Texas A&M Study Cow Size

[RobertMac]

That sounds so simple it might just work! :wink: Good post.

It works, but comes at a cost...easier to do when cull cow prices are good. But don't make dramatic changes...go slow.

 

[Big Swede]

I'm in the process of culling "selling" my open cows right now. At over $700.00 a head it's real easy culling them. I think I had about 30 head of opens and when I get a trailer load that look fat enough they go to town. I know what you are saying Robert Mac, but as far as culling goes about the only cows I sell are the opens, old gummers and the occasional lame cow.

 

[Dylan Biggs]

The other thing identified as important was the degree to which a herd is adapted to your environment so they can maintain reproductive efficiency with in it. The cattle need to be adapted.

Adapted to your environment is half the story...the other half is what is included in "environment". All management practices are "in your environment"!

If you want to test for grazing RFI, feed your herd forage only and select for functional efficiency.

Note: Feeding forage only doesn't mean trying to starve a profit out of your cattle...can be fat on forage only.

Good point, there is always a natural environment (climatic, soil types, forage types) ect, then the management environment which can vary dramatically within the same natural environment. In the context of my comments to cowhunter regarding the A&M study I was referring more to natural environment in terms of the cattle being adapted.

 

[Dylan Biggs]

The other thing identified as important was the degree to which a herd is adapted to your environment so they can maintain reproductive efficiency with in it. The cattle need to be adapted.

Adapted to your environment is half the story...the other half is what is included in "environment". All management practices are "in your environment"!

If you want to test for grazing RFI, feed your herd forage only and select for functional efficiency.

Note: Feeding forage only doesn't mean trying to starve a profit out of your cattle...can be fat on forage only.

Definition of Residual Feed Intake: University of California

Residual feed intake measures the variation in feed intake beyond that needed to support maintenance and growth requirements, and is calculated as the difference between actual feed intake and the feed an animal is expected to consume based on its body weight and average daily gain. Cattle that eat less than expected for their body weight and average daily gain have negative RFI, which equates to improved feed efficiency.

Based on this definition to test for RFI you have to measure actual intake and compare it to the expected intake relative it's maintenance requirements and its gain or in a lactating cow its milk production. So from what I can gather you can limit your breeding season and your feed(forage only) and identify the cows that stay in production under those conditions but you wouldn't know which individual cows would actually be doing the most on the least which is what RFI essentially is.

 

[RSL]

The other thing identified as important was the degree to which a herd is adapted to your environment so they can maintain reproductive efficiency with in it. The cattle need to be adapted.

Adapted to your environment is half the story...the other half is what is included in "environment". All management practices are "in your environment"!

If you want to test for grazing RFI, feed your herd forage only and select for functional efficiency.

Note: Feeding forage only doesn't mean trying to starve a profit out of your cattle...can be fat on forage only.

Definition of Residual Feed Intake: University of California

Residual feed intake measures the variation in feed intake beyond that needed to support maintenance and growth requirements, and is calculated as the difference between actual feed intake and the feed an animal is expected to consume based on its body weight and average daily gain. Cattle that eat less than expected for their body weight and average daily gain have negative RFI, which equates to improved feed efficiency.

Based on this definition to test for RFI you have to measure actual intake and compare it to the expected intake relative it's maintenance requirements and its gain or in a lactating cow its milk production. So from what I can gather you can limit your breeding season and your feed(forage only) and identify the cows that stay in production under those conditions but you wouldn't know which individual cows would actually be doing the most on the least which is what RFI essentially is.

The only issue with RFI that I have is you have to be very careful to ensure that you maintain intake, I think particularly in a foraging beast and harsh environments. There is balance involved here too...
In pigs they found RFI was related to appetite. They wound up very efficient but wouldn't eat enough to grow economically. I wonder if that doesn't apply to beef cattle. Think of Limo. Very efficient (gain per feed) but have appetite and growth rate issues. I think with RFI, we need to think about holding intake constant and improving gain/growth/reproduction. If a cow loses any appetite, she may not be able to consume enough during times of poor forage availability or quality.

 

[Dylan Biggs]

Adapted to your environment is half the story...the other half is what is included in "environment". All management practices are "in your environment"!

If you want to test for grazing RFI, feed your herd forage only and select for functional efficiency.

Note: Feeding forage only doesn't mean trying to starve a profit out of your cattle...can be fat on forage only.

Definition of Residual Feed Intake: University of California

Residual feed intake measures the variation in feed intake beyond that needed to support maintenance and growth requirements, and is calculated as the difference between actual feed intake and the feed an animal is expected to consume based on its body weight and average daily gain. Cattle that eat less than expected for their body weight and average daily gain have negative RFI, which equates to improved feed efficiency.

Based on this definition to test for RFI you have to measure actual intake and compare it to the expected intake relative it's maintenance requirements and its gain or in a lactating cow its milk production. So from what I can gather you can limit your breeding season and your feed(forage only) and identify the cows that stay in production under those conditions but you wouldn't know which individual cows would actually be doing the most on the least which is what RFI essentially is.

The only issue with RFI that I have is you have to be very careful to ensure that you maintain intake, I think particularly in a foraging beast and harsh environments. There is balance involved here too...
In pigs they found RFI was related to appetite. They wound up very efficient but wouldn't eat enough to grow economically. I wonder if that doesn't apply to beef cattle. Think of Limo. Very efficient (gain per feed) but have appetite and growth rate issues. I think with RFI, we need to think about holding intake constant and improving gain/growth/reproduction. If a cow loses any appetite, she may not be able to consume enough during times of poor forage availability or quality.

RSL am I assuming correctly that your intake concern is with the long term effect on the population?

 

[Lonecowboy]

Adapted to your environment is half the story...the other half is what is included in "environment". All management practices are "in your environment"!

If you want to test for grazing RFI, feed your herd forage only and select for functional efficiency.

Note: Feeding forage only doesn't mean trying to starve a profit out of your cattle...can be fat on forage only.

As I see it, you either alter your cattle to fit your enviroment,(usually cheaper, less inputs)
or alter the enviroment to fit your cattle.(usually more expensive, more inputs)
finding the balance that pencils out the best is the challenge.

I don't see it as "alter your cattle", but, as you say below, cull what doesn't fit your environment. The balance is to efficiently utilize the natural resources on your land with the least input $$$. In my mind, selection is selecting what to cull.

What I don't see anyone talking about is culling-
get rid of the ones that don't work!
If you make your cattle work for you and cull the poor/non performers soon you will have a herd that fits your enviroment.

good post Robert,
I just see any change, (such as adding an animal, say a bull, or culling a cow), as altering your herd. but as you say, to efficiently utilize the resources you have, cows are just a combine, harvesting what you can get the land to produce, and turning it into a marketable product.
we are just looking for a more eficient "combine" to harvest our crops, but you still have to have a marketable calf to sell, that is what I see as the balance.

 

[cowhunter]

My little combines are still gettin after it. The high pastures started greenin up a little and they were combinein there but we had a hard frost and it burnt that bahia back so they will move back to the low land and start back combinein that washy. Some have droped off a little but they don't meet u at the gate like our comercial cattle do. Bellerin like your 5 mins late with there hay. We r gettin some more rain today. So when it finely warms up. We will have plenty of grass. I'm goin to try and get about 30 more head then close my herd and only get new bulls. I got a lot of centipede grass. Cattle love it and its got more protein than anything else. But it grows short and not real fast. I'm goin to get some of that portable electric fence and try and plant some argentine.

 

[cowhunter]

My little combines are still gettin after it. The high pastures started greenin up a little and they were combinein there but we had a hard frost and it burnt that bahia back so they will move back to the low land and start back combinein that washy. Some have droped off a little but they don't meet u at the gate like our comercial cattle do. Bellerin like your 5 mins late with there hay. We r gettin some more rain today. So when it finely warms up. We will have plenty of grass. I'm goin to try and get about 30 more head then close my herd and only get new bulls. I got a lot of centipede grass. Cattle love it and its got more protein than anything else. But it grows short and not real fast. I'm goin to get some of that portable electric fence and try and plant some argentine in place of centipede. I might have my bison sold. That will be a worry gone.

 

[RobertMac]

Good point, there is always a natural environment (climatic, soil types, forage types) ect, then the management environment which can vary dramatically within the same natural environment. In the context of my comments to cowhunter regarding the A&M study I was referring more to natural environment in terms of the cattle being adapted.

But Dylan, you make my point that there is no "natural environment" only...there is always the "management environment" that changes things even if it is simply across a turn row or fence line.

I was being factitious with the "test for grazing RFI" comment.
My father was a USDA research engineer and I spent my summers during high school and college at a USDA/State University research farm doing grunt work for PhDs doing this type of studies. When I graduated, I went from that intellectual environment to the environment of "real world farming" with my brothers. It took me about a year and a half to realize that minutia from these type studies were way down the list of factors that influence profitability. I agree with you in limiting your breeding season, establishing an efficient system of utilizing your natural resources, and then (as Lonecowboy pointed out) culling the animals that don't stay in production. Knowing which cows in the group that stays in production, does the most with the least is of little relevance. RFI in a CAFO has more relevance because of the ability to control many variables...we in cow/calf don't have that option.

 

[RobertMac]

good post Robert,
I just see any change, (such as adding an animal, say a bull, or culling a cow), as altering your herd. but as you say, to efficiently utilize the resources you have, cows are just a combine, harvesting what you can get the land to produce, and turning it into a marketable product.
we are just looking for a more eficient "combine" to harvest our crops, but you still have to have a marketable calf to sell, that is what I see as the balance.

I agree we have to keep an eye on the end product, but the most marketable calf isn't always the best fit for all environments...particularly for ones like mine and Cowhunter's...better have some ear!

Cowhunter, you should do well with Argentina Bahia...nice looking forage. I feel your pain with the freezer burn! :wink:

 

[RSL]

Definition of Residual Feed Intake: University of California

Residual feed intake measures the variation in feed intake beyond that needed to support maintenance and growth requirements, and is calculated as the difference between actual feed intake and the feed an animal is expected to consume based on its body weight and average daily gain. Cattle that eat less than expected for their body weight and average daily gain have negative RFI, which equates to improved feed efficiency.

Based on this definition to test for RFI you have to measure actual intake and compare it to the expected intake relative it's maintenance requirements and its gain or in a lactating cow its milk production. So from what I can gather you can limit your breeding season and your feed(forage only) and identify the cows that stay in production under those conditions but you wouldn't know which individual cows would actually be doing the most on the least which is what RFI essentially is.

The only issue with RFI that I have is you have to be very careful to ensure that you maintain intake, I think particularly in a foraging beast and harsh environments. There is balance involved here too...
In pigs they found RFI was related to appetite. They wound up very efficient but wouldn't eat enough to grow economically. I wonder if that doesn't apply to beef cattle. Think of Limo. Very efficient (gain per feed) but have appetite and growth rate issues. I think with RFI, we need to think about holding intake constant and improving gain/growth/reproduction. If a cow loses any appetite, she may not be able to consume enough during times of poor forage availability or quality.

RSL am I assuming correctly that your intake concern is with the long term effect on the population?

I don't think we will get that far in a long time, but for a cowherd using a very strong RFI bull to produce replacements I think it would be interesting and important to keep an eye on foraging ability and raw intake.
I have run some numbers and it is interesting to see how much one could do with increasing production off the same forage base either by producing more or by running larger cow numbers. The trait has lots of pretty interesting and important potential, I just don't think it's the be all and end all like some are promoting (not on this forum but elsewhere).
When someone tells me I don't have to worry because selection won't effect anything else, then I start to worry.

 

[Lonecowboy]

good post Robert,
I just see any change, (such as adding an animal, say a bull, or culling a cow), as altering your herd. but as you say, to efficiently utilize the resources you have, cows are just a combine, harvesting what you can get the land to produce, and turning it into a marketable product.
we are just looking for a more eficient "combine" to harvest our crops, but you still have to have a marketable calf to sell, that is what I see as the balance.

I agree we have to keep an eye on the end product, but the most marketable calf isn't always the best fit for all environments...particularly for ones like mine and Cowhunter's...better have some ear!

exactly, the highest $ marketable calf on the lowest input cow for your enviroment.
you might be able to find higher$ calves or lower input cows but they might not pencil as well.
my culling strategy is pretty simple, I'm going to get a paycheck out of every cow every year one way or the other. if she doesn't have a decently marketable calf at her side she goes to town instead. no exceptions! If I have to mess with her,(ie; can't raise a calf on her own) for any reason, she goes!

 

[Faster horses]

Same here, lonecowboy and so far it's worked. Right?

 

[RobertMac]

good post Robert,
I just see any change, (such as adding an animal, say a bull, or culling a cow), as altering your herd. but as you say, to efficiently utilize the resources you have, cows are just a combine, harvesting what you can get the land to produce, and turning it into a marketable product.
we are just looking for a more eficient "combine" to harvest our crops, but you still have to have a marketable calf to sell, that is what I see as the balance.

I agree we have to keep an eye on the end product, but the most marketable calf isn't always the best fit for all environments...particularly for ones like mine and Cowhunter's...better have some ear!

exactly, the highest $ marketable calf on the lowest input cow for your enviroment.
you might be able to find higher$ calves or lower input cows but they might not pencil as well.
my culling strategy is pretty simple, I'm going to get a paycheck out of every cow every year one way or the other. if she doesn't have a decently marketable calf at her side she goes to town instead. no exceptions! If I have to mess with her,(ie; can't raise a calf on her own) for any reason, she goes!

The only thing I would add is to replace those cows with heifers from cows that ARE WORKING for you.

 

[Dylan Biggs]

Good point, there is always a natural environment (climatic, soil types, forage types) ect, then the management environment which can vary dramatically within the same natural environment. In the context of my comments to cowhunter regarding the A&M study I was referring more to natural environment in terms of the cattle being adapted.

But Dylan, you make my point that there is no "natural environment" only...there is always the "management environment" that changes things even if it is simply across a turn row or fence line.

I agree completely.

I was being factitious with the "test for grazing RFI" comment.
My father was a USDA research engineer and I spent my summers during high school and college at a USDA/State University research farm doing grunt work for PhDs doing this type of studies. When I graduated, I went from that intellectual environment to the environment of "real world farming" with my brothers. It took me about a year and a half to realize that minutia from these type studies were way down the list of factors that influence profitability. I agree with you in limiting your breeding season, establishing an efficient system of utilizing your natural resources, and then (as Lonecowboy pointed out) culling the animals that don't stay in production. Knowing which cows in the group that stays in production, does the most with the least is of little relevance. RFI in a CAFO has more relevance because of the ability to control many variables...we in cow/calf don't have that option.

Every one has an agenda and I think its probably fair to say that the vast majority of data and marketing propaganda form seedstock breeders is exaggerated relative to its real impact on the bottom line. There are so many variables in the management of any business let alone an ag business and I am sure genetics is a lot further down the list of importanace for success than most cattle junkies like my self would like
to admit. I am sure that good management of poor genetics will always work better than poor management with the absolute best genetics. The best combo of course is the best of both.

 

[Lonecowboy]

I agree we have to keep an eye on the end product, but the most marketable calf isn't always the best fit for all environments...particularly for ones like mine and Cowhunter's...better have some ear!

exactly, the highest $ marketable calf on the lowest input cow for your enviroment.
you might be able to find higher$ calves or lower input cows but they might not pencil as well.
my culling strategy is pretty simple, I'm going to get a paycheck out of every cow every year one way or the other. if she doesn't have a decently marketable calf at her side she goes to town instead. no exceptions! If I have to mess with her,(ie; can't raise a calf on her own) for any reason, she goes!

The only thing I would add is to replace those cows with heifers from cows that ARE WORKING for you.

10-4 Robert, I love it when cows that have passed 10 years of my culling have a heifer calf. I try to not even look at those out of 3-5 year olds, but with agressive culling you have to keep more heifers. I will gladly get rid of one that is marginal and take a chance on a heifer with known qualities. if you buy a heifer or cow you are buying one someone else has culled out of his herd for whatever reason.

 

[cowhunter]

I do have close to a natural inviroment. We can get a lot of rain from a haricaine and in a few short days I've got a 200 acre pond. But this don't mean I loose my pasture. Maiden cane soon grows out of the water and the cattle wade in and thrive on it as well as aquatic vegitation that comes later. It takes many months for the water to go away but your gain your old pasture back and its lush around the pond. What I jokeiny call washy will live under water as well as above it. Just like maiden cane.water won't kill centapede but it won't grow underwater. When it drys up it comes back. If I get rid of it, I'll have to get somethin that can handle water. Maybe comman burmuda or there's somethin there growin in south fla that can handle water and grows rank. I think its called savannah?

 

[DOC HARRIS]

Say u have some cattle averagein 1200. And your neighbor's cattle average 1600. Witch are goin to caust more to feed? Can the man with the smaller cattle run more per acer? Will the calfs off the bigger cows really weight at weanin that much more? If u can run more smaller cows per acer would not the biger calf crop justify a smaller weanin weight? Let's do the math. Little cow man can run 20 on 20 acers. 20 calfs at 300lbs. Big cow man can only run 15 on 20 acers 15 calfs at 350lbs. Little cow man; 6000lbs. Big cow man;5250lbs. When I ran angus bulls on scrub cattle. I got black polled calfs 80 percent of the time. I had to hold them a little longer to get my sellin weight but they sold for just as much as the calfs comein of the comercial cattle. I know I don't know near as much about beef cattle as most that post on here and don't won't to.if I was as smart as yall, I'd never get to fish, hunt, frog gig or 2 step with my wife now and then. But I aint never been in the red on no cattle and never went to the bank with my hat in my hand. Now please don't take no afence or get mad. I like all u folks and sure injoy your words of wisdom. But please answer my post. Is biger better?

NO.

DOC HARRIS

 

[cowhunter]

Now doc, that cuttin to the chase. Finely, some body that agrees with me 100 percent! Many thanks!