A Publication of:
OSU Extension - Fairfield County
831 College Ave., Suite D, Lancaster, OH 43130
and the
BEEF Cattle questions may be directed to the OSU Extension BEEF Team through Stephen Boyles or Stan Smith, Editor
You may subscribe to this weekly BEEF Cattle letter by sending a blank e-mail to beef-cattle-on@ag.osu.edu
Previous issues of the BEEF Cattle letter
Issue # 508
October 18, 2006
Heifer Development Program Seeks Cooperators - John Grimes, Extension Educator, OSU Extension-Highland County
The Ohio State University Extension Beef Team and the Ohio Cattlemen's Association are currently working together to pursue the establishment of beef heifer development programs in Ohio. Grant funding has been secured from the Southern Ohio Agricultural and Community Development Foundation to help initiate this concept and also enhance educational programs for beef producers. The initial goal is to identify two cooperators that will serve as beef heifer development centers in 2007 and beyond. Hopefully, this will ultimately result in more efficient cow-calf production in Ohio and provide new marketing opportunities for producers.
The basic Ohio heifer development model will be to establish locations where Ohio cattlemen can send heifer calves to be developed from approximately one year of age until they are confirmed bred. The cooperators would follow a set of criteria established by the OSU Animal Science Department and OSU Extension Beef Team for optimum heifer development. Management techniques including proper nutrition, heat synchronization, calving ease genetics, and modern identification systems will be emphasized. After females are confirmed bred, they can be returned to the consignor's herd as replacement females, or offered for sale to the public as replacement females for other herds. The grant funds are being used to support these activities, serving largely as start-up funds.
An ideal scenario would be to establish two development locations near Ohio's primary cow-calf production regions and also in areas that would provide easy access to the public for future educational programs. In order to help us identify a potential cooperator, we have developed an application for anyone interested in becoming a cooperator for the on-farm beef heifer development program. The application contains some basic questions to help determine a potential cooperator's background in the beef industry, facilities, availability of labor, educational background, etc. Once any applications are received, a site inspection and interview will be used to determine the eventual cooperators.
Any individuals interested in being considered as a cooperator for this project can secure an application by contacting John Grimes, OSU Extension-Highland County, at 937-393-1918 or by e-mail at grimes.1@osu.edu. Applications can also be downloaded from the OSU Extension Beef Team web page directly at http://beef.osu.edu/HfrDev/app.pdf (in pdf version or in an MS WORD doc) or the Ohio Cattlemen's Association web page at www.ohiocattle.org under the Beef Improvement section. Applications are due November 15, 2006 to John Grimes, OSU Extension-Highland County, 119 Governor Foraker Place, Hillsboro, Ohio 45133.
Pre-weaning Calves: Decreasing Disease and Increasing Value - Dr. W. Dee Whittier, Extension Veterinarian, Cattle, VA-MD Regional College of Vet. Med.
Calves that have been weaned before they are marketed are bringing premium prices in Virginia and across the country. This is at least partly due to the estimation of their increased health status but is probably also due to the perception that those who cared enough to market their calves this way probably cared about genetics and other factors that go into the production of high quality calves.
In a conversation with Bill McKinnon the other day he commented how easy it is to sell calves that have been pre-weaned. He also reminded me that in the relative few years since the Virginia Quality Assured (VQA) program was initiated the change in the percent being sold that are pre-weaned has been a flip-flop from few historically to most this year.
The increase in demand for pre-weaned calves comes along with some significant changes in the cattle industry. An increased number of calves have gone straight to feedlots in recent years. Feeders see lots of calves compared to many stocker operators. I'm convinced that they have been quick to recognize the decrease in disease seen in pre-weaned calves.
When we talk about disease in calves we generally are referring to shipping fever, also called respiratory disease or bovine respiratory disease complex. This disease is still the biggest cause of disease loss in the beef industry. In fact, it is accepted that more cattle die of respiratory disease each year than from all other causes, except at harvest. This frustrating disease has withstood many of the efforts to control it that have worked with other diseases. Vaccination has been almost totally successful in controlling a disease like blackleg. On the other hand, even high quality vaccination programs for calves still have associated cases or even outbreaks of respiratory disease. This has led the cattle industry to look for other preventives for the disease.
Shipping fever is not a classical disease where administering the disease agent to test cattle will produce the condition. In fact, administering the most important disease agent (the bacteria Manheimia hemmorhagicum or Pasteurella) even directly into healthy cattle windpipes often fails to result in any sickness. But when a number of other factors we call "stressors" enter into the picture, then these bacteria enter into the lung and multiply there. Table 1 is a list of the stressors that commonly challenge young feeder cattle.
| Table 1. Factors that challenge feeder cattle and increase the risk of shipping fever or respiratory disease. | ||
| Weaning | Going without feed | Exhaustion from marketing |
| Castrating/dehorning | Virus infections (colds) | Weather stress |
| Social stress from mixing | Weather stress | Processing calves |
| Going without water | Change in diet | Parasitism |
Prevention of respiratory disease in cattle has been a very difficult medical problem. Huge amounts of effort have gone into vaccination programs in an effort to control the disease. Much of the vaccination effort has been directed at preventing viral infections against the most damaging viruses (IBR, BVD, PI3 and BRSV). Manheimia/ Pasteurella vaccines have been tried for many years with somewhat discouraging results. Vaccines using a somewhat different approach have become available in the last several years and are generally accepted to have a larger influence on reducing the severity of the disease more than reducing the incidence.
As it has become apparent that vaccination programs are not a total solution to respiratory disease, other ways to reduce disease have been sought. Separating the stress of weaning from the stresses of marketing is a natural step. If a system for weaning calves that is low stress (across-fence weaning, for example) the risk that respiratory disease will occur on the farm where weaning takes place can be minimized.
Someone considering pre-weaning calves should closely consider the nutritional program given to calves. Right at weaning, good hay or pasture will encourage calves to eat and reduce stress. After the initial phase, calves should be fed a ration that will provide for at least moderate growth. Generating extra pounds to sell without making calves so fleshy that they will receive discounts at sale should be the objective.
Selling pre-weaned calves is an opportunity for Virginia producers to add value to a product that they have already produced. The added value comes from both increasing selling price and having more pounds to sell. To capture the increased selling price a sales route needs to be used that will advertise the increased value. The VQA program, tele-auction sales (commingled or single owner) or direct sales can all be used to assure that buyers have the chance to recognize the increased profit potential pre-weaned calves have.
Ethanol and Livestock - Management Issues and Resources - Brian Roe, Department of Agricultural, Environmental and Development Economics and OSU Extension
More ethanol plants will be coming to Ohio and to other livestock regions around the United States , which has led some to question how this will impact the livestock sector. While the 'when' and 'where' of additional Ohio ethanol plants are constantly evolving, livestock producers will have to deal with the fundamental fact - less corn will be available for feed while more ethanol byproducts will be available.
Over the next few months we will tackle several questions that have been surfacing about the emerging livestock-ethanol situation and update a set of links to resources that provide some of the most recent research on the topic.
Question: As the supply of ethanol co-products increases, how will that affect the price of the co-products?
John Lawrence, Iowa State University and director of the Iowa Beef Center, responds: "There have been several examples of when co-product has been free for the hauling as new plants come on-line, dryers malfunction, or something is out of spec, but this is not a long run sustainable price. Economics suggests that as the supply of co-products out paces demand prices will be lower. What is the lower bound? It depends on alternative markets for the co-product. One alternative are other buyers including livestock production in other states and countries. The storage and long distant movement suggests that plants will have to dry the product with is costly at current natural gas prices. A second alternative is the co-product's value as fuel for the plant. There is some price at which the plant is better off to burn DGS than sell it at too low of a price. Burning is likely to require additional investment into equipment and take time for plants to make that decision and get it installed. However, in the long run burning may set the lower price for DGS. A third alternative is to spread the DGS on the ground as fertilizer. There is some nitrogen and phosphorous value."
New Self-Assessment Tool for Beef Quality Assurance - Steve Boyles, OSU Extension Beef Specialist
Farmers are ranchers have a new tool for assessing their Beef Quality Assurance (BQA) program. A checklist can be a fast and easy way to evaluate how you are doing with your BQA program. Thanks to funds contributed by the Cattlemen's Beef Board from checkoff funds, "Quality Assurance Cattle Handling Practices, Procedures, and Facilities Evaluation: A Farm and Ranch Producer Evaluation" has been created.
This assessment tool deals with: Farm Facilities, Biosecurity, Cattle Corrals, Administration of Health Products, Stocker/Backgrounder & Feedlot Management, Cow/Calf BQA, Feedstuffs, Pesticides & Chemical Records, and Transportation.
A producer can go down through the checklist and do a self-assessment of their current BQA-related management practices. If you have an interest in BQA and assessing your current management you can go to the following link in the OSU Beef Team Library (http://beef.osu.edu/library/BQASelf.pdf).
Hard copies of this BQA self-assessment tool have been produced and will soon be available from local OSU Extension offices.
Forage Focus: Evaluate Hay Storage and Feeding Procedures - James B. Neel, Professor, Animal Science
The methods of storing and feeding hay can have a great impact on the winter feed bill and the profitability of cow-calf operations. Now, in the midst of winter feeding, would be a good time to evaluate the hay storage procedure used last spring and summer and the feeding practices carried out this winter. Both impact the volume of hay available as well as the cost of winter feeding.
Hay is the primary winter feed for Tennessee cowcalf operations. Approximately 91 percent of the hay fed to beef herds is harvested and stored in large round bales.
Eighty two percent of Tennessee's cow-calf producers store these large bales outside, uncovered, on the ground. Exposure to weather and moisture from the ground result in a large amount wasted or rotted hay that is not suitable to meet the cattle's nutrient needs.
Research conducted at the University of Tennessee showed that large round bales stored outside, uncovered, on the ground had dry matter losses of 28 percent. Similar research at other experiment stations reported losses up to 35 percent. This is a lot of hay lost.
Depending on the length of the winter feeding period and availability of grazing, from 1.5 to 2.0 tons of hay would be required to winter a late-winter to early-spring calving, mature beef cow. A 28 percent loss of dry matter in hay stored outside on the ground means significantly less hay available. Extra hay to replace the spoiled hay would increase the cost to winter the brood cow. If 1.5 tons of hay is required to winter a cow, spoilage increases that amount to 1.92, and the cost of the hay would go up from $75 to $92 per cow. In herds where 2.0 tons would be needed to feed the mature brood cow, 2.56 tons of hay would be needed and the cost would increase from $100 to $128.
Winter feeding is the most expensive phase of producing a feeder calf. Store large bales of hay to keep spoilage at a minimum. As you feed this winter, take a look at the amount of hay you have that is not suitable as feed for cattle. You can easily see the amount spoiled as the bales are moved to feeding areas. Think of the spoiled hay as money lost.
Make plans to reduce hay spoilage and winter feed costs for next year's hay crop. Contact a University of Tennessee Extension Office for information on hay storage practices to reduce spoilage and the winter feed bill for your cow herd.
Weekly Roberts Agricultural Commodity Market Report - Mike Roberts, Commodity Marketing Agent, Virginia Tech
LIVE CATTLE in Chicago (CME) closed mixed on Monday with the OCT'06LC at $87.600/cwt, off $0.850/cwt and the DEC'06LC off $0.500/cwt at $87.425/cwt. Live cattle futures were mixed with the nearbys lower amid concern for higher feed costs pushing fed cattle to market sooner rather than later. Short covering followed last week's declines as prices drifted lower in light early demand amid the lack of follow-through. Expectations for cash cattle are steady at best for the week. Cash cattle traded last week down $2-$3/cwt mostly at $88/cwt-$88.50/cwt with some prices to $87/cwt reported. Boxed beef was supportive as packers kept kill rates up providing a slightly firm tone to the market despite rumors last week they would reduce slaughter. Last week's estimated kill rate was slightly under the previous week. Monday's kill was reported at 125,000 head, much better than expected. Floor sources stated today they were still concerned that feedlot supplies are adequate and rising feed costs will push cattle into packer yards. Trader's expectations are that beef packers will not reduce slaughter rates to any appreciable extent due to very high fixed costs. Deferred months were supportive on expectations for tighter choice supplies. USDA early on Monday put choice beef cutout at $144.44/cwt, up $1.00/cwt. Early estimates for Friday's USDA monthly Cattle on Feed report for feedlots with 1,000 head or more placed the October on-feed supplies in a range of 107.6%-110% of last year at this time. September placement estimates ranged from 90.2%100% and marketing at 95.3%-100% of last year at this time. A lack of positive export news from Asia, added a bearish tone to the market. Cash sellers are encouraged to consider protecting a portion of 4th quarter '06 and 1st quarter '07 marketings. Hedgers sensitive to the downturn in this market should be on short positions by now. Corn users should hold off pricing inputs at this time while considering selling a put option.
FEEDER CATTLE at the CME closed up with OCT'06FC futures at $107.850/cwt, up $0.700/cwt. The NOV'06FC contract finished the day at $105.675/cwt, up $0.80/cwt. Lower CBOT corn futures in early trading on oversold conditions lent support to feeder cattle. Technical buy stops fueled early gains. The OCT'06FC contract 14-day Relative Strength Index (RSI) finished at 23.01. The RSI registered 14 at one point in the day. A contract is said to be oversold at 30 or below. Feeders started higher on short covering encouraged by the oversold condition but pared gains late when corn futures turned up and cattle futures slipped with the added weight on prices. Concerns over high feed costs are the same story in feeders. Late fund selling also added to setbacks in the nearby months. The CME Feeder Cattle Index for October 12 was placed at $111.79/cwt, off $0.50/cwt. This was also down $8.31/cwt since the record high set on September 7. Cash sellers are encouraged to consider protecting a portion of 4th quarter '06 and 1st quarter '07 marketings at this point. Corn users should hold off pricing inputs at this time while considering selling a put option.
Visit the OSU Beef Team calendar of meetings and upcoming events
BEEF Cattle is a weekly publication of Ohio State University Extension in Fairfield County and the OSU Beef Team. Contributors include members of the Beef Team and other beef cattle specialists and economists from across the U.S.
All educational programs conducted by Ohio State University Extension are available to clientele on a nondiscriminatory basis without regard to race, color, creed, religion, sexual orientation, national origin, gender, age, disability or Vietnam-era veteran status. Keith L. Smith, Associate Vice President for Ag. Admin. and Director, OSU Extension. TDD No. 800-589-8292 (Ohio only) or 614-292-1868
Fairfield County Agriculture and Natural Resources
