Ranchers.net Bull Session

What to do for fly control?

Things that come up in the daily operation of a ranch.
User avatar
Jinglebob
Rancher
Rancher
Posts: 5962
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 3:39 pm
Location: Western South Dakota

Postby Jinglebob » Sun May 01, 2005 4:21 pm

Probably because my yearlin' man was too cheap for anything other than salt grass and water. Cattle gained 2.25 to 2.5 lbs per day.

I always wanted to try mineral with the fly stuff in it. but since we started rotating, we don't get many anyway.

I don't feed much mineral. They get a little from their winter feed I guess.

We are a low input operation! :shock: :lol:

Used to not get our cows to eat any type of mineral. Now I just to think it pays much. When I can get afford to get a test to see what we are lacking, AND I am runnin just my own, I will go to a mineral program.

Funny, howed them old timers ever survive without all of the shots and minerals and stuff? :???: :shock: :lol:
Toda via estoy aqui. I am still here.
website www.dennisranch.com

User avatar
PPRM
Rancher
Rancher
Posts: 1950
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 6:44 pm
Location: NE Oregon

Postby PPRM » Sun May 01, 2005 4:41 pm

Jinglebob wrote:Funny, howed them old timers ever survive without all of the shots and minerals and stuff? :???: :shock: :lol:



JB, I have thought about this a lot. answer is it takes a lot more productive cattle to pay for many of the inputs. And I am talking about the inputs that are the same today as in yesteryear. Grass, land feed, fuel, ect...

Take mineral, really an inexpensive way to optimize gains from your feed, production from the cows and help with disease resistance. I feel a good mineral program lowers many off my other costs.


On the vaccines, our cattle co-mingle together a lot more than ever before with the trucking of cattle, ect. They are exposed more to these bugs. Helps to eliminate stressors to whatever extent feasible.

many different ways to make money at cattle, if you can keep input costs down, then your way works well. I also think there's a ton to be learned from guys taking your approach, but also some cheap inputs out there that can result in huge benefits
The difference between a rut and a grave is the depth

PPRM

User avatar
Big Muddy rancher
Rancher
Rancher
Posts: 21290
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 6:29 pm
Location: Big Muddy valley
Contact:

Postby Big Muddy rancher » Sun May 01, 2005 6:05 pm

Jinglebob, How cheap can he be if he doesn't control warbles? Don't you guys have warble control areas any more? Besides a pour on that cleans up lice and grubs doesn't cost it pays.
Avatar by Haymaker

I can't tame wild women.

But I can make tame women wild.

User avatar
Faster horses
Rancher
Rancher
Posts: 27781
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2005 12:21 pm
Location: SE MT

Postby Faster horses » Sun May 01, 2005 6:50 pm

My sentiments exactly. I wonder if your man realizes how much it costs him TO NOT use a pour-on in the fall. He can use any of the Ivomectrin products at 1/4 dose and get lice and grubs, I GUARANTEE IT!!

Remember, low-cost does not mean NO COST!!

The yearling guys here would not be without mineral. Takes away all that doctoring you mention. 'Course, I'll admit, you won't need to ride your horse nearly as much! When cattle need doctoring, they aren't gaining, in fact they are losing. Not much money in that. As far as the IGR goes, it costs less than ear tags to control the flies for the yearling season. Of course, you would need to feed it in mineral~

We have some salty old ranchers that run yearlings that never used to feed mineral. Now it is a REQUIREMENT that the people buy their mineral before they bring them to his pasture and the rancher (an older fella) taking them in, keeps the mineral out. Says it has sure taken the work out of running yearlings.

As far as "how did people get by without doing any of this?" I'll tell you how:
calves weighed 300 lbs. Yearlings weighed 600 lbs. Cows were little and we didn't ask them to produce what we ask of them now. Much of this is nothing more than meeting their nutrition requirements. Used to be, if a cow died, she died. Not so, anymore. We all want to keep them alive because of the costs involved. Same with breed up. When we first started on our own, heifers were bred at 2 years old, to calve at 3. Can you imagine doing that now? I don't know anyone that could afford to do it, or would want to do it. Why give up a productive year in a cows life? But when they didn't ask much out of the cow, it also didn't cost much to keep her until 3 years old. And of course, they were bigger at three. (Bigger and dumber~have you ever calved out three year olds that didn't calve at two? That is an experience in itself.)

Since we have been on a mineral program, we don't lose cows like we used to. I can't remember the last time a cow died on this place. And we dang sure don't doctor anything to speak of. Our calf crop last year, and so far this year, has not had a treatment for anything. That speaks volumes.

I bet your man doesn't drive the same pickup he drove in the 60's~so why would he treat his cattle the same?

User avatar
Jinglebob
Rancher
Rancher
Posts: 5962
Joined: Mon Feb 14, 2005 3:39 pm
Location: Western South Dakota

Postby Jinglebob » Sun May 01, 2005 9:41 pm

FH;
I just knew I'd get a reply from you! :lol:

My man does what ever the hell he wants and I don't argue. The customer is always right. If he don't want to feed mineral, why should i fight him?
I get paid the same either way. If it was on a gain deal, then I might argue or demand mineral.

As far as the smaller cows and calves and yearlings years ago, it reminds me of a quote. "Did you ever notice all of the ranches that were paid for from 400 pound calves and they can't make them work now with 650 pound calves?"

Each person has to figure out what works for them. If we ever get to chat remind me of this "heavy weaning weights verses light weaning weights" issue. I've got some figures you might be interested in.
Toda via estoy aqui. I am still here.

website www.dennisranch.com

User avatar
Faster horses
Rancher
Rancher
Posts: 27781
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2005 12:21 pm
Location: SE MT

Postby Faster horses » Sun May 01, 2005 10:49 pm

OUCH!! And of course, the customer is always right. Sometimes when he is WRONG he is still right. Too bad no one tries to educate him a bit. I believe he is leaving money on the table. But it is his money!!

I have seen the stuff on lighter calves vs. heavier ones. I have studied Kit Pharo's deal and actually have a bull from him. He makes a super presentation. Bottom line, you gotta have what feeders want, and so far that's not a steer finished at 1000-1100 lbs. Might be someday, but not yet, I don't believe.

Yea, we started out with 400# Hereford calves, like lots of people. But to make it work for us we had to change with the times. Big cattle that raise 400# calves still won't work. (Not to say small cattle that raise 400# calves won't work, but there aren't many small cows to be had.) And from my posts on here, you should know that I worry cattle are getting TOO big~but we don't need to go back to belt buckle cattle either. IMO.

Kit promotes the "grass fed" deal as well. And that might work for some. We just don't have the place to keep the calves over and run them the next summer.

Every place is different. We are just tickled pink with what we have found that works for us.To each his own.

There is a different thought out there now, that instead of keeping those light cattle gaining one pound a day in a feedlot and turning them out 'green' on grass; that it doesn't cost much more to let them gain 3#/day while in the lot, sell them at some point and buy back some light calves. Turns your money over twice. But that is another story for another day.

I appreciate your posts here, and I appreciate what you have to contribute. I didn't mean to ruffle your feathers, really. It is just that I get tired of the rut I see people in. Sometimes, if we can, it benefits us to 'think outside the box.' But I will say it for you, "it is none of my ----business!!"

I hope you accept my apology, because that is what this is~

(but not pouring for grubs is assnine)~whoops! I just had to say it!!!

Denny
Rancher
Rancher
Posts: 5608
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 3:21 pm
Location: Mn usa

Postby Denny » Sun May 01, 2005 11:14 pm

Italked to Kit on the phone he asked me what my weaning expetations were of 1000 to 1200# cows I told him at least a 550# average he says thats way to high I should settle for 400# average.Some of what he says is good but some is WAY off base.He's selling an opinion His,I didnt really think much of him after our chat he's right I'm wrong.He came across so Arrogant that I was'nt interested anymore.

User avatar
Soapweed
Rancher
Rancher
Posts: 16078
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2005 7:54 pm
Location: northern Nebraska Sandhills

Postby Soapweed » Mon May 02, 2005 7:14 am

I agree, Denny. Extremes either direction don't work. Moderation in all things is a good motto.

Back to the issue of fly control, believe me, I've tried it all. It would be impossible to count all the gunny sacks and baling wire I've tied onto chains between two posts (which is as good a "back-rubber" system as there is). No matter what is used for the fly control agent, after a year or two, immunity is built up. Ear tags worked real well for awhile, but they don't anymore. The only thing that ever really worked satisfactorily was DDT mixed with diesel, but of course that was taken off the market many years ago. Dust bags don't work. After awhile, a person gets tired seeing his efforts and finances being spit into the wind. Our cattle don't have any more flies than any others around the country. They are as contented as anybody's cattle. Plenty of grass, fresh water, and salt and good mineral more than makes up for a few flies. We always Warbex in the fall for lice and grub control. Our weaning weights have consistently gone up, and the size of our cows is still moderate (around 1200# average).

Some herd health costs give a good return on investment. Money spent on fly control, for our operation, is just money thrown out the window.

I still use Synovex C implants, because the extra 25 pounds per calf at selling time puts money in my pocket, and so far, I see not enough "premium" being paid for me not to do it. Our replacement heifer calves always get Synovex C (we've used it for about twenty-five years), and the conception rates are consistently about 95-96%. We have just a few more "opens" than we did without the implants, but the heifers develop enough bigger that we don't have to pull as many calves as before.

A few years ago, a local livestock supply dealer was trying to talk an old-time rancher into using Synovex C. The rancher was not interested. My friend said, "I'd like to have all the money you are losing by not implanting." The old rancher smiled and said, "I don't need the money."

To each their own, I reckon.

User avatar
Big Muddy rancher
Rancher
Rancher
Posts: 21290
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 6:29 pm
Location: Big Muddy valley
Contact:

Postby Big Muddy rancher » Mon May 02, 2005 7:45 am

Soapweed, when you were talking fly control ,were you not talking about horn flys. This started out about heel flies or warbles. Are you telling us that you don't control warbles on your cows?
Avatar by Haymaker



I can't tame wild women.



But I can make tame women wild.

User avatar
Faster horses
Rancher
Rancher
Posts: 27781
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2005 12:21 pm
Location: SE MT

Postby Faster horses » Mon May 02, 2005 6:13 pm

He uses Warbex, if you go back and read his post.

That is another product that builds up an immunity after extended use and not being rotated.

Grubs are easily killed. My sources (Dr. Don Bliss of Mid-America Labs for one) says you can pass Ivomec over the cows back and kill grubs. We have been using 1/5 or 1/4 dose of an avormectin product in the fall for lice and grubs. The applicator makes it much easier and safer than a dipper and the reduced dosage makes it very inexpensive. Plus it is effective. I do think it needs to be rotated as well.

We knew a fellow in Wyoming who got Warbex in his snoose, and he died after chewing it. I just don't like handling that stuff.

BTW, did anyone read the article on parasites in the last BEEF magazine? If you haven't, I recommend you go back and read it. Dr. Bliss TELLS ALL about the ivomectrin products losing its effacy. I have listened to him lecture to a room full of vets. He is not politically correct~calls it the way he sees it and he does so in this article. I have the utmost respect for him. We have worked with him for several years now on parasite control. He is an independent, does not work for any company. I think he owns Mid America Labs, but I am not sure.

User avatar
rancher
Rancher
Rancher
Posts: 1059
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2005 8:12 pm

Postby rancher » Mon May 02, 2005 9:05 pm

Soapweed wrote:I agree, Denny. Extremes either direction don't work. Moderation in all things is a good motto.

Back to the issue of fly control, believe me, I've tried it all. It would be impossible to count all the gunny sacks and baling wire I've tied onto chains between two posts (which is as good a "back-rubber" system as there is). No matter what is used for the fly control agent, after a year or two, immunity is built up. Ear tags worked real well for awhile, but they don't anymore. The only thing that ever really worked satisfactorily was DDT mixed with diesel, but of course that was taken off the market many years ago. Dust bags don't work. After awhile, a person gets tired seeing his efforts and finances being spit into the wind. Our cattle don't have any more flies than any others around the country. They are as contented as anybody's cattle. Plenty of grass, fresh water, and salt and good mineral more than makes up for a few flies. We always Warbex in the fall for lice and grub control. Our weaning weights have consistently gone up, and the size of our cows is still moderate (around 1200# average).

Some herd health costs give a good return on investment. Money spent on fly control, for our operation, is just money thrown out the window.

I still use Synovex C implants, because the extra 25 pounds per calf at selling time puts money in my pocket, and so far, I see not enough "premium" being paid for me not to do it. Our replacement heifer calves always get Synovex C (we've used it for about twenty-five years), and the conception rates are consistently about 95-96%. We have just a few more "opens" than we did without the implants, but the heifers develop enough bigger that we don't have to pull as many calves as before.

A few years ago, a local livestock supply dealer was trying to talk an old-time rancher into using Synovex C. The rancher was not interested. My friend said, "I'd like to have all the money you are losing by not implanting." The old rancher smiled and said, "I don't need the money."

To each their own, I reckon.


Straight diesel fuel works good for me.
Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind. - Dr. Seuss


Return to “Ranch Talk”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: woodsman and 9 guests