Tap
Well-known member
Jason, while I admire your thinking most times, sometimes we just have to disagree. :wink: I found an article that supports my bias.
I brought this over to a new topic, so we don't have to beat a dead horse in the other one. Since Leachman is in the story, let's not argue their merits here either. Okay Everyone? :roll:
From Drovers
Bigger, not better
By John Maday (Friday, September 15, 2006)
On the surface, it looks like an obvious choice. Select genetics for heavier weaning weights and heavier yearling weights. More weight, after all, means higher prices at sale time. There is, however, a problem with that strategy in that it tends to produce bigger, heavier cows. ¶ The average slaughter weight for fed steers has increased steadily in recent years and now averages around 1,300 pounds. Many steers go to slaughter weighing more than 1,400 pounds. There are several causes behind the trend, but one certainly is genetic selection for growth. So what happens when the heifer mates of those 1,400-pound steers go back into breeding herds? It's simple, says Lee Leachman, they grow into 1,400-pound cows.
Leachman is manager of Leachman of Colorado, a bull-test and seedstock-marketing company based in Wellington, Colo. He says that even in the Angus breed, two-thirds of the bulls will produce cows that weigh over 1,400 pounds. Cows are getting bigger, and the trend will continue because so many heifers going into breeding herds today have more growth potential than their dams.
The cost of bigger cows
"It's the old story of people looking at output but not at production costs," Leachman says. "They want to wean heavy calves that will gain in the feedlot. They select bulls for growth rate, but they don't know how big those bulls' daughters will get."
Leachman says the company has extensively studied the relationships between cow size, production costs and profitability. Data collected from cooperating seedstock herds includes 20,000 observations on cow mature weights and 120,000 frame scores along with data on reproduction and economics.
Based on these observations, Leachman says a smaller cow typically weans a higher percentage of her body weight, usually over 50 percent. This translates simply to more total weight of calves weaned from the same resource base. Smaller cows also rebreed at a higher rate because of lower nutritional requirements, especially in a harsh environment.
Most infertility problems, he says, occur with older cows and with 2- and 3-year-olds. Heifers' nutritional requirements are highest between weaning and maturity, which is one reason for lower fertility in younger animals. Young cows with lower growth rates and lighter mature weights are less likely to suffer from nutritional deficiencies.
So, Leachman says, look at the difference in the cost of maintaining a 1,400-pound cow versus one that weighs 1,150 pounds. The weight difference amounts to 20 percent, which translates to about a $36 increase in annual feed costs for the heavier cow. The 20 percent difference also means you could run 116 small cows or 100 of the heavy cows on the same land and feed.
But feed costs are just the beginning. The Leachman data show smaller cows will have better body condition, conception rates and percentage of weaned calves per cow exposed. For this example, we assume that 93 percent of the 116 smaller cows wean a calf, compared with 88 percent of the 100 heavier cows.
Calves from the smaller cows will wean at a higher percentage of cow weight, but actual weaning weights are lighter compared with those from the heavier cows. In this example, the lighter cows wean 525-pound calves, while the heavier cows wean calves weighing 600 pounds. The lighter calves might not win bragging rights at the coffee shop, but in this example, they earn more profit (see table).
Wayne Fahsholtz is president and CEO of Padlock Ranch, one of the country's largest cow-calf operations headquartered in Ranchester, Wyo. He says smaller cows should help the operation improve its profitability by reducing dependency on harvested forage. "We want to graze out as much as possible and need cows that convert the forage we have as efficiently as possible."
Fahsholtz says he works under assumptions that, on average, a larger cow will require more feed to maintain body condition, and cows with better body condition provide better reproductive efficiency. He adds that there probably are exceptions, such as some large cows that convert feed efficiently or thin cows that breed back with no problem.
The Padlock operation spreads across diverse and rugged country in Wyoming and Montana, and drought is a common challenge. In mid-August, Fahsholtz toured one 70,000-acre portion of the ranch, supporting 2,400 cows, where he didn't see a single blade of green grass. But the cows, he says, were maintaining reasonably good condition on the dry forage. "We also want cows that will produce feeder calves that will finish at 1,200 to 1,300 pounds and will work for the market," he says. He believes cows in the 1,150- to 1,200-pound range are most likely to achieve these goals. It is easy, he adds, to end up with cows larger than that without careful bull selection. "We try to select sires whose daughters will hit that target," he says, adding that the operation uses composite bulls to maintain hybrid vigor in the cow herd.
Padlock Ranch has begun using electronic identification tags to help collect individual information. "We are now recording body-condition score for each cow at preg-check time, Fahsholtz says, explaining that the data will help correlate body condition with reproduction and identify genetic lines that maintain body condition through the breeding season.
Traits that drive cow size
So how can a rancher make breeding decisions that will keep cow mature weights in check while also producing acceptable, profitable calves? Based on company data, Leachman provides these examples of how sire Expected Progeny Differences relate to cow size.
Birth weight: A plus-1-pound EPD change in birth weight will increase cow mature size by 17 pounds.
Yearling weight: A plus-10-pound EPD change in yearling weight increases cow size by 19 pounds.
Frame score: A plus-1 increase in frame score only increases mature weight by 3 pounds.
Ribeye area: Each .20-inch increase in REA actually decreases mature cow size by 9 pounds. Selecting for higher REA, Leachman says, changes the growth curve, resulting in cows that mature earlier and smaller.
Leachman takes the analysis further, looking at how these traits relate to profit at weaning.
Birth weight: A plus-1-pound EPD decreases profit at weaning by $15.
Weaning weight: A 10-pound increase increases profit at weaning by $50.
Yearling weight: A 10-pound increase decreases profit at weaning by $55.
Frame: An increase of one frame score decreases profit at weaning by $7.
Backfat: A plus-1 change adds $22 to profit
at weaning.
IMF: Intramuscular fat does not seem to affect profit at weaning either positively or negatively.
Ribeye area: A plus-1 EPD change increases profit at weaning by $13, primarily due to the trait's relationship with smaller cow size.
Leachman says producers should look for bulls that will produce cows in the range of 1,150 to 1,350 pounds. Generally, bulls with EPDs for plus-75 yearling weight and frame score of 5.7 will produce cows weighing about 1,250 pounds. Yearling-weight EPDs of 85 or higher and frame scores greater than 6.25 begin to push the limits for reasonable cow size in most environments. "Extremes in any direction," he says, "do not make a profit."
Choose a strategy
The ideal breeding strategy for a particular ranch depends on the ranch environment and also on marketing plans, Leachman says.
Producers using a terminal-cross program, where all their calves go the feedyard, do not need to worry about bull selection affecting mature size. Most producers, though, retain heifer calves for addition into the breeding herd. In these cases, selecting for growth traits such as heavy yearling weight and large frame scores produces heifers that grow into large, high-maintenance cows.
If a producer plans to own calves through processing and sell them on a value-based grid, the factors determining profit differ from those sold at weaning. With feedyard performance and carcass characteristics entering the equation, yearling weight becomes more important, backfat becomes a liability and intramuscular fat improves profitability. Ribeye area again improves profit due to higher carcass value along with the trait's correlation with cow size.
Dallas Horton, owner of Horton Cattle Co. and Leachman of Colorado, is involved in the seedstock, cow-calf and feeding sectors of the industry. He says cow-calf producers need to prioritize and consider what works on the ranch. Desirable maternal traits, he points out, tend to be antagonistic with terminal traits such as heavy yearling weights, heavy finished weights and low yield grades. The ideal cow for a rancher who keeps heifers for breeding, he says, is of modest size, highly fertile, breeds back and is easy fleshing.
Producers who retain ownership through feeding, he believes, should use a terminal-cross strategy with bulls selected for growth.
On his own ranch in central Wyoming, Horton uses several targeted approaches in breeding the cow herd. For the younger cows, he selects bulls with strong maternal traits that will produce daughters with mature weights around 1,200 pounds. Their steer calves will finish around that same weight and grade well, although they might not be the highest-yielding steers in the feedlot.
Cows over 4 years old go into a terminal-cross program using Charolais bulls selected for heavy weaning, yearling and carcass weights, but modest birth weights and good marbling. "I wouldn't think of keeping females from those matings," he says. "They are too big and too high-maintenance."
For the past few years, Leachman notes, profits have been good in most cow-calf operations. But the cycle will shift toward lower prices. When the market reaches its cycle lows, low-cost producers are the only ones selling calves at a profit.
I brought this over to a new topic, so we don't have to beat a dead horse in the other one. Since Leachman is in the story, let's not argue their merits here either. Okay Everyone? :roll:
From Drovers
Bigger, not better
By John Maday (Friday, September 15, 2006)
On the surface, it looks like an obvious choice. Select genetics for heavier weaning weights and heavier yearling weights. More weight, after all, means higher prices at sale time. There is, however, a problem with that strategy in that it tends to produce bigger, heavier cows. ¶ The average slaughter weight for fed steers has increased steadily in recent years and now averages around 1,300 pounds. Many steers go to slaughter weighing more than 1,400 pounds. There are several causes behind the trend, but one certainly is genetic selection for growth. So what happens when the heifer mates of those 1,400-pound steers go back into breeding herds? It's simple, says Lee Leachman, they grow into 1,400-pound cows.
Leachman is manager of Leachman of Colorado, a bull-test and seedstock-marketing company based in Wellington, Colo. He says that even in the Angus breed, two-thirds of the bulls will produce cows that weigh over 1,400 pounds. Cows are getting bigger, and the trend will continue because so many heifers going into breeding herds today have more growth potential than their dams.
The cost of bigger cows
"It's the old story of people looking at output but not at production costs," Leachman says. "They want to wean heavy calves that will gain in the feedlot. They select bulls for growth rate, but they don't know how big those bulls' daughters will get."
Leachman says the company has extensively studied the relationships between cow size, production costs and profitability. Data collected from cooperating seedstock herds includes 20,000 observations on cow mature weights and 120,000 frame scores along with data on reproduction and economics.
Based on these observations, Leachman says a smaller cow typically weans a higher percentage of her body weight, usually over 50 percent. This translates simply to more total weight of calves weaned from the same resource base. Smaller cows also rebreed at a higher rate because of lower nutritional requirements, especially in a harsh environment.
Most infertility problems, he says, occur with older cows and with 2- and 3-year-olds. Heifers' nutritional requirements are highest between weaning and maturity, which is one reason for lower fertility in younger animals. Young cows with lower growth rates and lighter mature weights are less likely to suffer from nutritional deficiencies.
So, Leachman says, look at the difference in the cost of maintaining a 1,400-pound cow versus one that weighs 1,150 pounds. The weight difference amounts to 20 percent, which translates to about a $36 increase in annual feed costs for the heavier cow. The 20 percent difference also means you could run 116 small cows or 100 of the heavy cows on the same land and feed.
But feed costs are just the beginning. The Leachman data show smaller cows will have better body condition, conception rates and percentage of weaned calves per cow exposed. For this example, we assume that 93 percent of the 116 smaller cows wean a calf, compared with 88 percent of the 100 heavier cows.
Calves from the smaller cows will wean at a higher percentage of cow weight, but actual weaning weights are lighter compared with those from the heavier cows. In this example, the lighter cows wean 525-pound calves, while the heavier cows wean calves weighing 600 pounds. The lighter calves might not win bragging rights at the coffee shop, but in this example, they earn more profit (see table).
Wayne Fahsholtz is president and CEO of Padlock Ranch, one of the country's largest cow-calf operations headquartered in Ranchester, Wyo. He says smaller cows should help the operation improve its profitability by reducing dependency on harvested forage. "We want to graze out as much as possible and need cows that convert the forage we have as efficiently as possible."
Fahsholtz says he works under assumptions that, on average, a larger cow will require more feed to maintain body condition, and cows with better body condition provide better reproductive efficiency. He adds that there probably are exceptions, such as some large cows that convert feed efficiently or thin cows that breed back with no problem.
The Padlock operation spreads across diverse and rugged country in Wyoming and Montana, and drought is a common challenge. In mid-August, Fahsholtz toured one 70,000-acre portion of the ranch, supporting 2,400 cows, where he didn't see a single blade of green grass. But the cows, he says, were maintaining reasonably good condition on the dry forage. "We also want cows that will produce feeder calves that will finish at 1,200 to 1,300 pounds and will work for the market," he says. He believes cows in the 1,150- to 1,200-pound range are most likely to achieve these goals. It is easy, he adds, to end up with cows larger than that without careful bull selection. "We try to select sires whose daughters will hit that target," he says, adding that the operation uses composite bulls to maintain hybrid vigor in the cow herd.
Padlock Ranch has begun using electronic identification tags to help collect individual information. "We are now recording body-condition score for each cow at preg-check time, Fahsholtz says, explaining that the data will help correlate body condition with reproduction and identify genetic lines that maintain body condition through the breeding season.
Traits that drive cow size
So how can a rancher make breeding decisions that will keep cow mature weights in check while also producing acceptable, profitable calves? Based on company data, Leachman provides these examples of how sire Expected Progeny Differences relate to cow size.
Birth weight: A plus-1-pound EPD change in birth weight will increase cow mature size by 17 pounds.
Yearling weight: A plus-10-pound EPD change in yearling weight increases cow size by 19 pounds.
Frame score: A plus-1 increase in frame score only increases mature weight by 3 pounds.
Ribeye area: Each .20-inch increase in REA actually decreases mature cow size by 9 pounds. Selecting for higher REA, Leachman says, changes the growth curve, resulting in cows that mature earlier and smaller.
Leachman takes the analysis further, looking at how these traits relate to profit at weaning.
Birth weight: A plus-1-pound EPD decreases profit at weaning by $15.
Weaning weight: A 10-pound increase increases profit at weaning by $50.
Yearling weight: A 10-pound increase decreases profit at weaning by $55.
Frame: An increase of one frame score decreases profit at weaning by $7.
Backfat: A plus-1 change adds $22 to profit
at weaning.
IMF: Intramuscular fat does not seem to affect profit at weaning either positively or negatively.
Ribeye area: A plus-1 EPD change increases profit at weaning by $13, primarily due to the trait's relationship with smaller cow size.
Leachman says producers should look for bulls that will produce cows in the range of 1,150 to 1,350 pounds. Generally, bulls with EPDs for plus-75 yearling weight and frame score of 5.7 will produce cows weighing about 1,250 pounds. Yearling-weight EPDs of 85 or higher and frame scores greater than 6.25 begin to push the limits for reasonable cow size in most environments. "Extremes in any direction," he says, "do not make a profit."
Choose a strategy
The ideal breeding strategy for a particular ranch depends on the ranch environment and also on marketing plans, Leachman says.
Producers using a terminal-cross program, where all their calves go the feedyard, do not need to worry about bull selection affecting mature size. Most producers, though, retain heifer calves for addition into the breeding herd. In these cases, selecting for growth traits such as heavy yearling weight and large frame scores produces heifers that grow into large, high-maintenance cows.
If a producer plans to own calves through processing and sell them on a value-based grid, the factors determining profit differ from those sold at weaning. With feedyard performance and carcass characteristics entering the equation, yearling weight becomes more important, backfat becomes a liability and intramuscular fat improves profitability. Ribeye area again improves profit due to higher carcass value along with the trait's correlation with cow size.
Dallas Horton, owner of Horton Cattle Co. and Leachman of Colorado, is involved in the seedstock, cow-calf and feeding sectors of the industry. He says cow-calf producers need to prioritize and consider what works on the ranch. Desirable maternal traits, he points out, tend to be antagonistic with terminal traits such as heavy yearling weights, heavy finished weights and low yield grades. The ideal cow for a rancher who keeps heifers for breeding, he says, is of modest size, highly fertile, breeds back and is easy fleshing.
Producers who retain ownership through feeding, he believes, should use a terminal-cross strategy with bulls selected for growth.
On his own ranch in central Wyoming, Horton uses several targeted approaches in breeding the cow herd. For the younger cows, he selects bulls with strong maternal traits that will produce daughters with mature weights around 1,200 pounds. Their steer calves will finish around that same weight and grade well, although they might not be the highest-yielding steers in the feedlot.
Cows over 4 years old go into a terminal-cross program using Charolais bulls selected for heavy weaning, yearling and carcass weights, but modest birth weights and good marbling. "I wouldn't think of keeping females from those matings," he says. "They are too big and too high-maintenance."
For the past few years, Leachman notes, profits have been good in most cow-calf operations. But the cycle will shift toward lower prices. When the market reaches its cycle lows, low-cost producers are the only ones selling calves at a profit.
