I was able to come to Iceland by convincing the U.S. and Icelandic governments to let me write about what it means to be a dairy farmer on the island.As the end of my time draws near, I’m forced to reflect on how well I’ve answered that question.

Dear Editor: I read your editorial, “Dairy is a risky business, and you’re OK with that” in the May 7 issue. Risk taking is a great American phenomenon. However, there is no reason dairying should be inherently any riskier than other types of farming. It is heavy government intervention that makes dairy more risky than crop farming, for example.

On my farm, the worst day of the year for milk production is the first day of summer. That’s when the cows have noticed I dragged out the old grill from the barn. Older cows know that grill stays fired up from now ’til Thanksgiving with a short spark on New Year’s and the Super Bowl.

Advances in forage genetics, harvesting, ensiling, management practices and forage analysis – in addition to dynamic ration balancing software – have allowed dairy farms to progressively feed increasing amounts of forage to their lactating cows. High-forage, lactating cow rations are typically defined as those containing more than 55 percent forage in the TMR or more than 25 percent forage neutral-detergent fiber (NDF) on a dry matter (DM) basis.

Heat detection is often cited as the most costly component and, undoubtedly, the major limiting factor to the success of A.I. programs on many dairy farms. Incorrect detection of estrus is related to loss of income due to extended calving intervals, milk loss, increased veterinary cost, increased heifer-rearing cost and slowed genetic progress. To achieve excellent heat detection, many factors have to be taken into account.