Cow-calf Operations Research Articles

Computers

Probably the reason I am here is because I am one veterinarian that is very interested in herd health practice, not necessarily just in feedlot but in cow calf production as well, and I am possibly one in the state that they could get a hold of that has had some experience with computers and so part of the reason I am on the program. I do not have anything in the way of lot of detailed programs or anything like that to offer you this afternoon for cow calf operations. What I would like to try to do in just a brief few mmutes is possibly outline for you or at least give you some thought on to how you could possibly utilize a computer, be it by terminal as Gary talked about or possibly having one of your own or working with a rancher that has his own.

Cow/Calf Programs Using TI59 Calculator

The use of programable calculators has increased from very little usage to enthusiasm. However, software or programs have not been developed as fast as hardware. The following programs were developed to aid in fulfilling the gap of software for the TI-59. The programs are for cow-calf operations, in which information is generated for supplementation of cows on grass to feeder calf budget projections.

Forecasting Monthly Slaughter Cow Prices with a Subset Autoregressive Model

Cow-calf operations dominate cattle production in the Southeast. The 1978 January 1 U.S. cattle inventory report shows that breeding cows make up 45 percent of the total inventory in Region 41 compared with 33.3 percent nationally [3]. Further, in 1977 cow slaughter accounted for 64.8 percent of federally inspected cattle slaughter in Region 4 compared with 23.6 percent nationally [8].

Economics of Using Cotton Gin Trash as a Supplemental Feed for Range Cattle

The economic use of alternative supplemental feeds was evaluated for a 2,024-ha cow-calf ranch operation in the Texas Rolling Plains. Particular interest was focused on the use of gin trash as a supplemental feed. The estimated value of gin trash compared with alternative supplemental feeds ranged up to $23.75 per ton. Potential ranch carrying capacity and annual net income were expanded with a supplemental feeding program including gin trash. Returns to rangeland resources may be increased by supplemental feeding. Supplemental feeding programs may be used to expand carrying capacity, improve performance on rangeland, and relieve grazing pressure when range conditions are poor. On the Texas Rolling Plains, typical supplemental feeds used are range cubes, protein blocks, cottonseed meal, and alfalfa hay or other roughage during winter months. Ranges in this region are dominated by warm-season species that usually furnish adequate amounts of quality forage from April to November. In the remaining dormant months, however, the range tends to be deficient in protein, phosphorus, vitamin A, and sometimes energy, particularly with heavy stocking rates. Cotton gin trash is a relatively cheap and abundant by-product available from gins in the Southern High Plains of Texas. Gin trash is used currently in commercial feedlot rations in the Texas-Oklahoma Panhandle as a substitute for traditional roughages and is available in bulk form directly from gins or in pellet form from processors. The major purpose of this paper was to evaluate the economic use of alternative supplemental feeds on a cow-calf ranch in the Texas Rolling Plains, with particular reference to use of gin trash as a supplemental feed.

Effects of Forage Quality Restrictions on Optimal Production Systems Determined by Linear Programming

Due to changing feed price relationships for beef production, it is anticipated that linear programming (LP) will be used to develop optimal feeding strategies for cow-calf operations in the South. An important relationship between forage quality and forage intake has been ignored in previous LP analyses. Forage quality and cows' intake of it are inversely related; i.e., as forage quality decreases with maturity, a cow's or calf's consumption of a particular forage must increase to continue meeting the animal's nutritional requirements. However, as the quality of forage decreases, digestibility decreases, and the animal's maximum intake capacity of that forage decreases (Figure 1). It is hypothesized that consideration of intake restrictions will change the optimal LP forage production system, livestock grazing system or supplemental feeding strategies when forages are an important nutrient source.

EFFECTS OF CREEP FEEDING, MATURE COW WEIGHT AND MILK YIELD ON FARM GROSS MARGINS IN AN INTEGRATED BEEF PRODUCTION MODEL

A linear programming model of integrated beef production was used to determine the effects of different mature cow weights, levels of potential milk yield and creep feeding on economic efficiency. All biological values for this study were taken from the literature. The criteria for comparison were farm gross margins, defined as the difference between total revenue and total variable costs. The model is integrated in the sense that it includes a cow–calf operation with replacements bred on the farm, a feedlot for steers and surplus heifers, cropping, and the labor and capital required for livestock and cropping. Two management programs for weaning and rearing young calves were considered at each of four levels of farm resources (80 and 120 ha of land, each with one or two hired men). Beef:feed price ratios, the maximal daily dry matter intake for cows and the minimal land available for pasture were also varied. Larger cow sizes always gave larger farm gross margins. At both 5 and 10 kg/day milk yield, the management program that used creep feeding through to weaning at 213 days rather than to 70 days gave smaller farm gross margins ($14,813 and $15,166, compared with $16,836 and $16,052). Conclusions about optimal levels for feeding cows for milk were affected by the management program and by maximal daily dry matter intakes for cows. The minimal level of pasture available did not affect the rankings of cow sizes with respect to farm gross margins; there was only a 1.2% change on the average in the farm gross margins with 40 ha minimal pasture available, compared to the optimal cropping program. The beef:feed price ratio was generally not important to the rankings of cow sizes and milk yield, but it affected the magnitude of differences between cow sizes and between milk yields. Research needs for more detailed data on calf energy requirements, dry matter intakes, production from nursing cows at pasture and for defining optimal management programs were identified.

The Effect of Vertical Integration on the Production Efficiency of Beef Cattle Operations

Cattle feeding and cow-calf operations are high investment, high risk farm enterprises. Except for those which are integrated, beef cattle enterprises are essentially marginal operations (Breimyer, p. 1). Seckler indicates that costs associated with transportation, buying and selling commission, shrinkage and death loss from the time the animal leaves the ranch until it reaches the packers are estimated between $10-$35 per head, depending on how far the animal is transported and how often it changes hands. Farris and Williams estimate the gain of an additional $10 of net return per head by integrating from the cow herd to the packer. In general, all evidence points toward significant external economies associated with vertical integration in beef production. The internal effect of forward integration on production efficiency, however, has not been adequately analyzed. Internally, production efficiency is influenced by size of operation and complementary use of resources. Thus, efficiency in beef cattle production is hypothesized as a function of size and system of operation. However, while a large number of studies show that significant economies are associated with size in all systems of beef operations, little research effort was designed to evaluate the effect of size and system on the production efficiency of beef cattle operations. Johnson and Eckert' s cost analyses of four feeding systems in Nebraska showed that both system and size affected feeding efficiency, with system being the more important variable. That study, using simple regression, tested the relationship between size and input-utilization efficiency separately for each input and for each feeding system. Kearl, analyzing net income for nine feeding systems, demonstrated that the breeding system which marketed the major part or all of their young cattle as yearlings had a slight advantage over the cow-calf system. In general, available empirical evidence relative to the effect of size and system on the production efficiency of beef cattle operations is inconclusive. The primary objective of this paper is to estimate production efficiency coefficients for three systems of beef cattle operations (cow-calf, cow-yearling, and completely integrated) and evaluate the effects of size and system on the efficiency of beef production.

INFLUENCE OF MATURE COW WEIGHT ON ECONOMIC EFFICIENCY IN BEEF CATTLE PRODUCTION

Linear programming has been used to investigate with a farm level model the influence of mature cow weight on economic efficiency in beef cattle production. Four other factors are considered: (1) farm size, (2) herd size, (3) beef and feed prices, and (4) a marketing option (i.e. the facility to feed home-grown crops or to feed and sell home-grown crops). Intermediate prices represent Ontario conditions for 1972. The model describes straightbred production, and is integrated in the sense that it includes a cow–calf operation with replacements bred on the farm, a beef feedlot for steers and surplus heifers, cropping, and the labor and capital required for livestock and cropping. Farm gross margin was the criterion for comparing the 450 combinations of factors, as this was considered the most relevant criterion for the farmer. Comparisons were made only within farm sizes. Optimal plans did not always correspond in ranking for gross margin/cow, gross margin/kg and farm gross margin. In general, the larger cows produced larger farm gross margins. The most important exceptions were under conditions of high feed prices relative to beef prices, where intermediate or small-sized cows were most profitable, depending on the farm size. With high beef prices, economic values (as defined in the text) for mature cow weights ranged from 33 to 51 % of the market price for beef. At intermediate feed and beef prices, economic values were smaller, averaging $0.083/kg or 11.6% of the market price for beef. Because of the assumption in the model of proportionality in growth, the economic values for weaning weight and daily gain could be derived from those for mature weight, giving average values of $0.181/kg and $4.51 per 0.1 kg/day, respectively. With high feed prices (relative to beef prices), economic values were negative under most conditions.

Alternative Cow-Calf and Stocker Production Systems in the Georgia Piedmont Area

Highlight: Economic analyses indicated that costs and returns were closely related to age of cattle, quality of forage, and cattle market prices in the Southeast. Brood cow-calf and stocker calf operations performed best when annual winter grazing was included in the production systems. Returns per acre to capital, land, and management during the 1966-1970 period were $18.37 for the winter cow-calf system with annual winter grazing and $10.87 for the summer Cowcalf unit. Returns per acre to capital, land, and management during the 1963-1970 period were estimated at $6.46 for the summer stocker calf system and $41.00 for the winter stocker calf system with annual winter grazing. The summer cow-calf system and the winter stocker calf system were the best combination of systems to increase total beef production for the Piedmont area.

Beef Milk Production for Maximum Efficiency

The goal for milk production in the commercial cow herd depends on the reflection of this milk in the performance of the calf, both pre and post weaning, and on the reproductive performance of the cow. Evidence suggests that the composition of the steer at a particular weight is not drastically dependent on the nutritional environment up to weaning. This means that the lean tissue growth can be had when the gain is most economical. The efficiency of utilizing gross energy through the cow in milk to the calf probably is competitive with the energy utilization by the calf itself. If low quality roughage, that can be harvested only by the cow, is considered, a good case for milk efficiency can be built. Milk production in excess of growth demands by the calf seems of little economic value since this results in less efficiency in the feedlot and lower prices per pound at weaning. The ceiling to milk production in the commercial cow herd is natural selection for reproductive performance. With a fixed calving season in a particular feed environment, an excessive level of milk production can result in a reduced calf crop. This level varies from extensive systems, utilizing natural ecologies where the cow herd must be adapted to the conditions, to intensive systems that utilize stored feed and an attempt to increase unit output rather than volume for improved net returns. As the cow-calf operation invades the more traditional farming areas where the capability for forage and grain production are great, a need will exist first for more rapid early growth and next for more maternal performance to exploit the potential, provided this is more economical than artificial feed environments. Vertical integration will allow exploitation of the most economical portions of the growth curve be they either pre- or post-weaning in a given circumstance. Several courses are open to improve maternal performance. Selection for weaning weight results in more accurate selection for pre-weaning growth than for maternal performance. Thus, the potential to utilize the maternal performance is there before it is available. Production of milk can be introduced quickly by using dairy breeding. Optimum levels need to be quickly established either by decreasing milk production or by improving the management system. Crossbreeding systems can both introduce milk and produce heterosis for the reproductive complex. The more extensive opertions are more dependent on maternal ability for increased calf weights yet are tied to a level commensurate with the feed resources to maintain reproductive performance. The more intensive operations are less dependent on maternal ability because of creep feeding, harvested feeds, and the possibilities of vertical integration; but they can utilize a higher level of maternal performance and still maintain reproductive performance should such prove to be the most economic segment of the growth curve in their particular system. Although maximizing milk production as a goal seems improper, this is not to say that the British beef breeds do not need both the growth potential to utilize it and some more maternal ability to exploit even under many conventional systems of beef production.

A Comparison of Factors That Affect Ranching Profits

To evaluate the impact of income and expense factors for beef cow-calf operations, 39 factors were identified. Using these, eight were evaluated independently for impact. A $10.00 difference in net return per cow resulted from the following changes: 57.2 pounds selling weight per calf; 3.6 cents per pound of calf weight sold; 10.3 percent calf crop; $4.02 per ton for hay; 12.2 months of pasture versus hay with hay at $14.00 per ton or 4.1 months with hay at $18.00 per ton; .2 animal unit months per acre in stocking rate; $25.30 per acre grazing land value; and $9.04 tax per animal unit. The input required to produce these changes and others related thereto must be assessed for each individual case before making resource use decisions for increasing income.

Symposium on Pasture Methods for Maximum Production in Beef Cattle: Pasture Systems for a Cow-Calf Operation

Symposium on Pasture Methods for Maximum Production in Beef Cattle: Pasture Systems for a Cow-Calf Operation

Creep Grazing for Suckling Calves - A Pasture Management Practice

Selling additional pounds of calf is a desirable objective in any beef cattle enterprise. One way to do this in a cow-calf operation is through creep grazing. Creep grazing puts additional pounds on nursing calves. When weaned, creep grazed calves may weigh 30 to 50 pounds more per calf than those calves that have not had creep grazing available to them. This document is SS-AGR-211, one of a series of the Agronomy Department, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida. Publication date February 2004.
 SS-AGR-211/AG193: Creep Grazing for Suckling Calves?A Pasture Management Practice (ufl.edu)

Production Aspects of a Beef Cow-Calf Operation on Grass Pastures

Production Aspects of a Beef Cow-Calf Operation on Grass Pastures