$EN in feedlots and cow/calf operations

[Kscattle]

I don't usually consider $EN in sires when choosing bulls to use and I just wonder, how many people ever truly notice a difference in positive or negative epd's on this. I feed my cows hay and a little bit of grain to keep them coming in to the lot to check them. I cannot say that I see a noticable difference how much the cows eat to keep condition. Is this epd mostly used in a feedlot setting, or am I missing something here? Some epd's are very noticable like WW,CE,YW but I can't see $B,$EN effecting my operation on a day to day basis.
Can someone explain what I'm missing? I'm probably just over thinking the whole concept.

 

[bse]

Ill try and answer on what I think and see. En is the difference in energy requirements and the dollars to maintain that cow so a cow with a negative -10EN will cost you 10 dollars more per year to keep versus one at zero. My cows that are negative EN produce the heavier calves and most of the time the ones I keep. That's how I see it anyway and it may play a bigger part if your trying to manage just the right amount of cattle to pasture. I see that EPD but it doesn't bother me either way on a cow or any bull I want to use it wouldn't be a deciding factor.

 

[Kscattle]

So your saying that negative $EN is a good thing. That makes sense, usually it goes hand in hand with milk epd's an frame. I guess I was assuming that having neg $EN was a bad thing. I've seen some calves with positive $EN and they looked short, squatty, and too fat, the owner said they were on minimal grain. I definetly won't use it as a deciding factor either. Thanks

 

[Chuckie]

I have kept my $EN's on the very low side of $EN + to the lowest of -11.00. All of my cows are large framed so they can be taller.
After much discussion here on the forum, I decided to take the opposite stand on the $EN's, and bought a $EN-22.00 bull. But his numbers and EPD values are much higher than what I have had before. I am hoping that it will pay off, and if it doesn't, then I will replace him.

 

[Kscattle]

I always try to keep my numbers in a balance, so to speak, but the $EN always seemed to be on the neg side of all the bulls I liked. It makes sense that the further neg the bull is the bigger calf will be raised in the future generations, thus more feed is needed to maintain condition, but too far neg isn't a good thing either.

 

[cross_7]

I didn't think $en had anything to do with the calf, but for replacement heifers
I thought there was a correlation between $en and milking ability
Higher $en and higher milk and vice versa
More milk makes heavier calves but higher maintenance cows
EDIT

selecting for $EN would tend to
identify animals with low milk and
smaller mature size,

 

[u4411clb]

The easiest way to recognize $EN in a cow calf operation is to for the next year completely take away the feed bucket and protein bucket from the cows. And at the end of the year take all the cows that had a calf and raised one. Then take a body condition score as well as pregnancy test those cows. The ones that are pregnant and have the highest body condition score are the ones with positive $EN. The open ones or the ones that have the lower body condition score are the ones with -$EN. .

 

[bse]

The ones that are pregnant and have the highest body condition score are the ones with positive $EN. The open ones or the ones that have the lower body condition score are the ones with -$EN.
Im sure not buying that statement at least not for my cows they all have the exact same things a good mineral grass or hay no extra protein or feed you cant walk through them or preg check them and tell any difference in positive or negative EN exept at weaning and the heavier better calves are out of my -EN cows. They may eat the extra 10 dollars worth of grass that number predicts( I don't know that either way) but if my calves are 40 lbs heavier which is the better cow? If mine are positive or negative they still have to do there job or they get a trip.

 

[u4411clb]

You have a very special herd. The larger framed heavy milking cows keep their flesh better when raising calves with no supplementation. If you are able to keep them in good flesh with only grass and mineral then perhaps you have found the $EN that works for you. But in general terms more moderate milking and moderate size cows flesh easier and breed back faster and don't eat as much. If you are saying this is not true at your place then who am I to argue.

 

[Kscattle]

I'll be he first to admit that I have big cows that keep condition and raise big calves every year and I have smaller frame cows that raise a little smaller calf. The question is, how do I replicate these big, easy fleshing cows? Simple as that, + or - $EN

 

[Stocker Steve]

If you are able to keep them in good flesh with only grass and mineral then perhaps you have found the $EN that works for you. But in general terms more moderate milking and moderate size cows flesh easier and breed back faster and don't eat as much..

Is your high priority big carcases in the feed lot, or profitable replacements in the herd? Seems like the terminal sire should provide over 50% of the growth for a feedlot calf. Think Limi or Simi or Char.
Big muscular heifers look better to me, but I don't think they are the most profitable replacements, on average. So I only use + energy bulls when I want angus X REPLACEMENTS which eliminates most of the AI book. OCC bulls are one of the EN exceptions, where you can see EN from + 20 to +30.
These + EN heifers tend to be shorter and rounder. I don't have enough history to know if they are better breeders, but they look like it. I wish all the breeds had a stay-ability index.

 

[u4411clb]

I am not a big muscular heifer buyer. I can go to a farm and look at replacement heifers and the owner can tell me about the 3-4 heifers he has that weaned off at 700 lbs and they looked shocked when I tell them I rather have the ones that weaned of in the middle of the pack around 600 lbs or so. They have even told me they were not keeping the 700lbers for them selves and I tell them I rather look at the mom and see which one is in good flesh and the best udder and take that cows calf. I am not big into allot of milk from a cow. I rather have one that has great teets and produces just enough milk. I rather let the bull do the work as far as the growth for calves that I am sending to the salebarn, I use angus but I use angus with high ww and yw epds. The bulls I use for replacements are more positive $EN with medium milk and medium growth but with good feet and disposition and bags. But I am straight commercial so curve bending doesn't do anything for me. 3,4,5 cows that have a giant calf do me no good. I need 40 steers and 30 heifers that all look alike and perform alike. I am just giving away pounds if a handful is way above the average of the others. So unless the guy selling me replacements can guarantee that those 3-5 cows will have heifers every year and I can get them he can keep his high growth 700lb weaning weights and let me get the middle of the road ones and let that high dollar -$EN bull or maybe in the future continental bull do its job. But that is just me.