Local auction action

[Big Swede]

If I had to pull a calf out of a mature cow I would get rid of the cow and the bull if I knew which one was the sire. I don't mind helping 5% or less of my heifers but helping cows is a no no in my book. The best tool I own in the calving barn is a rusty calf puller. :wink:

 

[Big Muddy rancher]

the next person that says the words, "frame score" has to sit in the corner and take a time-out. :wink: just go look at your cows, if you like them big and fat..good. if you like them small and skinny......good. if yours are somewhere in the middle...good. frame score this, frame score that...

sorry for the rant......that phrase is about as over used as "no creep"

What about big and skinny and small and fat? :wink:











Frame Score, Frame score, frame score :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[Grassfarmer]

Hope you're already sitting in the corner RSL :wink:

My last comment on the post shall be this - some of you may be tired of comments made against larger cattle. I personally make these comments because I'm tired of the BS that come from the keepers of what I consider large cattle. To continually pretend that you can have it all - turn a maternal breed into a terminal one, up growth rates and mature weights by 3-500lbs and still claim your cows eat the same and have the same calf birthweights as the smaller ones did 20 years ago is just dishonest in my opinion.
It seems it's OK for the keepers of large cattle to pour scorn on the keepers of small cattle because their cattle "can't get her done" but when we try to point out that based on the resources used our cattle are getting it done - possibly more efficiently, the large cattle keepers want to pick up the game and go home crying it's unfair to criticize their type of cow.

Some like large, some like small, some like in between - each to their own - ranching is an individualistic career. I do cherish the right of an individual to comment on matters pertaining to the beef industry - I though that was what this site was for :?

 

[katrina]

Okay..... Here is my two cents on this issue...... How many of you small cattle owners feed your cattle out??? Isn't this what's all about... Pasture to plate??? We do... And let me just say that you have to have at least a 600 pound carcass to grade... Isn't that what we want??? What we have found is that most of the fat cattle aren't what we call fat... Just bigger cattle with some fat... The sloppy fat wasted fat, fats are a thing of the past And in order to achieve this you must have a bigger famed critter.... Now feed efficiancy is a whole other creature. It's all about hanging weight and grading...... Now everyone must do what it takes to fill the nitch they have for them... I really appreciate everyones impute even if you don't agree with me

 

[RSL]

Hope you're already sitting in the corner RSL :wink:

My last comment on the post shall be this - some of you may be tired of comments made against larger cattle. I personally make these comments because I'm tired of the BS that come from the keepers of what I consider large cattle. To continually pretend that you can have it all - turn a maternal breed into a terminal one, up growth rates and mature weights by 3-500lbs and still claim your cows eat the same and have the same calf birthweights as the smaller ones did 20 years ago is just dishonest in my opinion.
It seems it's OK for the keepers of large cattle to pour scorn on the keepers of small cattle because their cattle "can't get her done" but when we try to point out that based on the resources used our cattle are getting it done - possibly more efficiently, the large cattle keepers want to pick up the game and go home crying it's unfair to criticize their type of cow.

Some like large, some like small, some like in between - each to their own - ranching is an individualistic career. I do cherish the right of an individual to comment on matters pertaining to the beef industry - I though that was what this site was for :?

I've done my time. I doubt most of us measure to be sure.
Basically if you have 100 BIG cows and feed 300 bales a year, then you downsize your cows, I bet most would have 100 smaller fatter cows and still feed 300 bales.
If you still had BIG cows and through testing improved feed efficiency 15% I bet most would still have 100 cows (not 115) and feed 300 bales.
For us I like smaller cows and framier bulls to produce the steers and heifers I don't want to keep. If I lived where it rained a bit more I would probably have a little bigger cows. Calves with a bit more SSSTTTTREEETTTCCCHHH and size sell better at auction. There is hot demand for big calves in November. This can be a pretty lucrative market with earlier calving and slightly bigger cows.
I think frame size is less important to the beef industry than:
fertility
calving ease
growth rate and efficiency
carcass size, yield and quality
herd and human health

Basically as long as the cowboy and the end customer is happy, the challenges are all just problems in the middle to sort out (another thread entirely).

 

[Silver]

I've done my time. I doubt most of us measure to be sure.
Basically if you have 100 BIG cows and feed 300 bales a year, then you downsize your cows, I bet most would have 100 smaller fatter cows and still feed 300 bales.
If you still had BIG cows and through testing improved feed efficiency 15% I bet most would still have 100 cows (not 115) and feed 300 bales.

That is been my working theory as well RSL. As I have said before, we have always figured roughly the same amount of hay to winter a cow when we had the little feather necks of the '50's or the monsters of the '80's or the more moderate size we have now. Cows that aren't easy keepers are culled out. If my cows were 300 lbs smaller I would not have any more of them.
I have noticed many folks get awful caught up in what cows eat the most then they go out and through feeding practices waste 10-15% more than they need to. Kinda reminds me of the hunters in the mountains that will spend $6000 on a rifle that's 2 lbs lighter than mine because "2 lbs is a lot of weight to pack up a mountain if you don't need to". I always tell them they could have just had a poop before they left. Point being there is more than one way to be achieve efficiency, and feed practices are a good place to start. What Grassfarmer is doing by storing grass and grazing into the winter is very forward thinking and goes further towards improving ranch efficiency than anything I've seen in a while.

 

[Justin]

the next person that says the words, "frame score" has to sit in the corner and take a time-out. :wink: just go look at your cows, if you like them big and fat..good. if you like them small and skinny......good. if yours are somewhere in the middle...good. frame score this, frame score that...

sorry for the rant......that phrase is about as over used as "no creep"

What about big and skinny and small and fat? :wink:













Frame Score, Frame score, frame score :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

smart azz :lol: :wink:

 

[leanin' H]

I've done my time. I doubt most of us measure to be sure.
Basically if you have 100 BIG cows and feed 300 bales a year, then you downsize your cows, I bet most would have 100 smaller fatter cows and still feed 300 bales.
If you still had BIG cows and through testing improved feed efficiency 15% I bet most would still have 100 cows (not 115) and feed 300 bales.

That is been my working theory as well RSL. As I have said before, we have always figured roughly the same amount of hay to winter a cow when we had the little feather necks of the '50's or the monsters of the '80's or the more moderate size we have now. Cows that aren't easy keepers are culled out. If my cows were 300 lbs smaller I would not have any more of them.
I have noticed many folks get awful caught up in what cows eat the most then they go out and through feeding practices waste 10-15% more than they need to. Kinda reminds me of the hunters in the mountains that will spend $6000 on a rifle that's 2 lbs lighter than mine because "2 lbs is a lot of weight to pack up a mountain if you don't need to". I always tell them they could have just had a poop before they left. Point being there is more than one way to be achieve efficiency, and feed practices are a good place to start. What Grassfarmer is doing by storing grass and grazing into the winter is very forward thinking and goes further towards improving ranch efficiency than anything I've seen in a while.

HOLY CRAP!!!!! I am in the process of beating my chest with a kitchen chair trying to dislodge the french toast I just inhaled accidentally while laughing! :lol: :lol: If I die Silver, I hope you'll speak at my funeral! That was priceless!!!!!!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Justin, F-R-A-M-E S-C-O-R-E 8)
Do what work on your outfit and dont worry about the rest right!

 

[Justin]

I've done my time. I doubt most of us measure to be sure.
Basically if you have 100 BIG cows and feed 300 bales a year, then you downsize your cows, I bet most would have 100 smaller fatter cows and still feed 300 bales.
If you still had BIG cows and through testing improved feed efficiency 15% I bet most would still have 100 cows (not 115) and feed 300 bales.

That is been my working theory as well RSL. As I have said before, we have always figured roughly the same amount of hay to winter a cow when we had the little feather necks of the '50's or the monsters of the '80's or the more moderate size we have now. Cows that aren't easy keepers are culled out. If my cows were 300 lbs smaller I would not have any more of them.
I have noticed many folks get awful caught up in what cows eat the most then they go out and through feeding practices waste 10-15% more than they need to. Kinda reminds me of the hunters in the mountains that will spend $6000 on a rifle that's 2 lbs lighter than mine because "2 lbs is a lot of weight to pack up a mountain if you don't need to". I always tell them they could have just had a poop before they left. Point being there is more than one way to be achieve efficiency, and feed practices are a good place to start. What Grassfarmer is doing by storing grass and grazing into the winter is very forward thinking and goes further towards improving ranch efficiency than anything I've seen in a while.

HOLY CRAP!!!!! I am in the process of beating my chest with a kitchen chair trying to dislodge the french toast I just inhaled accidentally while laughing! :lol: :lol: If I die Silver, I hope you'll speak at my funeral! That was priceless!!!!!!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Justin, F-R-A-M-E S-C-O-R-E 8)
Do what work on your outfit and dont worry about the rest right!

trust me, i'm not worried

 

[katrina]

I've done my time. I doubt most of us measure to be sure.
Basically if you have 100 BIG cows and feed 300 bales a year, then you downsize your cows, I bet most would have 100 smaller fatter cows and still feed 300 bales.
If you still had BIG cows and through testing improved feed efficiency 15% I bet most would still have 100 cows (not 115) and feed 300 bales.

That is been my working theory as well RSL. As I have said before, we have always figured roughly the same amount of hay to winter a cow when we had the little feather necks of the '50's or the monsters of the '80's or the more moderate size we have now. Cows that aren't easy keepers are culled out. If my cows were 300 lbs smaller I would not have any more of them.
I have noticed many folks get awful caught up in what cows eat the most then they go out and through feeding practices waste 10-15% more than they need to. Kinda reminds me of the hunters in the mountains that will spend $6000 on a rifle that's 2 lbs lighter than mine because "2 lbs is a lot of weight to pack up a mountain if you don't need to". I always tell them they could have just had a poop before they left. Point being there is more than one way to be achieve efficiency, and feed practices are a good place to start. What Grassfarmer is doing by storing grass and grazing into the winter is very forward thinking and goes further towards improving ranch efficiency than anything I've seen in a while.

Whoa doggies!!!!!! A two pound poop :!: :twisted:

 

[gcreekrch]

I've done my time. I doubt most of us measure to be sure.
Basically if you have 100 BIG cows and feed 300 bales a year, then you downsize your cows, I bet most would have 100 smaller fatter cows and still feed 300 bales.
If you still had BIG cows and through testing improved feed efficiency 15% I bet most would still have 100 cows (not 115) and feed 300 bales.

That is been my working theory as well RSL. As I have said before, we have always figured roughly the same amount of hay to winter a cow when we had the little feather necks of the '50's or the monsters of the '80's or the more moderate size we have now. Cows that aren't easy keepers are culled out. If my cows were 300 lbs smaller I would not have any more of them.
I have noticed many folks get awful caught up in what cows eat the most then they go out and through feeding practices waste 10-15% more than they need to. Kinda reminds me of the hunters in the mountains that will spend $6000 on a rifle that's 2 lbs lighter than mine because "2 lbs is a lot of weight to pack up a mountain if you don't need to". I always tell them they could have just had a poop before they left. Point being there is more than one way to be achieve efficiency, and feed practices are a good place to start. What Grassfarmer is doing by storing grass and grazing into the winter is very forward thinking and goes further towards improving ranch efficiency than anything I've seen in a while.

Whoa doggies!!!!!! A two pound poop :!: :twisted:

It has been said that things get larger the further north you get. :wink:

 

[burnt]

I've done my time. I doubt most of us measure to be sure.
Basically if you have 100 BIG cows and feed 300 bales a year, then you downsize your cows, I bet most would have 100 smaller fatter cows and still feed 300 bales.
If you still had BIG cows and through testing improved feed efficiency 15% I bet most would still have 100 cows (not 115) and feed 300 bales.

That is been my working theory as well RSL. As I have said before, we have always figured roughly the same amount of hay to winter a cow when we had the little feather necks of the '50's or the monsters of the '80's or the more moderate size we have now. Cows that aren't easy keepers are culled out. If my cows were 300 lbs smaller I would not have any more of them.
I have noticed many folks get awful caught up in what cows eat the most then they go out and through feeding practices waste 10-15% more than they need to. Kinda reminds me of the hunters in the mountains that will spend $6000 on a rifle that's 2 lbs lighter than mine because "2 lbs is a lot of weight to pack up a mountain if you don't need to". I always tell them they could have just had a poop before they left. Point being there is more than one way to be achieve efficiency, and feed practices are a good place to start. What Grassfarmer is doing by storing grass and grazing into the winter is very forward thinking and goes further towards improving ranch efficiency than anything I've seen in a while.

Whoa doggies!!!!!! A two pound poop :!: :twisted:

And we're not even talking Texas!! :shock: