Frame Creep

[SRBeef]

I did not mean to start an argument here.

Having a processable (if that is a word!) steer at about 11 months fits with my goals because they would be coming right off of grazing standing corn and to the processor. I know that they would most likely not be fully "finished" as generally done growing.

If, however, they are smaller framed animals to begin with smaller frame score (1200-1300 lb FS 5) cows, my hope is that they would yield enough good quality beef to work nicely in my own freezer beef sales. At time when I can get a bit of a premium price especially if I have a premium quality product. I may still come out ahead compared to having maximum pounds later. And they would be corn finished.

Maybe these steers would weigh 1000-1050. If they would hang at 55% = 550 lb (on 1000 lb low end) and dress at 55% that gives me about 302 lb total or split halves that weigh about 75 lb. At $4/lb that grosses about $1200. - $275 (.50/lb USDA) processing = $ 925 net or the same as if that 1000 lb animal had brought 92 cents at the sale barn.

Not too many 1000 lb animals selling at the sale barn for 92 cents right now. These are conservative numbers. If I can get $4.50 (many boneless cuts) or if the animal weighs 1100 lb or if the hang and dress are 58% or 60% then things look better. At least I am not in the hole. Much. And if the sale barn looks more attractive then the trailer goes there instead of the processor.

This is a learning experience. A key part of this is being able to give a largely corn fed finish on my own with very low investment in equipment and time. As Knersie I believe said, let the cows (and then the calves) do the work. I am acres limited. With this type system I also have more options.

Once I get past stocker weight however it looks like I need to go all the way to the finish line. But at that point I can go a couple different marketing directions.

To get back to frame size etc... the 1200 lb cow I pictured above has given me a couple bull calves in previous years. Not from T21 but both steers stopped and appeared finished at about 1100. They tasted great from what I have been told and eaten myself.

Here is a picture of the last steer out of 66 sired by a friends Angus bull:

He was 1175 lb in this photo and finished on clover. With my bull's yearling weight EPD, if it comes through like his other EPD's so far, I should reach this point as soon or sooner when combining cows like 66's and T21 genetics.

If I can just move things up a bit gradually. And hold some unharvested standing corn for just these steers into April (if calved in March that would make them 13 months old coming off of corn to the processor) it seems like this might work. In WI I don't need to strip till until maybe 2nd week in May so they can still be in corn through April if I manage it right over the winter. I'm learning.

The grazing of corn is the key. Here is the process, last years grazed stalks (as they were in Oct 2008) in foreground:

Strip tilling into what was left near the same spot in the field this spring in early May:

The corn as it looked on 10/10/09 near the same spot. By the way these two rows were slightly different corn seed numbers. You can see the one on the right did not fill as well as the one on the left which is what I will be planting more of in the future. Corn is like cattle in that you need to find the right genetics for your system.

You can see the remains of last fall's grazed stalks on the ground between this year's rows:

The whole system has to fit together. The cattle genetics, the rotational grazing, the strip tilled/low input corn, the market for the beef. And this system overcomes about every objection the vegetarian crowd has against beef.

I think it may work with some tweaking. At least on my smaller scale. FWIW

Jim

 

[smnherf]

WDA is "weight per day of age" and it is figured by subtracting the birth weight from the end point weight and dividing that by the age (in days) and is not test ADG (which can be manipulated). I really couldn't care less what TWO steers did. That proves NOTHING, there is a healthy boss steer in every pen....(and you have to factor in the two steers that went to the sick pen and the one that died when you calculate ADG to be scientifically accurate on pen weights). I still say that it is highly unlikely that you can finish a whole calf crop year in 12 months year in and year out without pouring the grain down the throat of the nursing calves and/or their momas, without sacrificing marbling, and keeping the cows' size below 1200 lbs (in good flesh). Through out all this I have gone way out of my way to say it is POSSIBLE.

I know how to calculate WDA and the difference in ADG vs WDA and how some lots manipulate ADG figures. The two steers were merely examples to proove my point. They were part of the group of 42. I am saying that I don't think that the industry is as far away as what some people make it out to be. 3.75 lbs per day gain and over 3.25 lbs WDA is very achievable with todays gentics, even moderate framed genetics.

Brian

 

[Aero]

Are you saying I should ignore weaning and cow weights? I see what you are saying about being five years down the road, but the same thing could be said about lots of other traits too, for example fertility.

"how much is enough?" was the main point. figure out what your environment will support (without supplementation) and try to stabilize it. you can't just keep pushing weaning weights up and cow weights down. find a level and optimize the system as a whole. the laws of thermodynamics apply pretty well to cattle in this situation.

1st law: there is only so much energy/stuff. interpret - you are only going to get so much out of a cow; don't expect miracles.
2nd law: there is a natural tendency for every process; if you want to change the process, it takes energy. interpret - the more you want to change nature's way, the more energy it will take.

 

[smnherf]

Jim,

Looks like you have a well thought out plan and you are implimenting that plan. Good luck.

Brian

 

[SRBeef]

Jim,

Looks like you have a well thought out plan and you are implimenting that plan. Good luck.

Brian

Thank you for the kind words, Brian.

It is interesting but getting things rolling takes much longer than I had hoped. But never a dull moment!

Jim

 

[smnherf]

These bad performers need to have numbers submitted so their dams and sires numbers will adjust accordingly. It's not just the animals themselves that are affected.

Yes, that is the way the sytem works. When I remove them from the TPR list, I have to enter a disposal code, or a reason why I am removing them. The AHA then puts that number into their database and the numbers on their parents get adjusted accordingl to their epd model formula. Herefords implemented this system a number of years ago, as I believe red angus did too.Maybe other too I am unsure of. Most associations don't do it this way. They can pick and choose what data to submitt for analysis.

Brian

 

[Brandonm22]

I am not trying to be argumentative here; but if our system requires us to plant fields of corn, wouldn't it be more efficient too just drylot the cows, chop the corn into silage or haylage, and feed that direct to the cows rather than running the expense of planting a corn field and then letting the cows walk down 20-40% of the crop???

Smherf, I fully believe that we have the genetics to get 3.25 lbs per day WDA on 365 day old calves (NR is selling semen from sires that could do that on the right cows with the right management).......CAN we make MONEY putting the groceries into the calves to get that kind of growth is what I am really wondering. I can turn 19 pounds of baby pigs and ~3.5 tons of feed into 2800 pounds of market hogs in 185 days too, but all the numbers shows THAT is losing money.

 

[smnherf]

Are you saying I should ignore weaning and cow weights? I see what you are saying about being five years down the road, but the same thing could be said about lots of other traits too, for example fertility.

"how much is enough?" was the main point. figure out what your environment will support (without supplementation) and try to stabilize it. you can't just keep pushing weaning weights up and cow weights down. find a level and optimize the system as a whole. the laws of thermodynamics apply pretty well to cattle in this situation.

1st law: there is only so much energy/stuff. interpret - you are only going to get so much out of a cow; don't expect miracles.
2nd law: there is a natural tendency for every process; if you want to change the process, it takes energy. interpret - the more you want to change nature's way, the more energy it will take.

I agree 100% and understand what you were saying. That is exactly what I am in the process of doing. . Continual pushing cow weights down while pushing weaning weights eventually would mean having 900 lb cows weaning 900 lb calves. About as practicle as having 2000 lb cows weaning 1000 lb calves which is the direction the epd chase is taking us.

Brian

 

[Herefords.US]

Are you saying I should ignore weaning and cow weights? I see what you are saying about being five years down the road, but the same thing could be said about lots of other traits too, for example fertility.

"how much is enough?" was the main point. figure out what your environment will support (without supplementation) and try to stabilize it. you can't just keep pushing weaning weights up and cow weights down. find a level and optimize the system as a whole. the laws of thermodynamics apply pretty well to cattle in this situation.

1st law: there is only so much energy/stuff. interpret - you are only going to get so much out of a cow; don't expect miracles.
2nd law: there is a natural tendency for every process; if you want to change the process, it takes energy. interpret - the more you want to change nature's way, the more energy it will take.

I agree 100% and understand what you were saying. That is exactly what I am in the process of doing. . Continual pushing cow weights down while pushing weaning weights eventually would mean having 900 lb cows weaning 900 lb calves. About as practicle as having 2000 lb cows weaning 1000 lb calves which is the direction the epd chase is taking us.

Brian

I think there is a lot of agreement in this thread, but we're just saying different things in different ways.

For instance, Brian, I agree that you can get 1200 lb. cows to raise steers that will weigh and finish at 1400 lb. at 14 months. You've proven that! BUT! Would those heifers that are contemporaries to those steers also turn into 1200 lb. mature cows, like their dams? I kinda doubt it.

You are probably going to have to compromise somewhere.

Shoot, Jim is already compromising! His 1200 lb. mature cow weight range has already "creeped" up to 1200-1300 lb. now and those 1100 lb. 11-12 month steer weights have "creeped" down to 1000-1050! :tiphat:

George

 

[SRBeef]

I am not trying to be argumentative here; but if our system requires us to plant fields of corn, wouldn't it be more efficient too just drylot the cows, chop the corn into silage or haylage, and feed that direct to the cows rather than running the expense of planting a corn field and then letting the cows walk down 20-40% of the crop???

Yes it would be more efficient IF you had a drylot and IF you had a silo or bunker and IF you had equipment and time to do that... I'm not being argumentative also but just looking at things from a different perspective.

My original plan was to have the neighbor combine harvest the corn for grain and THEN graze the stalks has is commonly done in some areas...

I got into grazing be accident when the 2007 floods led to very late planting and wet harvest. It looks like 2009 is going to be another very late, high moisture corn harvest in many northern areas...

My main business is corn, soybeans and other row crops.

The cattle are an add-on to the strip till experiment. But an experiment I am getting excited about. Nothing like some really good home-grown steaks to get you fired up. I had a freezer beef customer tell me the other day that my ground beef "even smells good"...

I'm trying to see how much good beef can I profitably raise per acre. I have no "retirement" program so I guess #66, T21 and their buddies are going to have to support us...

Jim

George, 1200 lb cows weaning 630 lb calves at 205 days which can be harvested at about 1100 lb at 12-13 months coming off of corn stalks is my goal.

I've been around long enough to know that I may not have an entire herd with every cow and calf meeting those goals. However I am more and more convinced that I can gradually move my herd average toward those goals. We'll see over time. In the meantime I will probably end up with 1000 lb steers from 1300 or 1350 lb cows as I work towards the goals.

One problem with our society these days is that we want instant answers and feedback. One thing about cattle is that they do not respond on society's current schedule. As you know, everything with cattle takes time. Maybe in some ways that's one of the things I like about them.

Edit: Brandon, I forgot to address your point about trampling "20-40%" of the corn...From experience, those cattle do not leave much corn grain behind at all! In fact I would guess they leave less grain than some combines! Depending on how long you leave them on a restricted area you can make them clean up as much as you want, almost. I've found it best to let them eat the grain, the husks and the upper part of the stalk. Leave most of the stalk in place. This is probably no different than after combining. The key is the grain and they do not waste hardly any of that!

 

[smnherf]

I think there is a lot of agreement in this thread, but we're just saying different things in different ways.

For instance, Brian, I agree that you can get 1200 lb. cows to raise steers that will weigh and finish at 1400 lb. at 14 months. You've proven that! BUT! Would those heifers that are contemporaries to those steers also turn into 1200 lb. mature cows, like their dams? I kinda doubt it.

You are probably going to have to compromise somewhere.


George[/quote]

Well we are saying a lot of the same things in different ways. The sire to the steers is only about 54" tall mature at best so he won't add a lot of frame, but he does add quite a bit of dimension. Maybe they will weigh 1300 lbs. :lol2: :lol2:

Brian

 

[Herefords.US]

Jim, I just hope we're both around here at CT 3 years from now where you can tell me how much that heifer calf sucking your 1200 lb. cow weighs - in similar condition to what her dam is in that picture. I'm betting that it'll be a lot closer to 1400 lb. (or even higher) than 1200 lb.

But I've been wrong before!

Regardless of what she eventually weighs, she's a real dandy - and I'll bet she makes a good cow!

George

 

[WichitaLineMan]

Yes, that is the way the sytem works. When I remove them from the TPR list, I have to enter a disposal code, or a reason why I am removing them. The AHA then puts that number into their database and the numbers on their parents get adjusted accordingl to their epd model formula. Herefords implemented this system a number of years ago, as I believe red angus did too.Maybe other too I am unsure of. Most associations don't do it this way. They can pick and choose what data to submitt for analysis.

Brian

I'd say that that works fine for stayability EPDs, but it is still skewing BW, WW and Milk data for sure. I think in the pure sense of the term a disposal means just that a disposal not that you moved her over to another pasture. The weaning weights and birth weights that those bloodlines are producing need to get into the system. The more data that is there the better. Lets say you had 'Ol Ranger who sired 10 daughters and you had 5 good uns and 5 bad uns. You move the bad uns to the "commercial" herd and you are skewing the data for 'Ol Ranger. Those 5 good uns may stay in your herd for 10 years and raise calves with below avg BW, and above Avg WW. 'Ol Ranger is getting the benefit of these cows added to his maternal numbers but the 5 nags in the commercial herd are no longer there to give the true picture of this bull as a maternal sire.

Hey, rationalize it any way you want but it is skewing data.

 

[Brandonm22]

Lets say you had 'Ol Ranger who sired 10 daughters and you had 5 good uns and 5 bad uns. You move the bad uns to the "commercial" herd and you are skewing the data for 'Ol Ranger. Those 5 good uns may stay in your herd for 10 years and raise calves with below avg BW, and above Avg WW. 'Ol Ranger is getting the benefit of these cows added to his maternal numbers but the 5 nags in the commercial herd are no longer there to give the true picture of this bull as a maternal sire.

Hey, rationalize it any way you want but it is skewing data.

MOST people who move registered Herefords over to their commercial herd are going to then breed them to Angus, Brahmans, Simmentals, Red Angus, Santa Gertrudis, or Charolais to sell good F1 females (in a lot of places worth more than the reg Herf heifers). Those 5 cows who were in the bottom half of production raising straightbred calves probably added 50 pounds to their weaning weights by raising crossbred calves. DO you really want the AHA too include THAT data???

 

[Oldtimer]

I'll deal with the bugaboos related to frrame five cattle before I'll embrace the disasters that are frame 7 and 8. Spent a few hours today looking at the freaks that passed for cattle in the late 80's early 90's. Big framed-big pelvic cattle have bigger BW calves so your really not accomplishing much by selecting for that. We measured them for a few years and didn't see any reason to continue. When we started running Charolais in the late 60's we had lots of 1,000 poiund cows could have those calves so I'm thinking a small cow can have a big pelvis. There';s lots of 5 foot tall women have had ten pound kids and lived to tell about it lol.

It was best summed up on another site the other day- by a Canadian rancher and AI rep (that must have started AIing about not too long after I did (60"s))- back when everything (all breeds) soon was promoted as having to be or match the biggest continentals and draft cows being imported ( we were told they were the "saviour" for the North American beef industry, back then)...

Well I'm covered with dust and spider webs but I found some of my A'I archives -catalogues pretty much from the advent of A'I to the present. As I look through them-we had some great cattle in the late 60's early 70's then when I get to the late 80's early 90's I have to wonder WTF were people thinking.

 

[SRBeef]

Jim, I just hope we're both around here at CT 3 years from now where you can tell me how much that heifer calf sucking your 1200 lb. cow weighs - in similar condition to what her dam is in that picture. I'm betting that it'll be a lot closer to 1400 lb. (or even higher) than 1200 lb.

But I've been wrong before!

Regardless of what she eventually weighs, she's a real dandy - and I'll bet she makes a good cow!

George

Well, If I'm alive and kicking in three years you're on. I am also going to try to get all of my herd's hip height when the vet and I work them in a couple weeks. Keeping a record of her frame height should over time let us see where this heifer is head as far as frame score shouldn't it?

By the way, I seem to remember reading somewhere that a cows "mature weight" is her weight right after calving?? is that correct?

Jim

 

[Ned Jr.]

By the way, I seem to remember reading somewhere that a cows "mature weight" is her weight right after calving?? is that correct?

Jim

I thought it was their weight at weaning? This is a very good question. My cows vary quite a bit. They have good grass threw the summer and probably average around 1,400 lbs. in the fall. Some years we can't even see the ground for the six months of winter we sometimes get and when I weigh them after calving they might only average around 1,200lbs.. Do I have 1,200 lb. cows or 1,400 lb. cows?

 

[SRBeef]

By the way, I seem to remember reading somewhere that a cows "mature weight" is her weight right after calving?? is that correct?

Jim

I thought it was their weight at weaning? This is a very good question. My cows vary quite a bit. They have good grass threw the summer and probably average around 1,400 lbs. in the fall. Some years we can't even see the ground for the six months of winter we sometimes get and when I weigh them after calving they might only average around 1,200lbs.. Do I have 1,200 lb. cows or 1,400 lb. cows?

I think in many years the cows get pulled down below their "normal" weight at weaning time after nursing a now large calf for 205 days. I seem to recall the logic was that right after calving they are at their "basic" weight. This year with the good grass, frankly my cows weights have not varied that much all summer so it may not make a difference when you weigh them this year. Last year they were too thin at weaning and that was my fault. In fact checking back on my Cattlemax data, one of them was down to 1135 lb at weaning last fall. This same cow was at 1270 this year when I last weighed her in early September and looks to be about the same now.

I would think that right after calving would be a more consistent base weight.

Good question though. Maybe I'm wrong. Jim

 

[dun]

Mature weight is calculated on a BCS of 5. If the BCS is different then that you have to add or subtract pounds based on the BCS variation from 5.
Not sure about when the mature weight is calculated but I would assume it's at weaning. But that's only because the ARAA doesn;t have data submitted for BCS and weight at calving only at weaning. Just my twisted logic

 

[smnherf]

Yes, that is the way the sytem works. When I remove them from the TPR list, I have to enter a disposal code, or a reason why I am removing them. The AHA then puts that number into their database and the numbers on their parents get adjusted accordingl to their epd model formula. Herefords implemented this system a number of years ago, as I believe red angus did too.Maybe other too I am unsure of. Most associations don't do it this way. They can pick and choose what data to submitt for analysis.

Brian

I'd say that that works fine for stayability EPDs, but it is still skewing BW, WW and Milk data for sure. I think in the pure sense of the term a disposal means just that a disposal not that you moved her over to another pasture. The weaning weights and birth weights that those bloodlines are producing need to get into the system. The more data that is there the better. Lets say you had 'Ol Ranger who sired 10 daughters and you had 5 good uns and 5 bad uns. You move the bad uns to the "commercial" herd and you are skewing the data for 'Ol Ranger. Those 5 good uns may stay in your herd for 10 years and raise calves with below avg BW, and above Avg WW. 'Ol Ranger is getting the benefit of these cows added to his maternal numbers but the 5 nags in the commercial herd are no longer there to give the true picture of this bull as a maternal sire.

Hey, rationalize it any way you want but it is skewing data.

Not if you sent data in on the 5 cows that you moved to commercial herd. If you enter the performance data in and then tell the AHA to put an inferior production disposal code on them, that sticks with the sire and the dam for ever in the analysis.

Call it what you want, but I am not going to continue spending resources on what I deem inferior cattle. Every female you bring into the herd doesn't work out. I looked up the data on the two cows. The 0117 cow had 4 calves submitted for data. She ratioed 101 for BW and 104.3 for WW. Lots of big name bulls with tons of semen selling have less data submitted on them than this cow does. She is hamburger now as she either was open or lost her calf this past spring. The 0331 cow had 2 calves submitted for data. She ratioed 97.5 WW and 110.3 WW. She is bred to a black bull. If the data is skewed, it is probably to the downward side then.