easy keepers

[turning grass into beef]

on a previous post, it was noted that "cattle that convert high energy rations efficiently into beef don't always convert grass into beef efficiently." if that is the case, there are a lot of commercial cattlemen that pay a pretty premium for bulls that have performed well on feed tests - in hopes to sell a few extra pounds of backgrounded yearling calves.

Rob, on this issue I agree 100%. I believe there are a lot of commercial cattlemen that pay big dollars for bulls that perform well on high energy rations. I can only assume that they are doing this in the hopes of selling a few extra pounds of backgrounded yearling calves.
I also believe that these same people do not take into account the effect that this has on their cow herd. If they are keeping replacements then in the coming years the feed costs to keep those cows in condition will increase. Too many people simply look at the weights of their calves from year to year to see if they are making progress. Maximizing returns does not necessarily maximize profits. If you use a bull that does not efficiently convert roughage to beef, that will negatively affect your input cost on your cow herd in the years to come (assuming you keep replacements).

 

[MikeC]

rocket 2222 wrote: Its the "expected" part that bothers me.

Maintenance and growth requirements of cattle is down to a science.

They are looking for only the "Biological" differences in the RFI research.

Ok, help out the village idiot here. How can a yearling bull in a test have a good feed conversion, good ADG, good REA, good IMF, low backfat, but have a worse RFI than a contemporary that had a terrible feed conversion and lower ADG with slightly lower backfat?

I'm probably missing the big picture, but out of those two animals, I know which one I'm picking. While I do believe RFI will become an important tool, I'm not sure they have it perfected yet.

ADG and FCR will eventually lead to increases in mature body size.

RFI does not.

RFI/NFI measures feed efficiency irregardless of maintenance requirements.

We have been choosing higher performing animals based on ADG and FCR for years but have grown the herd larger as a result. Wonderful???? Yes. But it comes with a cost.

Now which one would you choose?

 

[Red Bull Breeder]

Up until last year those high energy rations were cheap, you could feed them alot and still make money. You didn't have to be to smart to make a buck on cattle. Things have changed considerable!!Feed efficiency has just got realy important.

 

[Elder Statesman]

Rob, I meant poorer RFI not lower. Sorry for my bad choice of words. I have been involved with the GSBT in the past. That is where I came up with the scenario I mentioned before.

Mike, I agree with you on always choosing for high performance will lead to bigger mature weights. Not sure I agree with you on FCR. I have been compiling feedlot and carcass data for over 15 years. My cattle always do well with FCR but my cow size and weights have not changed. I don't choose bulls with the highest growth, but look for a more moderate animal with a good balance of traits. That is a problem some guys who chase the high YW epd's are facing now, too big of cows. The bull I mentioned did not have the highest ADG or even the best FCR.

I am a big believer in efficiency but I am going to choose the animal that can convert feed efficiently while producing a good carcass. In today's ballgame, optimum lbs. produced by converting as little feed as possible(grain or forage)into a quality carcass is what makes me and most producers money. That may change in the future. So in the case of the two bulls I mentioned before, I'm picking the bull with the poorer RFI.

I think RFI will become a useful tool. But just like ultrasound in the early days, I don't think it has been perfected yet. And I definitely wouldn't use it as the sole tool in selecting replacement cattle. But that is my opinion and I have been known to be wrong before. Even admitted it once or twice.

Red Bull, feed efficiency has always been important to some of us. Now it seems a lot of folks are jumping on the wagon. $4.00 corn and $1200 per acre pasture will do that.

Good discussion guys.

 

[ROB]

an interesting article: discussion concerning doability, RFI & FCR. many of you may have already read this but to me - it further confirms that RFI studies on the replacement heifers will further enhance the traits i am looking for (when properly combined with other attributes obtained in an actual feed test). additionally, with this being a hypothetical test, who's to say that the feed ration has to be a high energy ration. with the testing facility equipment at green springs, any feed ration could be used to do the research. would that prove to be more beneficial?

http://beefmagazine.com/mag/predicting_doability/

ROB

 

[EAT BEEF]

Somthing to think about most of us don't have perfect conditions to run cows in I think our feed will only let us produce so much growth. So if you have an 40ww-80yw bull and a 60ww-110yw bull how much more ww are we going to get without near perfect conditions? I don't think it will be to much but I'm not sure.If you are keeping replacments the lower # bull will almost always give you a more functional cow.

 

[rocket2222]

rocket 2222 wrote: Its the "expected" part that bothers me.

What bothers you about this? Maintenance and growth requirements of cattle is down to a science.

They are looking for only the "Biological" differences in the RFI research.

At a large feedlot in Kansas that uses the CVDS software, among other tools, they can predict almost exactly how much feed it will take to finish a pen of steers, how long it will take to finish them, what they will yield and grade at finishing, and the cost of doing so.

I've seen the data and it would surprise the skeptics.

Dang Mike, to think, this was the year I was going combine my spring and fall calving groups, so that next year I would have enough head together so that it would be possible to get someone to come here and scan them at a reasonable cost. Now, all I need to do is visit the local Wally Mart, pick up this CVDS software, plug in a couple numbers, and voila, all the scan data I need, and how much it cost me to get there. COOL :lol:

 

[MikeC]

Now, all I need to do is visit the local Wally Mart, pick up this CVDS software, plug in a couple numbers, and voila, all the scan data I need, and how much it cost me to get there. COOL

No, Wally doesn't carry the Cornell Value Discovery System software.

Besides, you'll still need to scan. :shock: