Cattle Are Losing Muscle!!!

[Jake]

Brandon and dun, The whole point in getting a larger ribeye is because ribeye area is equated to a higher-yielding animal with less fat.

Not just because it has a large ribeye or T-Bone to put on the table!

Ribeye area directly correlates to more lean muscle tissue.

That's why we should use ribeye area in our bull selection criteria.

yes, but you don't want to large of a REA because then you run into the problems simmies had with being too large. We'd be backtracking to the 80s if a happy medium isn't found. Which would be worse than having yield grade 3s and 4s

 

[greenwillowherefords]

Even though people squack about the smaller ribeye on some breeds, they still have to "fit the box". I don;t recall the exact figures but it's something like a T-bone of 1 lb and 1 inch thick is the optimum for retail markets.

dun

dun, I don't know how to gently say this...................
but here goes...................The "fit the box" argument is nothing but a load of crap. The discounts in beef only come when the carcass gets over 950 lbs. That's a huge carcass!Packers want high yielding cattle. Especially Tyson and Excel.

A 15 to 16 sq.in. ribeye is optimum.

I apologize up front for the frankness, but it's true.

That's one opinion, but the packer isn;t the one we have to satisfy, it's the consumer that is eating our product.

dun

Well said, Dun. There is a reason for the popularity of CAB and CHB, not to mention Ridgefield, and it is not because the consumer is longing for a ribeye that will hang off their plate. It is the eating experience that comes with the quality product. I'm certainly not against increasing our REA or yield grades, but I don't want to sacrifice the quality of the final product to get there. I firmly believe that the next few years will bring about more changes than we expect.

 

[dun]

I guess I shouldn;t be satisfied with the piddly little 13-13.5 inch ribeyes, high choice yg 2s with a hot carcass in the 760-780 range that earn a small permium from the feedlots.

dun

 

[MikeC]

I guess I shouldn;t be satisfied with the piddly little 13-13.5 inch ribeyes, high choice yg 2s with a hot carcass in the 760-780 range that earn a small permium from the feedlots.

dun

Dun, I hope you realize that no one is condemning your own personal cattle and/or management skills.

The article referenced is voicing concern for the cattle industry as a whole. Not the people who are already ahead of the curve.

 

[ollie]

While I respect both sides of this argument I lean toward Mike. We are selling protein . We also have to have a quality eating experience to market our product. I wonder if anyone has any data related to total beef sales in pounds over the last few years. A percent or two less yeild may have a factor in the high prices of recent years.

 

[dun]

I talked with a couple of different folks around here, granted they're british breeders, but their feeling is that the 15-16 inch ribeyes are fine and dandy for the yield grade grid, but not for the qaulity grid.
I still think a lot of it has to do with knowing your market and hitting that market.
I didn;t take the comments persoanlly, I just think that there's alwasy more then one way of looking at data. Like the half empty or half full question, it's in the perspective.

dun

 

[MikeC]

I talked with a couple of different folks around here, granted they're british breeders, but their feeling is that the 15-16 inch ribeyes are fine and dandy for the yield grade grid, but not for the qaulity grid.
I still think a lot of it has to do with knowing your market and hitting that market.
I didn;t take the comments persoanlly, I just think that there's alwasy more then one way of looking at data. Like the half empty or half full question, it's in the perspective.

dun

Again, it's not the issue of ribeye size, it's an issue of yield grades. The author of the article could have included backfat measurements as a criteria for a bull buying decision also.
But since there are so many angus and hereford calves on the market that were sired by less than desirable Ribeye area bulls, maybe he thought that Ribeye would get us better yield grades faster. I take the entire article as a warning to seedstock producers that changes should made. It won't be done until the commercial producer demands it though.

Problem is, so many commercial producers have no idea of what they are raising.

 

[Jake]

Problem is, so many commercial producers have no idea of what they are raising.

the real problem is that most of them don't care.

 

[Anonymous]

Problem is, so many commercial producers have no idea of what they are raising.

the real problem is that most of them don't care.

Mike and Jake - that may be the case where you folks live, but where I come from - unless you talk hobby folks - I could not disagree more.

The local commercial producers group here in my county consists of about 100 producers. Most of these guys are fairly large with herds in the 100's - they are pretty darned sure they want to raise a good calf - spend as few dollars as possible doing so - and in the end maximize their profits.

That may have something to do with the fact that we have been doing our darndest to survive for the past two years - meaning that we have to optimize breeding, maximize health of cow and growth of calf - and in the end - minimize input costs.

Otherwise you go belly up. And believe me - even though we are not out of danger due to horrendous losses over the past couple of years that have to be "made up for", those that have made it this far are danged serious about raising cattle.

JMHO

Bez'

 

[MikeC]

BEZ

Mike and Jake - that may be the case where you folks live, but where I come from - unless you talk hobby folks - I could not disagree more.

I ain't touching this. I brought up the fact that hobby folks sometimes produce inferior cattle/beef the other day and had hell to pay. I was even told that there is a need for less than desirable beef! :roll:

 

[Jake]

Problem is, so many commercial producers have no idea of what they are raising.

the real problem is that most of them don't care.

Mike and Jake - that may be the case where you folks live, but where I come from - unless you talk hobby folks - I could not disagree more.

The local commercial producers group here in my county consists of about 100 producers. Most of these guys are fairly large with herds in the 100's - they are pretty darned sure they want to raise a good calf - spend as few dollars as possible doing so - and in the end maximize their profits.

That may have something to do with the fact that we have been doing our darndest to survive for the past two years - meaning that we have to optimize breeding, maximize health of cow and growth of calf - and in the end - minimize input costs.

Otherwise you go belly up. And believe me - even though we are not out of danger due to horrendous losses over the past couple of years that have to be "made up for", those that have made it this far are danged serious about raising cattle.

JMHO

Bez'

I'm not saying that they don't care about the animal and how it looks, they just don't care so much about what's inside. They don't feel the hits or get the premiums so why should they care?

 

[greenwillowherefords]

BEZ

Mike and Jake - that may be the case where you folks live, but where I come from - unless you talk hobby folks - I could not disagree more.

I ain't touching this. I brought up the fact that hobby folks sometimes produce inferior cattle/beef the other day and had hell to pay. I was even told that there is a need for less than desirable beef! :roll:

I would even dare to say that I've seen some pretty good sized operations that produced inferior cattle/beef too!

I know he isn't a USDA expert, but I closely question my butcher about his opinion of the marbling and ribeye size of the calves that I butcher, which are closely related to my registered stock (for example sired by bulls I am or have used, or raised) because I want to know as much as I can about where I am carcass-wise.

 

[Editor]

A little off topic I guess, but Jay Nixon was eat up with plain common sense. You may not have liked everything he wrote, but he was sensible. I wonder if Cattle Today has an archive of his articles?

There are several Jay Nixon articles in our archives. Just go the the Archives under cattletoday.com and type Jay Nixon in the search. I think there are about 23 entries. ENJOY!