• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Carcass weights and Choice Select Spread- what say you

Help Support Ranchers.net:

PPRM

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,951
Reaction score
0
Location
NE Oregon
A lot of talk about how narrow the Choice select spread is. On the surface, a select 1 will pay higher per pound than a choice 3 on the grid. I think the talk misses a few incentives.

CAB premiums were $6.00/cwt. of carcass last I looked. Something to shoot for. Prime was $10.00/cwt. of carcass. these aren't often talked about. Final inentive is the additional weight value. Most Choice threes weigh considerably more than select ones so the overall payment is better.

My point is that I think a lot more guys are shooting for and getting into the CAB and Prime Premiums. I understand that if a calf genetically can't grade this well, more feed won't do it. However, if a calf genetically can make it, too little feed can result in missing the boat. Given the weight thing, I still think with today's corn price, it is worth trying for these premiums.

That's where my incentive paradigm sits,

What say you???

PPRM
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
This time of year we usually see the spread narrow, and we're real narrow right now due to long fed carcasses. Certainly you are correct that $2 corn and 80+ fats means feed them til they explode OR FLIRT WITH YG4 DISCOUNTS. This is exactly what is so enticing about the Brethour Ultrasound market planning.

The decision is not whether to feed them longer, but whether to breed them leaner/heavier muscled. If you have 2 1200# feds and 1 yields 60% and goes cab and the other goes 66%yg1 (evenwithout a lean bonus grid), Cab would have to be +10% over market.

The rest of the story is the "carcass breeds" seem to be thriftier running cows, with the possible exception of some halfcrazed saler. In other words, the 60%yielding calf may cost less to raise.
 

feeder

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
950
Reaction score
0
Location
Iowa
Well we might be surprised either way come next week. First time selling on the grid. Buyer seems confident of the cattle. We are not well versed in this area. Glad he gave a guarantee on the meat price. So hope we can capitalize on any up swing. This could be a learning experience we'll never forget!! I think I'd rather go to Vegas to the craps table.
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,482
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
A lot of these questions could be answered by sending them to Decatur County Feedyard in Oberlin, Ks where they use ultrasound/frame score/muscle score etc. and backfat/rumpfat to pick 'em at the most advantageous endpoint.
Feed Conversion rates play a big part in longer feeding. They calculate those and project the economics of each individual calf given all the data.
 

PPRM

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,951
Reaction score
0
Location
NE Oregon
I've always done pretty good sorting them. I don't remember the last time I got a YG4. I generally hit Choice with an occasional Select and an occasional Prime. This is a combination of calves from my herd and saleyard calves I've picked up. The ultrasound stuff sounds good, but isn't available here in the Northwest.

Feeder, I wouldn't sell my cattle any other way than the grid. I think in general you get more because it takes some uncertainty away from the packer and they can pay more aggressively. Also, it definetly wakes you up to where you are with the quality of calves you have. I used to only look at BW, WW, YW, conformation and disposition when picking bulls. Even though my calves do well, I now look at Rib Eye and IMF a lot. I also want fat to be down and % Retail Product to be up. This really narrows the bulls for you,

PPRM
 

feeder

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
950
Reaction score
0
Location
Iowa
Mike, we went to a meeting about that. Looked very interesting, but I can't remember the cost to ultrasound. But I think ultrasound is the way to go. We have someone in our area that does the ultrasound but I wonder is the data as good as the person doing it. I sure would want someone that knows his stuff. Oh the joys of new technology.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I am new to this forum, and I have just completed the registeration. I don't know if there is much that I can add, but it looks interesting.

As far as the Canadian cattle as the border opens I am in the camp of "it not being a big impact", with the acception of the trader's perceptions causing a shift in the basis, futures/cash.

The difference between choice and good will be a better indicator than the basis of the futures market.

Regards
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Anonymous said:
I am new to this forum, and I have just completed the registeration. I don't know if there is much that I can add, but it looks interesting.

As far as the Canadian cattle as the border opens I am in the camp of "it not being a big impact", with the acception of the trader's perceptions causing a shift in the basis, futures/cash.

The difference between choice and good will be a better indicator than the basis of the futures market.

Regards

TheInsider
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,482
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
feeder said:
Mike, we went to a meeting about that. Looked very interesting, but I can't remember the cost to ultrasound. But I think ultrasound is the way to go. We have someone in our area that does the ultrasound but I wonder is the data as good as the person doing it. I sure would want someone that knows his stuff. Oh the joys of new technology.

Craig Hays at Ultrainsights in Iowa is one of the best anywhere at ultrasound. Decatur County Feedyard does it as a service to their customers feeding for the grid.
 

sw

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2005
Messages
1,373
Reaction score
0
worth noting, all grids are not the same, some favor high grading cattle, some favor lean meat yield, match your cattle to the grid to get the most reward. That is where the ultrasound can really help, especially if you have never collected carcass data before, so you have an idea of where your endpoint will be. We are changin packers this year. Last year the packer we used was rewarding high yields, lean cattle, we got paid choice price for high select, fat was discounted, REA and muscle rewarded. This year they want high grades, no REA and no muscle incentives and no discount for fat. Our cattle typically yield 65%, around 65% choice, 70% YG 1 and 2, and <.5 inches back fat, we are going to use a different packer with a grid that rewards us for the cattle we have.
 

PPRM

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,951
Reaction score
0
Location
NE Oregon
sw,

Great Points. I am talking Tyson on my deal. The other Packer up here is Washington Beeef. If I had a bunch of selects I was feeding, I'd send them there.

Dick Snow is a nieghbor that raises Salers. he really believes and is passionate about their carcasses. he has found a midwest program that is looking for this, smart move,


PPRM
 

Murgen

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
2,108
Reaction score
0
Location
Ontario
Hey guys, ultrasound is great, but it's still only a phenotypic measurement, what about using genetic potential and managing and marketing by genotypes?
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,482
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
Murgen said:
Hey guys, ultrasound is great, but it's still only a phenotypic measurement, what about using genetic potential and managing and marketing by genotypes?


Ultrasound in the feedlot is a way to keep from wasting money by feeding an animal to an overfat endpoint. You are correct that if it is used in contemporary groups it is useful for furthur prediction, but, why not use all the tools in the toolbox?
 

Murgen

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
2,108
Reaction score
0
Location
Ontario
I wasn't discounting ultrasound, but was adding a tool, genetic testing, like DNA. If we know that there is less chance of animal going choice etc, then why feed it longer, hit a lean market/grid with that animal? How much does ultrasound of an individual cost?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
The problem with current industry grading is that marbling is rewarded more than red meat yield when marbling only has a 10% direct correlation with tenderness. Seam fat is expensive to feed on and expensive to trim off yet the standards are being lowered for seam fat from 1/4" trim to 1/8" trim to denuded.

All the emphasis has been placed on marbling because marbling was historically an insurance policy for overcooking of meat. Now with modern aging and better preperation, most consumers would never be able to tell the difference between a select piece of meat and choice if it was aged and prepared properly. One doesn't have to look past the success of CHB to see this. In a Colordo State University taste test CHB beat CAB in most categories including tenderness and flavor. Why is that? Because hereford docility and tenderness seem to go hand in hand. Ironically, CHB allows select in their mix.

Additional seam fat usually goes hand in hand with additional marbling. If that was not the case, CH Y3 would not be the base for most grids.

I acknowledge that most english breeds of cattle have to be fleshy enough to rebreed in northern climates. The solution is to take advantage of hybrid vigor in cross breeding programs. Have cattle that gain and convert better in the feedlot and have cows that breed back and last longer in the herd.

The target should be high select or low choice Y2, not Y3!

My prediction is that the industry will move towards better incentives for higher yielding carcasses despite the AAA's love affair with marbling and the inevitable seam fat that accompanies it.



~SH~
 

Mike

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
28,482
Reaction score
0
Location
Montgomery, Al
SH:"My prediction is that the industry will move towards better incentives for higher yielding carcasses despite the AAA's love affair with marbling and the inevitable seam fat that accompanies it."

I have already seen some buyers discounting blacks because of excess fat. The ironic part is that in the bull tests in the S.E. the angus from the "Top of the line" sires have little if any marbling advantage over other breeds.
 

PPRM

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,951
Reaction score
0
Location
NE Oregon
The technology is relatively new as far as measuring REA, IMF and backfat through ultrasound and putting out EPD's on it on a WIDE SPREAD BASIS. I am seeing more of my choice 2's hit CAB target. Several things make me believe that hitting YG 1 and 2 with high choice and some Prime can happen.

For one thing, there are some bulss with very positive rib-eye EPD's and High IMF EPD's. I also think of some of the easiest marbling breeds out there, Wagyu and Jersey, yes Jersey. If allowed mauure when fed, you'll see marbling occur with these without a ton of backfat. I just don't think we have really selected for high YG cattle that marble well for long.

I think my cros breeding combination gives me a jump on this. The Simmental seems to help with YG, while the Angus helps with marbling. I have gotten this before I started consciously selecting for it.

The select/choice arguement has guys in both camps, guys that I respect. I think one advantage we have is consumers with a variet of tastes. This allows us to produce a variet of cattle in a variety of environments. The thing is to find grids that work for your program, then work for your grid.

SH, it is good to hear from you my freind. Been thinkin you were out giving coyotes heck. One qoute from you in this is "never be able to tell the difference between a select piece of meat and choice if it was aged and prepared properly". Me thinks that most meat isn't prepared and aged properly, but Safeway Select program and others is an example of moving towards it. Proper aging and preparation, hey there's another thread,
 

Latest posts

Top