and supply the data allowing for the calculation of genetic indexes; and,
Whereas, a very large proportion of the Lactanet financing comes from dairy producers or organizations funded by producers (breed associations, A.I. units, DFC, etc.); and,
Whereas, today’s farms can have access to an array of tools allowing them to increase their efficiency and whereas those tools depend on data for their functioning;
Therefore …
Therefore, it is moved that Lactanet recognize that the genetic indexes obtained through the collection of data on our farms also belong to the producers and that the producers can consent to sharing these data with the stakeholders of their choice.
Reference information provided by Lactanet:
At the current time genetic indexes are calculated for all Canadian animals registered in a breed association herdbook and are publicly available.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Olivier Leclerc | St-Patrice, Quebec |
| 1st Supporter | Jean-Pierre Breton | St-Patrice, Quebec |
| 2nd Supporter | Philippe Dion | St-Narcisse, Quebec |
| 3rd Supporter | Vincent Roy | St-Isidore, Quebec |
| 4th Supporter | Sébastien Saindon | St-Alexandre-de-Kamouraska, Quebec |
All official male results are publicly available via files accessible on the Lactanet website. For females, genetic data is currently available through COMPASS and may be available in additional formats in the future as being considered in the Genetic Data Resolution.
Milk Recording
Whereas…
Whereas we want to maintain the importance and the credibility of lactations being completed.
Whereas the positive financial impact of shorter calving intervals is a generally acknowledged notion.
Whereas the use of bulls siring high fertility daughters, combined with sustained management methods aimed at reducing calving intervals, allows more and more producers to reach very satisfactory results.
Whereas once those objectives are reached and exceeded, many lactations do not reach the 305 days required, thus penalizing highly fertile and productive cows.
Whereas BCAs are unique indexes in Canada and 305-day lactations are ICAR international standards that cannot be modified.
Whereas it is recognized that practices having a substantial impact on the financial health of dairy farms are a concept consistent with its vision.
Therefore…
Therefore, it is proposed to ask Lactanet to evaluate the possibility and to find potential solutions aimed at recognizing cows having completed 280 days in milk, by using projections or other means, so that fertile and high-producing cows are no longer penalized due to the fact that they are calving again within the time frame desired by producers seeking efficient management.
Reference information provided by Lactanet:
An analysis of the data shows that the percentage of lactations where the cows were dried at less than 305 days in milk (DIM) has increased from 26% in 2014 to 32% in 2020. As well, in 2020 a total of 7.1% of the cows dried off between 280 and 289 DIM versus 5.5% in 2014 and 4.8 % in 2004. This is an issue previously discussed by the Industry Standards Committee without any clear solution.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Benoit Lafond | Guigues, Quebec |
| 1st Supporter | Lysanne Pelletier | St-Roch des Aulnaies, Quebec |
| 2nd Supporter | Julie Duchesne | St-Narcisse, Quebec |
| 3rd Supporter | Louis-St-Aubin | St-Clet, Quebec |
| 4th Supporter | Stéphane Alary | Luskville, Quebec |
This is an issue that has been considered previously. We will explore solutions for this issue in parallel with the lactation publication initiative (see Resolutions: Publishable Robot Records, Publishable Electronic Records and Publishable Records from Robots) as any solution for this issue will also involve data system changes for Lactanet and industry partners.
Whereas…
Whereas Lactanet’s vision is to provide the premier source of information and innovative solutions for Canadian dairy farmers while ensuring global leadership in the dairy industry and;
Whereas many dairy farmers have invested heavily in milking technology that provides daily data (milk weights, fat and protein measures, SCC) to use for herd management. There is also a huge amount of data being generated (ie: milk speed, number of visits) that is not being collected at all from herds that could be used for breed improvement and;
Whereas due to increasing operating costs and the stagnant price of milk, many producers are looking at ways to cut costs, if milk recording no longer provides them an abundance of novel information for herd management, it will be discontinued and;
Whereas with less and less herds contributing their data to the national database, the overall quality of the industry’s data will be compromised. Additionally, data from these farms would no longer be available to contribute to bull proofs or be used to support genomic numbers in the future.
Therefore…
Therefore, be it resolved, that Lactanet create and adapt to a more cost-effective, electronic method of data collection for farms with milking technology that provides daily data, with the goal of retaining these herds as Lactanet customers and obtaining their extensive data for breed improvement and benchmarking.
Reference information provided by Lactanet:
In addition to the current eDHI service, Lactanet has a number of initiatives in progress including the automated daily collection of information from automated milking systems as well as the establishment of a more efficient data exchange process that is being developed in conjunction with international partners and major equipment manufacturers (eg. DeLaval, GEA, Lely).
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Morgan Overvest Uyterlinde | L’Orignal, Ontario |
| 1st Supporter | Justin Velthuis | Metcalfe, Ontario |
| 2nd Supporter | Justin Crowley | Hastings, Ontario |
| 3rd Supporter | Harry Van der Linden | Antigonish, Nova Scotia |
| 4th Supporter | John Werry | Oshawa, Ontario |
Introduced nearly two years ago, our eDHI service offers a cost effective option to remotely collect data from on-farm electronic systems (robots and parlours). This service does not require a farm visit and has the option to use milk component sensor data in the calculation of management records. Also available for robot herds is a robot herd performance benchmark report.
Whereas …
Whereas technological advances and many milking systems provide daily data on milk weights, components and SCC and;
Whereas more and more producers are no longer using official and unofficial recording systems.
Therefore …
Therefore, it is proposed that milk recording find quick and achievable solutions to deliver a service adapted to clients using daily data collection systems in order to collectively retain producers and to keep important data in the system.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Andrew Wildeboer | Lacombe, Alberta |
| 1st Supporter | William Vandelinde | Lacombe, Alberta |
| 2nd Supporter | Scott Hastie | Bowden, Alberta |
| 3rd Supporter | Fred Hofstra | Millet, Alberta |
| 4th Supporter | Lee Simanton | Ponoka, Alberta |
Our eDHI service option is available (remote data collection with no farm visits) for customers with daily data collection systems (robots and electronic parlours). As well, there is an initiative in progress related to data exchange with on-farm systems and an industry initiative related to broadening the public availability of lactation records.
Whereas…
Whereas Lactanet’s vision is to provide the premier source of information and innovative solutions for Canadian dairy farmers while ensuring global leadership in the dairy industry.
Whereas, many dairy farmers have invested heavily in milking technology that provides daily data (milk weights, fat and protein measures, SCC) to use for herd management. There is also a huge amount of data being generated (i.e. milk speed, number of visits) that is not being collected at all from these herds that could be used for breed improvement.
Whereas, due to increasing operating costs and the stagnant price of milk, many producers are looking at ways to cut costs, if milk recording no longer provides them an abundance of novel information for herd management, it will be discontinued
Whereas, with less and less herds contributing their data to the national database the overall quality of the industry’s data will be compromised. Additionally, data from these farms would no longer be available to contribute to bull proofs or be used to support genomic numbers in the future.
Therefore…
Therefore, be it resolved that, Lactanet develop a system of monitoring the quality of information received from farms with daily data collection and work with milking equipment companies to facilitate this transfer of information from all farms interested in contributing their data (“publishable” and “non-publishable” data). Lactanet should be responsible for establishing the standards and procedures for collecting this on-farm, daily data.
Reference information provided by Lactanet:
Lactanet is a founding member of a global partnership (International Dairy Data Exchange Network – iDDEN) and is developing an updated global data exchange network with the objective of implementing new international standards and facilitating more efficient data exchange with on-farm systems. This initiative involves farmer owned organizations from Germany, Australia, Netherlands, Nordic countries, Austria and USA. Lactanet is also working with major dairy equipment manufacturers on the development and implementation of this new data exchange system.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Morgan Overvest Uyterlinde | L’Orignal, Ontario |
| 1st Supporter | Justin Velthuis | Metcalfe, Ontario |
| 2nd Supporter | Justin Crowley | Hastings, Ontario |
| 3rd Supporter | Harry Van der Linden | Antigonish, Nova Scotia |
| 4th Supporter | John Werry | Oshawa, Ontario |
We are currently collaborating with 6 international milk recording partners and global milking equipment companies to further improve the dairy data exchange process. This option would complement the remote data access options currently available to Lactanet customers. Further, our industry initiative to broaden the public availability of lactation records is in progress.
Whereas…
Whereas it is difficult for cows bred before 80 days in milk to make it to 305 days in milk without a short dry-off period which, in general, is not successful.
Whereas the profitability of a farm operation increases thanks to the reduction of the calving interval and that reproduction is one of the main reasons for culling in Québec.
Whereas BCAs are used for several prizes such as Star Cow, Master Breeder, Best Herd Average, etc. and that a cow who does not complete 305 days in milk will be penalized by 1 point each 2 days not completed, and that therefore cows with good reproductive performance are penalized.
Whereas the BCA results are lowered for cows who were superior in the herd, it becomes unnecessary to use BCAs to carefully select the best animals in the herd.
Therefore…
Therefore, it is proposed to no longer penalize cows that are dried off before having reached 305 days in milk and to keep the BCAs according to the projection of the last recording provided that they calve again within 70 days following the dry-off date.
*In those cases, only the BCA projections would be used for reports and prizes. The quantity of milk, fat and protein would be the quantity actually produced on the number of days at the end of the lactation.
Reference information provided by Lactanet:
An analysis of the 2019 data indicates that 78% of the cows that dried off between 280 and 304 DIM calved again within 70 days of dry off. This is an idea previously discussed by the Industry Standards Committee.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Lysanne Pelletier | Saint-Roch des Aulnaies, Quebec |
| 1st Supporter | Marie-Josée Bard | Ste-Anne de La Pocatière, Quebec |
| 2nd Supporter | Kevin Boulet | Saint-Francois-de-la-Rivière-du-Sud, Quebec |
| 3rd Supporter | Olivier Marquis | Saint-Alexandre de Kamouraska, Quebec |
| 4th Supporter | Jean-Philippe Charest | Saint-Alexandre de Kamourask, Quebec |
Similar to the 280 Day Lactations Resolution, this issue has been considered previously and we will consider the resolution proposal as we explore solutions. A solution to this issue will involve data system changes for Lactanet and industry partners.
Whereas…
Whereas Lactanet’s vision is to provide the premier source of information and innovative solutions for Canadian dairy farmers while ensuring global leadership in the dairy industry and;
Whereas, many dairy farmers have invested heavily in milking technology that provides daily data (milk weights, fat and protein measures, SCC) to use for herd management. There is also a huge amount of data being generated (i.e. milk speed, number of visits) that is not being collected at all from these herds that could be used for breed improvement and;
Whereas, due to increasing operating costs and the stagnant price of milk, many producers are looking at ways to cut costs; if milk recording no longer provides them an abundance of novel information for herd management, it will be discontinued and;
Whereas, with less and less herds contributing their data to the national database the overall quality of the industry’s data will be compromised. Additionally, data from these farms would no longer be available to contribute to bull proofs or be used to support genomic numbers in the future.
Therefore…
Therefore, be it resolved, that Lactanet provide a service that allows the electronic collection of production data for recording of complete, publishable records from herds with the ability to collect data from on-farm systems, with the additional goal of developing more suitable reports for these farms to add value to milk recording and to add value to existing services that no longer provide novel information to this type of producer.
Reference information provided by Lactanet:
There are currently 115,000 cows in robotic milking systems using regular DHI services where samples are collected routinely. There are an additional 13,500 cows currently enrolled in the eDHI service where milk production and sensor data (optional) is collected remotely. Most of the 950+ herds with robot milking systems also receive the specialized Robot Report – which provides performance and benchmarks on metrics unique to robot systems (eg. kg fat/box, cow refusals, robot failures, robot free time, robot milkings per day).
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Morgan Overvest Uyterlinde | L’Orignal, Ontario |
| 1st Supporter | Justin Velthuis | Metcalfe, Ontario |
| 2nd Supporter | Justin Crowley | Hastings, Ontario |
| 3rd Supporter | Harry Van der Linden | Antigonish, Nova Scotia |
| 4th Supporter | John Werry | Oshawa, Ontario |
An industry initiative to broaden the public availability of lactation records is currently in progress. This initiative will build on the current eDHI service option where data from robotic systems and electronic parlours can be accessed remotely without requiring a farm visit. Further, the development of additional robot specific products is in progress.
Whereas …
Whereas the number of herds using Lactanet is decreasing and;
Whereas more than 11% of herds in Canada use robotic milking and continues to increase and;
Whereas robotic systems gather accurate daily data from 2-3 milkings recording approximately 900 pieces of data per cow per year.
Therefore …
Therefore, it is proposed that Lactanet work with various relevant organizations to update and modernize data collection from robotic systems with the goal of promptly providing an official milk recording option that is publishable.
Reference information provided by Lactanet:
Dairy farms with robotic milking systems represent 14% of Lactanet herds and 18% of Lactanet cows. eDHI herds represent 1% of herds and 2% of cows using Lactanet milk recording services.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Andrew Wildeboer | Lacombe, Alberta |
| 1st Supporter | William Vandelinde | Lacombe, Alberta |
| 2nd Supporter | Scott Hastie | Bowden, Alberta |
| 3rd Supporter | Fred Hofstra | Millet, Alberta |
| 4th Supporter | Lee Simanton | Ponoka, Alberta |
An industry initiative to broaden the public availability of lactation records has been launched and is currently in progress. The initiative will include the collection and public availability of lactation records – including information from robotic milking systems. These changes will require changes by all industry partners and are anticipated to be completed later in 2022.
Whereas…
Whereas more and more producers are abandoning official and non-official milk recording to save money.
Whereas more than 11% of herds in Canada use robotic milking and that percentage is constantly increasing.
Whereas the robotic milking systems collect on a daily basis precise data from 2 to 3 milking per cow and therefore about 900 yearly data per cow.
Whereas the Holstein breed needs that its producers who are using a robotic milking system remain members. Basically, those breeders are essential to preserve the dynamism of our breeding clubs.
Whereas Lactanet has initiated electronic milk recording (eDHI) by which only milk yield has a publishable status, and not components.
Therefore…
Therefore, it is proposed to request that Lactanet quickly offer a publishable milk recording option to update and modernize the collection of data from robotic systems so that the electronic milk recording is completed and the components are publishable.
In addition, it is also requested that Lactanet reduce the milk recording membership fees over the coming year in order to encourage the members to keep using the service.
Reference information provided by Lactanet:
Lactanet introduced an eDHI service in early 2020 that includes remote data collection and provides the opportunity for publishable milk records. For robotic systems with component sensors, the data can be collected and used for the calculation of non-publishable production and BCA’s for components. While some European organizations are collecting sensor data for research purposes, we are not aware of any other milk recording organization globally that uses sensor data in the calculation of records at this time. Publishable component records are also possible if the on-farm component sensors meet the standards for accuracy established by the International Committee on Animal Recording (ICAR). This is the same organization that approves milk metering devices, milk analysis equipment for laboratories, record calculations, etc. At this time, no component sensors are currently ICAR approved.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Frédéric Pelletier | St-Donat, Quebec |
| 1st Supporter | Simon Proulx | Rimouski, Quebec |
| 2nd Supporter | Julie Duchesne | St-Narcisse, Quebec |
| 3rd Supporter | Benoit Lafond | Guigues, Quebec |
| 4th Supporter | Pascal Martin | Ste-Cécile-de-Milton, Quebec |
A service option to remotely collect data (eDHI) from robotic systems, including component sensor data, has been in place for nearly 2 years. This service option includes the ability for publishable Milk records. A new industry initiative to broaden the public availability of lactation records is currently in progress. Service fees are based on related costs and options that require less travel or staff time due to automation are reflected accordingly in the service fees.
Other
Whereas…
Whereas Lactanet is an organization open for innovations.
Whereas BCAs are outdated tools.
Whereas ranking indexes offered by Lactanet through milk recording do not take into account the overall performance of the animals.
Therefore…
Therefore, it is moved to issue an index comparable to the Herd Management Score for each cow having completed one lactation. A combined individual performance index (C.I.P.I.). This index must combine performance related to production, reproduction and milk quality and also compare it to Canadian individuals for the same age.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Francis Paquet | Sainte-Marie, Quebec |
| 1st Supporter | Marie-Pier Maheu | Sainte-Marie, Quebec |
| 2nd Supporter | Nicolas Turmel | Sainte-Marie, Quebec |
| 3rd Supporter | Dany Chabot | Saint-Elzear, Quebec |
| 4th Supporter | Serge Faucher | Sainte-Marie, Quebec |
This resolution is similar to the Individual Cow Performance Index Resolution. Development has been initiated and is planned for a 2023 introduction.
Whereas…
Whereas within any social, community or political organization, a member of a board of directors or advisory committee must normally withdraw from a decision when it is of financial interest for himself or an organization that he is associated with.
Whereas the decisions of the Genetic Evaluation Board (GEB) are of financial interest for producers and/or distributors of dairy bull semen in Canada.
Whereas the Genetic Evaluation Board is composed of 7 dairy producers, 5 members of the dairy genetic industry and 6 technical members who all have an equal share of voting rights.
Therefore…
Therefore, it is proposed that the voting members of the Genetic Evaluation Board be only the dairy members of the said Board.
Reference information provided by Lactanet:
There are a total of 17 voting members on the GEB (out of the total 18 members) of which 7 are producers/breeders.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Hubert Guimond | Ste-Anne-de-la Pocatière, Quebec |
| 1st Supporter | Alain Garon | St-Denis-de-la-Bouteillerie, Quebec |
| 2nd Supporter | Sébastian Saindon | St-Alexandre-de-Kamouraska, Quebec |
| 3rd Supporter | Dany Pelletier | St-Roch-des-Aulnaies, Quebec |
| 4th Supporter | Gervais Pelletier | St-Roch-des-Aulnaies, Quebec |
The Lactanet Board conducted a review of each industry committee during its first year and made changes as appropriate. The reviews included consideration of mandates, composition, representation and voting rights. No further GEB changes are planned at this time.
Whereas…
Whereas the Herd Management Score is a good indication of our herd management.
Whereas the improvement of our Herd Management Score has an effect on the improvement of the profitability of our operation.
Whereas having a Herd Management Score index for each animal, would allow us to identify the most profitable animals.
Therefore…
Therefore, it is moved that an Individual Cow Performance index be made available for each cow in the herd.
Reference information provided by Lactanet:
The development of a cow equivalent to the Herd Management Score is part of the Lactanet business plan. The project is still in early stages of concept and we are working on the challenges of finding an optimal solution based on science and economics. No details are yet finalized.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Olivier Leclerc | St-Patrice, Quebec |
| 1st Supporter | Jean-Pierre Breton | St-Patrice, Quebec |
| 2nd Supporter | Philippe Dion | St-Narcisse, Quebec |
| 3rd Supporter | Vincent Roy | St-Isidore, Quebec |
| 4th Supporter | Sébastien Saindon | St-Alexandre-de-Kamouraska, Quebec |
An initiative to develop and introduce an individual animal “performance” index is in progress. However, implementation will be delayed until 2023 due to internal resource limitations and the prioritization of the industry initiative to expand the public availability of lactation records (related to other resolutions).
Whereas…
Whereas the Industry Standards Committee is composed of eight people, only one of whom is a producer (representing the Lactanet Board of Directors).
Whereas the Committee would greatly benefit from integrating producers whose profile correspond to that of milking system users and who actively participate in the discussions about industry standards.
Whereas a thorough knowledge of the use of the various data sensors would be useful for determining the minimal standards relevant to the industry.
Whereas the producers are the basis of this industry, they are competent, informed, and highly ethical and result-oriented players.
Therefore…
Therefore, it is proposed that Lactanet add a significant number of unrelated producers corresponding to a variety of profiles in order to carry out the vision of the Industry Standards Committee.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Louis-St-Aubin | St-Clet, Quebec |
| 1st Supporter | Pascal Martin | Ste-Cécile-de-Milton, Quebec |
| 2nd Supporter | Benoit Lafond | Guigues, Quebec |
| 3rd Supporter | Julie Bechesne | St-Narcisse, Quebec |
| 4th Supporter | Hans Broenimann | Ste-Perpétue, Quebec |
The composition of the Industry Standards Committee was reviewed by the Lactanet Board during its first year and was recently amended to add a dairy producer. Further, the future of this committee is to be reviewed again in light of the new industry initiative to broaden the public access of lactation records.
Whereas…
Whereas the weight of the breed associations (1) is well below that of the milk recording agencies (6) on the Lactanet Board of Directors.
Whereas the members of the breed associations express their concerns to their association.
Whereas the breeders are disappointed with the withdrawal of the DGV publication by Lactanet.
Therefore…
Therefore, it is requested that Lactanet better distribute the weight of breed associations on its board of directors in order to better represent the interests of breeders.
Reference information provided by Lactanet:
The current Lactanet Board is comprised of directors from the following partners:
-3 farmer directors appointed by Valacta (Quebec and Atlantic)
-2 farmer directors from Ontario (elected at-large by DHI delegates)
-1 farmer director from Western Canadian DHI (western provinces)
-1 farmer director from Semex (must be a current Semex Board member)
-1 farmer director from DFC (must be a current DFC Board member)
-1 farmer director from Holstein Canada (must be a current Holstein Canada Board member)
-up to 2 external directors that do not need to be dairy farmers (to be appointed by the Board)
-1 external director is a licensed dairy farmer
-1 external director is a staff member of a dairy services organization in the Netherlands
Each of the 10 licensed dairy farmers on the board are all long-time members of at least one Canadian dairy breed organization.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Laurent Failletazt | St-Cyrille-de-Wendover, Quebec |
| 1st Supporter | Hans Broenimann | Ste-Perpétue, Quebec |
| 2nd Supporter | Pascal Martin | Ste-Cécile-de-Milton, Quebec |
| 3rd Supporter | Louis St-Aubin | St-Clet, Quebec |
| 4th Supporter | Benoit Lafond | Guigues, Quebec |
Each of the nine (9) core elected/appointed directors representing the lactanet partners must be a licensed Canadian dairy producer. Up to two (2) external directors that may be appointed by the Board are not required to be licensed dairy producers. All directors have a legal obligation to act in the best interests of the organization regardless of how they are selected/appointed to the board. For reference, all four industry committees include dairy producers and each of the current dairy producers on the Lactanet Board are members of a national breed association (including master breeder winner and past presidents of provincial breed associations).
Whereas…
Whereas Lactanet is concerned with the succession planning in dairy production.
Whereas the road is very long and nearly inaccessible for young people to join the Lactanet board of directors.
Whereas young people are also clients and their vision is important for sound planning of the future.
Therefore…
Therefore, it is moved that the two seats considered as external on the Lactanet board of directors be reserved for young Canadians aged 35 or younger passionate about dairy production and genetics.
Reference information provided by Lactanet:
The age distribution of the Board will change over time. For reference, the current board members range in age from 33 to 65 years of age.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Francis Paquet | Sainte-Marie, Quebec |
| 1st Supporter | Marie-Pier Maheu | Sainte-Marie, Quebec |
| 2nd Supporter | Nicolas Turmel | Sainte-Marie, Quebec |
| 3rd Supporter | Dany Chabot | Saint-Elzear, Quebec |
| 4th Supporter | Serge Faucher | Sainte-Marie, Quebec |
The Lactanet Board remains committed to implementing and supporting good governance practices. The objective of the external positions is to allow for the addition of skills that would enhance the ability of the Board to execute their responsibilities. Lactanet continues to support and invest in the development of future leaders and industry governance training programs. Two of the current Lactanet directors are past participants in such leaders development programs.
Whereas…
Whereas Lactanet is serving dairy producers and must be responsive to their needs.
Whereas it must be represented equitably by its clients, without any conflict of interest.
Whereas the financial contribution to Lactanet comes directly and indirectly from dairy producers.
Whereas producers annually invest more than 15 million in genetic tools.
Therefore…
Therefore, it is moved to change the governance structure by ensuring that all the Lactanet director seats are held by Canadian producers and not linked to other industry organizations. In order to avoid any conflict of interest in the decision-making process and to get Lactanet closer to the needs of its clients and not those of its partners. It is suggested to create with the partners an advisory committee for Lactanet.
Reference information provided by Lactanet:
The current Lactanet Board is comprised of licensed dairy farmer representatives from the following dairy farmer-owned industry partners: Holstein Canada, Semex, Dairy Farmers of Canada, Western Canadian DHI, Ontario DHI and Valacta. The Board may also appoint up to 2 external directors that do not need to be licensed dairy farmers (there are currently two appointed – one of which is a dairy farmer).
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Francis Paquet | Sainte-Marie, Quebec |
| 1st Supporter | Marie-Pier Maheu | Sainte-Marie, Quebec |
| 2nd Supporter | Nicolas Turmel | Sainte-Marie, Quebec |
| 3rd Supporter | Dany Chabot | Saint-Elzear, Quebec |
| 4th Supporter | Serge Faucher | Sainte-Marie, Quebec |
The resolution is not consistent with the original intent of Lactanet as a partnership and removes the direct connection with key industry partners. Communication and coordination with industry partners remains an important strategy for our industry. Each director has a legal obligation to act in the best interest of the organization regardless of how they became a director. Good governance practices at Lactanet include Director Code of Conduct with a strong conflict of interest and confidentiality policy. Breach of the Code of Conduct requires resignation from the Board.
Whereas…
Whereas Lactanet is the result of the merger of several milk production organizations.
Whereas the greatest share of Lactanet’s funding comes from the dairy producers using its services.
Whereas the number of dairy producers is decreasing each year.
Whereas mergers are not always a key to success in terms of operating costs.
Whereas it is essential to have quality service at a lower cost.
Therefore…
Therefore, it is requested that Lactanet develop a strategic plan for human resources for the next few years in order to ensure quality service but mostly a reduction in operational costs.
It is requested that in the interest of transparency, Lactanet disclose its strategic plan to producers in winter 2022.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Yves Labbé | St-Lambert-de-Lauzon, Quebec |
| 1st Supporter | Esthelle Charest | St-Lambert-de-Lauzon, Quebec |
| 2nd Supporter | Jean-Noel Labbé | St-Gervais, Quebec |
| 3rd Supporter | Jérôme Beaudoin | St-Henri-de-Lévis, Quebec |
| 4th Supporter | Mélanie Boulet | St-Michel-de-Bellechasse, Quebec |
Our vision and mission statements are available on the Lactanet website. As a dairy farmer led organization, our objective is to meet the needs of Canadian dairy producers, and we have traditionally used milk recording enrolment as the measure. While we continuously strive for operational efficiency, our strategic plan includes continued investment in innovation to meet the changing needs of our customers (new traits, data exchange with on-farm systems, collection and integration of sensor data, changes to the availability of lactation records, etc.). Many of our industry reports will include key elements of our plan and objectives, with more details where requested.
Whereas…
Whereas Lactanet is the result of the merger of several organizations operating in the field of milk production and;
Whereas several previous employees of those organizations stayed with the new entity, but with different roles and;
Whereas the producers wishing to obtain specific information have difficulty finding their way.
Therefore…
Therefore, it is requested to make that chart available to dairy producers.
Reference information provided by Lactanet:
The Lactanet organizational structure includes the following key operational divisions:
-Operations division, Daniel Lefebvre, Chief Operating Officer – labs, innovation and development, information technology, Customer Service Desk and Centre of Expertise;
-Industry Services division, Brian Van Doormaal, Chief Services Officer – genetic evaluations, DairyTrace and industry data exchange;
-Sales and Services West, Ron Hurtubise, Director – milk recording services in Ontario and West;
-Sales and Services East, Guy Boyer, Director – milk recording and advisory services in Quebec and Atlantic, proAction validation services in Quebec;
-Business Development, Richard Cantin, Director – national business development, herd management software and proAction validation services in Ontario;
-Communications, Annik Perron, Director – national communications activities;
-Finance, Rob McTaggart, Director – national finance and facilities;
-Human Resources – Clement-Guy Bernard, Director – national human resources activities.
| Name | Location | |
|---|---|---|
| Mover | Yves Labbé | St-Lambert-de-Lauzon, Quebec |
| 1st Supporter | Esthelle Charest | St-Lambert-de-Lauzon, Quebec |
| 2nd Supporter | Jean-Noel Labbé | St-Gervais, Quebec |
| 3rd Supporter | Jérôme Beaudoin | St-Henri-de-Lévis, Quebec |
| 4th Supporter | Mélanie Boulet | St-Michel-de-Bellechasse, Quebec |
The new unified Lactanet website, launched in June 2021, now includes both Board Members and senior managers. Anyone seeking additional information is invited to contact the appropriate senior manager or the Lactanet Customer Service Desk at 1-800-549-4373.