December 21, 2015
COWCHIP
DATES TO REMEMBER:
January
8-9
16
22-23
28-30
LCA Convention, Houma
Cattlemen’s Banquet, 6:30 p.m., Woodman of the World in Abbeville
Parish Livestock Show, Cecil McCrory Building, Abbeville
District Livestock Show, Blackham Coliseum, Lafayette
February
13-20
State Livestock Show, Lamar Dixon Expo Center, Gonzales
FACTORS TO CONSIDER FOR WINTER SUPPLEMENTATION:
We are a lucky bunch. It’s been a mild late fall and our summer grasses are still green. However,
chances are we will have a killing frost. With high costs and a falling cattle market, we need to make wise
supplementation decisions. Here are some factors to consider
- Hay Quantity – This is probably not a problem for most this year as the hay season was good for most.
However, if you’re short of hay (less than three round bales per cow), it may be time to consider culling older
and less productive cows. The market, although down, is still good and with herd expansion underway it may
not improve much as we go forward. Some culling should be considered by most producers this spring anyway.
A second alternative is to look for a high fiber, cheaper, supplemental feed (greater than 15% fiber) and feed it
at a high rate. Eight pounds per day to replace some of the hay should work.
- Hay Quality – If your hay is poor, less than 7% crude protein and/or less than 50% TDN, the
supplemental needs are high. Intake of such hay is limited because the rate of passage out of the rumen is slow.
So nutrition of the cow is suffering because both nutrient content and intake are low. A high protein (20%) and
highly digestible (80% TDN) supplement should be fed at five or six pounds a day for dry cows.
- Cow Production Stage – Cows nursing calves need more supplement than dry cows. Consider
separating this group from the dry cows and feeding them extra. Eight to 10 pounds of a high quality
supplement would be needed with below average hay. Of course, ryegrass, which is hard to come by this year
in many cases, is the real answer for fall calving cows.
1
- Body Condition – Thin cows need more groceries. Not only to add flesh before calving which is very
important to reproductive performance but also to maintain core temperature. A fleshier cow stays warmer with
less energy intake. If you’re grouping cows nursing calves separately then you may want to include the thin
ones in that group. Also, these thin cows should be considered for culling before this market breaks further.
- Age – Heifers either weanling or coming with their first calf need a more nutrient dense ration.
Because of their smaller body size they cannot consume as much as mature cows. Supplementation levels of
these growing heifers would be similar to lactating cows. They should also be grouped separately because they
cannot compete at the feed trough with mature cows.
ANY NEWS SUGGESTING PRICES HAVE BOTTOMED?
By Stephen Koontz from In the Cattle Markets
The main question I continue to get through this fall and early winter is: when will the plunge in the
cattle market be over? The whys of what's been happening have been fairly well-discussed: heavy slaughter
weights, large inventories of market-ready cattle, and the strong dollar. The strong domestic demand discussed
by Dr. Tonsor in this column was present in the third quarter but it has not been enough. Further, weakness in
the historically strong hamburger market suggests all may not well for the fourth quarter.
So are any of the right things happening to turn the market around? Yes, modestly. The best news from
last week is the turnaround in beef trade numbers. Beef imports were down and exports were up and both rather
sharply. Import tonnage for October was off 18% and exports were up 18%. As a result net imports were down
35%. Cheapening wholesale beef prices is the likely cause. Net beef imports went from 6% to 2% of the
volume of monthly commercial beef production. Of course this is a too-simple way of thinking about the issue
as the US exports very high and very low value products while importing primarily lean meat to be used in
hamburger. But the volume remaining in the domestic is reduced.
The thing that market watchers will need to see next is some additional softening of retail beef prices.
Retail beef prices are off from record highs but retailer margins remain very strong. Featuring of beef and a
willingness to sacrifice margin for sales will move additional volume. My take on fed cattle and beef
inventories the last half of this year is that feedlots first had heavy inventories to work through, then packers,
and now the retail level. Inventories remain problematic for everyone but the retail margin is usually biggest
before the featuring starts.
Steer slaughter weights appear to have turned the corner. Steer weights were 923 pounds last week and
that is six weeks past their high of 930. Heifer carcass weights are still increasing but steers appear to be in the
seasonal decline. Further, the cattle of feed reports show continued light placements and a drawdown of the
inventory of cattle on feed that have been on feed for over 120 days and 90 days. These numbers are down 6%
and 3%. While these are in line with normal seasonal declines, the last three months of placements have been
modest and this week's report will tell us if its four months.
What do the futures contract charts say? There are no clear bottoming patterns and the downtrends are
firmly in place. Further, support has been broken but the market has not softened much thereafter. These are
mainly technical signals for continued down moves. There are a few shorter term signals - a couple of strong
closes on single days but key reversals can be very short-lived. These patterns have preceded corrections to the
upside in the down trending markets.
Hedgeable margins for cattle feeders are not strong but they look better than they have in two years.
The hard break downward in feeder cattle prices are creating a much better outlook for that industry next year.
And while calf prices are considerably off from last year, the returns to cow-calf producers remain strong. It is
2
likely herd expansion will continue. The focus on feed costs in last week's column is a very useful perspective
to keep. Forage and feed grain prices are substantially reducing the high costs of the past five to seven years.
I think that's the operative phrase for cattle market outlook is: "Next year." We need to see two months
of strong marketings, more solid trade movement, and retail featuring. These are the things to watch for. And it
is then that cattle prices will show some strength.
COOL LANGUAGE INCLUDED IN OMNIBUS BILL:
Coming within days of facing retaliation from two of our largest trading partners, the text of the 2016
Omnibus Appropriations bill was released this week and includes a full repeal of mandatory Country-of-Origin
labeling; a significant victory for cattlemen and women. Canada and Mexico alone account for over $2 billion
in beef sales and nearly one-third of total U.S. beef exports. Retaliatory tariffs would force United States beef
out of these markets, permanently harming the U.S. beef industry.
House Agriculture Committee Chairman Mike Conaway (R-Texas) led the efforts in the House, which
passed stand-alone legislation with an overwhelming bipartisan vote of 300-131 in June.
"Back in June, the House overwhelmingly passed language to repeal mandatory COOL for products
challenged by our trading partners, and I am pleased to see similar language included in the omnibus package,"
said Conaway. "By including this language, we will be back in compliance with our WTO obligations, avoid
more than $1 billion in retaliation from Canada and Mexico, and prevent damages to our relationships with two
of our top trade partners. I especially commend Chairman Roberts for his diligence and hard work in getting
this across the finish line."
Across the Hill, Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Pat Roberts (R-Kansas) said America's beef
producers should be able to rest a little easier knowing the language is included in the bill.
"After decades of leading the charge against mandatory COOL, I'm proud to say Congress is one huge
step closer to giving producers a safeguard against over $1 billion in trade retaliation," said Chairman Roberts.
"The beef industry held true to its reputation of perseverance and continues to fight against regulations that
hinder the success of beef producers not only in Kansas but across the country."
COOL has not only brought us to the brink of retaliation after four rulings by the World Trade
Organization, but it has also proven itself a failed program. Cattle producers have long held that voluntary,
industry-led programs work better than any government mandate. Cattlemen and women work diligently to
provide a product that consumers seek out, and studies show that COOL has failed show any value. With
consumers unwilling to pay for the cost of the mandatory program, cattle producers are forced to bear the
burden. With mandatory COOL repealed, cattle producers can continue to invest in the voluntary labeling
programs that consumers do seek out.
Votes on the Omnibus bill are expected at the end of this week. NCBA appreciates the leadership of
Chairman Conaway and Chairman Roberts for their staunch defense of America's beef industry and the U.S.
economy that would suffer a devastating blow from the impending retaliation.
WHERE SHOULD WE GO FROM HERE?
With all indications pointing to herd expansion and the resulting decrease in prices predicted, evaluation
of our management practices become critical. While one can argue which management decision is most
important. The genetics we select sets potential performance and affects all other management decisions.
3
There is mounting evidence that we have moved too far in the direction of increased cow size. By
selecting bulls with superior growth traits for yearling weight and weaning weight, we’ve also selected far
larger mature cow size by retaining heifers from these bulls. The hope was that we would also increase
weaning weights of our calf crops. The problem is average weaning weights have not increased in the last 20
years. This is according to performance records from producers in Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and South
Dakota. While the genetics for growth have more than likely improved, the environment hasn’t allowed for the
genetics for increased growth to be expressed. This is demonstrated by weaning weights from those same
ranches being closely associated with wet and dry years. Increased spending on feeds, hay and pasture should
allow for heavier weaning weights, but is it sustainable long term, especially with herd expansion underway and
the prospects for lower calf prices.
In a study conducted by Oklahoma State University that included herds in Montana, Arkansas and
Oklahoma which analyzed the economics of larger cows it was found that for every 100 pounds of additional
cow weight, calf weaning weights increase six pounds on average. The extra 100 pounds of cow weight
resulted in an additional $42 of nutrition expense, so even at $2 per pound of weaning weight $2 x 6 pounds =
$12, the losses were considerable.
In addition, selecting sires with higher than average milk EPD’s should also be avoided if we are to
match our cow herd to our environment. Research at the USDA ARS Station at El Reno, OK showed cows
with the genetic potential to produce 11-15 pounds of milk per day were not doing so under that environments
potential. Also, as milk production increases, it does not result in proportionate gains in weaning weight. It’s
the law of diminishing returns. Each extra pound of milk a cow gives results in less and less of an increase in
weaning weight.
Smaller cows are more efficient. An 1,100 pound cow requires 7.6 pounds of forage to produce one
pound of calf weaning weight while a 1,400 pound cow needs 9.6 pounds of forage to produce one pound of
calf weaning weight. It becomes quite clear and is logical that smaller cow size is more efficient and should
provide for better economics. All the buzz about sustainability comes into play here. By moderating cow size
we become more efficient and can claim we are more sustainable because we are.
So how should we address such issues? The old rule of thumb, to have average frame scores in our cow
herd of 4 and then use frame score 5 or 6 bulls, should allow for an efficient cow herd and enough growth in the
calves to fit current market demands. Below is a frame scoring chart for heifers. A measure of hip height at
heifer selection time should be conducted to remove the extremes. We don’t want them too small either. If you
purchase most of your replacement heifers you may want to demand frame scores from your source.
As far as milk, one should know what breed averages are for the breeds of bulls you use and then keep
in mind 11 to 15 pounds of milk per day is all
that is needed to obtain acceptable weaning
weights. Any bull with EPD’s which would
result in milk yields higher than this should be
avoided.
Efficiency is critical in the cow
business. It will become even more so as we
enter into this phase of diminishing prices and
historically high costs of production.
Efficiency and sustainability is impacted
largely be the genetics of the cow herd. As in
most things moderation is best.
4
Table 1. Cattle Frame Scores based on hip height in inches1.
Females
Frame Score3
Age in
Months
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
5
37.2
39.3
41.3
43.4
45.5
47.5
6
38.2
40.3
42.3
44.4
46.5
48.5
7
39.2
41.2
43.3
45.3
47.4
49.4
8
40.1
42.1
44.1
46.2
48.2
50.2
9
40.9
42.9
44.9
49.0
47.0
51.0
10
41.6
43.7
45.7
47.7
49.7
51.7
11
42.3
44.3
46.4
48.4
50.4
52.4
12
43.0
45.0
47.0
49.0
51.0
53.0
13
43.6
45.5
47.5
49.5
51.5
53.5
14
44.1
46.1
48.0
50.0
52.0
54.0
15
44.5
46.5
48.5
50.5
52.4
54.4
16
44.9
46.9
48.9
50.8
52.8
54.8
17
45.3
47.2
49.2
51.1
53.1
55.1
18
45.6
47.5
49.5
51.4
53.4
55.3
19
45.8
47.7
49.7
51.6
53.6
55.5
20
46.0
47.9
49.8
51.8
53.7
55.6
21
46.1
48.0
50.0
51.9
53.8
55.7
4
Mature
48.2
50.0
52.0
53.9
55.8
57.5
Frame Score (5-21 months) = 0.4723 (ht)
-0.0239 (days of age) + 0.0000146 (days of age)2
+0.0000759 (ht) (days of age) – 11.7086
Heifer
Slaughter
900
1,000
1,100
1,200
1,300
1,400
5
Weight
Mature
Cow
1,000
1,100
1,200
1,300
1,400
1,500
Weight6
1
Approved by the Beef Improvement Federation.
2
Steers continue growth longer than bulls, being about ½ to 1 inch taller at 18 to 21 months.
3
USDA Medium Frame Size is a Frame Score of approximately 4.0 to 5.5.
4
If calved first at 2 years old. Add 1 inch if calved first at 3 years.
5
At 0.5 inch fat cover.
6
Moderate body fatness, cow Body Condition Score 5 (where 1 = extremely thin and 9 = obese; cow weight
varies 7% to 8% per condition score and up to 10% for extremes in muscling). For breeding at 14 to 15 months,
heifers should weigh 60 to 65% of this mature weight.
5
ANNUAL BANQUET AND DANCE:
Our 2016 Annual banquet will be held at the Woodman of the World in Abbeville on Saturday,
January 16. Happy Hour will begin at 6:30 p.m. with program, meal and dance to follow.
Supper will include brisket and dressing with all the trimmings. Price will be $15.00/person or
$30.00/couple and will be collected at the door. A cash bar will be open.
If you are interested, please fill out the form below and return it to Vermilion Parish Cattlemen’s
Association, 1105 West Port St., Abbeville, LA 70510, by January 8 or call 898-4335.
We hope to see you there and feel free to invite some potential members.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------RETURN TO VERMILION PARISH CATTLEMEN’S ASSOCIATION, 1105 WEST PORT STREET,
ABBEVILLE, LA 70510 BY January 8.
__________ I will attend the January 16 Banquet
__________ Number in party
Name: _____________________________________
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sincerely,
Andrew Granger
County Agent
Vermilion Parish
It is the policy of the Louisiana Cooperative Extension Service that no person shall be subjected to
discrimination on the grounds of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, or disability.
6