Date: January 31, 2003
SELECTING SIRES ON CARCASS TRAITS
Montana researchers used sires with high EPDs for either marbling (M)or percent retail product (RP). Compared to M-sired, RP-sired steers had 0.3 sq in larger ribeyes and .03 in less fat, so Yield Grade was 3.2 vs 3.4, not much of a difference. Quality grades for M and (RP) were: Prime, 16% (none); Premium Choice, 30% (24%); Low Choice, 38% (27%); Select, 16% (49%). Carcass weights were only 6 lb different. Using current USDA-reported carcass values, the difference in quality grades would be worth an average of $3.01/cwt carcass ($20.62/hd "bonus" in this case). What if the cow/calf producer is "due" half of that bonus? For 500 lb calves that would amount to about $2/cwt. There is some gravy to be had, but it's pretty thin.
NOT MAKING ENOUGH FROM COWS? TALK TO A FEEDER
The Livestock Marketing Information Center says cow/calf operations averaged returning about $9/cow/year from 1982 through 2002. But feeding lost over $10/hd. Cows lost from 1982 through 1985, showed a positive return for the next nine straight years, lost in three out of the next four years (breaking even in the other year), and have been positive the last four years. On the other hand, strings of positive or negative returns have never been longer than three years either way for feeders, losses averaging about $40/hd the last three years. The current cattle cycle (which averages 10 years) is entering the 15th year, longest ever. Liquidation of numbers has been going on for eight years, and is projected to continue for at least the next two years. If so, returns to cow/calf should remain positive. What about feeding? Guesses are welcome, educated or not.
ANALYZE FORAGE OR FECES?
Virginia workers analyzed forage and fecal samples from grazed tall fescue to estimate nutrient content and cow performance. Forage was analyzed by conventional chemical procedures and feces by infrared analysis for crude protein and TDN.. Changes in body weight (BW) and condition score (BCS) were predicted, using NRC nutrient requirements (for forage) or Nutrient Balance Analyzer, NutBal (for feces). Changes in both BW and BCS were accurately predicted using forage and NRC. NutBal over-predicted change in BW by 88 lb and BCS by .75 units. The authors concluded that, at least for fescue, NutBal is a promising predictor of CP but not TDN.
DO OLDER AND HIGHER-MILKING COWS EAT MORE?
Oklahoma researchers compared forage intake of Brangus first-calf heifers (H) and cows (C) of high (HI) or low (LO) milk EPD during late gestation, early lactation, and late lactation. During all three periods, ration was low quality (around 5% CP) Coastal hay ad lib, supplemented with cottonseed meal to meet protein requirements. During late gestation, H ate less total than C, but about the same in relation to body weight. Milk EPD did not affect intake. During early lactation, H and C again consumed about the same relative to weight, but HI ate about 8% more hay than LO. Milk production was 39% higher for C than H and HI produced 18% more than LO. During late lactation, LO-H consumed somewhat less in relation to weight and had slightly lower digestibility than the other groups. HI and LO did not differ for milk produced in late lactation.
Back to Newsletter Home