Cattle Management Practices for Enhancing Beef Tenderness
- Thread starter dcara
- Start date
Help Support CattleToday:
brianna":2ciqrwnd said:
I have no idea how efficient Murrey Grey cattle are I've never had any in the feedlot. However I do know they will never save you $11,000 worth of feed on 50 head. You still have lost income.
Susie David
Well-known member
We have been absorbing all the MG info and opinions for the past few years in the attempt to produce beef with increased yield and flavor.
We currently have a farm full of Angus, Limousin, Hereford and baldys. We have been getting 61-62% on our slaughters and 32-35% loss on the carcasses...any opinions on the MG improving our yields?
Thanks DMc
We currently have a farm full of Angus, Limousin, Hereford and baldys. We have been getting 61-62% on our slaughters and 32-35% loss on the carcasses...any opinions on the MG improving our yields?
Thanks DMc
Susie David":190v62gf said:
Well just by looking at the numbers stated here in a earlier post I'm doubting Murrey Greys can help you much on the increased yield. OK Jeanne stated they sell at 1200# live and that comes out to 720 dressed. Only 60% yield and that is far below what you are currently dressing.
OK Jeanne stated they sell at 1200# live and that comes out to 720 dressed. Only 60% yield and that is far below what you are currently dressing.[/quote]
Didn't she also say that they were finished on grass? Grass finished cattle generally yield slightly less don't they? Does anyone have any experience finishing them with grain?
Didn't she also say that they were finished on grass? Grass finished cattle generally yield slightly less don't they? Does anyone have any experience finishing them with grain?
hayray
Well-known member
OK Jeanne":2ha5dkzp said:
Feedlot production for the commodity market and feeding out your own cattle for direct marketing are two very different business. Heavy weights and larger framed cattle tend to produce a lower percentage of choice grade carcasses even though they may be more efficient producers of lean. I don't see any problem with your weights at all. Some of my Herefords and Angus go to slaughter at lighter weights than that. It also depends if they have been backgrounded before being put on full feed, - in that case heavy finished weights but lower percentage yield of choice and prime. If put on full feed at 450-500 pounds than slaughtering at 1000-1200 pounds may be a more efficient weight to slaughter while producing a premium grade product but low quantity grade, otherwise producing a lot of fat, especially for heifers. The latest National Beef Quality audit just came out and it showed that despite more percentage of cattle being USDA inspected, a lower percentage are grading choice and more are being prodcuced with high surface fat. On a lot of my 1000 pounders I am still taking home 400 lbs. of meat.
At the end of a pretty good summer of grazing, our momma
cows(at weaning time) will weigh around 1200 to 1350---
that's a 3.5 to 4(or a tad over) frame score. At the end
of breeding season in mid August, our bulls would be around
2000 lbs or just a tad less(frame 5). Not every steer will
be exactly the same height or bone structure. The shorter
ones finish out earlier--have plenty of brisket, and enough
fat cover to hang well---a well padded tail head. The
taller ones take longer. We finish on winter wheat/rye/oats
on a bottom land field that is usually grazed from Oct or
Nov to around the end of January when we start taking
them to the butcher---several at a time, all sold in advance.
Truthfully, we don't fool with weighing them before loading
to go to the butcher---no real point in it. Our scale has
to be set up every time we use it & I really wish we had a
place where we could leave it all the time. It's a real
chore(and heavy) to drag it into the chute into place.
After they go into the cooler, we get the hanging weights and that's what determines what the customer owes. I was guessing 1200 lbs, but it might be from 1150 to 1400.
Our butcher is a retired meat inspector for state of Okla;
opened his own place after retiring. He tells us that our
beef consistently is choice or at worst high select. He can
tell when cutting if the steaks are tender or not. My dad
was a butcher also & used to pick out his own halves
at the packing house for his grocery store....he said he
could generally tell by the looks and feel of a side if it
was going to be tender or not.
It was my impression that grade is not the same as
tenderness. I would think a feedlot operator would be
more concerned with grade than tenderness; since
grade is based on visual marbling. I personally think that
is is foolish for anyone direct-marketing beef to NOT
do the genetic testing on their herd----why start out
the process with animals who have no genetic
propensity for tenderness? But I'm guessing that
feedlot operators do not get paid on tenderness---
just grade/yield. We are not in the feedlot/commodity
beef business and therefore have not struggled with
those small margins that add up to so much for that
type of operations. We have done significant study
regarding tenderness and have spent a wad of money
testing our herd to assure that we at least get a good
start on an excellent product for the customer.
cows(at weaning time) will weigh around 1200 to 1350---
that's a 3.5 to 4(or a tad over) frame score. At the end
of breeding season in mid August, our bulls would be around
2000 lbs or just a tad less(frame 5). Not every steer will
be exactly the same height or bone structure. The shorter
ones finish out earlier--have plenty of brisket, and enough
fat cover to hang well---a well padded tail head. The
taller ones take longer. We finish on winter wheat/rye/oats
on a bottom land field that is usually grazed from Oct or
Nov to around the end of January when we start taking
them to the butcher---several at a time, all sold in advance.
Truthfully, we don't fool with weighing them before loading
to go to the butcher---no real point in it. Our scale has
to be set up every time we use it & I really wish we had a
place where we could leave it all the time. It's a real
chore(and heavy) to drag it into the chute into place.
After they go into the cooler, we get the hanging weights and that's what determines what the customer owes. I was guessing 1200 lbs, but it might be from 1150 to 1400.
Our butcher is a retired meat inspector for state of Okla;
opened his own place after retiring. He tells us that our
beef consistently is choice or at worst high select. He can
tell when cutting if the steaks are tender or not. My dad
was a butcher also & used to pick out his own halves
at the packing house for his grocery store....he said he
could generally tell by the looks and feel of a side if it
was going to be tender or not.
It was my impression that grade is not the same as
tenderness. I would think a feedlot operator would be
more concerned with grade than tenderness; since
grade is based on visual marbling. I personally think that
is is foolish for anyone direct-marketing beef to NOT
do the genetic testing on their herd----why start out
the process with animals who have no genetic
propensity for tenderness? But I'm guessing that
feedlot operators do not get paid on tenderness---
just grade/yield. We are not in the feedlot/commodity
beef business and therefore have not struggled with
those small margins that add up to so much for that
type of operations. We have done significant study
regarding tenderness and have spent a wad of money
testing our herd to assure that we at least get a good
start on an excellent product for the customer.
hayray":j7pn57ex said:
We do both types (selling to the packer and direct marketing) and they come right out of the same pen. Direct marketing always yields higher and it has nothing to do with the weight of the cattle. The small locker plant is working for you and they watch for your best interest. The packing plants work for themselves and they watch out for themselves accordingly. I have a really hard time believing larger framed cattle grade poorly compared to smaller framed cattle. That must be why I'm paid more per cwt for the larger framed cattle huh?
Been reading here for a year or so. Decided to post after reading this thread.
I bought a Murray Grey bull a while back and now have my first bunch of calves from him. Most of my cows are Charolais.
First I'll say calving was a treat. I expect most of my cows could have 3 calves of the size of the Murray Grey. Never had much problem calving with Charolais bulls but there was a big one every once in a while.
Going from Charolais to this cross cut the frame size by 10-15% and that's pretty much held true through the first 5 months. I still have the calves and will sell in Jan. The biggest difference as of right now is leg length. Hard for me to get use to the height,but so far as filling out, the body still looks a lot like Charolais. Just shorter and bones a little smaller.
Color wise, they all have a darker skin. Can mainly see that in the ears and nose. Hooves are dark and some black. Eyes are black. Color of hair, some are white, some tan, have a few that look like black angus and even have a few that have gray hair. Had one steer that was almost blue(roan) for the first 4 months and then he darkened as he got older.
They are all very calm and most can be touched. A couple are like pets. If I had the time they could all be like pets.
I don't want to change the subject of this thread but haven't seen any post of crossing cattle with Murray Grey sires. So I thought I throw this in here. I'll also add even if you're not in to crossbreeding, the Murray Grey will make one of the best calf easing bulls you'll find. It's just a natural trait.
Hope I didn't break any rules for changing the subject just a little. Y'all have a nice day.
I bought a Murray Grey bull a while back and now have my first bunch of calves from him. Most of my cows are Charolais.
First I'll say calving was a treat. I expect most of my cows could have 3 calves of the size of the Murray Grey. Never had much problem calving with Charolais bulls but there was a big one every once in a while.
Going from Charolais to this cross cut the frame size by 10-15% and that's pretty much held true through the first 5 months. I still have the calves and will sell in Jan. The biggest difference as of right now is leg length. Hard for me to get use to the height,but so far as filling out, the body still looks a lot like Charolais. Just shorter and bones a little smaller.
Color wise, they all have a darker skin. Can mainly see that in the ears and nose. Hooves are dark and some black. Eyes are black. Color of hair, some are white, some tan, have a few that look like black angus and even have a few that have gray hair. Had one steer that was almost blue(roan) for the first 4 months and then he darkened as he got older.
They are all very calm and most can be touched. A couple are like pets. If I had the time they could all be like pets.
I don't want to change the subject of this thread but haven't seen any post of crossing cattle with Murray Grey sires. So I thought I throw this in here. I'll also add even if you're not in to crossbreeding, the Murray Grey will make one of the best calf easing bulls you'll find. It's just a natural trait.
Hope I didn't break any rules for changing the subject just a little. Y'all have a nice day.
MoGal
Well-known member
RMCVA - were you pleased with the prices your calves brought in January and if you didn't sell them then, how are they now?
Will you continue to keep this cross or no??
Will you continue to keep this cross or no??
MoGal
Well-known member
Thank you for the PM.... here's the response I got and wanted to share with the rest of you.... as some of you may be interested in it just like I was..........
Yes I sold those calves back in Jan. Can't say I was over excited with that bunch of calves. They came through a bad drought last year. Our county was declared a 70% loss. They and the cows were pulled through with low quality hay and corn gluten/soy hull pellets. So it wasn't a good year to compair them to others.
The weights were all over the place. From 720-355. The smaller ones were from first calf heifers. These were all spring calves too. Looked like all the calves born before April 15th did very good. The ones born later didn't grow as well. The other part was I kept them as long as I could and when I sold the market had already started to fall in Jan. Back in Jan. here heifers were going for 85-88 cent. So that was a big let down too. The steers did a little better 5 weights were going for 102 then. So I got hit with drought and lower prices on that bunch.
Now I have 5 MG sired calves from the fall calving bunch. The rest are Charolais sired. They were born in Sept and Oct. It had started to rain in Sept. and we had a great crop of stockpile fescue. Those 5 calves have grown great. In fact I'm going to keep several of the heifers. My spring bunch started on March 6th and have 15 so far, They are all MG sired. Have 10 more to calve. So I'm giving the cross another chance and hope the weather is better this year for a better test.
I guess I haven't given you a clear answer and did a lot of explaining on what went wrong. So I'll end with this. The MG crosses were good enough for me to give it another chance. There were some great calves in that bunch, there were some good calves in that bunch and there was a few that I call dinks and just wouldn't grow period. So I hope for lots of good green grass this year and get a better picture of what these crosses will do. And I'm going to use the MG bull in May again.
Sorry for the long post. But didn't want to give the idea they are fantastic or put the cross down. Just need a better year to see what they'll do. And I hope the good Lord sees fit to have it rain a lot more than last year. One more year like last year will finish many of us off here with cattle. So far we're in much better shape than last year now. Got some subsoil moisture at this time. Had none last year.
Thanks for asking.
RM
Yes I sold those calves back in Jan. Can't say I was over excited with that bunch of calves. They came through a bad drought last year. Our county was declared a 70% loss. They and the cows were pulled through with low quality hay and corn gluten/soy hull pellets. So it wasn't a good year to compair them to others.
The weights were all over the place. From 720-355. The smaller ones were from first calf heifers. These were all spring calves too. Looked like all the calves born before April 15th did very good. The ones born later didn't grow as well. The other part was I kept them as long as I could and when I sold the market had already started to fall in Jan. Back in Jan. here heifers were going for 85-88 cent. So that was a big let down too. The steers did a little better 5 weights were going for 102 then. So I got hit with drought and lower prices on that bunch.
Now I have 5 MG sired calves from the fall calving bunch. The rest are Charolais sired. They were born in Sept and Oct. It had started to rain in Sept. and we had a great crop of stockpile fescue. Those 5 calves have grown great. In fact I'm going to keep several of the heifers. My spring bunch started on March 6th and have 15 so far, They are all MG sired. Have 10 more to calve. So I'm giving the cross another chance and hope the weather is better this year for a better test.
I guess I haven't given you a clear answer and did a lot of explaining on what went wrong. So I'll end with this. The MG crosses were good enough for me to give it another chance. There were some great calves in that bunch, there were some good calves in that bunch and there was a few that I call dinks and just wouldn't grow period. So I hope for lots of good green grass this year and get a better picture of what these crosses will do. And I'm going to use the MG bull in May again.
Sorry for the long post. But didn't want to give the idea they are fantastic or put the cross down. Just need a better year to see what they'll do. And I hope the good Lord sees fit to have it rain a lot more than last year. One more year like last year will finish many of us off here with cattle. So far we're in much better shape than last year now. Got some subsoil moisture at this time. Had none last year.
Thanks for asking.
RM
novatech
Well-known member
somn":392shipl said:
There is a chart on this site for feed efficiency
http://www.geneticsolutions.com.au/file ... 010_FE.pdf
