‘Optimism with a hint of uncertainty’

Editor’s Note: The 2025 Pennsylvania Dairy Producer Survey, funded by a Pa. Dept. of Ag grant, had 603 active dairy farms responding from 777 total surveys returned, representing 12 to 15% of Pennsylvania’s 4850 dairies. The average herd size of respondents was 152 cows vs. 133 in the 2020 Survey. Results were shared in a Nov. 25 “Protecting Your Profits” webinar hosted by the Center for Dairy Excellence. Part I, published in the Nov. 28 edition of Farmshine, examined transition planning, facility modernization and business structure trends. Part II continues with operational responses.

HARRISBURG, Pa. — The 2025 Pennsylvania Dairy Producer Survey reflects modest forward planning among producers, with slight increases in transition and facility-update intentions. Turning to the operational side of the survey, the responses paint a picture of a sector that is steady, cautious, and focused on the fundamentals of day-to-day management. The shifts are incremental rather than sweeping, echoing the gradual patterns seen in 2020.

During the Center for Dairy Excellence’s (CDE) November “Protecting Your Profits” webinar, CDE executive director Jayne Sebright and risk education coordinator Valerie Mason-Faith were joined by Penn State Extension educator Ginger Fenton to walk through the data.

They also reminded everyone that competitive Dairy Productivity Grants are available for up to $10,000 per applicant. This application process opened Dec. 3, 2025 and ends Jan. 5, 2026. Also, CDE began receiving applications for grants for Transition Teams, Transformation Teams and Dairy Decision Consultants. Those applications began Dec. 3, and continue on a first-come, first-served basis.

Labor remains a constant consideration. According to the 603 active dairy respondents in the 2025 Survey, 71% reported having paid employees. The survey did not distinguish between paid family and non-family labor. Farms with paid employees averaged 202 cows and about four full-time workers, equating to roughly one full-time equivalent per 50 cows, consistent with past surveys.

Latino labor continues to play a key role, with one-third of farms employing full-time Latino workers and additional farms reporting part-time or seasonal foreign-born help.

Dairy farmers reported the most frequent employee communication on herd health and daily operations, while communication around human resources matters or safety occurred less often, although 84% said they have standard operating procedures, but only 17% conduct annual employee reviews, similar to the previous cycle.

Milk quality remains a steady focus, according to somatic cell count (SCC) responses. More than half of respondents reported SCC levels between 100,000 and 250,000 — the dominant range across herd sizes, especially among herds of 50 to 99 cows. Very low and very high SCCs were less common. Together, this produces a steady milk-quality profile consistent with earlier surveys.

Only about 14% of respondents offered milk-quality incentives to employees, relying instead on routine oversight.

Participation in recognized animal-welfare programs grew from 80% in 2020 to 90% in 2025 — one of the more noticeable shifts in the survey. “Producers are generally more aware that what they are already doing aligns with program requirements,” said Sebright.

Biosecurity planning showed slower progress: 41% of respondents reported having no biosecurity plan, while just under 30% said theirs is fully implemented and the remainder were in the process of developing one. Producers’ understanding of highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) fell mostly in the mid-range of the survey scale, indicating moderate awareness.

Performance priorities shifted toward productivity and udder health. Producers were also asked to score 13 performance factors on a 1-to-5 importance scale. When compared with the 2020 results, the overall ranking order did not change much, except for three items that shifted places, all ranked near or above 4: Maximizing homegrown feed, increasing milk components, and improving udder health emerged as the highest-rated needs across the state’s dairies.

Lower-priority items included increasing herd size and utilizing alternative markets.

Several factors were marked as showing higher importance as respondents’ herd size grew: Increasing milk components, land availability, milk hauling services, labor availability, outside advisors, and applying technology.

When asked where they turn for management advice, producers overwhelmingly named nutritionists and veterinarians as their primary sources, shaping decisions in rations, herd health, and broader management.

Penn State Extension, the Center for Dairy Excellence and lenders were also cited, though far less frequently. Very few producers said they operate without outside input, underscoring the central role of technical advisors.

Pennsylvania’s traditional structure continued to be reflected in facility data, with 60% of respondents milking in tie-stalls and 35% in parlors. Just 4% reported using robotic milking systems, a figure roughly in line with industry estimates suggesting around 5% of U.S. dairies have adopted voluntary milking technology.

Housing systems follow similar patterns with slightly more than half of respondents housing cows in tie-stalls, while others use freestalls or a mixed system. Heifers are most commonly kept in bedded-pack barns, followed by group housing, and calves remain overwhelmingly raised in hutches or small pens.

Most (83%) do not purchase dairy herd replacements with nearly 16% buying replacements directly from other dairy producers.

Feeding practices remain centered on total mixed rations, with smaller numbers using top-dressing or partial mixed rations. Grazing patterns also held steady as 39% graze some portion of their herds, though very few graze lactating cows. Most grazing involves heifers and dry cows, with rotational grazing the most common method.

Marketing patterns show little movement from previous surveys. Nearly 80% of respondents market their milk through cooperatives. Producers named 35 co-ops, with DFA, Land O’Lakes and Maryland & Virginia / Maola among the most common. Just under 20% of respondents ship to independent processors.

Risk-management participation remains modest. About 46% of respondents participate in Dairy Margin Coverage (DMC), similar to 2020. Fewer than 10% use Dairy Revenue Protection (DRP), and only 5% use forward contracting. More than 40% use no risk-management tools at all.

When asked to rate their understanding of risk-management programs, three-quarters placed themselves at three or below on a five-point scale. Cost, premiums and lack of information remain the most commonly cited barriers.

Fenton described the overall tone of the 2025 responses as “a little more optimistic or forward-thinking” than in 2020. Mason-Faith agreed, calling it “optimism with a hint of uncertainty.”

The operational findings echo a Pennsylvania dairy sector refining established practices, implementing gradual improvements, and positioning itself for future decisions while remaining cautious. Producers were urged to explore free materials at centerfordairyexcellence.com.