Breeding Back First Calvers?

[Jeanne - Simme Valley]

Bottomline is to have your heifers in good BCS at the time of conception, and use management skills to KEEP them in that BCS.
If you purchase heifers in low BCS, or because of other circumstances, you find your heifer in too low a BCS prior to calving, ALL research has proven that you are better off feeding them then, getting their BCS up to where it should be at calving rather than waiting til after she calves.
Yes, feeding heifers in the last trimester can/will increase BW - but, the research showed you were looking at maybe 10# (not positive on the exact number) more BW and that 10# did not cause more dystocia than the contempory groups that were too thin. Thin cattle have less energy, labor takes longer, calves are thin and born weaker (lower survival), colostrum is poorer quality (lower survival), breed-back is poorer, lower WW. Bottomline (profit) proved to be beneficial to feed up to good BCS prior to calving.
We can all argue about Ole Bess is thinner than a rail & always spits out her calf & always has the heaviest WW - but, we're not talking about one animal - we're talking what's been proven best overall.

 

[JustSimmental]

I raise my own heifers and rarely buy heifers unless I know what their Dam's management has been.

I wanted to further explain what I said about first-calf heifers, so that others would understand where I am coming from. The question to the masses is:

Why are you breeding a heifer at 14-15 months of age?

I guarantee that 75% will answer that question with—so she will have something to sell--- which although being true is not the real reason.

The real reasons for breeding a heifer at 14-15 months of age are to see if she is reproductively sound and most importantly to get her into the rotation of calving and breeding -------

All with the understanding that this first calf won’t be the best one she will ever have, due in most part to her lack of maturity.

With that in mind, we want her first calving to be successful, which means

unassisted calving;

she takes care of her calf (I am in a predator area);

breeds back on time (this happens usually with supplementation);

continues her normal rate of growth on normal grazing resources and

weans a calf.

By weaning day, I don’t expect her to have the best calf in the pen, because my goals have already been met………. above.

Now, bred with her second calf, she has just as much of an opportunity to be a great cow as any of the others who came before her.

JS

 

[Jeanne - Simme Valley]

Couldn't find exactly what I was looking for, but here's a few researches:

"Bottom line - when first-calf beef cows calved in BCS of 4, 5, or 6, cows with greater BCS had progressively heavier calves at birth without increased calving problems. More cows calving with greater BCS also exhibited heat and became pregnant in the next breeding season than did cows calving with lower BCS. If you study Table 2, you will observe first-calf cows calving in BCS = 6 had calves weighing 4 to 7 pounds more at birth than cows calving in BCS of 5 or 4, respectively, but had no more calving problems. These cows calving in BCS = 6 also had 98% in heat and 96% pregnant in the next breeding season."

Here's a link to the whole article:
http://www.clemson.edu/extension/livest ... _2005.html

"This research and data presented in Table 7 also help to dispel the belief that starving or limited
feeding of heifers before calving is of real benefit. Calving losses are not reduced by feeding heifers
lower levels of feed before calving. While birth weight was reduced 7 pounds by feeding the low
level of energy before calving, calving difficulty was not reduced. It has been observed that heifers on low levels of feed prior to calving have reduced skeletal growth, including the pelvic area. The calf will be smaller, but so will the heifer and her pelvic area through which the calf must pass in the birth process.
Reducing levels of feed to first-calf heifers only results in reduced growth and poorer rebreeding
performance, as noted in Table 8. To breed heifers as yearlings, get a live calf and get the heifer rebred, heifers must be well-fed. In other words, feed the heifer to obtain her desired target weight before first breeding, and keep her in a body condition of 5 to 6 from first breeding through first calving and rebreeding"
http://animalscience.tamu.edu/images/pd ... cement.pdf

 

[Jeanne - Simme Valley]

I agree that we breed heifers to calve between 21-24 months of age so that they "fit" into our calving season and start producing an income.
I do not agree that her calf is or should be sub-par to the rest of the herd. My heifers "should" represent my best genetics. I don't breed them to a bull that is strickly a CE sire. And in this modern selection of sires, I don't think many BREEDERS use "throw-away sires" for heifers (another thread).

My heifers have produced some of my top money making offspring year in & year out. Granted, most of the calves won't weigh as much in the fall compared to mature cows. But, not all quality & value is based on pounds going over the scale. Even a commercial producer that keeps replacement heifers, can benefit from his heifers' heifer calves.

I just calculated the WPDA of my male calves out of 2 yr old dams. 3.15# compared to 3.21# for the mature group. Average age is 121 days (143 to 85), so that's 7.26# difference. My heifers had 0 assistance at calving.

Another argument that my $50-$100 investment in shell corn fed to my weaned heifers to offset our winters & have our heifers in proper BCS at the time of conception, pays off.

 

[MF135]

Just wondering how you can over feed a cow when it is out in pasture ???

Not running enough cattle on the pasture.

Don't get me wrong, I'd say you have a GREAT thing going - always have when I've seen your pictures. But, PERHAPS, it could be better? I think the argument says that there is still a bottom 10% of your herd. So, if you push them harder by stocking higher, you'll find that bottom 10% because they won't breed back. Now, those bottom 10% might STILL be better than what 90% of the rest of us are running on breedback, but you'd find the bottom 10% that way.

It's also a tool for leveraging your genetics. If you've culled and optimized to the point where you have 100% breedback like that, running more head on your pasture will produce more calves. Your cattle are obviously quite efficient - the best way to take advantage of those efficiencies is to feed less (stock higher)

That's the ARGUMENT - I'm not saying I agree with it to the Nth degree like that, but that's the argument.

Very well said.

 

[ALACOWMAN]

I raise my own heifers and rarely buy heifers unless I know what their Dam's management has been.

I wanted to further explain what I said about first-calf heifers, so that others would understand where I am coming from. The question to the masses is:

[color=#FF0000[u]]Why are you breeding a heifer at 14-15 months of age? [/u][/color]

I guarantee that 75% will answer that question with—so she will have something to sell--- which although being true is not the real reason.

The real reasons for breeding a heifer at 14-15 months of age are to see if she is reproductively sound and most importantly to get her into the rotation of calving and breeding -------

All with the understanding that this first calf won’t be the best one she will ever have, due in most part to her lack of maturity.

With that in mind, we want her first calving to be successful, which means

unassisted calving;

she takes care of her calf (I am in a predator area);

breeds back on time (this happens usually with supplementation);

continues her normal rate of growth on normal grazing resources and

weans a calf.

By weaning day, I don’t expect her to have the best calf in the pen, because my goals have already been met………. above.

Now, bred with her second calf, she has just as much of an opportunity to be a great cow as any of the others who came before her.

JS

i breed mine at 15 months to get them in production soon as possible..... retaining heifers aint cheap or quick whether that translates to have ""something to sell"" not the way i see it

 

[angus9259]

Some of you are indicating that you don't manage your heifers to be in good BCS at the time of conception & calving & that that is financially the best route. Well, I disagree. But, that's what makes our business interesting. Lots of different managements.

So, if I am "masking" problem cattle, I guess it would rear it's ugly head when they are 3 yr olds.

So, basically your question was to trip up posters, so you could say WE are managing wrong.

Not that this was my thread, but a couple things are hearing . . . .

1. Heifers should be managed to be in "good enough" bcs to breed back. That's their job. That may not be "good" bcs. I think managing livestock to be in "good enough" bcs to breed back is where the money is in commercial cattle.

2. I don't think anyone is masking a problem as much as not finding the bottom. Your herd, like others, is pretty top tier. The "problem cattle" you may be masking are possibly better than the top tier at another place. This is not about the overall quality of any one particular herd. However, there is always a bottom 10% and until BCS is managed to be "good enough" to breed back, you won't find the bottom 10% and, more importantly, you won't know the top 90% to continue building into.

 

[regolith]

Not being able to find the bottom 10% is a curious argument.

My herd is dairy, but I can rank them for production all the way from the bottom cow to the top cow. If you're keeping records of weaning weights, calving dates &c I'd expect you'd be able to do the same thing. I know which of my cows are slower breeders (even though nearly everything still in the herd has got in calf during the breeding season every year), which lose or retain condition easily. I might have culled out the bottom 10 - 30% over the years and I can still identify a bottom 10% - just that they're much better cows than the bottom 10% used to be.

The other interesting part of the argument is that by not 'hiding' the bottom 10% of your animals on fertility you're effectively culling those animals by natural selection - so improving the fertility of the retained cows. If I'm remembering right (I'm no geneticist), fertility is a highly heritable trait but genetic fertility is a very small part of the interacting stuff that determines whether or not your heifer gets in calf. And fertility on its own is only one trait of the many that make a good cow... though certainly it may be linked to other undesirable traits like losing excessive body condition.
So improving the herd by culling the less fertile ones is a worthwhile goal but it's a very small step towards what you want to achieve. Whereas I'm thinking if you manage them a bit better so that the decision isn't made for you when poorer heifers turn up open - then you are making the decision to cull. On your own criteria, which will be much broader than just fertility.

 

[angus9259]

Not being able to find the bottom 10% is a curious argument.

My herd is dairy, but I can rank them for production all the way from the bottom cow to the top cow. If you're keeping records of weaning weights, calving dates &c I'd expect you'd be able to do the same thing. I know which of my cows are slower breeders (even though nearly everything still in the herd has got in calf during the breeding season every year), which lose or retain condition easily. I might have culled out the bottom 10 - 30% over the years and I can still identify a bottom 10% - just that they're much better cows than the bottom 10% used to be.

The other interesting part of the argument is that by not 'hiding' the bottom 10% of your animals on fertility you're effectively culling those animals by natural selection - so improving the fertility of the retained cows. If I'm remembering right (I'm no geneticist), fertility is a highly heritable trait but genetic fertility is a very small part of the interacting stuff that determines whether or not your heifer gets in calf. And fertility on its own is only one trait of the many that make a good cow... though certainly it may be linked to other undesirable traits like losing excessive body condition.
So improving the herd by culling the less fertile ones is a worthwhile goal but it's a very small step towards what you want to achieve. Whereas I'm thinking if you manage them a bit better so that the decision isn't made for you when poorer heifers turn up open - then you are making the decision to cull. On your own criteria, which will be much broader than just fertility.

All good points.

 

[Stocker Steve]

Not being able to find the bottom 10% is a curious argument. quote]

A great goal for a seedstock producer, perhaps less so for a commerical operation. Depends a lot of the value of your culls.

I bred 14 yearling heifers last summer. Two did not work out, and they go to the locker plant as grass fed in a couple weeks. They look great and I will feel bad loading them out but they are actually worth more in someone else's freezer. So I am glad I found the bottom of the 2 year olds.

Now if some of the remaining 12 don't breed back then I have fewer options. I ate a 3 year old last myself year, she never saw corn grain in her life, and she was not the most tender, but it worked out in the end. :cboy:

 

[Jeanne - Simme Valley]

I don't need to "make my cows work harder" to tell the bottom 10%. I keep records. I totally agree with Regolith.
And, if my bottom 10% is making me a great profit, why in the world, would I want to sell/cull them?
You may have convinced yourself that that is a good reason to "work" your cows a little harder. For me, the better condition my cows are in, the better a calf they raise, and that's where I make my money. What fits for you to make the most profit, may be way off base for someone else.

 

[MF135]

I don't need to "make my cows work harder" to tell the bottom 10%. I keep records. I totally agree with Regolith.
And, if my bottom 10% is making me a great profit, why in the world, would I want to sell/cull them?
You may have convinced yourself that that is a good reason to "work" your cows a little harder. For me, the better condition my cows are in, the better a calf they raise, and that's where I make my money. What fits for you to make the most profit, may be way off base for someone else.

Because they are your bottom and not performing as well as their contemporaries. Imagine the profits if your bottom 10 had the production of your top 10. Each time you cull, the bar is raised within your heard and you now have a new herd standard to hold each animal to. Unless you consider your animals the absolute best within the breed, then there is room for improvement.

 

[hillsdown]

Just wondering how you can over feed a cow when it is out in pasture ???

Not running enough cattle on the pasture.

Don't get me wrong, I'd say you have a GREAT thing going - always have when I've seen your pictures. But, PERHAPS, it could be better? I think the argument says that there is still a bottom 10% of your herd. So, if you push them harder by stocking higher, you'll find that bottom 10% because they won't breed back. Now, those bottom 10% might STILL be better than what 90% of the rest of us are running on breedback, but you'd find the bottom 10% that way.

It's also a tool for leveraging your genetics. If you've culled and optimized to the point where you have 100% breed back like that, running more head on your pasture will produce more calves. Your cattle are obviously quite efficient - the best way to take advantage of those efficiencies is to feed less (stock higher)

That's the ARGUMENT - I'm not saying I agree with it to the Nth degree like that, but that's the argument.

I agree and that is probably why they all breed back, we had a very aggressive cull program . We do herd health every fall which alot of producers do not do ,so we can cull right away and not wait until the spring to see who calves. Also our land was extremely over grazed until I took control and started managing it , now we have some of the best pasture in the area. I think having a dairy background helps a little to manage cattle, especially heifers > however my beef get treated like range beef cattle, no pampering. However I am sure we will hit the wall again at some point soon and start all over again.

As far as calving at 24 months there have been numerous studies and Dun has posted a few on here that I wish someone could find. The studies found that the longer you wait to breed some breeds of cattle, the more calving and anabolic problems they will have as 3 and 4 year olds.

 

[Stocker Steve]

I agree and that is probably why they all breed back, we had a very aggressive cull program . quote]

How long were you hard cull'in?
What percent of your heifer calves are retained?

 

[angus9259]

I don't need to "make my cows work harder" to tell the bottom 10%. I keep records. I totally agree with Regolith.
And, if my bottom 10% is making me a great profit, why in the world, would I want to sell/cull them?
You may have convinced yourself that that is a good reason to "work" your cows a little harder. For me, the better condition my cows are in, the better a calf they raise, and that's where I make my money. What fits for you to make the most profit, may be way off base for someone else.

You only have so much space for cows - that's why you'd sell the bottom 10%. If that's not true for you, then the point is mute.

A cow is a production unit. If it can work harder and produce more with less, it should. I'm sure that the better condition your cows are in the better a calf they can raise. But the top 10% of your herd can raise that same calf in a little worse condition - NOT BAD CONDITION - but not as good. The bottom 10% of your herd will trail off. They will, as you point out, produce a weaker calf if their condition isn't so good. Unless you have unlimited space for cattle, these 10% should be culled so that you can populate from the top 10%.

I'm sure you keep great records. This isn't an attack. I'm sure your records tell you much. But there's no way to produce this particular record - which part of your herd is MOST productive - until you pull back on the feed a bit and find out. And the way to do that on pasture is stocking higher. The way to do that feeding hay is if you normally feed 4 bales a day of 2nd cut - throw out 3 bales and 1 bale of first. It's not a program overhaul.

 

[Angus Cowman]

I will add this and I am sure some will disagree

The smaller number of hfrs you are keeping and breeding the HIGHER # of breds you will get
if you are keeping 5 or 10 hfrs compared to 40-50 or 100 to 200
the same goes for breedback on a short breeding season
the smaller the herd the more will get bred in a that time frame
1 reason is you are probably spending more time with them and also it is easier to notice small problems in a smaller herd

last yr I had a 92% bred on my replacement hfrs
I onlykept 25 for rep hfrs and had 23 bred in a 60 natural cover season most were bred in the first 28 days all were bred by 42 days the were not sync'ed
as for herd health as HD mentioned yes I do annual vacc, pelvic exams and I preg check ALL of my cows after breeding so I know what is going on

 

[regolith]

If you can't get the same percentage on 100 as you do with 10 - there's something wrong somewhere, most likely with your bull ratio.
The only dispensation is that with higher numbers the likelihood of, for example, a freemartin in the mob would be higher. But then, ten small units probably has one of them with 10% of their herd a freemartin to make up for that...

1 reason is you are probably spending more time with them and also it is easier to notice small problems in a smaller herd

I do agree with this, absolutely (especially if you're relying on less motivated helpers for part of your stock management). The thing is that the number at which poorer performance is triggered isn't as low as fifty, and I don't know if it's as low as a hundred. Brought 66 heifers into the herd this year and 2 were open. It's been 0 - 2 every year so far, 66 is the biggest group.

 

[Jeanne - Simme Valley]

AC - I completely agree with what you are saying. But, with small numbers, if you only have 1 non-breeder, you have a high % ratio.
Angus9259 - you still don't get it.
I think each and every one of us has a "limited" amount of pasture/hay ground :shock: Most should be stocking it to get maximum production without hurting the land or lower performance due to being underfed.
I rotationally graze looking at usually 3-5 days on a piece. My cows "think" they should be moved by day 2-3, but they are kept on that peice of ground til it is cleaned up - even around the manure piles & most of the weeds (not thistles or buttercup or wild tomatoe). I do not want to need to mow each field after they leave it. We mow some/most pastures at least once through the year & spot spray weeds at least once in a field. But, the cattle will graze a "paddock" maybe 4 times through the year without getting mowed each time (you got me thinking - I would have to check that fact).
I cull cattle every year, as does each & every producer, but I do NOT base my culling on one issue.
If a herd is treated equally (high, medium or low management/nutrition), then you can easily pick out your culls by TOTAL perfermance. Not just "did they get bred on time".
Fertility is obviously the only performance trait that is a major concern for you.
After breeding 100% AI for 40 years with a 60-day calving season (and most of those years were strickly spring calving), I have a pretty good group of fertile myrtles. Yes, fertility is the most important trait for a cow. But, if your cows are breeding on YOUR schedule, that's fertile enough --- IF they are also producing the pounds, style & quality calf that is needed in YOUR operation to make the most money - whether you are producing terminal commercial calves or breeding stock or show calves. A successful commercial producer, produces calves that make them money & go on to make the feedlot money. I make money with steers the same way as any other farm, and make extra money with breeding stock.
I totally understand the concept of "making a cow work for a living" - but, limiting her nutrition level to lower BCS, just to "see" if she holds up to breeding expectations so you can cull your bottom 10% low fertile cows just doesn't fit into my concept of making money with cattle.
The better I take care of my cattle, the better they take care of me. But, as I keep saying, that's what great about our business - the versitility. I don't agree with what you are preaching, although I totally understand you will achieve "your" goals - to what end, I'm not sure.

 

[angus9259]

Angus9259 - you still don't get it.

Always and frequently a possibility.

 

[Jeanne - Simme Valley]

Angus9259 - you still don't get it.

Always and frequently a possibility.

HaHaHa :clap: I guess that could be said about all of us :lol: