Grass-fed -- a new post

[TexasBred]

I always wondered what the grass fed steaks taste like off those cattle that were driven from S. Texas to Kansas City. Bet your jaws got tired from chewing.

 

[brandonm_13]

I'm not quite old enough to remember, but I think drives were supposed to be done slow enough that cattle grazed along the way so they would gain weight. I don't think it would be much different than saying they were grazing in one direction.

Of course tenderness has a lot more to do that movement. Ever had a tender deer/elk/bison??? I imagine they move quite a bit too.

 

[edrsimms]

edr - Thank you for taking the time to post the extensive material above. You have an opinion and are passionate about it. That is good. The world needs many people with passion.
Thank you for your post
As in most things in life however, there is more than one way to raise beef.
True

While I share some of your viewpoints, I do remember having some just awful beef in the UK (England) that was definitely 100% grassfed. You did not need a label or sign on the door or menu to tell it was grass fed.

It requires some intensive grazing mgmt and it isnt easy

I have also been in an "American Steakhouse" in Germany where folks CHOSE to go have some guaranteed American corn-fed beef. You also did not need to look at the sign to tell this was NOT grass finished beef.

One of my sons has been in Argentina and reports the beef there and the cooking of the beef there was also very good. Beef in Argentina forms a much larger percent of folks diet than in many other countries.
Yes, most american cook their steak hot and fast -- it is done much differently in Argentina
Personally I think there is a middle ground between 100% grassfed and 100% corn finished.

This is what USDA calls "Natural"

Corn is NOT evil! Sometimes we don't use it very well and our long time approach in the US of a cheap food policy (but reasonable quality) drives large industrial type vertically integrated processors to push a good thing too far in the name of maximizing profits.

Of course Corn isnt evil, yet some of the by-products of the production o it is-- however. When is the last time you saw the North Platte that used to be a river and is now a sewer for the past 2 decades

I get very tired of hearing such as I heard on the radio recently an hour long rant that corn is the cause of global warming and that you can fight global warming by becoming a vegetarian...or something to that effect. Many concerned young folks, often several generations removed from ever having been on a farm, pick up this rubbish and think it is true.

yes, Some of the whacked environmentalists are way off base

I believe strongly in the free market system. And because of that system and passionate people like you, I believe things will eventually come back to a stable middle ground.

My ideas are that since there are FAR more small to medium sized ranchers in this country than large producers that "we" could help ourselves if we could just work together and raise a healthier product for everyone and in doing so improve our own individual bottom line, why be a slave to the very machine that gives you so little compared to an alternate product like Grass-fed beef

The truth and best way long term usually lies somewhere between the two extremes in many discussions like this.


Jim

 

[TexasBred]

Ed please elaborate on this:

Of course Corn isnt evil, yet some of the by-products of the production o it is-- however. When is the last time you saw the North Platte that used to be a river and is now a sewer for the past 2 decades.

 

[edrsimms]

Thank you for sharing your well thought out passion.

You are welcome.

However do not expect that many folks here will convert to your way of thinking. As you point out however the economics is leading us to more grass fed beef.

The trick is to keep the flavor that folks like.
This is an extensive topic and I will try and answer it if you really want to know -- let me know.
While that can be done with pure grass only, it is not easy and definitely not automatic with grass as anyone who has had local beef in the UK can tell you.

Question for you: you talk about maintaining fertility and quality pastures. Does this mean you do use additional purchased fertilizers on your pastures?
We use very little commercial fertilizer, but yes we use it...., we are not Organic- just grass-fed. We maintain a pH (Lime Index) suitable for what we need to do, I will explain further below

I soil test and apply what the tests indicate is needed to raise good grass. I use legumes (mostly clover) as the source of most N but there are various trace elements which are often missing from the soils in many geographic areas.

This is true

Since most of us do not have the ability to graze virgin rangeland and instead graze ground that has been farmed or hayed in the past, I think we need to see what we have to work with and a soil test is a place to start. jmho.
Thanks again for your extensive post and passion.

First of all to begin I want to say one very important thing --- and I will finsih this on my next post to you;
warm season perennial grasses have virtually no place in a grass finishing program

 

[edrsimms]

Since most of us do not have the ability to graze virgin rangeland and instead graze ground that has been farmed or hayed in the past, I think we need to see what we have to work with and a soil test is a place to start. jmho.

Thanks again for your extensive post and passion.

JimSRBeef
To try to get back to your question about high fertility and quality pastures there are many things that are beyond the soil test to understand. I dont want to insult your intelligence, but will just say this in a very fundamental way because there are several others to read this as well.
In Summary:
When cattle start to finish things start to get very difficult from a grass stand-point because fat requires the forage to be highly digestible and rich in soluble carbohydrates (sugars). these sugars are not only determined by the plant species, but stage of growth and level of soil mineralization. Ideal protien to soluble carbohydrates is 1:1. Nitrogen fertilizer has little place in a grass finishing program as it artificially elevates the protien of the grasses. While finishing cattle we would rather keep CP and carbohydrates in balance --hence 1:1. This ratio can be easily upset through the use of artificial N fertilizers . Finishing pastures tend to be high in legumes, not only because of their higher digestibilities, but because the soil N they create is in a slow release form that does not cause the plant proteins to spike as artificial N does.
To finish (to produce intramuscular fat)-- a grass-fed animal must gain at least 1.7 lbs per day to exceed the maintenance threshhold.
Forages have to be 65% digestible, at least 20% DM, CP that does not exceed 18%, and a soluble carbohydrate content of at least 15%.
This is why I say that warm season perennial grasses have no place in grass fed finishing and this has to be done with winter and summer annuals
The problems associated with this process are:
Your forages have to overlap one another in such a way that there are no ups and downs of quality grazing while on the 60 to 90 day finishing process (a bimodal curve of nutrition is like a roller coaster ride of nutrition and it wont work)
traditionally everyone in this business sees spring flush as a spike of nutrition which follows a summer slump of lower nutrition and this will kill a grass-fed program.

Ed

 

[brandonm_13]

Eastern Gamma grass(a native warm season perennial) can give gains over two pounds in summer. This is about the only plant that can compete with corn and soybeans(the plants, not the grain) for late summer gain.

 

[edrsimms]

Ed please elaborate on this:

Of course Corn isnt evil, yet some of the by-products of the production o it is-- however. When is the last time you saw the North Platte that used to be a river and is now a sewer for the past 2 decades.

The by-products of corn production is where the evil comes in Tex. In the big corn producing states like Nebraska (this was a good example what excess fertilizer and atrazine has done to an environment that at one time was the best of the best and is now a sewer).
I would have to say that Farmers are the worst category of land builders and unfortunately some of their practices have been taken on by the Rancher too. For many years, farmers applied limited fertilizer to just make their crop in any given year with no intention of doing anything to build the land up. No crop rotations were used as they traditionally did it and over time, the land got depleted of soil nutrients and was more succeptible to soil borne disease and pests. In an attempt to "bring the soil back" to its "original" status, farmers had to use a much higher rate of fertilization, herbicide application (weeds love poor land) and pesticides to fight above ground pests.
Due to run-off of all this extra fertilzer and pestidcides "they" polluted their riparian areas which polluted their ground water as well. This lack of good judgement turned the North Platte into a sewer. And this is only one example. The problem with the grain fed producer is they dont take into account the land uses that are involved in their operation. (you have to account for that too) With less grain-fed cattle to feed, I believe that farmers from the big corn-producing areas would curtail some of their deleterious practices, thus improving the overall status of the environment ---in general. But on the farmers behalf, they were only doing what they felt was necessary to appease the "grain-driven" enthusiasts.

Today it is a little different as ethanol plants are now taking most of the corn-based feed away from feedlot operations for energy and only now are the grain fed enthusiasts looking at other options like GRASS-FED.

 

[edrsimms]

I always wondered what the grass fed steaks taste like off those cattle that were driven from S. Texas to Kansas City. Bet your jaws got tired from chewing.

Those cattle were Yield Grade 8

 

[edrsimms]

Eastern Gamma grass(a native warm season perennial) can give gains over two pounds in summer. This is about the only plant that can compete with corn and soybeans(the plants, not the grain) for late summer gain.

This is true, but the only problem with Eastern Gamma Grass is that it is harder to get established and Hybrid Millet will do the job if managed correctly in less time and effort.

 

[edrsimms]

"While I share some of your viewpoints, I do remember having some just awful beef in the UK (England) that was definitely 100% grassfed. You did not need a label or sign on the door or menu to tell it was grass fed". SRS

I wanted to reply to this too----- The EU, which I include the UK in this category are far less concerned with IMF than we are --here in the US. Their choices in cattle breeds are evidence of this--like Charolais and Limmis in France (the zero marbling high lean breeds) They tend to make up for the lack of IMF in their beef by varying the cooking methods. So you really can't compare apples to oranges on a transcontinental basis. -- good information though.
Ed

 

[edrsimms]

All I want is some explanation of your very specific claim: "6 times healthier". You are providing a laundry list of benefits, but they don't add up to proof of the claim.
Why don't they add up to proof of the claim? The research is available from USDA and Clemson -- go look it up

Being from Missouri, I would also like to see the grass fed steer which grades "high choice-low prime" at 14 months.
It can be done, but on highly fertile soil matched with an overlapping forage base where there are no ups and downs of nutrition and the right type of cattle
I see you are a disciple of Michael Pollan. Yes, I read "The Omnivores Dilemma". I read it with an open mind and I found a lot to agree with. But, I reject the notion that some all powerful corporate entity is poisoning people with food.
Not exactly a disciple, but it was an interesting read, kinda like how you felt about it, one needs to understand how others view your passions, you must first understand their thoughts as you seem to forget, all too easily, that there are more non-beef producers eating our products than there are beef producers eating it. Also, an individual producer is usually not a good judge of their own meat as it tends to lead to a biased conclusion-- dont you think?

Pollan mentions the hippie gardens in San Francisco as a high point for agriculture. (pun intended) I have big reservations about that, but enough acid could make a person believe anything. The establishment is corrupt, corporations are bad, but mind-altering drugs are good. Not sure I want those people regulating my food.
Who do you think is regulating your food? Do you think it is a ex-farmer or rancher? Not even close, it is some misfit from San Francisco

Note that the meals Pollan builds his book around are all consumed with friends in a convivial atmosphere, except for the McDonalds meal which he consumes in the car. Could a Big Mac and fries be better in some way if it was consumed with friends and a bottle of good wine? And conversely, if we consume a grass fed ribeye between two pieces of bread while driving down the freeway are we likely to avoid indigestion?
I dont know about that, as I don't frequent Mickey D's

Your claims of health and well being for all if we just eat your product are way simplistic--over the top simplistic. I applaud your enthusiasm, but if you were Iowa Beef and you made such claims for a grass-fed product you would be hauled before Congress. You are just small enough to escape tough scrutiny of your claims.
Im sure you feel it is simplistic as you turn a blind eye to the most up to date research today, of the USDA and Clemson among any others that dare call your product out for scrutiny. Are you afraid that your product is Inferior? Some would argue that Personal attacks on a discussion board like the ones you are supplying today might just mean that you are afraid to admit that you could possibly be producing an inferior product


Why not give us poor, in the dark slaves some tips on how to raise a grass fed animal which grades high choice-low prime at 14 months and sells for $10/lb, instead of mocking us. You really need to be famous if you are doing this, and there are a lot of eager students here at CT.

It is coming

 

[edrsimms]

"Thanks John for a wonderful post. I have had to deal with absolutists and extremists on several occassions and it seems they are similar no matter the issue.

I have found that many times these people mean well but don't fully understand the facts. More times than not, their strong opinions are merely an attempt to convince themselves while other times their strong opinions and negative comments about other products is just an attempt to make up for an inferior product. Its been my experience that a quality product will sale without negative advertisment.

I provided the facts from the most up to date research today, from USDA and Clemson University and If you choose to deny these facts and call it "negative advertisements", then that just proves that you an uncapable of open discussion that at anytime might shed a less that desireable light on your product.

Instead of calling the research (that I am totally independent of) negative ads, where is your research that disputes these claims???? You have none, because if you don't deny the facts this info may very well prove to your peers that your product is indeed inferior, which would be too painstaking for you to endure and it is easier for you to just call it negaitve advertisements.

You say it yourself best below in this quote:
"If one must resort to this type marketing it tells me either they are lacking in character or have a very poor product or both. Jogeephus"

Where are your facts?
Go get your facts that dispute this research (done independently of me or anyone else without bias or negative advertisement)

You are the one resorting to negative personal attacks and all I did was provide the FACTS

 

[Jogeephus]

Ed, I could spend all day cutting and pasting like you do but I do not have the time nor the desire to do so.

I do not, however, believe that all beef farmers in Canada feed their cattle chicken feathers nor do I know of anyone in the USA who raises their beef on candy or other waste food products as the Beef Facts imply on the Eat Wild site. The claims on the site saying that grassfed cattle or more eco friendly through the implification that grass fed farmers are the only ones who use MIG grazing systems is shallow to say the least.

Using bits and pieces of facts when convenient to your argument is a sign of poor understanding. You, yourself, suggesting the use herbicides off label to people on the board is irresponsible to say the least. When someone pins you down to answer a simple question and you evade and wiggle like a worm lets me know a lot about you.

As I've said before, I have nothing against the grass finished cattle. There is a place for it and I'm sure the market will grow or maybe not. But to build a customer base by negative advertisement of mis use of facts is detrimental to the industry as a whole.

I agree with and ealier post, I really think that maybe you should write a book or give tours or something to show us how to get out from under the train. Maybe even a website showing your operation or even easier providing us with your location. A simple state would do.

I'll be looking out for your book and will be glad to buy it.

 

[john250]

Ed, you accuse me of attacking you personally. I've not attacked you personally, even as you stated that I'm feeding my family unhealthy beef.
But, since you started it, I've read all your posts and all the reports you posted and I think you're a pompous windbag. :welcome:

 

[mnmtranching]

Just a couple things about corn. In the last 50 years has gone from a national average 50 bushel per acre to now near 170. There is NO plant that will build soil, and add organic matter to the soil like corn. When all that's taken is the grain and the rest worked back into the soil.
Platte River has always been a seasonal river, check the history. Early travelers would, [fur trappers] etc. had to plan a early start to ascend the Platte. And get back down the following year before Mid Summer made canoe travel impossible.

 

[BeefmasterB]

The claims on the site saying that grassfed cattle or more eco friendly through the implification that grass fed farmers are the only ones who use MIG grazing systems is shallow to say the least.

Maybe. Could be more eco friendly IF no fertilizers, herbicides or pesticides were used.

About that MIG grazing; one of my buddies recently wondered what the big deal was with MIG since ranchers have being "doing it" for years. I think one would have to compare what was once called "rotational grazing" (now synonymous with MIG) 15 years ago to what it means today. Back then most ranchers just moved their cattle to some other property when there was nothing left to eat except dirt and with no idea of the nutrient quality of the grass. Now, special grasses are planted (after complete soil samples are taken) in a "paddock", each with it's own water source and overseeded with legumes in the winter. Grasses are tested for nutrient levels. The grass is allowed to get down only to a certain length and the cows are then moved to the next paddock. Often, no fertilizers, pesticides or herbicides are used. In others words, it's "intensely" managed to maximum grass and nutrient production. Of course, there's all sorts of others deviations from the MIG idea that still produce good livestock. "Grassfed" is simply another way to market cattle. Is it "better"? The consumer will tell you if it's better after they purchase it and the producer will look at his bottom line numbers after sales/costs and tell you if he thinks it's better. Just another angle.

 

[talldog]

Ed, you accuse me of attacking you personally. I've not attacked you personally, even as you stated that I'm feeding my family unhealthy beef.
But, since you started it, I've read all your posts and all the reports you posted and I think you're a pompous windbag. :welcome:

Ain't America Grand !! ---Sometimes rather than to just--Disagree--- We try to--- Assassinate ! Don't hate the PLAYER ,hate the GAME !!!! :tiphat:

 

[TexasBred]

"Grassfed" is simply another way to market cattle. Is it "better"? The consumer will tell you if it's better after they purchase it and the producer will look at his bottom line numbers after sales/costs and tell you if he thinks it's better. Just another angle.

I think this was the concensus from the get go. The proof is at the market. You'll certainly find enough people to consume all the grass fed beef but you'll also find folks who prefer grain fed. Joe Customer day in and day out cannot afford the grass fed (especially the more expensive cuts) regardless of how well he likes it.

I'll take a shot of good $500 a bottle single malt whiskey on occasion but for day to day consumption I have to drop down to a product that fits my budget.

 

[talldog]

"Grassfed" is simply another way to market cattle. Is it "better"? The consumer will tell you if it's better after they purchase it and the producer will look at his bottom line numbers after sales/costs and tell you if he thinks it's better. Just another angle.

I think this was the concensus from the get go. The proof is at the market. You'll certainly find enough people to consume all the grass fed beef but you'll also find folks who prefer grain fed. Joe Customer day in and day out cannot afford the grass fed (especially the more expensive cuts) regardless of how well he likes it.

I'll take a shot of good $500 a bottle single malt whiskey on occasion but for day to day consumption I have to drop down to a product that fits my budget.

That single malt is some FINE stuff ! :banana: