Abstract
Beef cattle producers in the North America have a variety of production and marketing options and must choose the best production system for their situation. This review describes considerations involved in choosing between feeding cattle conventionally versus feeding them in programs that prohibit the use of certain technologies. Data from peer-reviewed journals, extension publications, nutritional consultants, governmental organizations, and feed companies were used to construct this review. Most cattle in North America are fed in conventional production systems. Conventional beef production systems typically use steroidal implants, ionophores, and beta-adrenergic agonists to improve animal productivity; as well as feed grade and injectable antimicrobials to control, treat or prevent disease and improve animal health. These technologies have been shown to lower the cost of production, allowing for beef to be competitive in the global protein market. Some consumers have expressed a preference for beef produced without these technologies. These “All-natural” (AN) cattle may bring a premium price in the market. The economic impact of differing productions systems can be described in relation to 1) cost of production, 2) operating costs of the feedlot, 3) price paid for feeder calves, and 4) price received for fed cattle. Conventional production provides the most favorable outcome for factors 1, 2, and 3, while AN production provides the most favorable outcome for item 4. There are also industry wide and societal aspects related to differing beef production systems related to health and safety of beef, land use, and cost of production allowing for a greater share of the global protein market. Technologies used in conventional production are critical tools to North American beef production. Differences in efficiencies between each type of non-conventional production systems must be re-captured in added premiums when cattle are marketed and sold. Premiums for AN cattle are enticing, but the true differences in the cost of production between the AN and conventional cattle must be evaluated in order for a producer to make the correct decision for their operation.
Highlights
Beef cattle producers must choose the best production system for their situation
Pharmaceutical technologies and growth technologies are critical tools to North American and US beef production and consistently offer a positive return on investment by lowering the cost of production resulting in greater gross revenue
Lower cost of beef production increases the likelihood that consumers from various socio-economic classes can enjoy a wholesome, nutrient dense animal protein
Summary
Beef cattle producers must choose the best production system for their situation. Conventional production systems use steroidal implants, ionophores, and beta-adrenergic agonists to improve animal productivity; feed grade and injectable antimicrobials are used to control, treat or prevent disease and improve animal health. Conventional systems allow feeding of animal by-products and genetically modified feedstuffs, which may not be allowed in some natural programs and are never allowed in organic cattle feeding systems. These management differences between conventional and “All-natural” (AN) lower the cost of production in favor of conventional production. Throughout this paper, anything that is not produced conventionally or organically will be referred to as either AN or NHTC For these examples, AN will match NE3 specifications, NHTC will allow use of any technology except certain growth promotants (Table 1). The objective of this review is to compare technology effects on production systems used in North American beef production to allow for individual organizations to determine which production system is best for their customers
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
