K-State Research and Extension

“Early Weaning Nutrition”

by Chris Reinhardt, feedlot specialist

The hits just keep on coming. The promise of a long, green summer have evaporated with the moisture. It’s time to consider early weaning.

After the summer of 2011, the range needs rest to recover. Pulling calves off the cows now will not only reduce lactation drain on precious cow nutrients, but pulling those calves off the range will reduce the grazing pressure on the grass. Many ranchers have already reduced cow numbers through strategic culling, so pulling calves off early may be the best option to maintain cow numbers and improve range condition next spring.

The nutritional needs of those early-weaned calves are not greatly different from a conventionally weaned calf. If possible on the day of weaning, attract calves to the bunk by spreading 2-3 lbs of good-quality, long-stemmed hay loose in the bunk. On top of the loose hay spread 2-3 lbs of either a complete starter pellet or a mixed ration. The ration should be about 50:50 blend of good quality chopped hay:concentrate. The concentrate can be a blend of processed grain, grain by-products, and a complete balanced supplement. Make sure the diet stays well-mixed and calves can’t easily separate the grain from the hay. As soon as calves are all readily coming to the bunk and consuming the mixed ration, the loose hay is no longer needed.

If mixing facilities are not available, a complete starter feed can be used for the first few weeks after weaning.

Target protein concentration of the starter diet should be 15% crude protein, and most of that protein should come from natural plant sources, such as distiller’s grains or corn gluten feed. If the only forage available is dry, chopped hay, wet byproducts can be beneficial in “conditioning” the ration, which will help keep individual ingredients from separating out in the bunk. Silage or haylage can accomplish this same purpose. If needed, this can also be accomplished by adding water to the mixer during mixing.

Monitor consumption and step up the amount of feed carefully. Healthy calves should normally consume about 3% of their body weight of this 50% forage diet, on a dry matter basis. So a group of calves which average 300 lbs should ultimately eat about 9 lbs of dry matter, which would be 12-13 lbs of a 70% dry matter ration.

Continue to monitor the calves for symptoms of respiratory disease (depression, nasal discharge, lack of appetite) and coccidiosis (diarrhea). Calves which don’t readily come to the bunk at the morning feeding time are likely candidates for further observation. However, rectal temperature can be misleading in the summer, especially after 9 or 10:00 a.m., so just because a calf has a rectal temperature greater than 103.5°F doesn’t necessarily indicate respiratory disease.

Early weaning definitely challenges conventional thinking, facilities, and logistics. But it can be very effective at preserving range condition, cow condition, and calf performance.

“In Defense of Early Weaning”

by Chris Reinhardt, feedlot specialist 

Although most areas have gotten a reprieve from the 2011 drought, others are still feeling the lingering effects of low rainfall and high feed costs. Early weaning is an effective way to save on summer pasture and preserve cow body condition going into the winter. In fact, early weaning may be worth considering every year regardless of summer pasture conditions.

The rumen of calves begins to develop at the very first opportunity to consume solid food. Although calves rely on milk as their primary nutrient source as long as the supply is abundant, they will also begin to graze alongside their dam at only a few weeks of age. You will often observe calves grazing very close to their mothers’ heads, sampling the exact same grasses as their mother as she teaches them what to eat and what to avoid.

The grass that is consumed early in life enters the rumen and begins to be fermented by bacteria which the calf picks up from its mother and the world around it. As this fermentation progresses, and the calf supplies increasingly greater quantities of grass, the rumen grows in size and develops papillae, or finger-like projections, which aid in nutrient uptake from the rumen. So the suckling calf is actually a fully functioning ruminant by 90 days of age.

In addition, the 6-7 month age window may actually have disadvantages compared to weaning at a younger age. The passive immunity provided by colostrum remains active for 3-4 months but then wanes, after which time the calf must rely completely on its own immune system. But in many cases the immune system is not fully competent to battle all pathogens which attack the newly weaned calf: viruses, bacteria, dust, internal parasites, etc. So it is possible that the 90-day old calf may have an immunological advantage to the 205-day old calf in battling pathogens.

Weather also plays a large factor in weaned calf health. If we could guarantee sunshine and moderate temperatures throughout the fall weaning season, calf health would not be an issue. But, unfortunately, the combination of cold temperatures, precipitation, wind, and mud in the fall further suppresses an already incompetent immune system—a perfect recipe for respiratory disease.

Finally, the elimination of milk production after weaning allows the nutrients consumed by the cow to go back into rebuilding body condition. This could result in substantial reductions in winter feed requirements because (a) nutrients harvested by the cow are nearly always lower cost than feeds harvested and transported to the cow, and (b) forage quality in late summer and fall is nearly always greater than during the winter.

The 2011 taught that it pays to be prepared for all possible eventualities in the cattle business. Although there are some complicating management considerations, early weaning can save on pasture forage, preserve cow body condition, and improve post-weaning health of the calf.

“Heat Stress Interventions”

by Chris Reinhardt, feedlot specialist

Prevention is better than a cure—for virtually any disorder we can think of. But this is especially pertinent if you’re a cattle feeder going into summer heat. We know that we can intervene in the event of extreme heat events to prevent cattle death. But by that point cattle have likely been off feed for a protracted period and performance has been lost; we’re just happy to save the cattle.

The most effective and surest preventative of extreme heat stress for black-hided cattle is some sort of shade structure. We often see this in pasture cattle: even though extremely hot, humid conditions may exist on pasture, if cattle can find shade during the hottest part of the afternoon, they will be back out grazing after the sun begins to set. Shades can be sturdy, permanent structures, mobile, portable structures, or temporary structures using a frame with cloth overhead. Costs will tend to follow the permanence of the design. Also, the shade portion of the structure does not need to be solid; partial shade is better than no shade.

Another preventative measure is light-colored bedding. Recent K-State research (Rezak et al., 2012) suggests that during high heat days, the surface temperature of chopped hay or straw is 25°F cooler than that of the bare dirt floor and provides a cooler place for cattle to lay down and rest. And resting improves performance.

Other research suggests that wetting the surface of pen mounds in the morning prior to extreme heat can reduce surface temperatures and reduce heat load of cattle. The water essentially is “cooked off” by the radiant heat of the sun, and the evaporating water is taking heat with it from the pen surface. Without the water, the surface would simply absorb this heat and transfer it back to the cattle. However, the downside of this approach is that by adding water we may also be contributing to humidity conditions.

The key in all of these examples is to get interventions in place prior to the extreme heat event, give cattle a chance to utilize and benefit from the relief measures, and be prepared—summer is coming.

“Heat Stress Time Already?”

by Chris Reinhardt, feedlot specialist

For folks in agriculture, last summer seems like only minutes ago. Between the drought and the heat, none of us want a heavy dose of 2011 again.

But the other thing about agriculture is that we deal with what nature doles out. And last year we in the feedlot business learned something about heat stress. We learned it costs performance, it costs a lot of time and human energy to alleviate, and it can even cost animal lives.

So what if we actually anticipated that it could get hot this summer? Summer and heat in Kansas go hand-in-hand. It shouldn’t be a surprise to anyone if temperatures soar above 90 and cattle start to stress. Frankly, it surprises me every time anyone acts surprised.

So we know it’s going to get hot, and thanks to folks like Dr. Terry Mader of the University of Nebraska, we know what factors contribute to heat stress and what factors we can mitigate. High temps by themselves don’t cause a great deal of stress, but combine high temperatures with high humidity, lack of wind, and solar radiation, and you’ve got a recipe for disaster.

The good news is that it’s still April and the real challenge is still a couple months away, giving everybody plenty of time to prepare. PRE-pare: it means getting ready BEFORE the event happens. There’s not much we can do about temperature or humidity, but we can work on airflow and solar exposure.

If feedlot pens are properly mounded (8 feet high; 10 feet across the crown; 20-25 square feet of mound surface per animal on each side of the mound) and air movement outside the pen is not restricted with trees, cattle will use the mounds to catch what breezes may come through. The other area that we can affect heat stress is the construction of shades.

The beauty of this is that shades don’t just keep us out of a wreck—they can add performance! Shades during the summer—even in a dry climate—are worth:

To make this work, shades should be: (1) taller than your loader, (2) provide 20-25 sq. ft. of shade per head, and (3) be oriented lengthwise North-South so that the shaded area moves throughout the day to allow the previously shaded area to dry.

It’s time.

“S.O.R.T. – A Four Letter Word”

by Chris Reinhardt, feedlot specialist

Patton is quoted as saying, “No good decision was made from a swivel chair.” So it’s easy for me to sit here and tell you how you “should” be marketing your fed cattle—but “easy” and “right” are seldom the same things.

The questions I would have to ask are myriad, but mostly surround the target (quality grade, carcass weight, grid-type, live vs. carcass value, etc.) you’re trying to achieve. But there is another level that the “consultant” often overlooks, or even avoids: sorting logistics. (See the swivel-chair comment, again).

After sorting, a half-full pen doesn’t maximize yardage (from customer cattle) or maximize facilities utilization (for company-owned cattle). If you feed 80-head pens for logistics of feeder cattle freight, you can’t split those pens into 3 full loads of finished cattle; you could sort into 2 outcome groups but this fails to capture the full value of sorting. If you feed mostly small groups of customer cattle, you can’t easily re-blend non-market-ready cattle from separate original pens into new outcome groups.

It has been estimated that sorting into 3 uniform outcome groups shortly before harvest may increase profitability of the entire pen by $16 per animal. Sorting allows you to remove potentially over-weight and over-fat cattle, which allows you to feed the lighter and leaner animals longer, increasing the total weight sold out of the pen without increasing the percentage of out cattle which, for grid cattle, may bring hefty discounts, and for non-grid cattle, may bring the ire of your packer-partner. Also, an added positive by-product of this opportunity to increase the days on feed for the lighter and leaner cattle is that they also have a greater opportunity to move into higher value quality grades.

The relationship between carcass price and feed costs will dictate the actual endpoint to which cattle can be fed. At high grain-to-cattle prices, cattle may need to be marketed at a low yield grade 3, whereas if carcass value rises relative to grain costs, cattle may be fed well toward mid to upper yield grade 3. However, after cattle reach yield grade 4, efficiencies and cost of gain normally exceed the value of the carcass weight added through additional days on feed.

Finally, if the decision is made to utilize a beta agonist, the logistics of sorting become even more complicated. Ideally, cattle would be sorted into outcome groups prior to feeding the beta agonist, and the marketing date could be determined at time of sorting. If this is not feasible due to lack of sorting pens, another option may be to market the fattest and heaviest cattle from the pen, then initiate feeding the beta agonist and market after that feeding phase is complete.

Sorting does indeed complicate fed cattle marketing. If sorting can be accomplished with minimal stress on the cattle, it can be a source of additional revenue for the astute cattle feeder.

“Performance Paradigm II: Carcass Marketing Window”

by Chris Reinhardt, feedlot specialist

When are feedlot cattle done?

Most managers who’ve sold a few pens of cattle can eyeball a pen of cattle and thumbnail when the average of the pen is ready to be shipped. It’s what we do.

But after moving to a carcass-value (grid) marketing system, this traditional approach to terminating the finishing period is no longer a best practice. In the past, selling on a live basis, we were paid an average price per pound for all animals, for all pounds. But on a grid system, we are paid a different price per pound for each animal based on it’s individual, not the average, value.

Grid premiums and discounts are based on supply and demand. The Choice-Select spread is based on how many Choice boxes are available relative to the demand, and the volume of Choice carcasses that normally arrive at that plant during a given week. Yield grade 4 and 5 discounts are based on how many over-fat carcasses the plant has to deal with during the week and what the meat market will bear. Yield grade 1 and 2 premiums are based on what the demand is for lean boxes. The grid is designed to incentivize more of the types of carcasses which are in demand and dis-incentivize those that create added cost to the plant. As an illustration: although we normally consider Choice beef to be more valuable than Select, we’ve actually had brief periods when the Choice-Select spread has actually been negative, because the Choice demand was completely fulfilled, and the Select customers did not want to pay extra for Choice, and actually were willing to pay slightly less because of the extra internal fat that Choice meat carries.

Producers on a grid have essentially told their packer-partner to evaluate each animal separately from their penmates, and to pay on what each individual animal is worth, yet they continue to insist on selling when only the average of the pen is ready. If we built door frames for the average, half of us would bang our head every time. In other words, if the theoretical “average” animal is ready, half of the pen is over-fat and the other half is under-fat. Neither half is going to receive it’s hypothetical maximum value, and all will bring less than they could bring per pound, regardless of what grid is being used.

Why not match shipment practices to the very same evaluation system that will be used to determine individual value? Why not evaluate animals individually and sell them when they achieve some standard which will bring maximum value from the grid? Although ultimate marbling potential is driven partially by genetics, it is also driven by overall level of body fat. Few yield grade 1 or 2 carcasses grade Choice or above. By feeding to a Yield grade 3 or above every animal is given the opportunity to reach Choice, although not all have the ability.

Although many grids provide a small premium for lean carcasses (yield grade 1 and 2), the feed efficiency of lean animals is not sufficiently better than the feed efficiency of yield grade 3 animals to justify shipping early. If we calculate daily carcass gain as 80% of daily live weight gain, and conversion similarly, we can determine that carcass value of gain almost always exceeds carcass cost of gain until animals approach yield grade 4.

So the goals of carcass-based marketing are (1) retain animals until the cost of carcass gain approaches the value of carcass gain and (2) sell animals when each individual will approach maximum grid value, not the “average” animal.

“Performance Paradigm I: Carcass Gain” 

by Chris Reinhardt, feedlot specialist

Consider dressing percentage. All the old generalities still apply: steers dress higher than heifers, fed cattle higher than cows, beef breeds higher than dairy breeds, the average dressing percent of fed beef cattle is 62-64%. But what is the dressing percentage of the last pound of gain put on in the feedlot?

Here’s the deal: a fed steers walks into the pen with the greatest percentage of the head, hide, hooves, horns, and offal he’ll walk out of that pen with after 150 or 200 days on feed. So is he gaining 4 lbs per day of head, hide, hooves, horns, or offal? No, he’s putting on mostly muscle and fat—most of which winds up on the carcass, not on the floor (so-to-speak). So what’s the dressing percentage of that gain?—it’s fairly high. Some serial slaughter studies suggest that over 80% of the live weight gained at the end of the feeding period is carcass; that is, if a steer is gaining 3.0 lbs per day live, he’s also gaining 2.4 lbs of carcass daily.

Why does it matter? Because that mountain of performance data we’ve been collecting for the past few decades is potentially misleading, if you’ve switched to marketing on either a carcass weight or carcass value (grid) basis. The information is still true, but it no longer reflects the true relationship between the cost of gain and the value of gain. The cost of gain should now be calculated as daily cost over daily CARCASS gain, not daily LIVE gain, and the value of gain should be considered equal to the daily CARCASS cutout value, not the LIVE price.

The take home message is that cattle continue to gain carcass weight efficiently even at the end of the feeding period, after live efficiency would indicate that feeding is no longer cost effective. As a rule, when cattle approach yield grade 4 the increasing fat content of gain causes overall gain to slow and makes cost of carcass gain inefficient. But up until that point, remember that about 80% of all gain is going onto the carcass and feeding deep into yield grade 3 can be cost effective.

So if you’re a carcass-based seller, re-evaluate your marketing window based on value and cost of carcass gain, rather than value and cost of live gain.

“Moisture Management”

by Chris Reinhardt, feedlot specialist

Mud kills. It kills performance, it kills profitability, and it can kill cattle. That seems like an ironic way to begin an article when most of the High Plains are thirsting for moisture. But even in the dry west, we sometimes have more moisture than pen conditions can handle.

Numbers that all cattle feeders should commit to memory is that 4-8” mud reduces gain by about 14%, and 12-24” mud reduces gain by about 25%. So for every 4 days cattle have to slog through hock-deep mud, add another day and 20 lbs of dry matter feed to reach finish. And add 1 additional day for every 7 days of slogging through mud over their pasterns. Conceivably, after a typical Kansas winter storm, if pens get and stay muddy, we could extend the feeding period dramatically.

Wait—it get’s worse. In severely muddy conditions, cattle simply choose not to fight the mud and make fewer trips to the feedbunk, reducing their feed consumption. Consider that roughly half of a 900-lb steer’s daily intake goes to maintenance—simply keeping the lights on and the internal furnace burning. It’s the level of intake ABOVE maintenance that leads to gain. We expect to increase the cost of maintenance by about 10% due to cold, wet, conditions and increase maintenance an additional 10% due to increased energy expended just to get to the bunk. That increase eats into the amount of energy left over for gain. Then, if poor pen conditions discourage consumption, the available energy pool for gain decreases further.

Many of us have horror stories about zero gaining cattle after a winter storm. Divide 20 lbs of feed consumption by zero—you get a really big number.

We cannot prevent winter from coming to the plains, but we can prepare for it. Make sure all pens have good drainage to prevent water from standing and creating permanently muddy pens. Also, have a plan for snow removal. A wet snow has about 1” of moisture in each 8-10” of snow. If that snow is removed from the pen immediately after the storm and before it can melt, that can prevent a great deal of moisture from sucking the bottom out of the pen.

Finally, if muddy conditions do occur, have a plan in place to remove at least a portion of the mud. After several days of fighting severely muddy pens, you can actually watch cattle follow the box scraper and lay down in the firm, dry area the scraper leaves behind. That should say a lot.

“Creative Feeding Solutions”

by Chris Reinhardt, feedlot specialist

After the summer that was 2011, it’s time to get creative. It’s time to re-think everything we’ve always done and known about winter beef cow nutrition. Feed and forage are scarce, and what is available is costly.

But the beauty of the beef cow is that she can use feeds that non-ruminants and higher-performance ruminants cannot. Pigs, chickens, feedlot steers, and dairy cows can’t make use of much wheat straw, corn stalks, or milo stubble. With proper protein supplementation, the non-lactating brood cow has the capacity—and the time—to consume and digest a sufficient volume to meet her energy needs.

The other factor which makes the use of low quality forages feasible is the abundance of ethanol byproducts. These products—either wet or dry—are an excellent source of protein, energy, and phosphorus for use in brood cow rations. And they oftentimes are priced similar to or at a discount to corn.

If cows are in the middle 1/3 of gestation and not lactating, a blend of distillers grains and wheat straw or corn stover can meet their protein and energy needs. And when the cows move to the last 1/3 of gestation, increasing the amount of distillers grains or blending a moderate quality prairie hay with the wheat straw or corn stover will meet the needs.

Grinding these low-quality forages and feeding in a bunk may slightly improve digestion and intake but will certainly reduce waste. Mixing the forage with the supplemental concentrates will also improve your ability to provide a balanced diet to all cows in the group. If this is feasible, producers should consider separating cows by age and condition score and balancing the ration differently depending on nutrient needs. We do not want to create long-term welfare cows, but if we do not take care of the cow through inter, she will not be ready to optimally care for her calf come the spring. The decision to sell either the pair in the spring or the cow as a bred female the following fall can then be made AFTER she’s done her job in the spring.

Ranchers have traditionally relied on hay and commercial cubes to maintain the cow herd through winter. If ever there was a year to think outside the feed box, this is it.

“Body Condition Scoring Beef Cows”

by Chris Reinhardt, feedlot specialist

After this record-hot summer of 2011, we’ll need to be vigilant to the condition in which our cows go into winter. If they’re thin at calving time, we will sacrifice colostrum quality and quantity, calf vigor, and subsequent fertility during next summer’s breeding season.

Body condition score (BCS) on a beef cow is the closest thing we have to a dip stick for determining, at a glance, her nutritional status. But scoring cows properly and really benefitting from this tool requires a bit more effort and observation than simply looking and thinking, “They look a little thin”. The reason for talking about BCS now is that there’s still time to adjust nutrient supply to get the cows into the target BCS by calving time.

To properly evaluate an individual cow, you should look at her topline, brisket, ribs, flank, round, and tail head. The “ideal” or “target” BCS for cows at the time of calving is the BCS = 5. This cow will show the last 1-2 ribs first thing in the morning before feeding, have good fullness of muscle in the round with definite muscle definition, the spine will be apparent but individual vertebrae will not be discernable, and there are no obvious fat depots behind the shoulder or around the tailhead. We would say this cow has a good “bloom”. A borderline thin cow (BCS = 4) will clearly show 3-4 ribs first thing in the morning, will have no obvious fat depots in the brisket or tailhead, and you can see the individual vertebrae along the topline. The cow still shows some muscle through the round, and you could say she looks “healthy but thin”. In a borderline fleshy cow (BCS = 6) the ribs and vertebrae will not be obvious, as they are covered by fat. The muscling down through the round will be plump and full, but muscle definition is still apparent, and there will be small but noticeable fat deposits behind the shoulder, in the flank, brisket, and around the tailhead.

A change in BCS (from BCS 4 to 5, for example) requires addition of from 75 to 100 lbs live body weight, depending on the mature size or frame size of the cows. If you’re 2 months from the start of calving and need to add 1 BCS, you’ll need to feed the cows for maintenance, last 1/3 of gestation, and an additional 1.0 to 1.5 lb/day gain. This means increasing the amount of good quality hay as well as the amount of supplement. Thin cows (BCS 4 or below) can be separated off and fed a higher plane of nutrition. The argument can be made that this creates “welfare cows”. However, good record-keeping will indicate whether these cows are perennial “hard-keepers” or if they are simply too young or too old to compete with the mature cows. If they’re too young, another year of maturity should cure this; if they’re too old, you may consider culling them after weaning time. The key here is that good record keeping allows YOU to cull intentionally based on productivity, not based on lack of observation and management.

Cows which calve below a BCS 5 will delay their return to estrus and breed back late. If these cows do not maintain a 365-day calving cycle, they could after 1-2 late breedings effectively “cull themselves” due to being open at preg check time. Young cows are especially susceptible to this possibility because they are gestating a calf, nursing a calf, and still growing frame and muscle themselves. Unfortunately, young cows are the future of your herd and possibly your most progressive genetics. Hopefully these cows aren’t culled simply for lack of nutrients.

Body condition scoring the herd is a simple process, and can be done on a large paper tablet. Make columns for BCS 3, 4, 5, and 6 and as you pass through the herd first thing in the morning, make a tick mark for each cow in each of the columns. Multiply the number of 3’s by 3, the 4’s by 4, etc., add up the total score and divide by the total number of tick marks. This should give you an average BCS for the herd. But more important than the average is how many cows you’ve got in the critical scores of 3 and 4. 4’s can be easily fed into the 5 range, but 3’s could potentially not cycle in time to stay in the herd. If 3’s can be fed up into the 4-range, they’ll at least have a chance to breed, albeit late during the normal breeding season.

Take a little time to truly, critically evaluate the nutrient status of your cow herd this winter, and use this simple, but powerful tool to manage the fertility and health of your herd going into next spring, and give yourself full control over the genetics of your herd for years to come.