Over The Wire

August 2008

2008-08-11T09:56:00.001-07:00

Comments from Jim:
The summer grazing season is progressing nicely as I write this newsletter. Hay prices are still out of sight and feed grains; especially corn is higher than a kite. What affect this will have on calf prices this fall is yet to be seen.
The last edition of Over the Wire covered cow efficiency in terms of pounds of calf produced versus cow size. This edition of the newsletter will concentrate on the calving season as it relates to efficiency and profitability for cow calf producers. I will try to look at the advantages and disadvantages of calving in the spring; the late spring; and in the fall.
Feel free to give me a call if you have any questions on this topic or any other cattle related issue.
Sincerely,
Jim Church
University of Idaho
Extension Educator, Livestock

The Pros and Cons of Early Spring, Late Spring or Fall Calving Season

Cattle producers are living through some very interesting times. Production costs are going through the roof, calf prices appear to be holding steady or slightly decreasing and the rate of consolidation is staggering. We are in an election year and the buzz word is “change”. If you want to see change, watch what happens to the cattle business over the next 5 to 10 years. It may make your head spin.

Those producers that are in it for the long haul, are faced with carefully analyzing their business management plans in order to stay competitive. One management practice that has been discussed with more regularity in the last year or two is calving season. High feed costs are driving this discussion. That is why we need to look at the pros and cons of calving in the early spring, versus calving in the late spring, versus calving in the fall.

To begin with, changing the time of year that you calve is a major decision that can have a dramatic affect on your operation. My recommendation is to walk before you run when considering a calving season change. Dr. Kris Ringwall, North Dakota State University Extension Beef Specialist, stated in a publication on calving season changes that the masses of producers will tend to do what makes money over the long haul. In other words, what works best and makes money for producers in a region of the country, is usually the calving season that the majority of producers are using.

Dr. Gerald Stokka, Extension Beef Veterinarian from Kansas State University outlined in a K-State publication on calving season that choosing the time of year to calve should be based on economic, management and health considerations. This recommendation was echoed by the publication written by Dr. Ringwall. I think we need to look at these considerations:

Economic Considerations:

When considering the economic affect of a change in calving season a producer must analyze the change in the value of the calf, the change in the annual cow costs and the change in the cost of
facilities. Let’s look at all of these:

1. Value of the calf – if we change from an early spring calving herd to a late spring calving herd the calves will be lighter at weaning time. This is not a big deal if the calves are backgrounded, however if the calves are sold at weaning the later calves can be as much as 100 pounds lighter than the early spring calves. The price per pound will be more, but the total dollars received could be less if the calves are sold at weaning. Fall born calves sold at weaning in the spring, will weigh similar to early spring calves and will actually have a price advantage over spring born calves due to historic seasonal price differences for calves. So on average, total dollars received for calves sold at weaning will probably be highest for fall born calves, followed by early spring born calves and then calves born in late spring.
percent of the total cow unit revenue. For example, if cow unit revenue is $550 then total feed costs including pasture should be no more than $220.

Late spring calving matches the nutrient requirements of the cows more closely with the forage resource than other calving seasons, therefore annual cow costs would be the lowest.

Dr. Stephen Blezinger, a management consultant from Sulphur Springs, Texas wrote about this topic in an article that appeared in Cattle Today. Dr. Blezinger indicated that a study conducted in Nebraska showed that late spring/summer calving cows were fed 3000 pounds less hay per cow than cows that calved in early to mid spring. Protein costs were the same but the late calving cows were wintered out on crop aftermath and other forages late into the winter feeding period.

Another cost that must be taken into account for fall calving operations is the cost of creep feeding calves during the winter months. To insure adequate growth, fall born calves should be creep fed an energy feed. With grain prices high, this could be a considerable expense.

Cost of facilities – Calving in late winter or early spring requires more calving facilities than other times of the year. Calves need protection from cold temperatures and wet conditions. Late spring and fall calving herds require fewer calving facilities. Therefore, facility costs are highest for winter/early spring calving operations and lowest for fall calving.

2. Annual cow costs – Feed costs make up 60 to 70 percent of the annual cost of owning a cow. Therefore calving season can have a dramatic affect on annual cow costs. We all know that nutrient requirements for cows are greatest 30 days prior to calving up through the first trimester of the subsequent pregnancy. Calving at a time when the pasture and range forage is of high quality, will reduce production costs. Production costs increase when harvested forages have to be fed to meet nutrient requirements during the critical pre-post calving time frame.

Research has shown that in order to sustain profitability cow feed costs should be no more than 40 percent of the total cow unit revenue. For example, if cow unit revenue is $550 then total feed costs including pasture should be no more than $220.

Late spring calving matches the nutrient requirements of the cows more closely with the forage resource than other calving seasons, therefore annual cow costs would be the lowest.

Dr. Stephen Blezinger, a management consultant from Sulphur Springs, Texas wrote about this topic in an article that appeared in Cattle Today. Dr. Blezinger indicated that a study conducted in Nebraska showed that late spring/summer calving cows were fed 3000 pounds less hay per cow than cows that calved in early to mid spring. Protein costs were the same but the late calving cows were wintered out on crop aftermath and other forages late into the winter feeding period.

Another cost that must be taken into account for fall calving operations is the cost of creep feeding calves during the winter months. To insure adequate growth, fall born calves should be creep fed an energy feed. With grain prices high, this could be a considerable expense.

Cost of facilities – Calving in late winter or early spring requires more calving facilities than other times of the year. Calves need protection from cold temperatures and wet conditions. Late spring and fall calving herds require fewer calving facilities. Therefore, facility costs are highest for winter/early spring calving operations and lowest for fall calving.
3. operations. Each producer must analyze what is available in terms of facilities and make decisions accordingly. Keeping facility costs low is critical for long term profitability

Management Considerations:

Calving in late winter or early spring requires more labor. Weather problems require producers to be on hand to get newborn calves in barns out of the weather, or have enough barn space to calve inside out of the elements. This is labor intensive. Late spring and fall calving cows are out on grass and require much less attention. Labor costs are reduced greatly. However, producers calving in late spring or fall need to have pastures with facilities that allow the producer to provide assistance if a cow experiences calving difficulties.

Pasture quality should also be a concern for producers that calve in late spring or fall. If the increased nutrient requirements are being met through pasture grasses, then the pasture must have forage that is of high quality and in quantity to satisfy the needs of the herd. Otherwise, supplements need to be provided.

Health Considerations:

Disease in newborn calves is reduced significantly when cows calve out on pasture in late spring or fall. The cattle are distributed widely throughout the pasture which reduces the buildup of disease organisms. Weather stress from cold, snowy weather is way lower and mud is usually not a problem. Very few if any calves have to be treated for scours. The overall health of the calves is better and death loss due to scours or some other stress related disease in way lower in late spring and fall born calves compared to winter or early spring calves.

Research has proven that under wet, muddy conditions, a calf’s energy requirement increases and the ability of the calf to absorb immunoglobins in the colostrum is reduced which makes the calf more susceptible to scours.

Summary:

So what does this tell me? To begin with, there are a lot of factors that must be considered when selecting a calving season. In North Central Idaho, I would say that the calving season is split about 50-50 between spring and fall calving herds. Which season is the best for this region? I don’t know; each operation is different. However like I indicated earlier, every good businessman should continuously analyze his/her business to determine production efficiency and profitability. Look at annual cow costs, value of the calves at marketing time along with facility costs and make changes only if they will improve the bottom line. Changing a calving season can really upset cash flow which may make the banker extremely nervous.

Good luck with the upcoming marketing season for spring calvers and for the fall calvers, have a great calving season.

May 2008

2008-05-07T10:34:00.001-07:00

Comments from Jim:
This has been one of the longest winters on record here in North Central Idaho. The extended cold, snowy weather caused some delays in spring planting of wheat, barley and oat crops. It also caused some major delays in early season grass growth. Hopefully the early summer will be normal and we can have a really good grass and hay year.
This edition of Over The Wire deals with cow efficiency. Much is said and written about reducing feed costs but the efficiency of the cow herd is just as important.
Feel free to give me a call if you have any questions on this topic or any other cattle related issue.
Sincerely,
Jim Church
University of Idaho
Extension Educator, Livestock

Cow Efficiency

Let’s face it, the next few years could be tough for cow-calf producers. According to economic experts calf prices will weaken compared to the prices we have seen over the last five years. This is being caused by extremely high feed costs, increases in fuel costs and a leveling off or reduction in beef consumption due to a slow down in the economy. With these scenarios facing the industry, cow-calf operators will need to use all their management skills to remain profitable and stay in the business.

With a reduction in income, a corresponding reduction in expenses is needed to maintain previous profit levels. Therefore all expense items need to be analyzed. The place to begin is winter feed costs. In most operations the cost of feeding cows through the winter makes up 60 percent of the total cost of owning that cow for a year. In past newsletters, I have talked about utilizing lower quality forages and in the last issue of Over The Wire, Dr. Jason Ahola provided some ration examples using such feed stuffs as straw. Extending the fall grazing season using crop aftermath grazing has also been discussed and recommended in previous newsletters and at a number of cattle producer schools over the years. But I don’t think we have discussed cow efficiency enough and how it can impact the amount and quality of winter feed needed to winter cows.

About fifteen years ago, Doc Hatfield spoke at the Idaho County Cattle Association Annual Meeting. Doc Hatfield is from Brothers, Oregon and he and his wife Connie are the people that started the very successful Oregon Country Beef program to market their beef. Doc started his talk by indicating that he and Connie had really enjoyed their drive over to Grangeville and especially liked driving in the Salmon River Canyon. He said that he noticed cows along the way that appeared to be way too big for the environment they were living in. He said they looked thin and were in need of more feed. He went on to share with us his philosophy of matching the cow size and breeds to the environment. In other words, optimize cow efficiency.

The cattle industry has done a tremendous job of increasing cow size since the 1970’s. We have gotten them big and growthy. In fact, today we have fewer total beef cows in this country than at any time in the last 50 years or more, yet we have record pounds of beef produced. How is this possible? Less calves produced from a smaller cow herd but more pounds of beef! The calves are bigger and heavier, that’s why.

The question we need to ask is how efficient has it been to produce these bigger, heavier calves? Are we really making more money, or are we simply just turning over more dollars to satisfy the appetite of inefficient cows that produce these big calves?

Determining the efficiency of the cow herd starts with knowing how much the cows weigh. This does not require weighing each cow individually. To get an average weight, look back at cull cow sale receipts and look at the weights. If you can go back and look at sale receipts from the last two or three years, it will give you a really good idea what the average weight is of the cows in your herd.

What does knowing the weight of the cows have to do with efficiency?

Cow weights alone mean nothing, but coupled with the average weaning weights of calves produced, now we have something to work with. Calf weights can be determined by looking at sale receipts, if the calves are sold at weaning time.

For years the general rule of thumb for measuring efficiency was to look and see if the cow is weaning off at least 50 percent of her body weight in calf. In other words, if she weighs 1200 pounds, she should wean off a calf that weighs 600 pounds. However, more recent research has shown that a 1600 pound cow wouldn’t have to wean off 50 percent of her body weight to be as efficient as a 1000 pound cow that weans off a calf weighing 500. Below is a chart that shows the calf size required for differing body weights to be considered equally efficient. This chart was published by R.A. Long for the American Angus Association back in 1998.

Let’s look at an example:

Average weight of cull cows sold off the ranch over the last five years = 1377 pounds
Average weight of calves at weaning time = 605 pounds.

Percentage calf weight weaned compared to mature cow weight = 605/1377 = 43.9 percent.

In this example, the cows are close but are not meeting the 45.9 percent target for a cow weighing approx. 1400, therefore they are not as efficient as we would like.

How About Feed Requirements?

What difference does it make if the cows weigh 1377 or 1200 on average? It makes a great deal of difference when you look at the dry matter, protein and energy requirements of the two cows.

This doesn’t look like a big difference, but if you multiply this out over the length of the winter feeding period, it is huge.

Let’s say we have a 150 day feeding period, the difference in dry matter intake for the 1200 pound cow versus the 1377 is 390 pounds. The 1200 pound cow would need 390 pounds less feed for the feeding period. At $150 per ton, that is a savings of $30. Multiply this by the number of cows in the herd, and it starts to add up. If you are going to have to spend $30 more to feed the bigger cow, she had better return at least this much in additional income from heavier calves in order to break even.

Of course we can make our cows weigh 1200 pounds by starving them, but the point to be made is look at the frame size of the cows. Frame score 6 and 7 cows will weigh over 1300 pounds at a body condition score of 5. Frame score 4 and 5 cows, at the same body condition score will weigh less and require less feed.

Selecting for Efficiency

Now is the time to start selecting for efficiency if you haven’t already started. The selection criteria should include:

1. Select replacement heifers from high performing moderate framed cows. Frame score can be determined if you know the age and hip height of the females. Below is a frame score chart that will help in determining frame size:

2. Select bulls that have superior genetics for efficiency in their daughters. This can be determined by using the Dollar Value Indexes such as the $EN Index that the Angus Breed uses.

For example if bull A has a $EN value of $15 and bull B has a $EN value of $2, on average the daughters out of bull A will have an energy savings per year of $13 over daughters out of bull B. You would want to use Bull A if at all possible, especially if you are going to keep heifers out of him.

3. A strict culling protocol to remove poor performing cows should be followed.
a. Cull those big, hay consuming cows that wean off only 40 percent of their body weight.
b. Cull hard keeping cows. You know, those cows that are always thin even though they are
eating you out of house and home. Make sure they are not thin due to superior milking ability.

Summary

In summary I would like to really encourage you to look at the efficiency of your cowherd. Start by determining mature cow weights and frame score. Next determine the average weight of the calves at weaning. Figure the percent of body weight your cows are weaning off in calf weight.

Then look at the nutritional requirements of wintering your cows in relation to their body size. Is it costing you a fortune to keep your cows at a body condition score of 5, or would it be advantageous to look at reducing cow size?

Finally, seriously consider making changes if needed.

Calving date is another hot topic in regards to input costs. The next issue of this newsletter will look at the advantages and disadvantages of fall, spring and summer calving on costs and returns to the operation. Until then, good luck with the haying and grazing season.

February 2008

2008-02-27T15:18:00.000-08:00

Hi everyone,

I guess you can say that we are getting plenty of snow pack this winter. Spring and early summer water supplies should be excellent. I can deal with the snow but the wind is another story. The snow drifts on my place are several feet deep.

This weather has made calving interesting for those producers that spring calve. Unless you have some barns, the calves have been really stressed. It will get better though, the mud month of March is coming and it should be really wet as this snow goes off.

This edition of Over The Wire has two articles in it that should be of interest to cattle producers. The first article on least cost winter cow rations is written by Dr. Jason Ahola, University of Idaho Extension Beef Specialist stationed in Caldwell. The information contained in the article is very useful and should help you plan for next year’s feeding season. The second article is one I have written on some new $ Value Indexes that you may be interested in. It seems like every time we turn around, there are new EPD’s and $ Indexes that we need to consider when purchasing replacement bulls and heifers.

I hope that this newsletter is useful to you. Feel free to contact me at 208-983-2667 with additional questions on these topics or on any related cattle subject.

Sincerely,

Jim Church
University of Idaho

Rules of Thumb for Winter Cow Rations
Considerations for feeding cows a least-cost ration in a new era of high forage prices
By Jason K. Ahola, Ph.D.

Without question, feed costs across the entire beef industry have increased substantially over the past 18 months. However, the rise in forage prices during 2007 has contributed to a dramatic increase in winter cow feeding costs.
Feed cost is the highest variable cost on most cow/calf operations. There are methods available to evaluate feedstuffs and create a “least-cost ration” for cows. However, less than 10% of cow/calf producers analyze their forages for nutrient content, based on USDA survey data. And, only about one-quarter of those producers actually develop a least-cost ration. As a result, many U.S. beef cows are receiving excess nutrients and/or a ration that is not least-cost.
Free Ration-Balancing SoftwareA free and easy-to-use computer ration balancing program is available for producers from Oklahoma State University – COWculator. The software and directions are available at http://www.ansi.okstate.edu/exten/cowculator/.
This Microsoft Excel-based software enables a producer to enter simple information about their cows (pregnancy status, body weight and condition, breed, etc.), along with forage analysis results (protein, energy, etc.). As a bonus, the “feedlist” comes ‘pre-loaded’ with typical feed values for common feedstuffs. The user develops a ration using feeds from the feedlist which are compared to cow requirements. Ultimately, a simple sheet can be printed off and used for daily feeding.
Development and use of a simple ration enables animal requirements to be met while ensuring optimum performance. But, more importantly it can reduce feed costs by avoiding overfeeding (especially protein, which is costly).
Information NeededTwo pieces of information are necessary to create a ration: 1) cow nutrient requirements (examples are in Table 1), and 2) nutrient composition of typical feedstuffs (examples are in Table 2). These tables include estimates for energy via Total Digestible Nutrients (TDN) values and protein via Crude Protein (CP) values.

Rules of ThumbFor producers who don’t have a computer to use COWculator, there are a few simple rules of thumb for cow feeding. Several rations were developed using COWculator software for a 1,200 lb pregnant cow in late gestation to help provide insight into these “rules” (see Table 3).
A ration consisting only of good alfalfa (Ration 1) for a 1,200 lb pregnant cow should include up to 24 lbs and cost about $1.54/hd/day (if good alfalfa costs $130/Ton). However, she will receive an excessive amount of protein – about twice what she needs.
Cheaper and lower quality alfalfa could be fed instead (Ration 2) if a small amount of corn is added, costing about $1.44/hd/day (assuming fair alfalfa is worth $110/Ton and corn $170/Ton).

Grass hay, instead of alfalfa, can provide adequate energy to this pregnant cow, but protein may be deficient if the grass was mature at harvest. Interestingly, in many parts of the U.S. grass hay is more expensive than alfalfa hay on a ‘per pound’ basis (and much more on a ‘per pound of protein’ basis), but provides much less protein and similar energy. Nonetheless, a ration of only “good” grass hay (24 lbs) can meet the pregnant cow’s needs, while mature grass hay needs to be fed with a small amount of supplemental protein (1-2 lbs).
If low quality forage (e.g. straw or corn stalks) and corn can be added to an alfalfa-based ration, cost can be reduced (Ration 3) to about $1.37/hd/day (if straw is $60/Ton). This savings of $0.07/hd/day equals about $10/cow during a typical winter feeding period.
Ration 4, which consists primarily of corn stalks, can maintain body condition in a pregnant cow if protein supplement (containing about 30% CP) is also provided. If baled corn stalks are $75/Ton, it costs $1.35/hd/day. However, the stalks need to have a decent energy content (e.g. TDN of 54% or higher). Conversely, a straw-based ration (Ration 5) must contain about 4 lbs of corn and 4 lbs of a 30% CP protein supplement to meet a 1,200 lb pregnant cow’s requirements.
Interestingly, if straw is $60/Ton this ration would cost about $1.32/hd/day, which is truly the “least-cost ration” using the above feedstuffs.
The Bottom LineRation cost can be decreased by replacing high-priced feeds (usually alfalfa or good grass hay) with cheaper and lower quality forages (straw or corn stalks) and a small amount of corn and/or protein supplement – resulting in a decrease of about $0.22/hd/day, or more. Once a cow begins lactating, her energy requirement will increase and a new ration will be needed. Similarly, cows that are significantly larger or smaller than 1,200 lbs may need a different ration, as well as cows that should be gaining body weight and condition during late pregnancy. It would be valuable for a cow/calf producer to experiment with a free and user-friendly ration balancing program like COWculator in order to create a least-cost ration. Since forage prices will likely continue to increase in price, as they have done recently, it may be the only way to remain profitable in the future.
Dr. Jason Ahola is an Extension beef specialist with the University of Idaho. Contact him at jahola@uidaho.edu or 208-454-7654.

$ Values or Economic Indexes;
New Selection Tools for Cattle Producers
Cattle producers have been using tools to measure performance for many years. We started by weighing cattle and figuring the average daily gain. This led to the use of within herd ratios where we could compare the performance of one animal against another in the herd.

There was a need to evaluate cattle not only in herd but across herds from different states. This brought about the use of Estimated Breeding Values (EBV’s). Next in line were the Expected Progeny Differences (EPD’s) which do a great job of allowing us to compare one animal against other animals in the breed no matter where the animals are located. The most current measurement tool are the $ Values or Economic Indexes. These figures help us to determine the economic impact an animal will have on our herd compared to other animals in the breed. The goal of the index process is to assist commercial cattle producers in evaluating candidates for selection based on their economic merit.

Let’s take a look at some of these new $ Values. Below is a listing and an explanation of the $ Values for several of the major beef breeds:

$ Value Indexes = The $ Value is an estimate of how future progeny from a sire is expected to perform on average compared to progeny of other sires if the sires were randomly mated to cows and if the calves were exposed to the same environment.

Angus $ Values:

Weaned Calf Value ($W) – an index expressed in dollars per head that measures the average difference in future progeny performance during the preweaning period. This would include both revenue and cost adjustments associated with differences in birth weight, weaning direct growth, milk and mature cow size.

Cow Energy Value ($EN) – the difference in cow energy requirements expressed in dollars per cow saved. The higher the number, the more efficient the future daughters will be which relates to more money saved.

Feedlot Value ($F) – an index expressed in dollars per head for post weaning performance.

Grid Value ($G) – an index expressed in dollars per head for carcass grid merit.

Quality Grade ($QG) – represents the quality grade portion of the $G value. Marb EPD and ultrasound fat (%IMF) EPD contribute to the calculation of the $QG. This value would be used if the producer wants to place a high emphasis on quality grade in his selection criteria.

Yield Grade ($YG) – represents the yield grade portion of the $G value. It utilizes the ribeye area, fat thickness and weight for calculating an economic value for red meat yield. Producers needing to improve yield grade would concentrate on this value.

Beef Value ($B) - an index expressed in dollars per head that predicts the average difference in progeny for postweaning and carcass value performance compared to progeny of other sires.

Hereford $ Values:

Baldy Maternal Index (BMI$) – an index expressed in dollars per head that predicts the profit for producers that use Hereford bulls in a rotational crossbreeding program on Angus based cows and heifers.

Certified Hereford Beef Index (CHB$) – an index expressed in dollars per head that predicts carcass performance of crossbred Hereford/British calves when sold on a grid pricing formula in the Certified Hereford Beef program.

Calving Ease Index (CEZ$) – this index identifies the most profitable Hereford bulls when mated to yearling heifers.

Brahman Influence Index (BII$) – this index is similar to the BMI$ with one difference, the Herefords bulls are mated to Brahman cattle and the emphasis is on fertility, age at puberty, traits that are deficient in Brahman cattle.

Charolais $ Values:

Terminal Sire Profitability Index – utilizes economic and management descriptions of your ranching operation, along with EPD’s on available Charolais bulls to assist in identifying the most profitable sires for your unique operation.

Limousin $ Values:

Mainstream Terminal Index ($MTI) – takes both genetics and economics into account to rank animals in terms of expected profit per carcass produced from weaning to market endpoints of Yield Grade 1s and 2s and Select to low Choice quality grades.

Gelbvieh $ Values:

Days to Finish (DtF) – expressed in days to reach a constant fat endpoint, which is commonly used in the feedlot to determine when cattle are finished.

Feedlot Merit (FM) – measures the dollar value associated with the expected gain and feedlot efficiency of progeny when fed in a typical feedlot arrangement. Expressed in dollars per head.

Carcass Value (CV) – expressed in dollar value per head, comparing progeny of one animal to another in dollar differences when progeny are sold on a grid.

Simmental $ Values:

All Purpose Index (API) – evaluates sires being used on entire cowherd to produce both replacement females along with steers and heifers sent to the feedlot and on to the packing house. All traits with the exception of tenderness are taking into consideration in this index. Expressed in dollar value per head.

Terminal Index (TI) – evaluates sires being bred to females where all the offspring will be fed and sold on the grade a yield grid. Maternal traits such as milk, stayability and calving ease are not considered for this index. Expressed in dollar value per head.

In Summary:

These were the indexes I could find from the major breeds. I am sure that all the breeds have these indexes but because of space constraints I haven’t taken the time to research each breed.

As you can see, the amount of information available is staggering. The question becomes, how do I use these indexes to help me select a bull? Also, which indexes do I really need to use? I don’t have room in this newsletter to address these questions, however in the next issue of Over The Wire, I will try to give examples of how to use this data when making your selections.

In the meantime, if you need information on these indexes, access the various breed websites and do a little researching. You will be able to find the information you need. Also, call up the breed association and visit with their performance program director. They can be of great help. Also, feel free to give me a call. I will try to provide some assistance.

Information on the $ Value Indexes was obtained from the websites of the American Angus Association, the American Hereford Association, the North American Limousin Foundation, the American Gelvieh Association, the American-International Charolais Association and the American Simmental Association.

October 2007

2007-10-10T14:51:00.000-07:00

Hi Everyone,

Wow! What a summer we just went through. Weeks and weeks of dry hot weather, poor quality forages on summer ranges and in some cases, water shortages. It can’t get any worse can it? You bet it can. How about extremely high hay and grain prices? Makes you scratch your head, doesn’t it?
There is some good news though, calf prices are still pretty high. Let’s hope that they stay high through the fall and early winter.
I have talked to some cattle producers over the last several weeks and many spring calving operations weaned their calves early and sold them. Early weaning is one of the options that I will discuss in greater detail in this newsletter. Speaking of early weaning, I have actual data on how some spring calves gained during the month of September and early October. I weighed calves on three ranches in the area to determine how much these calves gained late in the season. Table 1. on page three has the results. They are interesting.
With high feed prices and poor fall feed, you will definitely earn your money as the manager of your operation this year. This edition of “Over The Wire” deals with tips on drought management and keeping winter feed costs as low as possible. If you have any additional questions on this topic or any other beef cattle topic, feel free to contact me at the Idaho County Extension Office. Good luck during the fall season.
Sincerely,

Jim Church
University of Idaho
Extension Educator, Livestock
Strategies To Survive The Drought and High Winter Feed Costs

Let’s face it, this summer and fall have been extremely dry. In some areas we have had less than half the normal yearly rainfall. Hay crops have been adversely affected and so have the pastures and ranges. With short supplies of poor quality grass this fall and out of sight hay prices, what are some options for keeping out of the banker’s doghouse?
To begin with producers need to analyze their options for managing the conditions brought on by drought. According to Extension beef cattle specialists John Paterson, Rick Funston and Ron Carlstrom from Montana State University and Greg Lardy from North Dakota State University producers have the following options to consider during a drought:
· Do nothing.
· Selective reduction of the cow herd.
· Early weaning of calves to reduce nutritional demands on cows.
· Leasing additional grazing ground versus purchasing of supplemental feeds.
· Purchasing supplemental feedstuffs.
· Move cowherd to a dry lot for full feeding.
· Limit feed grain to meet nutrient requirements.
· Sell all the livestock.

Let’s take a look at each of these options:
Do Nothing:
This is the option where you keep your fingers crossed and hope things get better. Some times this works, but the majority of the time it doesn’t. Producers should look at a combination of the options listed above.
Selective reduction of the cow herd:
I really think that during years of short feed and high hay prices, deep culling should be employed, if cull cow prices are reasonable. The first group of cows to look at are cows that consistently calve late because they more than likely bring in a small calf each year. You may want to look at the poor milking cows and cows with problem udders. Cows that are of poor quality or are hard keepers, make sure they are not thin because they milk well and raise a huge calf. Older cows and those with feet and leg problems are also prime candidates for a trip to town. The point is to keep cows that make you money and get rid of the marginal cows. However, if you have plenty of feed and cull cow prices are low, it may pay to feed them until spring. Research has shown that it pays to sell cull cows after January 1st, but the key is available feed.
Early weaning of calves:
It may be wise to think about weaning spring born calves earlier than normal in periods of drought. By the time this newsletter goes out, the window for early weaning will have passed. Cows that are grazing on dry, low quality feed will lose body condition in a hurry if they are nursing calves. The calves will also not grow well if they are eating low quality forage. By removing the calves, the cows will not require the level of nutrients needed while nursing and thus maintain body condition. The weaned calves can be sold right off the cow or fed hay for a few weeks if hay supplies are sufficient.
As I mentioned in my comments earlier, I have three herds in Idaho and Lewis Counties that are cooperating on an early weaning project. The calves from each of these herds were weighed the last week of August or the first week of September. The calves were reweighed about thirty days later. Table 1. outlines how well the calves gained during September this year:
Table 1. Calf gain on Three Ranches in September 2007
Avg. Avg. Days Avg.
Ranch Start Wt. End Wt. on Test Daily Gain
A 471 516 32 1.42
B 485 507 30 0.99
C 447 491 28 1.57
The calves gained from 1 pound to a pound and a half depending on the ranch during the last 30 days on the cow. The cow calf pairs were on pasture so the cost of that pound of gain would be low. If the pasture rental cost is $12 per pair per month, that equals $.40 cents per day for the pair. Divide this by 2 and you get $.20 cents. I am going to place a cost of $.20 cents per pound gain on that 1 pound per day gain while on the cow.
If we have enough hay and supplements, we can feed the calves to gain 2 pounds per day easy after being weaned. With hay at $100 per ton and barley at $300 per ton the cost per pound of gain would be $0.63 with feeding 10 pounds of hay and 5 pounds of barley per day. The cost of gain is higher with the calf weaned but you have to figure that each pound on a calf is worth at least $1.10. So the result would be a net return of $0.90 per day if the calves were left on the cows and $0.95 if the calves were weaned and fed to gain 2 pounds per day.
So how do you interpret the data? Normally on a dry year it pays to wean early and feed the calves, but this year feed costs are so high that it is a toss up. You may be just as well off to leave the calves on the cows.
One factor we are not taking into account is the body condition scores of the cows. Cows that have been nursing calves through this dry period may be losing a lot of valuable body condition. This condition could be saved if the calves were weaned. Putting condition back on cows is expensive.
I will repeat this project next year to see what kind of differences there are between years.
Leasing Additional Ground:
This option can be a great one if producers can find fall pastures or crop aftermath to graze in the fall. The trouble is everyone is looking for fall pasture and it is extremely hard to find. Most wheat and barley fields in this area have no fences. There is a tremendous amount of feed available on these fields but producers would have to be willing to put up electric fences and in most cases, haul water. The cattle would have to be trained to the electric fence and hauling water would get old in a hurry. However, if you can pencil this option out and make it work financially, it might be worth the effort. Delaying the winter feeding period by 30 days or longer will make this option much more attractive.
Purchasing Supplemental Feeds:
If you are feeding straw or grazing fall forages that are very low in quality, you will have to provide a protein supplement for the cattle. Adding protein to the diet will enhance the growth of rumen bacteria which will allow for better utilization and consumption of the poor quality forage. Of course the added protein also helps the cattle meet their nutrient requirements. Don’t forget about trace mineral supplementation at this time. Low quality forages usually lack the trace minerals needed by the cattle. A good lose mineral program is recommended.
Move Cowherd to Drylot for Full Feeding:
This is an expensive option but may not be avoided if pasture and range forages are gone. If cows have to be put on full feed early in the winter feeding period, look at utilizing low quality forages such as bluegrass straw, or ammoniated wheat or barley straw. These roughages will provide filler and can extend the stack of top quality hay for later use. If you are feeding straws, you will have to provide supplemental protein and in some cases energy for the cows. Also, be sure to provide trace mineral supplements as well.
Limit Feed Grain to Meet Nutrient Requirements:
As I just mentioned, low quality forages lack the protein requirements needed by the cows. They also may lack the energy requirements, depending on the stage of gestation/lactation that the cows are in. If energy is lacking in the diet, limit feeding five pounds or so of grain each day will help. However with barley at about $300 a ton, this will be expensive this year. You will also have to have good tight feed bunks with enough bunk space to allow all the cattle to eat at once. This may be a limiting factor.
Sell All The Livestock:
Drastic times make for drastic measures. Selling all the cattle is an option, but one that most producers don’t really want to choose. There are tax ramifications not to mention the loss of years and years of genetic selection to build up the herd. Everyone has to make their own decision as to whether this option is considered.
Minimizing Hay Waste During the Feeding Period
One management practice that producers can look at to reduce feed costs is the amount of hay that is wasted each year during the winter feeding period. I would bet that if a person really evaluated the amount of hay that the cows waste, it would be shocking.
According to research conducted at the University of Missouri the amount of hay wasted will vary depending on the feeding method used. It can range from less than 10 percent all the way up to 45 percent or almost half of the feed. Limit feeding cows in feed bunks is the most efficient way to feed cows. On average they will waste about 10 percent of the feed using this method. The worst way to feed is to spread the hay out on the ground. Cattle will waste about 45 percent of the hay by trampling on it, fouling it with urine or manure and by using it for bedding.
If cows have free access to an unlimited amount of hay they will eat 20 to 30 percent more hay than they need each day. Feeding only a 1 day supply per feeding will lower the feed wasted from 25 percent down to 10 percent.
Years like this with high hay prices, it would be wise to look at reducing the amount of hay that is wasted. If at all possible, limit feed the cows in bunks. Hay loss and waste can be reduced if a one day supply is fed compared to feeding a several day supply each time hay is fed. If you can’t feed on a daily basis, be sure to feed in bunks or round bale feeders. Try to avoid feeding on the ground. This may not be feasible depending on your situation, but evaluate ways to reduce waste. Saving 10 percent of your hay can add up to big dollars by the end of the winter feeding period.
Good luck with your winter feeding program and let’s hope for ample moisture and a normal winter free from extending below zero temperatures.

June 2007

2007-07-23T09:52:00.000-07:00

Hi everyone,

It is hard to believe that summer is here. Late May produced some extremely high temperatures with dry conditions. Hay crops and pastures were stressed hard at that time. June arrived and we were met with cooling temperatures and some multi-million dollar rains. Some producers took advantage of the early dry conditions and put their hay up but the majority of folks will be haying at the usual time.

This newsletter will look at selling finished cattle using the grid or formula pricing method. I will also discuss the price spread between carcasses that grade choice versus those that grade select, why this is occurring and how it will affect you as a local producer.

Finally, I am introducing a new program for 4-H and FFA steer project exhibitors called the Steer of Merit Award. This letter will outline the criteria needed to win this award.

I hope you enjoy the articles in this newsletter. Feel free to call me at 208-983-2667 if you have any questions or concerns regarding the beef cattle business.

Sincerely,

Jim Church
University of Idaho
Extension Educator, Livestock

Price Premiums/Discounts on the Grid

A large volume of finished cattle in this country are marketed using the grid basis to determine the price. What this means is the cattle are slaughtered and then given a value based on the animal’s quality and yield grade. A base price is offered for cattle that grade low choice and are a yield grade 3. Carcasses can receive a premium over the base if they grade higher than low choice and have a yield grade lower than 3.

The opposite is true as well. Carcasses will be discounted if they grade below low choice and if they have a yield grade of 4 or 5. There are a lot of combinations for the quality and yield grade premiums and discounts. To determine these premiums and discounts, the packers have them plotted on a grid. This is where the term, “sold on the grid” comes from.

Below is a USDA five mid-western state average direct slaughter cattle premiums and discounts report for the week of June 4, 2007:

Quality Grade Range Weighted Avg.
Prime 3.00-28.00 17.05
Choice 0.00 0.00
Select (13.00-10.00) (11.00)
Standard (28.00-14.50) (16.35)
Dark Cutter (55.00-25.00) (37.90)
( ) minus

Yield Grade
1.0-2.0 0.00-8.00 4.37
2.0-2.5 0.00-3.00 2.07
2.5-3.0 0.00-2.50 1.99
3.0-3.5 (1.00)-0.00 0.00
3.5-4.0 (1.00)-0.00 0.00
4.0-5.0 (20.00-10.00) -15.15
5.0/up (25.00-15.00) -22.57

Carcass Weight
400-500 lbs (55.00-14.00) (35.97)
500-550 lbs (30.00-12.00) (23.82)
550-600 lbs (7.00)-0.00 (0.72)
600-950 lbs 0.00-0.00 0.00
950-1000 lbs (10.00 )-0.00 (0.29)
Over 1000 lbs (35.00-10.00) (24.38)

As you can see on the grid example, there is a large discount from the base price if the cattle don’t grade choice. For example let’s say that we have a steer that grades Select and is a yield grade 2.7. On June 4, 2007 the base price in Nebraska for Choice, yield grade 3 carcasses was $148 per cwt. If we use the grid we would have been discounted $11.00 per cwt because this carcass was a Select and been given a premium of $1.99 per cwt because the carcass had a yield grade of 2.7. The price we would receive for that carcass is: $138.99 per cwt.

Base Price = $148.00
Minus - Quality Grade Discount (Select) = $11.00
Plus - Yield Grade Premium (YG 2.7) = $1.99
($148.00-$11.00+$1.99)
Price Received = $138.99 per cwt.

So how much money did we lose because this steer didn’t grade choice? If the steer had a carcass weight of 775 pounds we have 7.75 hundred weights. Multiply this by $11.00 which equals $85.25.

Let’s do another example. Our steer grades average
choice but is short and dumpy, has average muscle thickness with a lot of external fat so the yield grade is 4.2. We would get no premium for the quality grade (some packers offer premiums for carcasses grading average or high Choice) but we would take a discount for the yield grade. So, if the carcass weighs 775 pounds again we have 7.75 hundred weights. Multiply this by $15.15 and we have a discount of $117.41.

What’s Coming This Year?

According to several beef economists, the Choice/Select spread may hit record levels this year. In June 2006, the weekly average Choice/Select spread hit a record of $23.08. If we pass this mark, things could get interesting.

Typically the Choice/Select spread is less than $10 with an average around $6-$8. The USDA published a report that shows the average Choice/Select spread over the last six years. The following table outlines the spread:

Annual Average Choice-Select Boxed Beef Price Spread

Year Price Premium Choice over Select
2000 4.00
2001 4.00
2002 3.00
2003 6.50
2004 8.00
2005 9.00
2006 14.00

Experts are indicating that the projected wide spread is due to several factors:

1. There is a very tight supply of Choice graded beef. Why? Feed costs are causing feeders to ship cattle quicker out of their feedlots. Dr. Jim Mintert, Kansas State University economist, said that the spread reflects changes in costs to produce Choice versus Select beef.

Feeders don’t want to feed that expensive corn any longer than they have to. If the spread is wide, feeders can offset the additional feed costs through the premiums received for higher quality cattle.

However, the feeders will have to monitor the spread very carefully when making marketing decisions or they could lose large amounts of money.

2. The demand for Choice graded beef is very strong. The restaurant trade demands high quality beef. That market is constantly getting bigger. On the other hand, the grilling season peak that occurs during the summer tends to narrow the spread. Packers are able to move more Select graded beef for this market.

How Do I Use This Information on My Ranch?

Discounts and premiums are a fact of life for all segments of the cattle industry. We need to pay attention to the discounts for both quality (Choice/Select spread) and yield grades. Our breeding decisions should be made with this in mind. Choose breeds that compliment each other in terms of carcass acceptability. Breeding for just quality grade, may hurt you in the yield grade department if you are not careful. Breeding for just yield grade, will hurt you with quality grading.

Carefully analyze carcass EPD’s when selecting new herd sires. This information is tremendously valuable and will help you determine which bulls will sire calves that will hang high quality carcasses. Don’t forget about the growth and efficiency of the cattle. Selecting for just carcass traits can be disastrous. There has to be a balance in your breeding program. I will look at breeds and crossbreeding programs in a future newsletter.

Steer of Merit Program for Idaho County 4-H & FFA Members

A new program called the Steer of Merit Program will be introduced in Idaho County this coming summer. The purpose of the program is to recognize exhibitors and breeders of elite steer projects. Steers will have to meet a set of extremely strict criteria in order to qualify for the award. The steers will be analyzed for live performance and carcass quality.

In order to be classified as a Steer of Merit, the following minimums must be met:

Live Performance:
Live Placing in Show ring = Blue Ribbon Required
Average Daily Gain = 3.2 pounds per day or better
Pounds Feed Per Pound Gained = 6.5 pounds of feed or less

Carcass Quality:
Ribeye area per 100 pounds of live weight = 1.1 square in.
Fat Thickness over Ribeye = 0.4 inches or less
Marbling Score = 5 percent Intramuscular Fat Score

Ultrasound data will be collected on the project steers during the Idaho County Fair. Rate of Gain and Feed Efficiency information will also be gathered at that time.

Steer exhibitors that have raised a project that meets the minimum criteria will be awarded a framed Steer of Merit Certificate. The breeder of the steer will also receive a framed Steer of Merit Certificate. Data on how well the steer performed will be included on the certificates.

Sponsors of the Steer of Merit Award are the University of Idaho, Idaho County Extension System and the Idaho-Lewis County Cattle Association. The award winners will receive their certificates at the annual Idaho-Lewis County Cattle Association banquet held in October each year.

May 2007

2007-05-04T13:31:00.000-07:00

Comments from Jim

Hi everyone,

Topics in this newsletter include a discussion on using straw in next winter’s cow rations and on analyzing cow size and efficiency. Hopefully this information will be of use. Feel free to cuss and discuss these ideas at the local coffee shop or sale barn.

Along the lines of extended fall grazing and alternative forages, I am in the process of putting the final touches on a demonstration research trial looking at alternative fall forages that will grow in the area. These forages will be seeded after wheat harvest in August. We’ll see if there is something we can plant that will grow and allow for grazing in November. Time will tell. Also, as part of the trial, I will be looking at how feasible early weaning of spring born calves is in the area. Spring calves will be weighed the first of September and then again in mid-October to monitor growth. Should be interesting. Currently I am just about done identifying farmer/rancher cooperators for the trials. There will be six operations cooperating in the project from Grangeville to Spaulding. I will keep you updated in this newsletter on the developments of the project.

Finally, if you know of someone in the cattle business that is not receiving this newsletter but would like a copy, please call me at 208-983-2667. I’ll add them to the list.

Sincerely,
Jim Church
University of Idaho
Extension Educator, Livestock

Hay Costs are Taking All the Fun Out of the Cattle Business

The price of hay has taken all the fun out of feeding cows in the winter. Makes a guy want to sell the ole gals and head to a warmer climate without any mud, but then we wouldn’t have the cow man life style now would we? Hay prices are out of sight! I have heard some pretty amazing horror stories in regards to how much people are paying for hay. Anywhere from $100 per ton for some pretty average hay to over $160 for good quality hay shipped into the region. In fact this week I saw an ad in the paper where you could buy top quality alfalfa delivered to your barn for $200 per ton. Wow!

South Idaho and Columbia Basin Hay Growers On their way to the bank.

A month ago I was talking to a local hay grower that placed an advertisement in the regional classified ads paper listing his hay for sale. This grower had over 30 calls. People were so desperate for hay that they asked if the person they sold the hay to had already hauled the hay away. When he said no, they offered him $10 a ton more than what the buyer had paid. A little cutthroat if you ask me.

So why are hay prices so high and why are
supplies so short? Let’s take a look at supplies first. Consumption of hay in Idaho has increased dramatically over the last several years.

The expanding dairy industry in southern Idaho has increased the demand for alfalfa and other forages. Alfalfa hay that is any good at all goes to the dairies. This leaves the rained on, lower quality hay for the beef industry. In our area, last year was not a good year for hay production. Weather patterns reduced yields in some places 30 percent or more. The grazing season this fall was not great either. We didn’t get a really good green-up so everyone had to start feeding at about the normal time. With a third less crop at least, no break in terms of an extended grazing season this past fall and a high demand for hay in southern Idaho and the Columbia Basin, supplies were tight and prices skyrocketed.

Speaking of prices, another factor contributing to high hay prices is the price of corn and other grains. Corn right now is golden in more ways than just color. The bio-fuel craze has really influenced corn prices. Barley, oats and wheat have all been pulled upwards due to the corn prices. Result: more roughage is used in rations replacing the high energy, high priced grains which in turn makes the roughage (hay) more expensive. Ouch!!

Remember as a kid when you would yell, “Hey” to someone and they would respond by saying, “ Buy straw, it’s cheaper”? No? Well I remember this, but maybe it is a south Idaho thing. But my point is this, don’t forget about straw. Yep that’s right, straw. We have tons of this material that can be bailed up and either fed straight or ammoniated and fed to cattle during the winter feeding period. Straw will cheapen any ration and can be fed successfully to mid-gestation cows with no problems.

Ammoniating straw will cost around $30 to $40 per ton and will provide a useable protein level of around 8 to 9 percent for the cattle. This meets the protein requirements for a dry cow in the second trimester of pregnancy.

If you calve in mid to late February and March, ammoniated straw can be used in the ration in November and December. This will save the good hay for later in the winter. If you calve in September or October, straw can be fed the last part of March and April.

Preparing a stack for ammoniation at
The University of Idaho.

Not everyone has access to cheap straw, but if you do, ammoniating the straw and feeding it is a viable option.

Feeding plain straw is also an option. It can be fed along with either good high protein hay or with grain and some protein supplement. Again this should be fed in the second trimester to cows, which is the stage of the production cycle that they require the least amount of nutrition.

These high feed prices require producers to be creative. Look for cheaper feed sources and see what you can do. Consider using straw, look into extending the grazing season by grazing crop aftermath or save some grass to graze in December. Whatever you do, remember that the ration needs to be balanced. Like the wise man says, “You can’t starve a profit out of a cow”.

Who’s Doing All the Work on Your Ranch?

Alright, be honest, who is dong all the work on your ranch? Is it you, or your cows? The majority of ranchers in North Central Idaho are probably guilty of doing all the work. Most cows in this region are on welfare. So, where do you stand? Are you in the majority or have you put your cows to work?

Jim have you gone crazy in your advancing age? What in the world are you getting at? Well to begin with, I have slipped some over time, but the point I’m trying to make is this; we are facing higher and higher production costs in the cattle business and the possibility of declining calf prices in the next few years. With this in mind, each of us needs to analyze our management and marketing programs to determine if changes can be made to lower the cost of production while maintaining an income level that will allow us to stay in the business.

The first thing we need to look at is the cow. Over twenty years ago I started hearing experts talk about matching the cow to the environment. Okay, what was being pushed by these so called experts? I think they were trying to tell us to pick a cow that could survive by grazing forages available on the ranch, with very little supplemental feed in the winter time. This cow would maintain her body condition, calve on her own, rebreed on time and wean a respectable sized calf. So, how have we been doing in the last 20 years?

We have done a great job of getting our cows bigger and bigger. Weaning weights have increased tremendously as have finished carcass weights. I would venture to guess that most of us are feeding more hay now than we ever have and the amount of grain used to finish cattle has increased. What do you think? Am I about right?

Let’s see, where’s my saddle?

Daily Nutrient Requirements
Mature Cows – First 3-4 mo’s Post-Partum

Wt. DM TDN Protein
Lbs Lbs Lbs
1100 22 12 2
1400 26 14 2.3

Now what do we do?

I really think it is time to get serious about making the cow harvest the majority of the feed she consumes in a year. Put the cow to work instead of letting her stand in a dry lot (mud lot in my case) while you haul feed to her every day. Get her off the welfare roles. The cow is perfectly designed to take care of herself if we just give her an opportunity to do it.

How can I do this?

It will take a tremendous commitment and a drastic change in management. Here are some things to consider:

· Cow size.
Are the cows capable of surviving and maintaining body condition on low quality forages during the winter time? If they can’t you may have to reduce your mature cow size to be successful.

· Calving season.
Does the calving season occur when the forage quality is at or
approaching the peak of quality?

· Availability of off season grazing.
Do you have somewhere to go in the winter time to graze the cattle on crop aftermath or stockpiled
forages?

I will talk in more detail in a future newsletter about calving season and available forage, but let’s look at cow size.

Frame score and mature cow weight:

How big are your cows? What is the mature cow weight and the frame score? What is the body condition score? We need to know these things to determine efficiency.

I would venture to guess that in North Central Idaho, our mature cow weights are somewhere in the range of 1300 to 1400 pounds. What do you think? I would also bet that the average frame score is around a 5 and in some herds it is a 6. Are these cows too big? Are these cows efficiently producing pounds of calf? I can’t answer this for you. You have to look at your costs and net returns.

Ask yourself this, if I currently am feeding my cows during the winter feeding period for 5 to 6 months, what would happen if I found some poor quality winter forage to graze and turned the cows out for say an additional two months reducing my winter feeding period to 120 days?

Would they maintain body condition, calve and rebreed on time?

Each year Cattle Fax conducts a survey to determine the annual cost of owning a cow. In the Northwest, the average cow cost was as follows:

Feed costs = $206
Labor = $63
Interest = $19
Other costs = $91
Total = $315

The average producer in the Northwest spends $315 each year in cow ownership costs. How much does it cost you? Nationwide the average annual cow cost is $379 and 62% of that cost is winter feed costs. This is why we need to seriously look at winter feed costs.

As I stated earlier, the experts told us to match the cow to the ranch. I don’t know your ranch and in this region of the country we have some tremendous differences in topography and climate so I can’t give you an answer that will fit everyone. If you make money even on the bottom side of the cattle cycle you are probably matching your resources. If the only years you actually make money are the years we have extremely high calf that will fit everyone.

If you make money even on the bottom side of the cattle cycle you are probably matching your resources. If the only years you actually make money are the years we have extremely high calf prices, you really need to analyze your operation, starting with the cows.

The Tail End………

I think we have been content to haul feed to our cows day after day after day during the winter. Nationally, low cost producers have gone away from this practice. They make the cows earn a living and do what they were designed to do, graze most of the year. These operators make money and like it.

I realize that I don’t have all the answers but hopefully this letter and the ones to follow will
help spark some interest in looking at ways to do things better and in the end increase net profits.

Spring 2005

2005-04-29T09:41:00.000-07:00

Managing for Success During the Upcoming Breeding Season
SPRING 2005

The calving season is in full swing and soon it will be time to start the artificial insemination program or turn the bulls in for the breeding season. This is a very important time of year and producers need to pay special attention to how they manage their replacement heifers and cow herd so that they cycle back and breed on time.

The goal of every cattle producer is to properly develop heifers so that they have their first calf at two years of age. These heifers then need to be managed to cycle back and rebreed so that they calve in 365 days or on or near their third birthday. This is repeated each and every year that the cow is in the herd. A tall order but one that has to be accomplished by each cow in order to maintain productivity and profitability.

There are several factors that contribute to the success or failure of getting the cows to cycle back and breed on time so that the goal of having each cow calve every 365 days can be reached.

These factors are herd health, nutrition, body condition, genetics, age of dam, and calving difficulty. Let’s look in depth at each of these factors.

Herd Health
A good herd health program is required in order to achieve success in a reproductive management system. There are a number of reproductive diseases that can cause all kinds of problems. Each producer needs to vaccinate their cattle for reproductive diseases on a regular basis. Designing a herd health program should be done in consultation with a veterinarian that is familiar with the problems in the local area.

Each year Cattle Fax, a beef cattle marketing service, conducts a survey of their subscribers. In the survey they ask questions regarding cost of production. From the results they are able to determine low, medium and high cost producers. A common denominator of the low cost producers is a well-designed strict herd health program. Low cost producers do not cut corners or try to save money in the area of herd health. They realize that a healthy animal will make money. Sick or diseased animals are a drain on the economic viability of the herd.

Following a good herd health program will keep the cows healthy and help them to cycle back and rebreed on time.

Genetics

Genetics can influence reproductive efficiency a great deal. We have all seen cows that are hard keeping and tend to calve later each year. They just don’t have the genetics to be efficient in the environment that they are living. If all the cows in the herd are having the same problem, then it is not due to genetics it is due to some other factor.

If the majority of the cows are cycling back and breeding on time, but there are a few cows that fall further behind, cull the late calvers. They are genetically inferior and need to be removed from the herd.

Also, be sure not to keep any replacement heifers from these cows. Chances are they will have the same problems as their mothers.

Age of Dam

Heifers generally have a 20 to 30 day longer interval between calving and return to estrus. It just takes a heifer longer to recover from the calving experience than it does a cow. Managing heifers separate from the cows is essential in maintaining reproductive efficiency. Heifers should be bred to calve three to four weeks ahead of the main cowherd. This will allow them the extra time to cycle back and be bred on time with the other cows.

Nutrition

Feeding a balanced diet that meets the nutritional requirements of the heifers and cows is the most important management practice that producers can follow in order to insure that the herd maintains a tight calving season and returns to estrus on time. This is the most critical area.

Cows that are fed right will perform to their genetic potential. Cows that are starved will eventually starve the budget. Like the old saying goes, “You can’t starve a profit out of a cow”.

The most important time during the production cycle to pay close attention to nutrition is sixty days before calving until 90 days postpartum or when the cows are bred. The relationship between protein and energy requirements and prompt rebreeding has been well documented through a number of research studies.

Protein requirements for a 1200-pound cow in the second tri-mester is 7%. This increases to 9.6% during the last 60 days of pregnancy and for three months after calving. A huge increase.

Forages need to be tested for protein and energy levels. Once this is known, a ration can be balanced to meet the needs of the cows. Protein can be added to the diet through a variety of sources such as alfalfa, soybean meal, canola meal, pea screenings, protein blocks and tubs and others. If energy is lacking, some type of grain can also be added. The whole key is knowing the quality of the forages being fed. A good trace mineral supplement should also be fed free choice to the cowherd. Many of our forages lack the trace minerals needed to insure return to estrus.

Body Condition

Body condition is directly correlated to how well or poorly the cows are being fed, which in turn can have a drastic affect on return to estrus, services per conception, calving interval, milk production, weaning weight and calf health.

Research has shown that the target body condition score for cows at calving time is a BCS score of 5. This of course is using the numerical system from 1 to 9 in which a score of 1 is extremely thin and a score of 9 is obese. First calf heifers should have a BCS score of 6 at calving. It is important to maintain these body condition scores through proper nutrition after the cows or heifers have calved. If the females are losing body condition after calving, reproductive efficiency and income is reduced.

It is recommended that the cows and heifers be body condition scored at weaning time in the fall. Those cows that are thin and need additional condition can then be fed accordingly to improve condition scores prior to the calving season. It is very hard to increase body condition once the cow or heifer has calved.

Calving Difficulty

A research project conducted in Montana showed that cows that had difficulty in the delivery of their calf took longer to cycle back than cows that experienced no calving problems. It is extremely important to try and minimize calving difficulty in your herd. Of course it is impossible to eliminate all calving problems, but the key is to determine when a problem is occurring and provide assistance early. This same research project showed that early assistance reduced the time it took to return to estrus compared to cows that experience a long drawn out calving problem.

Early assistance pays off in relation to return to estrus, calving interval, and healthier calves.

Summary
The goal of having each cow calve every 365 days is a tough goal to reach but can be done through proper management. Paying close attention to the factors outlined in this newsletter will help. Feel free to contact your veterinarian, nutritionists or myself if you have questions or concerns on this topic.

On The Lighter Side
“Jim, come on in, the doctor will see you now,” the nurse said as she opened the doorway that led into the examination area of the doctor’s clinic. “Take a seat up on the table and make yourself comfortable. The doctor will be in momentarily.”

“How will I explain my condition to the doctor? Will he be able to help me? How much is this going to cost me? Is the nurse going to give me a shot?” I muttered to myself as I sat there in the cold examination room. Just then the door opened and in walked Dr. Boneman.

“Well Jim, long time no see. What brings you in here today?” the doctor said as he surveyed my chart. “Doc, this is really painful for me. I have put this off for many years and finally with some coaxing from my wife, I have decided to get some help.” I said with a helpless look in my eye. Dr. Boneman got a very concerned look on his face and then got real serious. “Jim, I’m here to help but you’ve got to tell me all about your problem. What are the symptoms?”

Squirming like a greased pig running from a hoard of kids, I finally started to explain my situation. “It all started over thirty years ago. I was young and impressionable and watched all the male role models in my life partake in this activity each and every day. Soon I found myself longing for it, first in small doses and then I couldn’t get enough. It was as if it were a genetic thing passed down from one generation to the next. I would spend all my spare time with it and any spare cash went towards funding this activity. I even borrowed money to support it and once used the spare cash we were saving to buy Christmas presents to satisfy my need.”

“Wow, that sounds serious,” Dr. Boneman said. “Heck I’m only getting started,” I said as the years of frustration came flowing out of my mouth. “My condition got worse. I started trying to get my own kids involved. I used up my vacation time wallowing in my habit and found myself wanting to only associate with people that shared my affliction. What can I do? Is there a cure for a guy like me?” I pleaded with the doctor as tears welled up in my eyes.

“Jim this problem is serious. I don’t think we should have you use any drugs because that may compound the problem. Have you ever thought about attending AA or some other support group?” Dr. Boneman asked with a worried tone in his voice. “What? AA?” I asked. “Why in the world would I want to attend an AA meeting?” “Jim, Alcohol Anonymous is a great program that really helps people with addictions to alcohol such as yours. I think you should start attending the local meetings.”

“Doc you misdiagnosed this one by a mile. I’m not addicted to alcohol; heck I barely drink one beer a month. My addiction is to the cattle business. I can’t get it out of my system. It’s in my blood. I am not the only one with it either. Everyone that has cattle comes down with the condition. It is highly contagious. Can you help my friends and me? Please before it’s too late!”

New! Over the Wire

2005-03-31T16:01:00.001-08:00

A Livestock Newsletter for North Central Idaho