Abstract: Cattle’s feeding is based on grass silage in Northern Europe, but grass growth is highly dependent on weather conditions. In farms decision making, grass area is usually determined by the variation of yield. To be adequate in every situation, the lowest expected yield level determines the cultivated area. Other way to manage the grass yield risk is to increase silage storage capacity over annual consumption. Variation of grass yield in climate data from years 1961-1990 was compared with 15 different climate scenario models simulating years 2046-2065. A model was developed for evaluating the inadequacy risk in terms of cultivated area and storing capacity. The cost of risk is presented and discussed.In northern Europe a typical farm has storage for roughage consumption of almost one year. In addition, there can be a buffer storage. The  extra storage is to be used before and during the harvest season. New harvest will be fed to animals only after the buffer empty. Shortage in the buffer storage is possible to be filled, when the yield exceeds the target level. For risk management, two alternative mechanisms are given: forage buffer and possibility to alter the field area.According to our results, there are no significant adverse effects in the cost of risk and implied farm profitability due to climate change. Selecting the risk management scenario of 30 % grass yield risk turned out to be the least cost solution. No Label

Abstract: Dairy sector contributes around 4% of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, of which 2/3 and 1/3 are attributed to milk and meat production, respectively. The main GHGs released from dairy farms are methane, nitrous oxide and carbon dioxide. The increased trend in emissions has stimulated research evaluating alternative mitigation options. Much of the work to date has focused on animal breeding, dietary factors and rumen manipulation. There have been little studies assessing the impact of secondary factors such as animal health on emissions at farm level. Production losses associated with udder health are significant. Somatic cell count (SCC) is an indicator on udder health. In Norway, around 45, 60 and 70% of cows in a dairy herd at first, second and third lactation are expected to have SCC of 50,000 cells/ml and above. Another indirect factor is replacement rate. Increasing the replacement rate due to health disorders, infertility and reduced milk yield is likely to increase the total farm emissions if the milking heifer replacements are kept in the herd.In this study, the impact of elevated SCC (200,000 cells/ml and above) and replacement rate on farm GHG emissions was evaluated. HolosNor, a farm scale model adapting IPCC methodology was used to estimate net farm GHG emissions. Preliminary results indicate an increasing trend in emissions (per kg milk and meat) as the SCC increases. Results suggest that animal health should be considered as an indirect mitigation strategy; however, further studies are required to enable comparisons of different farming systems. No Label

Abstract: The workshop was called to define an overarching question to be answered by all Regional  Pilot Studies and to select from the existing studies those that fit best to the aims of  MACSUR. The question that evolved from the discussions is “What would be the different  contributions of different European adaptation strategies to ensure global food security  until 2050 at different scales (farm to EU) while keeping the GHG targets?” Workshop  participants agreed to use the newest climate simulations related to Representative  Concentration Pathways that were also used by the AgMIP and ISI-MIP projects. There was  also agreement to use a subset of the AgMIP scenarios (S2-S6) for impact assessments, with  AgMIP scenario S1 as the reference scenario, for details see Table 3 below. The selection  of Regional Pilot Studies was discussed separately for European Grand Regions, but there  was no concluding decision taken. The Project Steering Committee will finally decide on  showcase studies at a meeting in the first week of July based on characterisations sent in  by interested members. Questionnaires for characterising the Regional Pilot Studies will be  sent by the Hub to the regional contact persons mentioned in Table 2 to fill in. The  characterization list can be extended. The questionnaires should be filled in by the end of  June. Stakeholder meetings are planned for October 2013 in each region where  preliminary/sample outputs of the regional pilot studies should be presented. Results will  be presented at the mid-term meeting in April 2014. The last year of MACSUR is then  available to improve the studies.The geographic extent of the Regional Pilot Studies is  approximately county level – representing the area of the studies they are based on. The  Regional Pilot Studies will be linked within the grand regions (northern, central, southern  Europe) by consistent regional and continental Representative Agricultural Pathways (RAP).  These regional RAPs will feed into the RAP process underway at AgMIP. Through the  common RAPs the Regional Pilot Studies will reflect the common challenges of the greater  region and by having several Regional Pilot Studies the diversity of the environment,  farming systems, and political systems is represented. The workshop was a first step into  further planning and performing the Regional Pilot Studies that will fine-tune the results of  the workshop. No Label