342 Economic evaluation of Jersey steers using an aggressive implant strategy

Abstract

Abstract Our objective was to evaluate the profitability of Jersey steers fed in a Non-Hormone Treated Cattle (NHTC) program compared to those receiving an aggressive implant strategy. Jersey steers (n = 30; initial BW 183.3 ± 43.4kg) were allocated to one of two treatments: IMP (Revalor-200 administered at d0-d70-d140-d210-d280-d350) or CON (negative control) and fed for 420 days to assess economic viability for beef production. Live cattle, carcass, and subprimal prices were collected and consolidated from USDA Mandatory Price Reports for the 2018 calendar year. Data were analyzed via independent t-test. Initial cost was $357.02 per animal. Daily feed and yardage costs totaled $2.58 and $2.13 for IMP and CON, respectively. Live cattle value was greater for IMP cattle (P = 0.02; $1,281.20 vs $1,180.70 hd-1) than CON, which resulted from greater live weight. Base grid value was greater for IMP than CON (P = 0.01; $1,209.80 vs $1,076.00) however quality grade discounts were hefty for IMP (-$73.55) due to low marbling and dark-firm-dry outcomes, whereas all CON (+$37.50) carcasses graded Choice and Prime. Premiums for NHTC averaged $121.60 for CON cattle. Although not different (P = 0.19) CON steers netted greater numerical carcass value when marketed on a value-based grid than IMP steers ($1,178.92 vs $1,063.93). Boxed beef values for six steers randomly fabricated per treatment but did not differ (P = 0.87) between IMP and CON ($1,227.19 vs $1,207.92 hd-1). When marketed live, CON returned greater net production value (P = 0.04; -$69.23 vs -$160.60) than IMP, as well as on the grid (P < 0.01; -$71.05 vs -$377.83). However, net production value did not differ when marketed as boxed beef (P = 0.18; -$42.05 vs -$214.56). Marketing Jersey steer beef as NHTC appears to be more economically viable than an aggressive implant strategy, yet neither treatment yielded profit.