Between a ROCK and a HARD SPOT!
- Thread starter DOC HARRIS
- Start date
Help Support CattleToday:
DOC HARRIS
Well-known member
There seems to always be exceptions to every rule, and these figures are certainly exceptional EPD's! By keeping replacement heifers from these matings, one would certainly improve the SIZE of one's cow herd! No question about that. By repetitively following these beginning protocols, your future cow herd could be producing GIGANTIC calves, and comparably GIGANTIC feed and forage costs - and so the spiral continues - until the breeder finds himself between a ROCK and a HARD SPOT!
To each his own.
One day - - - - -
DOC HARRIS
To each his own.
One day - - - - -
DOC HARRIS
Guys, I have seen the best and worst of both worlds.... I raise charolais, i remember when i could walk under them when i was 10 years old. I also have made a living selling bulls to previous owners of OCC Angus Cattle that were frame 4-5 and customers were selling 520 lbs calves in Oct/Nov.. ...
I agree we need to find that happy medium, i like the 6-6.5 level.. and cattle that can produce those huge weights and performance in a small package...
I am going to through this out there... Show me the cows and prove it..
I will lead, below you will find a female, she is a NWSS class winner, frame 6.1, stout and made correct, her REA ratio was 112 and yearling wt was 1024 lbs.. Her weight as of Nov 1st 2007 days after her 2nd calf was 1385 lbs.. Her credit to performance, 1st calf Adj ww 931 lbs that calf went on to have a YW of 1597 for a WDA of 4.67 lbs his REA was 17.7 and marbling ratio 122 and his 6 of the 9 EPD's are in the Top 1% of the breed, Top it off he is a 6.4 frame. Her second calf has a Projected (to young to record) WW of 813 lbs... She has also been flushed twice and produced 32 embryos in 2 flushes..
Ok, Moderate frame, Small size, Excellent Maternal traits, strong phenotype and genotype, Strong Performance, excellent growth, and proven results in both Carcass data, maternal, and performance data....
Here she is ... Prove to me you are raising what your preaching!! I have !!
http://cattletoday.com/photos/data/500/ ... CF1644.JPG
http://cattletoday.com/photos/showphoto ... puser=4585
I agree we need to find that happy medium, i like the 6-6.5 level.. and cattle that can produce those huge weights and performance in a small package...
I am going to through this out there... Show me the cows and prove it..
I will lead, below you will find a female, she is a NWSS class winner, frame 6.1, stout and made correct, her REA ratio was 112 and yearling wt was 1024 lbs.. Her weight as of Nov 1st 2007 days after her 2nd calf was 1385 lbs.. Her credit to performance, 1st calf Adj ww 931 lbs that calf went on to have a YW of 1597 for a WDA of 4.67 lbs his REA was 17.7 and marbling ratio 122 and his 6 of the 9 EPD's are in the Top 1% of the breed, Top it off he is a 6.4 frame. Her second calf has a Projected (to young to record) WW of 813 lbs... She has also been flushed twice and produced 32 embryos in 2 flushes..
Ok, Moderate frame, Small size, Excellent Maternal traits, strong phenotype and genotype, Strong Performance, excellent growth, and proven results in both Carcass data, maternal, and performance data....
Here she is ... Prove to me you are raising what your preaching!! I have !!
http://cattletoday.com/photos/data/500/ ... CF1644.JPG
http://cattletoday.com/photos/showphoto ... puser=4585
Here is a good example of why smaller isn't always better.
When feed prices are high like they are, the buyers want heavier feeder cattle to buy, so they don't have to put as much corn into them before they are finished.
These are a few actual calf sales that that I wrote down yesterday at the Watertown, SD sale barn. As you will see the heavier cattle either sold more per lbs or real close to the same and way more per head.
Here is one owners calves:
945 lbs steers - $90.75 = $958/head
792 lbs steers - $88.00 = $697/head
The heavier calves brought $261 more than the lights
Another owner:
938 lbs steers - $91.30 = $856/head
747 lbs steers - $93.50 = $698/head
The heavier calves brought $158more than the lights
Another owner:
924 lbs steers - $91.25 = $843
783 lbs steers $92.00 = $720
The heavier calves brought $123 more than the lights
When feed prices are high like they are, the buyers want heavier feeder cattle to buy, so they don't have to put as much corn into them before they are finished.
These are a few actual calf sales that that I wrote down yesterday at the Watertown, SD sale barn. As you will see the heavier cattle either sold more per lbs or real close to the same and way more per head.
Here is one owners calves:
945 lbs steers - $90.75 = $958/head
792 lbs steers - $88.00 = $697/head
The heavier calves brought $261 more than the lights
Another owner:
938 lbs steers - $91.30 = $856/head
747 lbs steers - $93.50 = $698/head
The heavier calves brought $158more than the lights
Another owner:
924 lbs steers - $91.25 = $843
783 lbs steers $92.00 = $720
The heavier calves brought $123 more than the lights
The argument is made that it requires less corn to finish heavier steers, but aren't those heavier WW calves going to finish at a heavier weight and thus require just as much feed? I confess to being without any feedlot experience, but this is how I understand it. For instance, calf A frame 4 weans at 600 lbs, finishes at 1100 lbs. Gain required 500 lbs. Calf B frame 7, weans 800lbs, finishes at 1400 lbs. Gain required 600 lbs. Isn't calf B going to require more feed?
The argument is moot for us anyway as time and again we see that frame 7 and larger cattle cannot make in our operation.
The argument is moot for us anyway as time and again we see that frame 7 and larger cattle cannot make in our operation.
KMacGinley
Well-known member
Hey Brian: Why were those calves heavier? Was it because they were older, or were their mothers much better milkers? Either way, there was higher cost associated with the extra money.
Angus Brangus: How do you cut down a ribeye?
Angus Brangus: How do you cut down a ribeye?
There have been some impressive figures tossed out in this post but I maintain that unless you can see the whole picture on how they were achieved there is no way to tell what the true bottom line is.
One thing is certain though if input costs stay where they are or continue to rise cattlemen will soon find out if they have the right type of cattle and management to fit their operation.
One thing is certain though if input costs stay where they are or continue to rise cattlemen will soon find out if they have the right type of cattle and management to fit their operation.
gberry":d5je8yyn said:
Just because a calf weans at 7-800 lbs doesn't mean he'll need to go to 1400 to finish. He may well be slaughtered at 1100, just like the 600 pound weaner. If our Angus bulls don't come off test as yearlings at 1100, we're seriously disappointed.
IMO, Frame score 7 cattle are too big. But I know bull buyers in this part of the country aren't interested in FS 4-5 bulls either. So it goes back to my question as to "how big is too big?"
Here's some more math to add to the equation:
A typical cow will consume between 2% and 3% of it's bodyweight in dry matter each day. I'll use 2.5% for an average. So......
a 1300 lb. cow will consume 32.5 lbs. of dry matter a day. 32.5 X 365 = 11,862.5
an 1800 lb. cow will consume 45 lbs. of dry matter a day. 45 X 365 = 16,425
So the difference in forage consumption is 4562.5 lbs. over the course of a year.
So a 1300 lb. cow eats 72% of the dry matter of an 1800 lb. cow. From this information you could run almost 14 1300 lb. cows on the same grass as 10 1800 lb. cows.
A typical cow will consume between 2% and 3% of it's bodyweight in dry matter each day. I'll use 2.5% for an average. So......
a 1300 lb. cow will consume 32.5 lbs. of dry matter a day. 32.5 X 365 = 11,862.5
an 1800 lb. cow will consume 45 lbs. of dry matter a day. 45 X 365 = 16,425
So the difference in forage consumption is 4562.5 lbs. over the course of a year.
So a 1300 lb. cow eats 72% of the dry matter of an 1800 lb. cow. From this information you could run almost 14 1300 lb. cows on the same grass as 10 1800 lb. cows.
smuff76":3by1xuux said:
But the larger cows are somewhat more efficient. The larger rumen gives them an advantage in processing their food. I won't argue that larger cows eat more than smaller cows, but the numbers you've put up here aren't so cut and dried.
I don't know who's promoting 1800 lb cows anyway. I see 1200 lbs posted quite often as the "perfect" weight.
I really don't know why they were heavier. All I can say was that I am sure the ownership groups were managed the same, but who knows why some were heavier than the others. I am going out and guessing that the cows were similar by ownership and the heavier ones were born from the first cycle and the lighter one were born in the second and third cycles. But by looking at the calves, they were all pretty darn good quality as far as muscle, length, depth and bone. I would be willing to bet by looking at the calves that their dams were not small framed, as you could see the smaller framed groups come in and their was about a $5 to $10/cwt difference in the same weight groups where the smaller framed calves were cheaper.
KMAC,
As far as these bigger having more expenses into them compared to the smaller ones. That may be true, BUT, if I am correct in the above statement, that the cows were all the same and the lighter ones were just younger, then the bigger calves made them alot more money. Because if the smaller calves would be the same age as the bigger ones, they would have most likely been the same weight and they would have sold for the same money.
KMAC,
As far as these bigger having more expenses into them compared to the smaller ones. That may be true, BUT, if I am correct in the above statement, that the cows were all the same and the lighter ones were just younger, then the bigger calves made them alot more money. Because if the smaller calves would be the same age as the bigger ones, they would have most likely been the same weight and they would have sold for the same money.
ALACOWMAN
Well-known member
your example is a little excessive on the cow's as far as weight. a 7+ frame cow that weighs 1800 pds?smuff76":3qtoba59 said:
The 1800 was meant to be a bit excessive. We have been talking about cow size and I was simply trying to put some numbers into the equation. That way if someone wanted to run the numbers on their cows they might find the information useful.
Frankie":386ifm4f said:
I have read (again I have no feedlot experience) that a steer is going to be properly finished at about 100 pounds more than it's dam weighs and a heifer at about 100 pounds less. I know this is a rough approximation (and it may not be accurate), but I doubt there are many 1000 lb cows weaning 800 lb calfs. I doubt many of them are weaning 600 lb calfs, but I think it is much more likely. My point is that larger framed cattle have to be fed to a heavier weight. So rather than trying to grow larger framed cattle to get to those 800-900 lb weights which sold better at BRG's sale, perhaps it would be better (more efficient) to have smaller cows wean 600 lb calves and then graze them to 800-900 lbs to get the best price.
KMacGinley
Well-known member
In the real world, calves weaning at 7-800 lbs are not going to be finished at 1100, they are going to be done anywhere from 1350 to 1500+. Especially since most feedlots are in the feed selling business not the optimum cattle feeding business.
The 8 and 9 weights that I see being sold around here have either been backgrounded or grazed for a number of months to get to that weight.
Our buyers want small large framed calved but will take large medium frames. The one they they want in either size is #1 muscle.
Our buyers want small large framed calved but will take large medium frames. The one they they want in either size is #1 muscle.
