talldog
Well-known member
Harris Teeter carries a complete line of prime here and a decent price !! :tiphat:
Grass-fed -- a new post
- Thread starter edrsimms
- Start date
Help Support CattleToday:
grannysoo
Well-known member
talldog":2i1fxpdl said:
Sounds like you're one of them danged city slickers with their fancy grocery store nearby. We're nothing more than backwoods country hicks down in our area. :mrgreen:
At least we've got Wally-World.
mnmtranching
Well-known member
In spite of what is being implied here. Americans LOVE American beef. !00,000 head of domestic beef consumed daily. Americans #1 asked for food? YUP it's hamburger. US steaks, best in the world. Feedlots do a great job. Improve the average US steak, there working on it and getting better.
The main thing that does bring the quality down is the improper feeding. Things like skimping on grain, getting to much age on cattle, to slow of growth. Some of the reasons grass feeding went out with the advancement in technology.
For those that want grass fed fine do it. The majority of Americans are gonna want tasty juicy fed US steaks.
In the future there is likely to be more feeding in the US not less. We can produce the corn, soy, and alfalfa more efficiently then grow the grass. Makes for getting cattle to market younger at the desirable weight for quality beef.
The main thing that does bring the quality down is the improper feeding. Things like skimping on grain, getting to much age on cattle, to slow of growth. Some of the reasons grass feeding went out with the advancement in technology.
For those that want grass fed fine do it. The majority of Americans are gonna want tasty juicy fed US steaks.
In the future there is likely to be more feeding in the US not less. We can produce the corn, soy, and alfalfa more efficiently then grow the grass. Makes for getting cattle to market younger at the desirable weight for quality beef.
talldog
Well-known member
You're right Grannysoo---Harris Teeter is only 53 miles from the house. Don't believe I need any steaks this year ! :cowboy:
dun":1tcy5aom said:
Instead, our government gives the farmers handouts so they can compete with the imports. Of course, we call them subsidies to keep from offending anyone. I'm not certain of the solution and the far reaching effects of any changes, but, at least superficially, it makes sense to me to add a little tax on imports. This would allow US farmers to charge more for their product and be competitive. I think this would be better than using tax dollars to give farmers a decent living. Not to mention that most subsidies go to the largest producers which, as I understand it, was not the original intent.
S&WSigma40VEShooter
Well-known member
Unibomber manifesto. LMFAO
SixBucksADay
Member
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2009
- Messages
- 14
- Reaction score
- 0
I usually ignore the posts that promote an agenda, are far fetched, off base or just wrong. I understand my experience and opinions are also biased and I can live and learn from every experience, but your ramblings go too far and do the whole cattle industry a disservice to the point , I believe, they need to be addressed.
I've been reading through your posts. You make many assumptions and stereotypes as though cattle survive exclusively on grain. Your ramblings are misguided and lead those who are trying to understand the industry into confusion. There are many peole here that read for personal gain and knowledge (me included) and your posts mislead newcomers to the industry down the wrong road with biased, one-sided opinions (not science). Your 'lessons' to us serve only your agenda. You lack practical knowledge, it shows, and you are dangerous to the industry.
In the large scope of things cattle are finished on grain not raised on grain. They are finished, the last 1/4 to 1/3 of their approximate 14 month life cycle to increase IMF (intramuscular fat) and provide the taste that Americans and much of the world, identifies as a good tasting cut of meat. The grain feeding is to satisfy the market expectations. As cow /calf producers our cattle never see grain. It is too expensive. This notion that cows are raised on grain and it is affecting the lineage of breeding and gentics to the extent that we are now breeding inferior animals is crazy. You have been infected by someones agenda and are cherry-picking studies to support your premise.
Most cows exist their entire lives on grass and grass/alfalfa hay in the winter (northern herds). Feeding cows grain is not cost effective and unless you have a small hobby herd and want to pamper them (which is fine) your perception that all cows exist on grain and are therefore genetically inept now because of it, is absurd. A cow who outlives her usefullness as a brood animal will most likely go to slaughter and become, mostly hamburger and never see a grain ration. A cow has to maintain body condition, fertility, and raise a calf every year on the range and in the hills. The selection process is mostly based on her performance. Her performance is a function of her feed conversion abilities on grass. Her ability to take cellulose and everything else grass has to offer and do her best with it, affects her longevity and her status as a brood cow. The cows that maintain themselves best, have the best conformation, and raise the best and healthiest calves are the ones who's daughters are kept for replacements and therefore propagate their genetics. It has been this way since commercial cattle have been raised with and without the addition of technology. While technology allows us to analyze the animal further and deeper you will find an old timer with a keen eye will keep up with data assessment of gain and carcass traits (ultrasound) up to 75% of an analytical assessment alone. A visual assessment by someone with years of experience will forever excel on conformation values.
We run a large commercial herd and implement all of the latest technology; every aspect. We do our selection based on numbers and conformation and then have some of the old timers do their selection in an unbiased fashion. They have been right 75% of the time. This tells us that we would eventually acheive the same outcome, only using technology gets us there faster. Many of the animals that score well on ribeye area, IMF, and gain do not make the cut for conformation and so they are not retained. Some of the marginal carcass value heifers, that have exceptional conformation traits, are kept to breed. Our ranches 'marginal' is above industry averages, but first and foremost we need conformationally correct cows for longevity in the herd.
As far as finishing cattle on grain. Cattle on a high energy ration in the feedlot do not exist in a state of acidosis as you suggest. If you are feeding a ration that puts them there, you are not gaining, you are loosing calves (mortality), and you are going out of business. Acidosis can occur with a ration too high in energy and too low in roughage, as you say, but if you have a ration so imbalanced you had better identify it and correct it in your feeding operation or you are failing. You will find many feedlots exist where there is alot of produce and produce processing. The cull produce (potatoes, tomatoes, peas, corn, etc.) that have blemishes and will not be acceptible on the grocer's shelf, wind up being trucked to a feedlot and incorporated into a scientifically analyzed ration to balance protein, carbs, roughage, and more, much more. The ration will most likely include chopped straw, vegetable by product, maybe some hay, and some grain to acheive the carbohydrate load that will promote gain and IMF, but not put them in a state of acidosis. For the people who believe feedlots are evil ask them if they would prefer millions of pounds of vegetables being hauled to the land fill or does it make more sense to feed to an animal and generate a source of protein from it?
Looking at the big picture cows are raised exclusively on grass and the selection process for propagating genetics starts there. Market calves are most often weaned, put out on grass as stockers, then finished on a grain ration. We strive to breed animals that excel through all stages.
I've had good grass-fed beef. It was all we could get in Europe where I lived for awhile. It was good Irish beef raised exclusively on grass. It does taste a little different. It is a taste that has a niche market here in the US that will probably grow some. When the demand and market for grass-fed beef grows, so too, will the supply. The beef market is driven from the top down. You cannot produce a product and make people like it and buy it. Right now, most people prefer grain finished beef. It is the way it is, kick and scream all you want.
Your perception about the average cow/calf producer hating the grass-fed or organic producer is flat out wrong. Do it your way, we don't care. The problem we see is that many of these producers try to promote their product by bashing and bad-mouthing our product. That is the wrong way to go about it and only damages the market as a whole. It is a selfish and self-serving marketing strategy that has long-term negative ramificatins for the whole industry. I cringe every time I see someone proting their organic and/or grass-fed beef at the expense of grain finished beef.
I suggest you embrace your education and continue in your studies, but balance it with some real and practical applications. When you get some experience on a commercial operation, understand the logic and economics of it, you will be a more balanced producer and an asset to the industry. Right now you and your knowledge are not promoting the industry. If that is your intent, well then you are doing just fine. If you enjoy grass-fed beef and want to promote it, great, but you do the industry a disservice when you rant against grain finished beef without the experience to know what you speak of.
Good luck. When you get to the point you are actually doing your own research I'd like to hear about it. If you should ever gain experience on a real, commercial, and profitable operation I'd like to read about your experience as applied to your education. We would all learn something from that.
I've been reading through your posts. You make many assumptions and stereotypes as though cattle survive exclusively on grain. Your ramblings are misguided and lead those who are trying to understand the industry into confusion. There are many peole here that read for personal gain and knowledge (me included) and your posts mislead newcomers to the industry down the wrong road with biased, one-sided opinions (not science). Your 'lessons' to us serve only your agenda. You lack practical knowledge, it shows, and you are dangerous to the industry.
In the large scope of things cattle are finished on grain not raised on grain. They are finished, the last 1/4 to 1/3 of their approximate 14 month life cycle to increase IMF (intramuscular fat) and provide the taste that Americans and much of the world, identifies as a good tasting cut of meat. The grain feeding is to satisfy the market expectations. As cow /calf producers our cattle never see grain. It is too expensive. This notion that cows are raised on grain and it is affecting the lineage of breeding and gentics to the extent that we are now breeding inferior animals is crazy. You have been infected by someones agenda and are cherry-picking studies to support your premise.
Most cows exist their entire lives on grass and grass/alfalfa hay in the winter (northern herds). Feeding cows grain is not cost effective and unless you have a small hobby herd and want to pamper them (which is fine) your perception that all cows exist on grain and are therefore genetically inept now because of it, is absurd. A cow who outlives her usefullness as a brood animal will most likely go to slaughter and become, mostly hamburger and never see a grain ration. A cow has to maintain body condition, fertility, and raise a calf every year on the range and in the hills. The selection process is mostly based on her performance. Her performance is a function of her feed conversion abilities on grass. Her ability to take cellulose and everything else grass has to offer and do her best with it, affects her longevity and her status as a brood cow. The cows that maintain themselves best, have the best conformation, and raise the best and healthiest calves are the ones who's daughters are kept for replacements and therefore propagate their genetics. It has been this way since commercial cattle have been raised with and without the addition of technology. While technology allows us to analyze the animal further and deeper you will find an old timer with a keen eye will keep up with data assessment of gain and carcass traits (ultrasound) up to 75% of an analytical assessment alone. A visual assessment by someone with years of experience will forever excel on conformation values.
We run a large commercial herd and implement all of the latest technology; every aspect. We do our selection based on numbers and conformation and then have some of the old timers do their selection in an unbiased fashion. They have been right 75% of the time. This tells us that we would eventually acheive the same outcome, only using technology gets us there faster. Many of the animals that score well on ribeye area, IMF, and gain do not make the cut for conformation and so they are not retained. Some of the marginal carcass value heifers, that have exceptional conformation traits, are kept to breed. Our ranches 'marginal' is above industry averages, but first and foremost we need conformationally correct cows for longevity in the herd.
As far as finishing cattle on grain. Cattle on a high energy ration in the feedlot do not exist in a state of acidosis as you suggest. If you are feeding a ration that puts them there, you are not gaining, you are loosing calves (mortality), and you are going out of business. Acidosis can occur with a ration too high in energy and too low in roughage, as you say, but if you have a ration so imbalanced you had better identify it and correct it in your feeding operation or you are failing. You will find many feedlots exist where there is alot of produce and produce processing. The cull produce (potatoes, tomatoes, peas, corn, etc.) that have blemishes and will not be acceptible on the grocer's shelf, wind up being trucked to a feedlot and incorporated into a scientifically analyzed ration to balance protein, carbs, roughage, and more, much more. The ration will most likely include chopped straw, vegetable by product, maybe some hay, and some grain to acheive the carbohydrate load that will promote gain and IMF, but not put them in a state of acidosis. For the people who believe feedlots are evil ask them if they would prefer millions of pounds of vegetables being hauled to the land fill or does it make more sense to feed to an animal and generate a source of protein from it?
Looking at the big picture cows are raised exclusively on grass and the selection process for propagating genetics starts there. Market calves are most often weaned, put out on grass as stockers, then finished on a grain ration. We strive to breed animals that excel through all stages.
I've had good grass-fed beef. It was all we could get in Europe where I lived for awhile. It was good Irish beef raised exclusively on grass. It does taste a little different. It is a taste that has a niche market here in the US that will probably grow some. When the demand and market for grass-fed beef grows, so too, will the supply. The beef market is driven from the top down. You cannot produce a product and make people like it and buy it. Right now, most people prefer grain finished beef. It is the way it is, kick and scream all you want.
Your perception about the average cow/calf producer hating the grass-fed or organic producer is flat out wrong. Do it your way, we don't care. The problem we see is that many of these producers try to promote their product by bashing and bad-mouthing our product. That is the wrong way to go about it and only damages the market as a whole. It is a selfish and self-serving marketing strategy that has long-term negative ramificatins for the whole industry. I cringe every time I see someone proting their organic and/or grass-fed beef at the expense of grain finished beef.
I suggest you embrace your education and continue in your studies, but balance it with some real and practical applications. When you get some experience on a commercial operation, understand the logic and economics of it, you will be a more balanced producer and an asset to the industry. Right now you and your knowledge are not promoting the industry. If that is your intent, well then you are doing just fine. If you enjoy grass-fed beef and want to promote it, great, but you do the industry a disservice when you rant against grain finished beef without the experience to know what you speak of.
Good luck. When you get to the point you are actually doing your own research I'd like to hear about it. If you should ever gain experience on a real, commercial, and profitable operation I'd like to read about your experience as applied to your education. We would all learn something from that.
SixBucksADay
Member
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2009
- Messages
- 14
- Reaction score
- 0
What is "LMFAO" I see at the end of some posts?
SixBucksADay
Member
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2009
- Messages
- 14
- Reaction score
- 0
Okayyy,
I am out of the loop. My teenagers arn't allowed cell phones unless thay can pay for them themselves. Same goes for satellite and cable TV. Guess what? Anyway, I think I figured it out. L is for laughing and O is for Off???
I am out of the loop. My teenagers arn't allowed cell phones unless thay can pay for them themselves. Same goes for satellite and cable TV. Guess what? Anyway, I think I figured it out. L is for laughing and O is for Off???
fargus
Well-known member
You got it. I think you probably figured out what the other letters are for. Well written reply 6bucks, I enjoyed reading it.
