Hail to the Non-Creep Feeder

[Brandonm2]

I still don;t agree with the concept of feeding heifers better then the cow herd. We never have and until this year I can;t remember when the last heifer (first calver) didn;t breed back on schedule. The one that didn;t this year was a bought heifer and has alwasy been rough coated from I assume, the fescue since she came from up north. This year she's raising a dandy calf but is still rough coated, losing condition and hasn;t cycled yet. She's not keeping up her end of the bargain so she'll be heading down the road come weaning time. Registered cow, great genetics, just don;t work in our environement.

dun

We always liked to "baby" the heifers. They got the better field, more hay, they were more likely to get grain, their hay was always barned hay, if we had a rye grass field they were in it. That may not be the best way to go for everybody; but there are people now who have taken that to extremes and are feeding mixed ration 3-5 lbs a day two times a day. We in the cow business NOT the hog business a cow is SUPPOSED to do some work.

 

[Wewild]

I still don;t agree with the concept of feeding heifers better then the cow herd.
dun

The way I look at it is that is a small investment for the next 10 to 15 years. It works for us.

 

[Wewild]

We always liked to "baby" the heifers. They got the better field, more hay, they were more likely to get grain, their hay was always barned hay, if we had a rye grass field they were in it. That may not be the best way to go for everybody; but there are people now who have taken that to extremes and are feeding mixed ration 3-5 lbs a day two times a day. We in the cow business NOT the hog business a cow is SUPPOSED to do some work.

We like to set them up to succeed.

 

[msscamp]

It seems to me that many producers that don't creep feed feel they are superior to those that would even consider such a rediculas concept. They seem to wear the idea as a badge of honor. Mntman summed up the position of most of the talk on this board quite quickly.

I don't know about the superior part, but raising cattle is a hard business with little profit to begin with. Why would I want to cut into my bottom line by creeping when it's much more economical (not to mention less time and work) to stock with cows that can do the job I hired them for?

Yet I really don't understand the complete disregard of creep feeding. Aren't we in the business of putting pounds of meat across the scales? Shouldn't we strive to get the greatest performance out of our genetics that we can? Don't we want to get our cattle to market as quickly and as economically as we can.

Yes to all the above questions, but if you're raising the right kind of cattle for your environment creep feeding should not be necessary.

I have heard several disadvantages listed. Really the only one that holds any validity is economics, even then find cheaper feed sources. A friend of mine uses home grown oats and corn mixed with distillers grain and some minerals.

Do you honestly believe that 'home-grown' comes without a cost? Did the seed for that corn and those oats come free? What about the time and fuel spent tilling the field to raise them? How about the fertilizer and possibly water (I'm not sure if corn can be grown without irrigation - it cannot in my area) to grow them? Are you taking into account the fuel needed to harvest them? Now, add into that the money that could have been made by selling them rather than feeding them to calves because their mothers are not doing their job.

It just seems to me that management is always left out of the discussion.

Management is included in the argument and includes choosing cattle that can meet your goals in your environment without anything other than grass, water, hay in the winter time, and mineral.

Feeding under any circumstances doesn't mean continously dumping tons of feed into a self feeder.

If I have to creep feed (or provide any feed besides grass or hay in the winter) then that cow or heifer is not doing the job she was hired to do and she will be going to the next sale.

George

 

[S.R.R.]

It seems to me that many producers that don't creep feed feel they are superior to those that would even consider such a rediculas concept. They seem to wear the idea as a badge of honor. Mntman summed up the position of most of the talk on this board quite quickly.

I don't know about the superior part, but raising cattle is a hard business with little profit to begin with. Why would I want to cut into my bottom line by creeping when it's much more economical (not to mention less time and work) to stock with cows that can do the job I hired them for?

Yet I really don't understand the complete disregard of creep feeding. Aren't we in the business of putting pounds of meat across the scales? Shouldn't we strive to get the greatest performance out of our genetics that we can? Don't we want to get our cattle to market as quickly and as economically as we can.

Yes to all the above questions, but if you're raising the right kind of cattle for your environment creep feeding should not be necessary.

I have heard several disadvantages listed. Really the only one that holds any validity is economics, even then find cheaper feed sources. A friend of mine uses home grown oats and corn mixed with distillers grain and some minerals.

Do you honestly believe that 'home-grown' comes without a cost? Did the seed for that corn and those oats come free? What about the time and fuel spent tilling the field to raise them? How about the fertilizer and possibly water (I'm not sure if corn can be grown without irrigation - it cannot in my area) to grow them? Are you taking into account the fuel needed to harvest them? Now, add into that the money that could have been made by selling them rather than feeding them to calves because their mothers are not doing their job.

It just seems to me that management is always left out of the discussion.

Management is included in the argument and includes choosing cattle that can meet your goals in your environment without anything other than grass, water, hay in the winter time, and mineral.

Feeding under any circumstances doesn't mean continously dumping tons of feed into a self feeder.

If I have to creep feed (or provide any feed besides grass or hay in the winter) then that cow or heifer is not doing the job she was hired to do and she will be going to the next sale.

George

:clap: :clap: Well said msscamp.

 

[Brandonm2]

We always liked to "baby" the heifers. They got the better field, more hay, they were more likely to get grain, their hay was always barned hay, if we had a rye grass field they were in it. That may not be the best way to go for everybody; but there are people now who have taken that to extremes and are feeding mixed ration 3-5 lbs a day two times a day. We in the cow business NOT the hog business a cow is SUPPOSED to do some work.

We like to set them up to succeed.

Not disputing that. What I think we are debating is whether or not it is in our LONG TERM best interests as breeders for every single heifer ever retained to succeed. In other words, by creating an artificial environment that every healthy heifer ought to be able to succeed in do we multiply genetics that we should not really be multiplying?

 

[MikeC]

I do whatever it takes to put 2 lbs per day on the heifers and 3 lbs. per day on the bulls. Forage is preferable but...............

 

[lazy ace]

Pardon me for playing Devil's Advocate on this one, but the theory that creep-feeding gives a false sense of an animals performance is true. A creep-fed calf certainly will gain more than one ONLY on grass and milk.

HOWEVER, is all grass created equal? No. Some calves are reared on milk and alfalfa pastures, while others are reared on milk and prairie wool. One rancher may have 750lb weaning weights and another 550lbs, both from "forage", BUT what kind of forage was it? This could be just as much of a wool-over-the-eyes trick as the creep-feeding ration. My point is simply, don't knock the creep-feeding rations like they're the only misrepresentation. There's a pile of superficial info in this industry, and I have to say that Monk has a point when he says it should come back to management and good judgement.

If you see a 900-1000lb weaning weight at 200 days of age, claiming to be from milk and grass, it's BULL$H!T. Trust me. It just don't happen like that.

BTW, we don't creep anything, and never will. My apologies for being a turd-disturbing, hive-kicker.

This is the most accurate statement on creeping I have heard yet. I know a pure bred breeder who does not creep but turns into irrigated turnips about mid summer and says once they get used to eating them they will gain 3.5 to 5 pounds a day until they wean.

We only creep are purebreds when it is extremely dry. BRG stated that using creep with recip cows because they don't milk is acceptable. My question is why stick in valuable genetics into cows that you know are poorer producers, cut their heads off and find a better group.

People are afraid of one calf getting an advantage from creeping over the next calf. When all calves get the same access to creep it is still a level playing field. The calf that eats twice as much as the other calves because the mom is a P.O.S. cow will still show up. Good genetics always out shine poorer genetics and that dink will show up. That bull that has the top yearling weight and the top ADG always gets looked at, how do you know he didn't eat twice as much as the other ones on test? He may be the stud of the day but no one knows what his individual conversion rate was.

Whether you decide to creep or not to creep, when a purebred breeders culling practices are strict and honest, commercial cattlemen will benifit and make money. That is what it all boils down to MAKING MONEY for yourself and your customer! An oldtimer jack knife may be the cheapest investment any purebred operation owns.

Have a good one

Lazy ace

 

[George Monk]

sorry for not weighing in on this since I started the thread but it has been a very busy weekend.
there have been several statements that go something like this ... get cows that work in your environment. Absolutely this has to be done. Yet doesn't good management then include how to get the most out of that very cow? I don't pretend to begin to know the answer but I am posing the question. If you can put 25lbs extra on a calf for less than market cost even if that 25 only nets you a couple of dollars shouldn't you try? Maybe creep feeding doesn't work in rougher country or maybe it is good grassland were it doesn't work. We have pretty good land and I seem to be able to add about 100lbs without too much expense and still top the market so I must not be selling "fat" calves.

Do you honestly believe that 'home-grown' comes without a cost? Did the seed for that corn and those oats come free? What about the time and fuel spent tilling the field to raise them? How about the fertilizer and possibly water (I'm not sure if corn can be grown without irrigation - it cannot in my area) to grow them? Are you taking into account the fuel needed to harvest them? Now, add into that the money that could have been made by selling them rather than feeding them to calves because their mothers are not doing their job.

Absolutely not! there is a tremendous amount of cost associated with crop production. So much so that it is very hard to apply all the costs. However the prices paid for grain now is very poor and one way to increase the value of crops has always been to run it through livestock. When I raised hogs I never sold any corn because I could get more for it by feeding it to my livestock. When I mix a batch of feed I look at COOPs web page and get the price they pay on the day I mix it. Not a pure science but that is how I price my inputs.

 

[Wewild]

What I think we are debating is whether or not it is in our LONG TERM best interests as breeders for every single heifer ever retained to succeed. In other words, by creating an artificial environment that every healthy heifer ought to be able to succeed in do we multiply genetics that we should not really be multiplying?

I think I already said that.

It is obvious that you can't make an animal dependent on sack feed.

 

[Brandonm2]

What I think we are debating is whether or not it is in our LONG TERM best interests as breeders for every single heifer ever retained to succeed. In other words, by creating an artificial environment that every healthy heifer ought to be able to succeed in do we multiply genetics that we should not really be multiplying?

I think I already said that.

It is obvious that you can't make an animal dependent on sack feed.

Nobody is arguing that the cow will become chemically addicted to soybean meal. The question you keep avoiding is: How will you ever know whether she was good enough to make it without the sack feed if you NEVER take that risk? The original point is that these overfed over pampered oversized PETS that a lot of people like to pretend are the best of their breed MAY not be the best animals for REAL cattlemen to purchase for real world ranching.

 

[Wewild]

[ The question you keep avoiding is: How will you ever know whether she was good enough to make it without the sack feed if you NEVER take that risk?

Never heard you ask this question .... but one should be able to tell the first winter after they quit feeding supplements.

 

[ALACOWMAN]

ill be the first too admit too feeding my replacements not alot but i feed em . but all my calves are weaned off moma only . im not a registered breeder. a steer should be a reflecton of his sire and the moma should have the package too bring that steer too 205 days for me without aid . if your buying a bull that went from 0-205 without creep and would make a outstanding steer thats the kind of animal i want. because his babies well be the result of him being above average animal

 

[mnmtranching]

My point was GOOD grass GOOD cows why creepfeed. If you have this you will be able to wean a 650 lb calf at 7 mo. In a good creep feeding program you could possibly put another 50 lbs on your calves [mostly all fat] no cattle buyer, replacement buyer, or feedlot is going to want that fat in that young an animal, and no way would a stocker operation want a fat calf.
For those that ask why, its becouse when that calf changes envirnments first thing it will do is lose most of that fat, then it will have to adjust to its new ration. Most poeple buying calves want good doing calves in nice shape, somewhat green and ready to go to work for you.

mnmt

 

[dph]

This always comes up on this board and I always like to hear arguements pro and con. We creep feed, we don't have a shortage of grass (except it is getting very dry here currently), and have cows in good condition. Corn is cheap, prices are high, and we can add pounds, not just in the month and a half we creep, but also during weaning when they are in a lot with feed they are already use to.

I see a lot of mention of oats, there seem to be several nutritionalists in our area knocking oats in a creep mix as of late. They say its too expensive for what the cattle get out of it. Of course they are trying to sell you something that will replace them...

I still like this purina accuration creep, and kent has a similar product now. If they start hitting the feeder hard, we can up the rate and get consumption back down to where we want it. We often use 400 lbs of accuration/ton to get them started, and then take them up to 5 and then 6 if need be. As far as raising your own corn, figuring feeder cattle even close to where they've been, with just an average feed conversion, that bushel is going to bring a lot more going through that calf than going through the elevator. Although corn may be on a bit of an upswing right now.

I think the work that has been done on studying the effects of creep on replacements is great. It will be interesting to see how the makeup of the creep can change that in the future, and what rate of gain is acceptable. We shoot for a lower gain than most, and that makes it a little more expensive short term.

 

[TheBullLady]

Here are my thoughts about creep feeding.. which, I do!

No matter if you creep feed or not, you're not going to make a bad doing, ugly calf beautiful by offering creep! You'll make a sorry calf put a little more weight on to bring more $$ at the auction, and you'll make you're good calves gain more and mature better. I'm going to cull the bottom of the calf herd anyway, so it doesn't make a hill of beans difference if they are fed or not. Also.. it does make a difference when the calves are weaned and sent to the feedyard, because the feeders really like it when the calves are "bunk broke", and they take the weaning process a lot easier.. not getting as stressed out, and hence less chance of getting sick.

It's totally a management practice and decision.. as mentioned before, it's one of those things that not everyone will agree on, but all have good opinions about it.

 

[Stocker Steve]

If you can creep feed your terminal calves and get enough lbs added on them that you can end up ahead on sale day then great!

Can is the key word.

There is a lot of data out there about the great results supplementing (a pound or two per day) protein with mature grasses in the west and south. It seems to help digestion... I don't graze there so I have to take their word on it.

There is mixed data on supplementing energy on lush grasses. It can hurt digestion if you get into a starchy feed... Increasing gain of 0.50 to 0.75 pounds per day is commonly reported, but if you dig into it the best feed conversion is often about 9 to 11 lb/lb. You have to have a high value of gain or very inexpensive feed & labor to make this pencil out.

I am supplementing some grass yearlings this year as an experiment. They are gaining 2.9 lbs per day but I would have lost money doing this if the market had not come up the last 6 weeks.

 

[Texas Ranch Man]

I do not creep feed at all. I do however feed 1% body weght "CUBES" to my cattle weekly. We are in the 2nd year of drought here. They graze, lick salt, and I provide a 20% Natural Protien Bucket. They drink water out of the Pond. I will admit I can not tell what the calves daily weight gain is, but I can say my F-1 Moma Cows are not losing body condition. Maybe this goes back to having a little Bhrama Blood in the Herd. Not trying to be smart, just adding my 2 cents to the discussion. I do not raise cattle for a living, but I certainly live a little better doing so.