Big muscular bulls

Help Support CattleToday:

sainty01":11cm37ag said:
http://www.ranchers.net/forum/about8712-0.html

Interesting link.

Rod, I agree with your comments on ranchers.net rather than the one's here.

That links also almost a year old. That link was also discussing purely roughed animals without mineral supplementation (or so I thought). In my area, you simply cannot get away without proper mineral supplementation.

In January I had a chance to tour several proper ranches who raise forage developed bulls and I've since read several articles on the topic. In my area, green grass runs around 12% protein. 1st cut alfalfa usually around 15 - 18%. 2nd cut usually a couple points higher. I discovered that I was overfeeding my developing bulls by a long shot, even with a measly 8 or 10 lbs of whole oats. When I got back to the ranch, I mixed some straw in with the hay, dropped the grain completely from their diets (over the span of a week). What I saw was no decrease in weight gain per day, no reduction in muscling, and excellent sperm counts that spring. 1 year does not an expert make, especially given the limited number of animals I was feeding, however the proper forage developed bulls I saw were not lacking in muscling, development, or semen counts.

Perhaps if you tried to raise bulls on poor forage I can see supplementation up to the 12% protein range being necessary, but I see some of these bull developers socking feeder cattle rations to their animals, and all thats doing is covering up flaws and ensuring that bull will fall apart when he hits the range. Not saying thats what you're doing Sainty as I have no idea what protein levels your corn and forage is at, but when I travel to the purebred sales in my area, I see too much of that "fed to genetic potential" junk.

Rod
 
Sainty,

Your stance seems to be well thought out and I can respect that from anyone.

The bottom line for me, however, is that if a bull comes here and melts away when put on pasture - that bull is useless. It doesn't matter how great the epd's, how great the bull looks at saletime; if a bull cannot efficiently convert the forage I have to maintain body condition, that bull is wasting money.
 
S.R.R.":fsdylz1c said:
sainty01":fsdylz1c said:
Is their a way to tell when new posts have been added to a forum that you are participating in? I continually seem to post a message and than forget about it, than when people have questions I fail to notice. (sorry about the delay)

First to answer Dun's question. Although I think it was more of a statement. Developing females on forage is a practical and widely accepted method. I see the comparison you are reaching for but the nutritional needs for heifers in considerable lower. Ranchers and collegiate authorities agree that females need only weigh 65% of their mature weight at breeding and 85% by the time they have their first calf.

As for the hype statement. Over the past couple of years several seedstock producers have taken advantage of "grassfed, forage developed bulls" and used it to successfully and widely market their bulls.

The problem with marketing and developing bulls on forage alone is two-fold. First many of these seedstock producers are not "truly" developing their bulls on forage alone. They have a battery of feedtrucks and grain bins on their ranches.

I always use the comparison to teenage athletes because it is something that most most producers are familiar with. If you compare livestock to humans many times you can see why something works or why it doesn't. A high school football player that eats a low protein diet would develop less muscle, have lower stamina and endurance and be ineffective in his athletic field. A bull that is on a low protein forage diet is subject to the same problem as the football player. Semen quality and quantity is one of the very first things affected by improper nutrition.

I understand why producers are intrigued by the idea of forage developed bulls. We've all seen too many fat, lazy, foundered bulls that were overfed. However, imho forage developed bulls is swinging to the other extreme.

Does that clear up my thoughts?



Are you trying to tell me that if I bought one of your NON forage raised bulls and let him out with my cows he would stay in good condition and that because he was raised with ++ grain ect. his sperm would be better?
What turnip truck did you fall off of??

I do not know what bull sale you were at but a two year old bull that only weights 950lbs is the result of poor pasture or animals to start with!!!!!!! I am sure a number of us on here could sell you a foraged raised two year old bull that will be well over 1500lb. Were was this so called bull sale and were were your glasses???

Edited for language by Mod. Next time I'll delete it completely.

Sorry there Mod! I got a bit to excited!! ;-)
 
Bottom line to me is............................

Producers won't pay as much much for forage raised bulls because they aren't quite as well developed as supplemented bulls. Been there done that.

Just because a bull is supplemented doesn't mean that he forgets how to graze. Grazing is an inherited trait that cannot be bred out.

I have seen forage bulls melt just as fast as supplemented bulls.

From studying the forage raised bulls I have sold. They melt faster because of less fat cells manufactured. The supplemented bulls had much more "Reserve" to fall back on when the going gets rough.

It's balancing act to raise bulls that will last. Over feeding will screw them up and under feeding will screw them up.

The big thing is how they are treated when they hit the ranch.
 
sainty01":1ew9nghq said:
Msscamp: Thanks for the information about the red folders and watch this topic.

You're welcome. :)

The feedtrucks at these operations ARE being used to feed cattle a hot ration. Sure feed trucks aren't a dead give a way but in this example they were. As to your feeding program. I wouldn't define it as a forage program if you also let the bulls have some of that beet pulp.

Yes, the bulls also receive that ration.

Beet pulp as you know is an incredible feedstuff. Most nutritionist define it in it's own category because of it's unique qualities. Most BP has about 10% Crude Protein, and 18% Crude fiber which puts it inbetween a forage and an Energy Feed. Although most coops and feed producers use it at as an energy source. I wish we had access to it.

Yes, beetpulp is an incredible feedstuff. Along with the properties you've mentioned, it also appears to have the capability of increasing digestibility of forage - at least according to everything I've read on it and our experience with it.

BTW, where in WY are you located I went to Jr. College in Casper.

I'm a few miles west of Torrington - about 2.5 hours southeast of Casper.

I totally agree with your comment, "Testing and the proper forage can (and does) provide more than adequate nutrition."

Each seedstock producer's definition of "forage/range raised" seems to be different and that was the reason for my original hype comment.

Thank you for that statement, I'm beginning to understand now.

Does anyone else ever wonder how much easier these conversations would be if they were done in person.

Oh yeah! :lol: :lol:

Many times it seems people mostly agree but it takes a long time to get everyone seeing the small details that they differ on.

I think you're right.
 
Ratfish":vw1kny3x said:
dun: A bull and a steer get along alright?

Depends on the bull and the steer, but they usually do. I've never done it personally but know a couple of folks that have. Worked out better for them then multiple bulls in the sam paddock.

dun
 
Ratfish":1p20t136 said:
dun: A bull and a steer get along alright?

Generally speaking, yes. We've been known to throw a steer in with the bulls (and vice versa) and have yet to have a problem with it. It usually happens each spring when we've kept a steer for butchering and don't have an available corral to put him in. Once the girls have gone out to summer pasture, he is sorted off, finished, and goes to the butcher.
 

Latest posts

Top