CAB Researchers explain Decline

[Dusty]

Larry Corah and Mark McCully, authors of the latest study for CAB.. reported the five primary factors they believe are contributing to the decline Quality Grades:

1. Health Problems
2. Feeding by-products
3. Large Feedlots lowering production
4. Indaquate nutrition
5. Impant Usage

More Contributors.. or "other contributing Factors"
1. Genetic Influence
2. early weaning
3. Grain-based creep
4. scared cattle
5. high levels of vitamin A
6. Fewer heifer slaughtered
7. Cattle are older at slaughter
8. More Rideye muscle-less marbling.

OK. so the feed yards are feeding the cattle wrong, to many people are using bad genetics, Ribeyes are getting to large and marbling is getting desceased, Cattle are getting older at slaughter because angus can't mature as early at the proper weight... People all of the sudden are using implants that are not helping ... Cattle are all of the sudden not as calm..

CAB lets blame everyone else, if 80% of the cattle in the Us are angus.. then 50% of those or 40% are bad Genetics for america... this report is saying.. Also Health problems,, give me a break.. Face it, your leading the carcass chase with a name,, now after 10 years your finding out that all your promotions is bringing the industry down and it's time to "right the wrong" and "tell everyone how to raise cattle" It's a JOKE!!

For the full report it can be found online at http://www.cabpartners.com and go the the education center.

 

[Dusty]

I own a registered Angus Herd and sell about 50 Angus bulls yearly... So if i am an angus basher I am bashing myself..!!
Thanks Angus / Brangus...

 

[Dusty]

Lets just face the facts.. 1/2 to 1/3 of the angus breeders are in the business for a profit. Lets look at the large scale breeders, Bohi, Limestone, Express, Sweatwater.. what do you ever hear of their bulls doing in the commercial industry... nothing.. nothing at all... and Limestone had a female sale last fall that averaged 25k a lot ... they are in the Black Angus business for a profit.. now.. use Leachman and Fink Beef and how many people are they helping on the commercial level.. They i consider as being the Angus Breeders who influence the commercial world due to the fact 95% of their bulls influence the Beef Supply Chain.. They provide dependable reliable beef!!

 

[3MR]

All those listed reasons are leading to the decline in beaf quality. As it stands now the average producer gets more for higher weights than chasing higher choice. If your not selling on the grid very little, if any, of the grade premiums come back to you. Higher carcass weights do give you a return.

Its pretty common knowledge that we have a higher rate of health issues in beaf today. Im not going to argue the point, you can either believe it or not.

I didnt read the study, but I believe the age problem was related to animals that were younger at slaughter. Every breed takes time to produce beaf that grades.

I'll tell you what. You keep doing what your doing and I will keep doing what I am doing.

This whole argument sort of sounds like the serial killer blaming the cops for shooting him, ludicrist!

 

[Dusty]

Cattle that are slaughter younger tend to grade slightly better then older cattle, particularly if they were placed on high energy rations at an earlier age... Straight from the Article Number 7 of the additional contributors

 

[preston39]

Dusty,

You are correct..a constructive review is progressive.

Angus is out front so the breed will receive the blame for beef product shortcomings.

It reminds me of my definition of an early American;

"A pioneer with an arrow in his bottom".

Wannabees have a need and will continue to take potshots at Angus out of envy. While it is commonplace it is disrespectful. I would not attempt to degrade anothers' selected breed. Well meaning constructive comments,yes.

Angus does not need to defend itself. Witness others desire and efforts to match Angus's standing with consumers.

Having said that I hasten to add that the breed has schortcomings as reflected in the summary in your post and need for corrections is at hand.

 

[3MR]

Cattle that are slaughter younger tend to grade slightly better then older cattle, particularly if they were placed on high energy rations at an earlier age... Straight from the Article Number 7 of the additional contributors

I guess it depends on what they mean by younger and older.

I agree; placing them on the higher energy ration at an early age, ie at weaning or before, or using less aggressive implants will help grade. As im sure you know, creating grade beaf is a slow process that takes the entire life of the animal, not something you can do with aggresive hormones and feed in the last 90 days before slaughter.

This all goes back to my personal belief and theory that the decline in higher grade beef in the US is a result of producers working towards increased carcass weight over higher meat grades. Grade and carcass weight usually work against each other in the short term.

 

[Angus Guy]

Next week the AAA is having an outreach seminar in my area of which I'm going to attend. This thread and some of the others are going to be some of the questions I will ask. I have printed some of the comments made so I will have the concerns of others right in front of me (so I do'nt get something wrong) when talking to them. I will try to take some notes to share back with all of you.

 

[IL Rancher]

Hey Angus Guy, Where is this meeting at, you aren't too far away from here.. Is it for AAA members only?

 

[Dusty]

I also believe that you can attend those AAA meetings online at http://www.liveauctions.tv also..

Guys the reason i write these posts, along with other breeders about CAB is to open the eyes of commercial cattlemen and help refine the techniques of discussion within various regions of the US>. Lets take a look at this, if 3 people take this conversation to the local Coffee Shop and bring it up progress is made.. I encourage everyone to get involved and state you opinion with out your voice,, uneducated producers are left to think CAB is the best,, When CAB is far from perfect, but trying to make strides!!

Smile everyone... Let me have it

 

[Brandonm2]

Larry Corah and Mark McCully, authors of the latest study for CAB.. reported the five primary factors they believe are contributing to the decline Quality Grades:

1. Health Problems
2. Feeding by-products
3. Large Feedlots lowering production
4. Indaquate nutrition
5. Impant Usage

1. health problems.....So they are telling us that we have the worst health status we have ever seen??? That is plausible. BVD type II, respiratory infections, Johne's are much more serious threats but are they really telling us that we have been getting sicker and sicker cattle consistently since 1975??? Even if that IS true, we need genetics with better immunity to infection, especially since antibiotic use is likely too be further regulated.

2. Feeding by-products.......this is absolute nonsense. Quality grade has been in decline for a generation. Even when corn was $1.50 a bushel. Distillers grains may well make this problem even worse; but this problem has been growing long before ethanol powered cars were anything other than a novelty item. I attended a conference in 1993 where sucking quality grades was featured topic and NOW we would kill too go back to the level of Choice found in 1990.


3. larger feedlots......better feedlot management clearly is needed (and that probably is also related to #1); but ultimately we have too produce the cattle that will thrive in the environment we ask them too thrive in so identifying the genetics which perform in the ACTUAL feedlot and not just in some purebreeders front pasture has got to be a focus so I think this goes back too genetics too.



4. Indaquate nutrition. This one makes no sense at all. Weaning weights are higher than ever before so obviously the calves are eating as good as ever. Maybe better feed rations at the giant feed lots are needed; but again I don't think it is really possible too claim that 1975 feedlots were better at balancing feed rations than 2007s but even if that is totally true it still comes down too providing genetics that will grade on the feed that we have.


5. Implant Usage. This does make some sense; but does anybody really have any data showing that if we stop implanting all together that 70% of the cattle will grade Choice or better like they USED to do? Most studies show that the implants pay for themselves. Until the science shows them to be costing us more than they are gaining us (or govt takes them away) I think we need too find cattle that will grade despite the implant. That means identifying the genetics which work in the real world.


The feedlots, drug manufacturers, ranchers, feed millers, etc may all have roles too play in reversing this trend by becoming better managers or suppliers; BUT ultimately SOMEBODY (whether it be Angus breeders, Hereford breeders, Charolais breeders, Simmental breeders, Limousin breeders, Brangus breeders, composite creators, all of the above, some breeders not listed above, whomever) has got to give the industry cattle which will perform at an acceptable level in the pasture, in the feedlot, on the kill floor, and on the plate. If the cattle are failing it is ultimately the fault of the genetics.

 

[3MR]

I agree genetics has something to do with it, but I also blame that on the producer practice of chasing higher carcass weights over higher grades.

Their is no doubt that cross bred animals have the ability to produce higher grades over straight breed animals, but if we as producers chose too, we could all raise animals that predomitaly grade choice regardless of breed. Instead we have done the opposite. We have bred and practiced methods that increase carcass weights at the expense of grade.

The lower price of by product feed led to more animals being fed out for increased weights immediatly prior to slaughter which leads to lower grades. Bi product feeds are not limited to ethanol bi products and have been around for a long time.

 

[3MR]

Im going to have to continue to dissagree with you. We have been slaughtering higher and higher carcass weights. Color does get you a higher return, but not over carcass weight. Im not saying producers havent been breeding black, I know they have. I understand they have been doing this to the detriment of grade. This is because of individual bull choice, not breed. Your high priest :lol: Mile C has spoken on this many times.

But; if you are saying they havent been chasing higher carcass weights then I dont think you are looking close enough and are ignoring what is pretty much common knowledge.

 

[3MR]

Thats why I try to call them producers rather than breeders, feedlots, etc., but it is a combined problem, IMO. The feedlots wouldnt be buying them if the breeder wasnt selling them. The feedlots are the ones using the aggressive implant and feedings though, again IMO.

Yes, Mike C has a church. Its called the Breeds Thread. Ocassionaly he has a revival in an adjacent thread. He has also been known to do private services.

 

[3MR]

PS: I wouldnt pay him to much homage though. It might go to his head and the next thing you know he will be passing the collection plate. :lol:

 

[dun]

Thats why I try to call them producers rather than breeders, feedlots, etc., but it is a combined problem, IMO. The feedlots wouldnt be buying them if the breeder wasnt selling them. The feedlots are the ones using the aggressive implant and feedings though, again IMO.

Yes, Mike C has a church. Its called the Breeds Thread. Ocassionaly he has a revival in an adjacent thread. He has also been known to do private services.

I would tend to agree with you on this. The average cow/calf operation sells by weight at around 5 months. Then off to the feed yard. (weight determined at the sale barn scale in most cases).

And I would agree that the packer wants to get as much as he can simply due to demand and currrent pricing.

To blame CAB for all the issues in the system won't help anybody. CAB responds to the buyers while AAA works on quality issues in the breed. If breedback is a problem then maybe the breeders need some more education. If the problem is at the feedyard - same thing - education.

Too often we see on these boards and in coversation with other producers "I sell pounds". Pretty much tells me that although there is a lot of lip service given to quality grade, not everyone carrys through with it.

dun

 

[Badlands]

Carcass weight has positive phenotypic and genetic correlations with marbling.

Hence, as carcass weight increases, so does marbling.


Next argument, please?


Badlands

 

[BRG]

Ranchers and feedlots sell by the lbs, and the more of them you have the more you make. If things were to change and the packers were give you a better premium for the better grades instead of docking you harder for a poorer one, things might change some. In this business you have to sell what pays the most, and right now that is ussually pounds and not grids. In my opinion, the grids are made for the packer not the rancher or feeder.

 

[Frankie]

Ranchers and feedlots sell by the lbs, and the more of them you have the more you make. If things were to change and the packers were give you a better premium for the better grades instead of docking you harder for a poorer one, things might change some. In this business you have to sell what pays the most, and right now that is ussually pounds and not grids. In my opinion, the grids are made for the packer not the rancher or feeder.

Almost half the cattle sold are sold on some sort of grid. The cattle business isn't made up of many premiums, but lots and lots of discounts. Whatever you can do to avoid those will help you be profitable.

 

[Frankie]

Carcass weight has positive phenotypic and genetic correlations with marbling.

Hence, as carcass weight increases, so does marbling.


Next argument, please?


Badlands

Not if the weight goes on quickly because of implants.