How do I design a dairy farm

QM milk in a nutshell

QM-Milch stands for "Quality Management Milk", a program which promotes the quality of milk production on the dairy farm under certified conditions. The nationwide standard QM-Milch has established quality criteria for milk production, which are checked on the producer side by certification bodies like us - and thus supports the positive image of milk and milk products.
The new "QM Milk Standard 2020", which replaced the QM Milk Standard 2.0, has been in effect since January 1, 2020.


Brochure: The QM Milk Standard 2020

On the milchZert homepage you will find a brochure on the QM Milk Standard 2020. In addition to a brief overview of the QM Milk program, the most important changes are summarized in compact form. You can also download the brochure there.

Daniel Stöckl is the new deputy head of the certification body

On November 1st, Mr. Daniel Stöckl succeeded Reinhard Foth, who retired from active service in January. Together with Ms. Franziska Renner, he will take over the position of deputy head of the certification body at milchZert GmbH.

After studying agriculture at the Weihenstephan-Triesdorf University of Applied Sciences, Daniel Stöckl started his career on January 1st, 2020 at mpr as a coordinator for the field service. In addition to coordinating the field service, he was responsible for database maintenance and feed dispatch as well as for performing QM and VLOG audits. In addition, he acted as an interface between auditors, farmers, dairies, IT and other certification bodies.

As deputy head of the certification body, Mr. Stöckl will expand his previous area of ​​responsibility to include the control and approval of test reports according to the four-eyes principle.

Corona pandemic: Extension of the waiting period for QM milk

So far, the system provider has referred to the regulations within the QM Milk Standard 2020, in particular the use of the waiting period, with regard to the implementation of the audit for the QM Milk Standard. It says there that follow-up audit dates can be set up to three months after the certificate has expired (= waiting period) (see QM Milk Standard 2020: "7. Issuing certificates").

As a reaction to the development of the pandemic, the standard provider QM-Milch e.V. has now decided that, with immediate effect and until further notice, the waiting period based on the QM-Milch Standard 2020 by two months to a total of five months is extended after the certificate period has expired. A written application from the milk producer does not have to be submitted.

Due to their urgency, special controls currently have a high priority and we will continue to carry out them promptly.

The development is being followed up by QM-Milch e.V., so that the special regulation that has been made may have to be reassessed and adjusted.

additional Information this can be found on the website of the Association of Milcherzeuger Bayern e.V., which, as the QM milk regional office, is the point of contact in Bavaria:



We would like to expressly point out once again that when performing the audits, appropriate hygiene measures, recognized as effective, are taken by our auditors for their own protection as well as for the protection of farm managers and employees of the dairy farms in order to keep the risk of infection as low as possible. Please also note our current report on field service activities in times of the Corona virus COVID-19.

Field work in times of the corona virus COVID-19

The situation regarding the "corona pandemic" is serious and in some cases far-reaching precautionary measures are being taken to delay the spread as much as possible.

In addition to the cancellation of numerous events, the closure of daycare centers, schools and other public institutions, it is strongly recommended that all social contacts be avoided as far as possible. In any case, the known hygiene measures must be followed to prevent virus transmission and thus a possible chain of infection.

MilchZert GmbH is often asked whether our field service should not be stopped in this situation. We are constantly re-evaluating the situation and do not currently see any technical advantage if we stopped our work, on the contrary. Our Field workers are trained to avoid animal diseases. They know all the measures, including those relating to the corona virus, to avoid risks. To date, there has been no case of illness among milchZert employees and our employees have strict instructions when symptoms occur that could indicate a corona infection, to take all necessary precautionary measures and, in particular, to stay at home and no longer have any external contacts.

MilchZert GmbH as part of the food industry also has in To ensure safe food in times of crisis and thus also to ensure security of supply for the population contribute, as do all milk producers and dairies and their employees. We take this Responsibility fulfilled with professional know-how and ask you to support us.

If you have any questions, please contact me ([email protected]).

Dr. Christian Baumgartner - Managing Director

Correct desolation of the horns in calves

In the QM milk perpetration The correct obliteration of the horns is also checked. The exact wording in the QM test report is: Dehorning of calves under six weeks (Obliteration of the horn system) takes place by means of use pain-reducing measures. The CC directive dictates that dehorning of calves up to the age of six weeks using Pain relievers and sedatives (calming down) has to be done to everyone Exploring opportunities to reduce pain and suffering. The corresponding veterinary medicinal products must be used in accordance with the veterinarian's treatment instructions and their use must be documented. If the calves' horns are sclerosed for more than six weeks, the veterinarian must perform an anesthetic.

Further information and a picture gallery with a detailed description of the desertification can be found on our Milchpur platform.

Call for dairy farms wanted

Cross herbs - a problem for dairy farms too

The ragwort is widespread in Bavaria and, due to its biological properties, only occurs on organically farmed areas difficult to fight. While cattle avoid ingesting the plants on pasture, the animals cannot sort out the plant components in hay or silage. Problematic ingredients are so-called pyrrolizidine alkaloids, which are primarily the Damage the liver, but also as possibly mutagenic and carcinogenic get ranked.

Although it is assumed that, with good management, no ragweeds end up in dairy cattle feed, two European studies of Drinking milk from the trade detected pyrrolizidine alkaloids in very low concentrations in 6% of the samples. It is not known whether these findings can be traced back to individual farms or whether many farms have a subliminal pollution that could possibly also be attributed to plants other than ragweeds.

This question is intended as part of the large-scale Project "PA-SAFE-FEED" which is funded by the Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture (BMEL) based on a resolution of the German Bundestag. The project sponsor is the Federal Agency for Agriculture and Food (BLE) within the framework of the federal program for organic farming and other forms of sustainable agriculture.

For this purpose in Bavaria and Schleswig-Holstein Dairy farms with permanent grassland wantedwho are ready to have their milk and, if necessary, feed samples checked for PA residues. The aim is to include conventional and organic farms and to sample them both when grazing and during winter feeding.

In further parts of the project, the Animal Health Effects checked as there are no reliable data on non-critical dosages. There are also at the Max Rubner Institute on the Schädtbek experimental station (Schleswig-Holstein) Experiments on small ruminants planned, as these are less sensitive compared to cattle and, for example, sheep avoid the plants as much. Corresponding studies on cattle are taking place in Braunschweig at the experimental station of the Friedrich Löffler Institute. A possible transfer of pyrrolizidine alkaloids from animal feed into milk or meat is to be investigated by the Chair of Food Safety at the Ludwig Maximilians University in Munich.

In addition to the Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, the Max Rubner Institute in Kiel and Kulmbach, the Friedrich Löffler Institute in Braunschweig and the Federal Institute for Risk Assessment in Berlin are involved in the project as research institutions. That is supported Practical project from Milchprüfring Bayern e.V. as well as the Milk producers' association Schleswig-Holstein e.V., the Bioland Association in Schleswig-Holstein and the Schleswig-Holstein Nature Conservation Foundation.


Contact Person:

Florian Kaltner, Chair of Food Safety, LMU Munich, Tel. 089-2180-78524, [email protected]

Dr. Christoph Gottschalk, Chair of Food Safety, LMU Munich, Tel. 089-2180-78526, [email protected]

QM-Milch - New standard from January 1st, 2020

The new "QM Milk Standard 2020" will come into force on January 1, 2020. Standard 2.0, which is currently still in use, will be changed from the one already mentioned at the beginning of next year without any transition period "QM Milk Standard 2020" replaced.


A compact summary for you - the most important changes at a glance:

1. More criteria:

  • Determination of the pregnancy status
  • no posture-related deficiencies / technopathies
  • efficient antibiotic-reduced treatment (for udder health)
  • Storage of medicines
  • Neat appearance of the company
  • Increase the criteria on 69 (previously 64)


2. Distribution of points:

  • The maximum achievable score lies by 81 (previously 72).
  • The Minimum score lies in the future at 61 (previously 54).
  • For the Minimum score must in the future 75 percent of the possible points can be achieved (previously 72 percent).


3. Focus areas and inspection intervals:

  • In the future there will also be three so-called Focus areas: Animal welfare, milk hygiene and the operational environment.
  • Within the Focus areas must be a Minimum score can be achieved:
    - Animal welfare: 11-13
    - Milk hygiene: 12-14
    - Business environment: 8-10
  • At Failure to achieve the Minimum score in one of the three areas: Shorten the test interval 18 months.
  • At To reach the Minimum score: Check interval at three years or. 36 months (as until now).


4. K.O. criteria and follow-up controls:

  • If a K.O. criterion is not met in the regular audit, the Follow-up check within one month instead of (two months so far).
  • When a KO criteria or the Minimum score in the Follow-up check are not achieved, is the QM milk failed and the Withdrawal of certificates he follows.
  • Is the Minimum number of pointsl at regular auditnot reached, the follow-up check takes place within one month instead of.
  • Will the Minimum score in the Follow-up inspection not achieved, finds one 2. Follow-up inspection within another month.
  • Will the pass score in the 2. No follow-up inspectionreached, is the QM milk failed and the Withdrawal of certificates he follows.


More information:

  • Criterion 1.10: "There is enough lying space for the cows" - The non-compliance is still no knockout criterion! No overcrowding is rewarded with 2 points, a maximum of 10 percent overcrowding is accepted and rewarded with 1 point.
  • The Clearance certificate for feed ends on December 31, 2019 when the QM-Milch Standard 2020 comes into force, i.e. only feed from feed companies that have participated in a certified quality system may be delivered to QM-Milch companies.

    The Federal Standard for Milk Production 2020 and the QM Milk Handbook for Milk Producers 2020 can be downloaded from the following link.


© QM milk

Use of antibiotics in livestock farming is falling

Antibiotic resistance is a serious global problem in human and veterinary medicine. In order to counteract the spread of antibiotic resistance in animal husbandry, a national antibiotic minimization concept for fattening animals was introduced in Germany in 2014 with the 16th amendment to the Medicines Act. With the 16th amendment to the AMG, this concept has now been evaluated by the Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture. The figures cover the period from the second half of 2014 up to and including 2017.

The main results are:

  • The total amount of antibiotics used for all six types of use fell from 298 tonnes to 204 tonnes in the period under review, which is a reduction of 31.6 percent.
  • The greatest reduction was achieved in pigs: fattening piglets minus 46 percent (from 87.5 t to 47.2 t); Fattening pigs minus 43 percent (from 115 t to 65.2 t).
  • Fattening turkeys minus 4 percent (from 38.1 t to 36.7 t); Broilers minus 1 percent (from 29.7 t to 29.5 t); Fattening calves minus 4 percent (from 26 t to 25 t).
  • For beef cattle, the calculated reduction was minus 76 percent. The absolute quantities used were very low at 1.7 t at the beginning and 0.4 t at the end of the observation period.
  • Reserve antibiotics were used to a small extent in pigs and cattle (each less than 10 percent of the respective amount consumed). For broiler chickens and turkeys with a share of around 40 percent of the respective consumption amount.

The report shows that the consumption of antibiotics in broiler chickens and turkeys has decreased significantly. The extent of the use of so-called reserve antibiotics, i.e. antibiotics that are primarily used to treat certain infectious diseases in humans, is too high for these types of use. It amounts to almost 40 percent of the total consumption.


© Federal Ministry of Food and Agriculture (BMEL)

Guiding principles for vegan and vegetarian foods

The German Food Book Commission (DLMBK) has the "Guiding principles for vegan and vegetarian foodsWithSimilarity to food
of animal origin
" released, which in the opinion of the Federation for Food Law and Food Science e. V. (BLL) will lead to some challenges for the manufacturing economy but also for consumers.

Dr. Sieglinde Stähle from the scientific management of the BLL and for the economy also a member of the DLMBK explains:"Vegan and Vegetarian Products lie in trend, and the growing number those who no or seat old meat, would also like to one fall back on a certain variety. Important but is thatnone through the Designations mislead becomes. Therefore, the question arose as to whether the common practice of naming such 'substitute products' analogously to the familiar meat and sausage products that they are modeled on is helpful or confusing and whether such names should not be reserved for the 'original' . Ultimately, the commission took the form of a tiered Labeling concept depending on the similarity between Meat products and their Analogs found a compromise - a part of the designations is taboo,a part can maintained while others have to be described. "

Khe sees precisely Guiding principle before that Designations, the on the basis on specially grown meat cuts like "ham" take place in the future no longer used should be that Designations based on cut pieces of meat like bfor example "Schnitzel"as to foods made from minced meat such as "Meatballs"usedcan be that designations for categories of sausage products, e.g. B. "Streichwurst" or "Bratwurst" Farther are common that Designations for specific Sausages how "Lyoner", "Salami", "Liverwurst" again in the future no morebe used should and if so then only in descriptive form like "salami type" or "salami type".

It is important in the assessment that with the so designated products according to the guiding principles an extensive or at least sufficient sensory similarity to in Referenced foods of animal origin, especially in appearance, smell, taste and consistency. Dr. Stähle emphasizes: "The gradations are deliberately chosen, but it becomes clear as soon as you read that the Distinctions are not immediately clear are why that Concept needs explanation and a lot of information work still needs to be done here. On the one hand for the very heterogeneous Provider side and the Manufacturer, who need to know how to determine them Products future ldesignate in conformity with the principles, on the other hand, also for the customers who will soon buy the "vegetarian soy product Lyoner style". "

The "Guiding principles for vegan and vegetarian foods with similarity to food of animal origin "give exclusively Notes on labeling for food that is in their Condition and sensory such with similar to animal ingredients are and included no new requirements to the Composition vegan or vegetarian food. For the Definition of "vegetarian" and "vegan" This already exists since April 2016 based on a Decision the one at that time Conference of Consumer Protection Ministers uniform and clear criteria that not only offer food manufacturers legal certainty, but above all for consumer a quality and reliable basis are for guidance.
These relevant definition are unchangedin the new guiding principles received by everyone interested on the Website of the German Food Book Commission
( can be viewed.

© Federation for Food Law and Food Science e.V.


QA guidelines: These are the changes for the new year

QS GmbH leads to 01.01.2019 the annual revision of the QS guidelines for cattle farmers. This essentially only changes for the participating farmers an important point.

Adjustment of the assessment for the criterion "[2.1.2] The implementation and documentation of the self-assessment":

The evaluation is no longer a knockout criterion. However, self-checks must still be documented before the initial audit and afterwards at least once per calendar year.

If this is not the case, there is a devaluation or a poorer overall result and thus a change in the control rhythm (QA status).

The self-control can be carried out at

GMO-free feeding - new standard from 01.01.2019

On 01.01.2019 there will be changes in the VLOG standard for GMO-free feeding. This mainly affects "risky feed". From the beginning of 2019, maize (dried maize kernels) will no longer count as “risky feed” if it has been grown in defined countries (VLOG specification). The maize may also have been processed in a drying plant. However, a corresponding meaningful confirmation (that no mixing with GMO-modified feed has taken place) must be available.

The KO requirements have also changed - the "handling of non-compliant feed and animals", the item "traceability" and the "separation of the flow of goods" have also been added. The point "Animal population overview" is no longer part of the KO criteria.

The classification criteria for farms in the Risk class 0 have essentially remained the same. To in the slightest Risk class 0 To be classified, the following requirements must be met:

  • Only non-exchangeable feed (clearly assigned to another animal species) subject to labeling may be located on the site, i.e. that e.g. feed subject to labeling may be located on the farm if it is clearly assigned to another animal species, e.g. chickens.
  • Systems and feeding facilities that come into contact with feed that are subject to labeling are completely separate from the VLOG operating unit.
  • There is no change in feed quality (with regard to GMOs).
  • Potentially risky feed used in the VLOG operating unit is certified according to the VLOG standard and its VLOG status is not interrupted from manufacture to the end consumer.
  • Milling and mixing plants used outside the company are certified according to the VLOG standard.

The new VLOG standard 19.01 was published by VLOG e.V. at the beginning of October and will be valid from 01.01.2019.

GMO-free feeding according to the VLOG standard - new requirements