Another Thing about Black Angus

Help Support CattleToday:

mnmtranching

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 29, 2006
Messages
5,061
Reaction score
1
Location
MN
Cattle buyers, Feedlot owners, packers and mnmt all agree :D

More then enough round :nod:
 

HerefordSire

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
5,212
Reaction score
0
Location
Arkansas
mnmtranching":2qsm1pc3 said:
Cattle buyers, Feedlot owners, packers and mnmt all agree :D

More then enough round :nod:

First off, Happy Birthday oldtimer.

Secondly, what is the deal with funnel butts? Is this an Angus issue? Is it a jealously issue? Do Herefords have funnel butts?

Thirdly, do cattle buyers, feedlot owners, packers, and mnmt care about funnel butts?
 

alacattleman

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 22, 2006
Messages
4,141
Reaction score
0
Location
heart of dixie
HerefordSire":3ruf7k7v said:
mnmtranching":3ruf7k7v said:
Cattle buyers, Feedlot owners, packers and mnmt all agree :D

More then enough round :nod:

First off, Happy Birthday oldtimer.

Secondly, what is the deal with funnel butts? Is this an Angus issue? Is it a jealously issue? Do Herefords have funnel butts?

Thirdly, do cattle buyers, feedlot owners, packers, and mnmt care about funnel butts?[/i]
if they didnt then why should we... be like buying part of a car
 

RD-Sam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 28, 2008
Messages
1,452
Reaction score
0
I think I read something the other day about them not caring as much about the rear quarter, in fact smaller portions were prefered. Maybe the big time breeders are aware of this and that has led to the funnel butts.
 

alacattleman

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 22, 2006
Messages
4,141
Reaction score
0
Location
heart of dixie
RD-Sam":25g1a0ux said:
I think I read something the other day about them not caring as much about the rear quarter, in fact smaller portions were prefered. Maybe the big time breeders are aware of this and that has led to the funnel butts.
the big time breeders ive seen, are putting rear ends back on em... granted it aint the most important,, but with a good muscled rear you ""usually"" get a overall good package
 

Willow Springs

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 19, 2008
Messages
212
Reaction score
1
Location
North of Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
So if they don't want heavy muscle (large rounds) and muscle in the rump equals larger or heavier muscle thoughout the carcass and they want smaller portions why do we breed for big high growth cattle?
Wouldn't a small framed, heavy muscled animal be the most profitable?
 

RD-Sam

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 28, 2008
Messages
1,452
Reaction score
0
Correct size steaks and roasts are what they are asking for, they have gotten too large in recent years.
 

Willow Springs

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 19, 2008
Messages
212
Reaction score
1
Location
North of Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Correct size steaks and roasts are what they are asking for, they have gotten too large in recent years.

So why the resistence to downsizing mature cow size in the industry? We either need to decrease size of the cattle or keep breeding the type we are with less muscle. Like I said before; smaller, well muscled cattle would fit what the end user wants better than what we are producing now. We keep selecting on performance and REA EPD's which is the opposite of what the end users ask for.

The problem is that we still get paid by the pound, so cow/calf producers keep trying to produce more pounds. Somehow there is a disconnect. Would the total market for beef be better if we could sell more smaller cuts? The pricepoint would certainly be lower which would attract some customers; eating quality would also be better because of more consistent steak thickness (thicker than current).

Cattle buyers, Feedlot owners, packers and mnmt all agree

More then enough round

So which is worth more as beef; the one with more round or less round all other things being equal. The other general rule is that the one with more round will also have more meat in the higher value areas as well as was mentioned earlier in the thread.
 

mwj

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 10, 2004
Messages
1,196
Reaction score
18
Location
central Ill.
So you are saying that big front quarters are a plus :shock: That lean round should have more meat yield than a chuck.
 
OP
mnmtranching

mnmtranching

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 29, 2006
Messages
5,061
Reaction score
1
Location
MN
Buyers, feedlots and packers want uniformity. [not necessarily mnmt] Black Angus seems to be what they want. And for sure the Red Angus are there to. They want finished beef around that 1300 pound mark. Heavy finished cattle are docked significantly.
The "funnel butt" thing is kinda odd. You will only see the term here on CT. No other place in the cattle industry is it used. From what I see it mostly relates to condition.
Anybody see a fat cattle sale? ALL decent quality hard fed beef cattle will have fat round butts.
Angus cattle won't have the weight back there that a Limi will. Most of that round is considered grinding meat, packers don't want to grind anymore of a choice fed then they have to. So it's the percent of the carcass that will be the high priced middle meats that makes the packer $.
And so the popularity of the Black Angus.
 

alacattleman

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 22, 2006
Messages
4,141
Reaction score
0
Location
heart of dixie
mnmtranching":lc2krpk0 said:
Buyers, feedlots and packers want uniformity. [not necessarily mnmt] Black Angus seems to be what they want. And for sure the Red Angus are there to. They want finished beef around that 1300 pound mark. Heavy finished cattle are docked significantly.
The "funnel butt" thing is kinda odd. You will only see the term here on CT. No other place in the cattle industry is it used. From what I see it mostly relates to condition.
Anybody see a fat cattle sale? ALL decent quality hard fed beef cattle will have fat round butts.
Angus cattle won't have the weight back there that a Limi will. Most of that round is considered grinding meat, packers don't want to grind anymore of a choice fed then they have to. So it's the percent of the carcass that will be the high priced middle meats that makes the packer $.
And so the popularity of the Black Angus.
it was caustic or doc harris that coined that phrase,, we alway say hatchett assed.. are your refering too the moving parts being grinding meat?
 

brandonm_13

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 19, 2008
Messages
632
Reaction score
3
Location
Tennessee
mnmtranching":2dnvhyuj said:
Buyers, feedlots and packers want uniformity. [not necessarily mnmt] Black Angus seems to be what they want. And for sure the Red Angus are there to. They want finished beef around that 1300 pound mark. Heavy finished cattle are docked significantly.
The "funnel butt" thing is kinda odd. You will only see the term here on CT. No other place in the cattle industry is it used. From what I see it mostly relates to condition.
Anybody see a fat cattle sale? ALL decent quality hard fed beef cattle will have fat round butts.
Angus cattle won't have the weight back there that a Limi will. Most of that round is considered grinding meat, packers don't want to grind anymore of a choice fed then they have to. So it's the percent of the carcass that will be the high priced middle meats that makes the packer $.
And so the popularity of the Black Angus.

There is a big difference in an overly fat cow that has a butt, and a lean/moderate cow with a butt. A Limi with a butt is just more pounds of saleable meat. Most of the round in my areas goes into roast. Granted, it may only bring the same as ground beef(or slightly more), but there is no grinding cost in there. The only reason the rump isn't a more costly cut of meat is because all we want in the U.S. are steaks and burgers. In France, rumps are more highly regarded because they use a lot of slow cooking methods.
 

ANAZAZI

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 29, 2007
Messages
2,946
Reaction score
2
Location
Sweden
The price of a slaughtered animal in my country is determined by 20& front; 30% back, and 50% rear end.
 
OP
mnmtranching

mnmtranching

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 29, 2006
Messages
5,061
Reaction score
1
Location
MN
brandonm_13":380dmbet said:
mnmtranching":380dmbet said:
Buyers, feedlots and packers want uniformity. [not necessarily mnmt] Black Angus seems to be what they want. And for sure the Red Angus are there to. They want finished beef around that 1300 pound mark. Heavy finished cattle are docked significantly.
The "funnel butt" thing is kinda odd. You will only see the term here on CT. No other place in the cattle industry is it used. From what I see it mostly relates to condition.
Anybody see a fat cattle sale? ALL decent quality hard fed beef cattle will have fat round butts.
Angus cattle won't have the weight back there that a Limi will. Most of that round is considered grinding meat, packers don't want to grind anymore of a choice fed then they have to. So it's the percent of the carcass that will be the high priced middle meats that makes the packer $.
And so the popularity of the Black Angus.

There is a big difference in an overly fat cow that has a butt, and a lean/moderate cow with a butt. A Limi with a butt is just more pounds of saleable meat. Most of the round in my areas goes into roast. Granted, it may only bring the same as ground beef(or slightly more), but there is no grinding cost in there. The only reason the rump isn't a more costly cut of meat is because all we want in the U.S. are steaks and burgers. In France, rumps are more highly regarded because they use a lot of slow cooking methods.

Actually, we don't want to be like the French. :banana: :banana:
My discussion is not about slaughter cows. Cow slaughter is a different route then the slaughter of feed cattle. In cow slaughter there "might be" some cuts destined for the deli market and fast foods with the roast beef sandwiches. Almost ALL cow beef is boned and ground. And yup, the bigger and higher the yielding cow the better the price. Often the 1800 pound Holstein with be a market topper. Ain't much hind end on a Holstein.
 

alftn

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
645
Reaction score
0
Location
Tn.
No we do not want to be like france....They get 6 week a year vacation,They have a 35 hour work week, they have free medical care, they have a longer life ... Them damn French sure are bad.......O yell without the french we might have eaisly wound up like canada..Whom also has shorter work weeks , and free medical care....My god that must be bad....
 
OP
mnmtranching

mnmtranching

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 29, 2006
Messages
5,061
Reaction score
1
Location
MN
alftn":3i1ry9kp said:
No we do not want to be like france....They get 6 week a year vacation,They have a 35 hour work week, they have free medical care, they have a longer life ... Them be nice French sure are bad.......O yell without the french we might have eaisly wound up like canada..Whom also has shorter work weeks , and free medical care....My god that must be bad....

Socialism working, France allows immigration. :nod:
 

Similar threads

A
Replies
0
Views
1K
Anonymous
A
A
Replies
1
Views
1K
Anonymous
A
A
Replies
4
Views
2K
Anonymous
A

Latest posts

Top