SEARCH

Are the Numbers Growing & What’s the Right Development Program?

The beef cow herd number in the U.S. has been on a steady downward trend since the peak of the last defined cattle cycle (mid 1990s). In Canada, the number has been an even steeper decline. Some would suggest that the cattle cycle is broken, looks different or is simply not well defined today. Record values of essentially every class of animal in the beef industry, coupled with low inventory and supplies, is leading to an outcry by many analysts and experts for herd expansion. Well, these calls are likely being heard to some extent as there is evidence of more replacement females being retained.

The USDA January 1 Cattle Inventory Report cites replacement heifer numbers up one percent to 5.2 million head. The report listed several states where the largest increase may be occurring, primarily in the Northern Plains and some Rocky Mountain states. This would probably makes sense given the drought in the Southern Plains, however that could change now as improved moisture conditions are returning to some drought stricken areas. I have also had lots of recent discussions with cattle producers and traders that would anecdotally support more replacements being held over.

Replacement heifers do get bred (or at least that’s the intent) and a lot of good research has been done on how to best achieve this. After all, the heifer is the beginning of a very large investment that takes a few years to fully achieve and win back a just reward. If indeed a lot of heifers are being held back due to price and demand, there may be more than average that don’t, or will not, measure up. If you are purchasing, select what fits you and take time to evaluate.

What Should They Weigh and When Do They Need to Be Bred?

One common benchmark in developing heifers is to have them reach a target weight of 65 percent of mature body weight by breeding and 85 percent of mature weight by calving. It’s also understood (or not) that mature weights of cows are getting larger. So, with the above benchmarks, today 65 percent of a 1400 lb cow is a 910 lb breeding heifer. Sounds pretty big doesn’t it?

Develop Heifers Under Similar Conditions They Will Experience Throughout Life

Puberty is more a function of size versus age in beef cattle, but can it be reached too aggressively? It’s relatively easy to feed healthy heifers into breeding or achieve the desired weight, but feed costs may be prohibitive in today’s $6.00+ corn reality. More recent studies have shown that targeting 50-60 percent of mature body weight may wind up in selecting a more fertile heifer long term and for less cost to develop. The breeding percentage on these replacement heifers may not be as high, but selling an open yearling heifer for the feedlot is more profitable than selling an open two-year-old cow. And those heifers that do breed are likely to be more efficient lifetime breeders. In the end, the second calf, or the second conception on a cow, is probably more important than achieving the first. A costly scenario is one where a not so efficient heifer was fed well or was perhaps over-conditioned, did breed, and then failed to rebreed the next season because she’s then treated like a cow and fed more like the rest of the herd. In addition, over-conditioned animals may have more dystocia at calving.

Feeding and supplement strategies for the above scenarios do support utilizing self-fed supplements such as Crystalyx^® with moderate to low quality forages and in good forage grazing systems. It also supports the use of Ionophores such as Bovatec^® or Rumensin^® to improve feed efficiency and growth.  Overall, we still need a breeding heifer that is in adequate body condition (six would be ideal) prior to breeding.

None of the above takes away the need for matching the type of genetics to the environment and the goals of the individual operation. Conducting breeding soundness exams for replacement heifers 1-3 months ahead of the breeding season is also a good practice in determining fertility, pelvic scores, body conformation, etc.

With today’s market and demand, there appears to be more interest in retaining more replacement heifers. This will provide opportunity for those buying, selling and developing heifers. Choose heifers that fit your program the best and follow through with nutrition programs that support cost efficient growth and reproduction.

As a Nutritionist, I often field questions from cattlemen on calf scours, weak calves and other calving time disasters. Most all of these questions come after the problem has already set in. While we cannot control the weather that will play a large role in stressing newly born claves, we can control the management of stress in our herds.  

Providing more than just “adequate” facilities/pastures for calving is one management tool that will pay dividends when trying to prevent a scours outbreak. If you are calving in or around buildings, providing a clean, dry area for the cows and calves is essential. A buildup of manure or moisture, as well as other calves that may be sick, are your worst enemies if you calve in a small area. If you calve in pastures, you can reduce the pathogen load normally seen in smaller lots or around buildings. In addition, the University of Nebraska Sandhills Calving System may provide even greater protection to newly born claves. In short, this system suggests you move the pregnant cows to a new pasture every two weeks or so. By leaving the cows with calves behind, you minimize the pathogens that can affect newly born calves in the new pasture.

Nutrition is also a management tool we all control. For spring calving cows, most forages are deficient in the trace minerals and vitamins necessary for production of good quality colostrum. Supplementation of trace minerals, vitamins and phosphorus is then absolutely essential to building the quality of colostrum that will provide the calf with a robust immune system necessary to avoid scours. Supplementation should start at least six weeks prior to calving and may be required all winter (for protein) if low quality forages are used. If you wait until scours become an issue, you will have waited too long. It takes weeks of proper nutrition to build quality colostrum.

In recent years, we have seen a number of supplements with Altech’s^®  Bio-Mos^® become available to cattlemen to use pre-calving through the end of calving. Bio-Mos^® is a mannan oligosaccharide (mos) that attaches to harmful bacteria in the gut of cattle. It has been suggested that this attachment renders the bacteria harmless as it can no longer cause damage to the gut wall.

If you are worried about colostrum quality, take steps to provide some nutritional insurance. CRYSTALYX^® Brand Supplements are an easy way to affordably provide protein, trace minerals, vitamins, phosphorus and Bio-Mos^® in a supplement block that’s available 24/7, while minimizing your investment in time, labor and equipment.    

It’s a new year, 2012, and the optimism in the Cattle Industry continues. Spring calving is just around the corner and thus a great percentage of the 2012 Calf-crop is in the 3^rd trimester of fetal development or very close to it. Over 85% of fetal growth occurs during this stage of gestation, and nutritional demands of the mother cow are increasing at a rapid rate. Protein and energy demands increase nearly 20% just during the last month of pregnancy (see chart below). 

Cow Body Condition has got to be the number one priority in a cow-calf nutrition program. As an indicator of Energy status, it affects everything from health to reproductive efficiency, and ultimately profitability. At no point is Body Condition more critical than during late gestation and early lactation. The processes of fetal development, delivering a calf, milk production and repair of the reproductive tract, are all physiological stresses. All these require large quantities of energy to enable cows to rebreed in 85 days in order to maintain a calving interval of 12 months.

Once the calf is born, its survival and immunity is dependent on receiving high quality colostrum the first 24 hours of life. Colostrum in milk provides the passive immunity to a calf from the IgG (Immunoglobulin) concentration. These immunoglobulins are antibodies that fight bacterial and viral challenges the calf will encounter until its active immunity is developed. 

A cow that is in good health, adequate body condition (BCS 5-7), and is meeting nutritional requirements during the last trimester of gestation will produce adequate amounts and quality of colostrum for her newborn calf. On the flip side, cows that are nutritionally challenged and losing body condition will produce lower quality colostrum, experience more dystocia,  have less vigorous calves with more health problems, and be challenged to re breed efficiently etc.

So, with Mother Nature’s help, if we have been utilizing a good supplement strategy to maintain body condition and utilize forages effectively, calving season should go well right? Yes, it should if we continue to pay attention to nutrition and continue to make best use of available forages. Now is likely the time to utilize our better quality forages or increase supplementation to lower quality forages (generally forages less than 10-12% protein).

 Mineral and vitamin requirements also increase during the third trimester and are important to immune function, reproductive efficiency, etc... If byproduct feeds such as distiller grains are being utilized, mineral nutrition can be further complicated and may need to be fine -tuned in addition to simply being fed at higher levels.

 For many areas of the U.S., it’s been a nice mild winter so far. For cow-calf producers, that’s not a bad thing as cold stress, nutritional stress, feeding costs, etc…, have likely been reduced from where they potentially could be. These market and environmental conditions have made it possible to get more out of winter grazing and hopefully producers have used supplement strategies to maintain or even add condition score to their cows. Now as calving season approaches, be sure to continue to pay attention to nutrition and make the best of 2012.

Talk to your CRYSTALYX^® dealer for more information. Obtain input on specific CRYSTALYX^® Brand Supplement and programs that fit the third trimester of pregnancy for your Beef Cow operation.

Cash Flow Considerations THEN and NOW

As I travel in cow calf regions and visit with cattlemen, I have noticed a distinct shift in their plans for retaining heifers. Last year at weaning, a heifer calf was more valuable as a feeder than a breeding animal. On many farms and ranches cash was tight due to increasing input cost.  Generating some cash and paying bills by selling the heifer calf had very little risk. If a cow in the herd needed to be replaced a young cow could be purchased for about the same or less money.

This year the economic considerations for retaining heifers for replacements have shifted. Input costs have increased, most notably forage cost, but we are seeing record prices for feeder calves and replacement heifers. Projections are the nation’s cow herd will be smaller due to the prolonged drought in the southwest.

Another difference between this year and today is related to the value of ground for row crops versus pasture. People that had to decide between planting more acres verses keeping cows and pasture made their choice last fall. Those cows are not on the market today. These and other factors have pushed the value of breeding animals to the point where cash flow is not the only consideration in deciding to keep heifers for breeding stock. We now have more questions to discuss at meetings, coffee shops and sales barns.

1. What will replacement heifers and cows cost in the future?
2. Will raising your own replacements be less expensive?
3. Is there more income potential in selling replacement heifer?

Below is a summary of some recent bred heifer sales.* 

  *Sales results should not be considered “official” and were taken from posted sales data and radio market reports

Spring born calves are now being weaned, shipped, marketed and transitioned from summer through fall to winter.  The words “calf weaning” can spell fear for some producers and opportunity for others.  Weaning practices or methods vary from conventional methods to ones where pre-conditioning is involved, to fenceline, two-step, or simply the “weaning them on the truck to town” method.

Weaning tips normally revolve around stress reduction.  There may be an ongoing debate on which programs work the best and which fit facilities, topography, feed resources, and manpower issues.  There is strong data from several studies around the U.S. that suggest fenceline weaning or low-stress weaning programs have advantages on calf behavior and performance. 

Below summarizes some benefits of a fenceline weaning system for a 7 day period vs. conventional or total separation weaning from dams (source, Price et. al - Univ. of California Davis 2003)

• Increased time grazing and eating in days immediately following weaning
• Less time walking and more time spent lying down following weaning
• Less time bawling (vocalizing)
• Increased weight gain in the first 2wks following weaning (23 more lbs.) and this gain difference persisted through 10 weeks following weaning (26 lbs. more )

While the advantages above do support the practice, Fencline weaning will require well maintained fences (often a combination of a permanent and electric fence) and adequate, easily accessed water on both sides of the fence.

Whatever the practice, good nutrition is not exempt in making a program more successful.  Just as important is management and perhaps the weaning method that makes the most sense for an individual operation.  Even calves sold right off the cow will benefit by good nutrition prior to weaning as this will help whoever buys them in their receiving program.  This may sound like it cost the seller and benefits the buyer, but calves marketed in value added programs or preconditioned typically bring significantly more money.

For years now, Crystalyx^® has highlighted a very versatile supplement product in Brigade^®.  This product was first evaluated in receiving calves that are typically stressed and experience high morbidity.  Volumes have been written that calves that get sick in a weaning or receiving situation do not perform as well, are less profitable, less marketable, have higher health and treatment cost, etc...  One key to reducing stress and ultimately sickness in weaned calves is getting them to start on feed quicker or maintain feed intake.  Several demonstrations and the experience of many cattle producers have shown the economic benefits of Brigade^®.

Using a product like Crystalyx^® Brigade^® will supply a continuous availability of concentrated nutrients in a palatable form.  Even if calves are not eating normally, they still tend to consume Brigade^®.  This small amount of supplement will increase appetite, stimulate rumen microbial activity and forage digestion.  It will also encourage water consumption which in-turn can help improve dry matter intake.   One practice that would work in both fenceline and conventional weaning programs would be to offer Brigade® to both cows and calves prior to weaning for about 1-2 weeks.  This gives a head start nutritionally for calves, plus it acclimates them to the barrel so they know exactly what it is come the day of weaning.  

CRYSTALYX^® Brigade^® has been recommended by many CRYSTALYX^® dealers and sales professionals as a key tool in starter programs.  Make it part of yours when weaning program as it will fit all methods!

Earlier this month I was fortunate enough to attend the Joint Annual Meetings for the American Society of Animal Scientists. One of the hot topics was the debate on cow size and management. 

Over the past 3 decades the predominant measure of cow efficiency has been pounds of beef produced per beef cow. This figure has increased notably in this time. Between 1975 and 2005 carcass weights for steers and heifers have increased 144 and 194 pounds, respectively¹.  In attaining these heavier carcass weights, the face of the U.S. beef breeding herd has changed. Average live weights for mature cows and bulls have increased to 1,350 and 1,769 pounds, respectively, in 2005 from 1,047 and 1,340 pounds, respectively, in 1975¹.  At the same time, cows were selected for increased milk production along with increased mature weight. This increased the average beef cow’s dry matter requirement by roughly 25%¹.

The debate hinges on whether we should be adapting the environment to sustain these larger cattle, or if we should be choosing different genetic types to better conform to differing environments. Should we be choosing for cattle that are better adapted to limited resources with minimal inputs? In many instances this choice would lead to a smaller mature cow size and lowered milk production. Rising grain prices and an overall reduction in available grazing lands make sustaining today’s current production levels with the current genetic base a challenge.

How will you be dealing with the rising cost of harvested and supplemental feed? Do you have any plans to decrease the overall mature size of your cow herd?

¹ A historical perspective on the influence of the beef industry on mature cow size. B. McMurry. J. Anim. Sci. Vol. 89, E-Suppl. 1. p. 161. 2011.

The beef cow herd is at the lowest level since 1963, and the heifers are going to the feed yard at a rate that does not support herd expansion.  Several factors around the country are contributing to the further decline in the cow herd.  The rate of decline may have slowed due to lower culling activity on a national basis, but drought conditions in some parts of the country are sending cows to the sale barn.  In the Midwest and Southeast producers are dealing with reduced pasture availability due to competition for crop ground.  In addition, some heifers that were held back for replacement may have been sold due to tight cash flow as the result of a slow start to the grazing season which resulted in unplanned hay purchases.  What will be the determining factor for when the herd begins to expand?  Cash flow and forage availability will be short term factors to consider.  However, the decision to retain heifers as replacements needs to consider the long term demand for breeding stock and feeder cattle.  If the feeder cattle market stays strong and the cow herd continues to decline, those who decide to retain heifers this year should be very well rewarded for the decision.

Areas that have available grass have a distinct advantage in the cost to raise replacement heifers.  Raising heifers on pasture and a low cost per head per day supplement such as Iono-Lyx^® B300 is a proven system.  In areas of reduced pasture availability, some producers are taking a new look at rotational grazing and various low moisture block supplement strategies to maximize pasture utilization.   Efforts to extend the grazing season by 2 to 3 weeks will have a significant economical impact. 

In areas where pasture availability is a concern, some operations are considering a dry lot feeding program for all or part of the replacements.  This option will be more expensive due to increased use of stored forage, but can be a viable option if total cost is controlled.  The cost can be minimized if consideration is given to ways to reduce the total labor and equipment cost associated with dry lot feeding.  A common assumption is a tractor and feed wagon will be utilized every day.  Using the Crystal Clear Economyx^® tool, I entered a conservative tractor value of $100,000 and feeder wagon cost at $30,000 and contributed 25% of that expense to the heifer feeding program.  Fuel and operating cost of the tractor was estimated at $0.40 per hour.  Feeding every day with 1 hours of tractor time resulted in estimated yearly cost for the wagon of $50 per head and tractor/fuel cost of $164 per head.   Nutritionally we don’t need to feed replacement heifers like feed lot steers, and mechanically we don’t need to feed replacement heifers like steers.   A dry lot feeding program for replacement can be profitable if the equipment and fuel cost can be minimized.

What factors are you considering in your decision to retain or not retain heifers?

Most all cattlemen easily understand the direct impact conception rate has on their bottom line. Another measure that can directly affect ranch profitability is calving distribution. While pregnancy checking may give us a good indication of what our conception rate is (number of cows pregnant divided by the number of cows exposed), we will likely need to wait until calving to get a better feel for our calving distribution. 

So, what is “calving distribution”, and why should I be concerned with it? Calving distribution is a look at which cycle of your breeding season each of your calves are born. If you have a 60-day breeding season, you have about three, 21-day cycles, to get your cows bred. If you keep track of the birthdates of your calves, you can then generate the calving distribution of your calves. You can now look at the percentage of your calves that are born in each of the 3 breeding cycles in this 60-day breeding season.  

Why would this matter? Harlan Hughes has put together a graph in Figure 1, showing the relative profitability of when a calf is born within the calving distribution of a herd.

I have heard ranchers tell of herds where 65 percent of the calves are born in the first 21 days, as well as herds where 85 percent of the calves were born in the first 21 days.  It is entirely possible that both of these herds have the same conception rate, yet one is likely to be more profitable. Let’s say both herds are 100 cows and 95 percent of the cows were pregnant. If the ranches were only measuring conception rate, they are likely to be equally happy at this point. Let’s also say 3 percent of the live calves were lost by the time they were weaned. This gives us 92 live calves per herd to sell at weaning.

Will the checks for both herds be the same? Probably not. The second herd has 18 more calves born in the first cycle than the first herd (92 x 65% = 60 calves and 92 x 85% = 78 calves). If those 18 calves gain 2.5 pounds a day for an extra 21 days before they are weaned, they have added 945 pounds more pay weight than the first herd.  That could total over $1,400 more in your paycheck. And that herd probably has calves moving from the third cycle to the second cycle as well. Each cow that conceives a cycle earlier, can add about $78 more to your bottom line. Regardless of when a cow conceives, the cost to carry her for a year will be pretty much the same.  She should just as well conceive earlier, and deliver a heavier calf.

Now, just how do you get a calving distribution more like the second herd than the first?  Nutrition, genetics and management are the tools you have at your disposal. You may still have time to optimize any of these before your 2012 calves are conceived.