Cow size as it relates to finished steer

[BC]

I know the topic of cow size has been discussed numerous times. We all talk about wanting smaller more efficient cows (1000 to 1200 lbs), but my question is how do we produce the 1350 to 1475 steer that the packers now desire.

The latest data on carcass data from USDA shows the average steer carcass was 898 lbs. That is 16 lbs. lighter than last year when we know we fed cattle too long. Depending on what dressing percent you get (61% to 63%), that is going to mean a 1425 to 1475 lb. live steer to get a 898 lb carcass.

 

[Supa Dexta]

Smaller cows can still have larger calves, as well as be brought up in weight themselves, from their working clothes. Target cw is 650-850 here. The trick is still getting the right frame to fat ratio, and getting them there quick and cheap as you can. Large carcasses don't help anyone.


Your reported dress percentages are always higher than ours also, but you're keeping parts we dont in that figure. We're high 50's

 

[Rusty Faucet]

What's wrong with producing 1200 lb. fats vs. 1400 pounders...we need to make our cattle smaller & effective to meet demand in the future not bigger. Big cattle are a waste of inputs and dollars.

 

[Margonme]

My cows don't fall into the 1000 to 1200 weight range. I been selling some bred heifers lately. Just turning that leaf over. What I am seeing is people want a bigger cow in these parts.

 

[BC]

What's wrong with producing 1200 lb. fats vs. 1400 pounders...we need to make our cattle smaller & effective to meet demand in the future not bigger. Big cattle are a waste of inputs and dollars.

There is nothing wrong with it, EXCEPT the Packers want a larger carcass. It cost them just as much to kill a 1200 lb steer as it does a 1450 lb. steer.

 

[Stocker Steve]

What's wrong with producing 1200 lb. fats vs. 1400 pounders...we need to make our cattle smaller & effective to meet demand in the future not bigger. Big cattle are a waste of inputs and dollars.

There is nothing wrong with it, EXCEPT the Packers want a larger carcass. It cost them just as much to kill a 1200 lb steer as it does a 1450 lb. steer.

2X

It does not take a big cow to produce a 1400# steer. Cow/calf guy needs efficient cows and growthy terminal bulls.

 

[WalnutCrest]

Growthy terminal bulls ... require heterosis only available from true fullblood bulls, preferably linebred.

 

[City Guy]

As a former restaurant owner I can tell you fine dining establishments, buffets, institutions and family restaurants don't want large cuts; fast food don't need them and most families can't afford them. That leaves only the roadhouses where steaks that hang over the edges of the plate are popular. Are there enough of them to dominate the market?

 

[Nesikep]

When I go to a steakhouse I'm usually rather disappointed in the 7oz steak... especially for $30

 

[True Grit Farms]

You guy's and your small steaks are fooling no one but yourselves. We can't produce enough quality cuts of beef in this country, so we have to import select cuts to meet the demands of the people. Just for those of you that don't know or realize, a cow is not all steaks.

 

[greybeard]

When I go to a steakhouse I'm usually rather disappointed in the 7oz steak... especially for $30

Same here. Disappointed that it's only 7 oz and too often, disappointed in quality and taste too, and then, glad it was only 7oz.

 

[WalnutCrest]

Most steaks I see in restaurants are covered in sauces, bacon or spices because the meat itself is bland.

Beef that was finished on a diverse diet is more flavorful. Beef that was harvested at an older age is also more flavorful.

As a nation, most beeves are harvested at young ages off a monoculture diet.

You shouldn't be surprised at the prevalence of bland steaks. Or hamburger. Or roasts.

 

[elkwc]

I know I want and select for cows in the 1,250-1,400 range with a top of 1,500. These cows overall make more money than the cows smaller than 1,250 for us. It takes a cow this size and a bull that will weigh at least 2,000 to raise the type of calves that will sell at the top here. They have to be at least a frame 5.0. Anything with a smaller frame is docked here. I want calves that grow fast and efficiently. Cost of gain is what it comes down too. Many breeder including seedstock producers have never fed a pen of cattle so don't know what it really takes to make money all the way to the market. And for smaller breeders that have 1-3 bulls and retain their heifers having a bull to raise terminal calves doesn't make sense. They need a cow/bull combo that will raise both and for us we have found the above works best in the current market. Many talk about wanting smaller moderate cattle. When I was looking for a bull this summer the only bulls left at most breeders were the smaller bulls that will mature less than a ton and a frame size less than 5.0. As one breeder told me that his customers keep saying they want more moderate cattle but when he raises them they buy the bigger ones and he can't sell the more moderate bulls. His moderate bulls are very good if they will work for you but I passed also. He said he was going back to raising all bulls with a little more frame as that is what is selling.

 

[City Guy]

Is it necessary to get top price to maximize profits? It's the total $$ left after expenses that matters, whether you raise large or small cattle.(Can you say WALMART?) I think most of the small cow enthusiasts are saying that even with the dock the overall profit is larger. I've worked it out on my "City Guy" computer a few times in different ways and it seems that , if one takes advantage of the small size (i.e. more cows on the same land and greater efficiency) the profits are higher most of the time, just not on a per cow basis. Of course, your cattle raising neighbors are going to make fun of your puny calves but if you have more money you can buy them coffee and donuts to shut them up!

I used to sell cars and it was the customers who were obsessed with getting the most for their trade-in that I made the most commission on, because they lost sight of the total deal. I can see that happening to anyone who thinks they MUST get "top price".

 

[City Guy]

More and more upscale restaurants these days are demanding more flavor and are contracting with local farmers to produce their products "the natural way".
The consumption of beef, per capita, is steadily dropping and you all have pointed out why. Beef, in general, is of poor quality and overpriced. The consumers don't care if cows go extinct, so long as they have some economical source of protein.
The meat packers, the butchers, and the truck drivers don't care so long as they have something to cut up, haul and sell. The feed lots have a lot to lose but could convert to feeding lambs, or hogs or ostriches. And ranchers could also change what they raise and sell. And it may come to that, unless we realize that cattle and other ruminants belong on the poor quality, steep slopes, hot, dry, cold, wet areas of the world, foraging on plants that nothing else will eat.Then and only then will beef stand a chance in the diets of the 22nd century. Either way, the beef industry as we know it today is doomed. The best way to adapt to change is to be the first to do it.

 

[WalnutCrest]

The best way to adapt to change is to be the third one to do it.

The first one gets eaten. The second gets eaten, too ... just in a different way.

The third guy stands a chance.

The 27th guy to change? Yeah, he dies too. He dies from starvation because he waited too long.

 

[City Guy]

WC: Interesting observation. BTW How much of Kansas is in the fescue belt, I've never been to Kansas.

 

[City Guy]

WC: OOPS, I take that back. I was in Shawnee Mission KS once, on business. Shawnee Mission turned out not to be an actual place, just a catch-all name for a bunch of small towns! Is that correct or did I dream the whole thing?

 

[WalnutCrest]

WC: OOPS, I take that back. I was in Shawnee Mission KS once, on business. Shawnee Mission turned out not to be an actual place, just a catch-all name for a bunch of small towns! Is that correct or did I dream the whole thing?

Kansas City is FULL of tiny independent 'towns' with no obvious markers that would tell you when you've left one and entered the other. Larger ones are always trying to annex smaller ones.

Fescue is limited to the eastern quarter of the state. The rest is native prairie, pretty much.

 

[elkwc]

WC: Interesting observation. BTW How much of Kansas is in the fescue belt, I've never been to Kansas.

In extreme SW KS there is some native but a lot of soil bank grass and a lot in CRP and some of it is being grazed now. The latter two are mixes and they vary as the gov't changed mixes a few times.