K-State Research and Extension

“Mud Mitigation”

by Chris Reinhardt, feedlot specialist  

As cattle people we grudgingly accept the various natural elements as part of the cost of doing business. Rain, snow, ice, and extreme temperatures are part of life in Kansas for ranchers and cattle feeders. And each of these factors that move animals outside of their comfort zone, called the “thermo neutral zone”, steals a measure of performance. With respect to mud, however, we know that the cost of fighting mud on lost performance is high, and we can prepare for the inevitability of it.

Researchers have estimated that although pastern-level mud has little effect on performance, hock-deep mud is costly. Gain will be reduced by 1/3 to ½ when cattle are fighting foot-deep mud. The energy required to reach the bunk or water trough increases dramatically so part of their intake energy is lost to this energy expenditure; the stress of fighting the mud will actually discourage cattle from making the trek to the bunk causing reduced intake; cattle have a hard time finding a comfortable resting area causing an increase in energy use just standing around instead of lying down; wet hide from laying in the mud will cause cold stress and shivering to increase.

When we consider that only about half of animals’ normal daily energy intake is going toward gain on “stress-free” days, all of these increases in energy expenditure dramatically cut into what is left over for gain.

Preparing for mud won’t eliminate these costs entirely, but we can reduce them.

1. Mounds within the pen. Cattle should have about 25 ft² of mound space per animal. Mounds should have a slope of about 1:5 on the sides to facilitate moisture to flow away from the cattle and the ‘valleys’ between mounds should slope about 3-4% away from the bunk. The mound end that is nearest the bunk should connect directly to the concrete bunk pad so that cattle don’t have to slog through deep mud to get to the bunk.
2. Increase pen space per animal. Whereas 125 ft² of pen space might be adequate during dry conditions in the summer, 350 ft² may be barely sufficient during wet conditions. Adjust animal density as conditions dictate.
3. Smooth pen surfaces using a scraper or box blade whenever the weather allows. The longer that muddy conditions persist, the worse the pen conditions will become and cattle will have an even greater difficulty moving throughout the pen.

Living and raising cattle in Kansas has many rewards. By preparing pens this fall ahead of the wet and cold times sure to come, we can get through fall, spring, and winter with minimal loss of performance, and reap the financial rewards next year.

“The Value of a Pound”

by Chris Reinhardt, feedlot specialist

What’s another pound of calf worth at sale time? Is it simply the same as the value per pound of the calf, or is it more complicated than that?

This is actually quite important in order to make good decisions going into weaning time regarding any value-added management programs we may want to implement. Preconditioning for at least 45 days can add substantial weight to calves. Implanting calves either during the suckling phase or during preconditioning and backgrounding also will make calves heavier and affect their sale price per pound.

The slide is there for a reason. Heavier calves are less efficient, on average, with all else being equal. So heavier calves bring a slightly lower price per pound than lighter calves.

If we assume that 500 lb calves will be worth $2.50 per lb, and then apply a 15 cent per pound slide for each one hundred pounds heavier from the 500 lb base, we can easily calculate the value of added weight. Now let’s do some simple math.

The 500 lb calf is worth $1,250 (500 lb × $2.50/lb). If we add 100 lb during preconditioning and backgrounding, and there is a 15 cent per pound slide, then the 600 lb calf is worth $1,410 (600 lb × $2.35/lb). Subtract the new gross value from the original gross value ($1,410 – $1,250) = $160 which is the value of the 100 pounds of added weight; or, $160 ÷ 100 lbs = $1.60 per pound of the added weight.

That’s still good money, but a fair bit less than simply looking at the price per pound at the auction market. More importantly, $1.60 per added pound will likely make upcoming management decisions, which will give you more pounds to sell this fall, profitable decisions and profitable pounds.

“A Good Year for Early Weaning”

by Chris Reinhardt, feedlot specialist

Normally we only consider early weaning when we are in the throes of a nasty drought. However, given what we now know about calf and cow nutrition, we may want to expand our thinking.

Late summer forage quality in pastures declines, even in good rainfall years. The lower energy and protein content of late summer grass does not support a great deal of calf gain. Doubly challenging is that this late season forage also does not support a great level of lactation by the calf’s dam, so calf ADG declines considerably late in the grazing season. Assuming adequate moisture, late season calf gain may be estimated in the range of 0.5 to 1.5 lb per day.

Although the actual amount of milk and grass consumed by calves varies greatly, it can be stated broadly that the calf’s first choice for nutrients, as long as he can get away with it, is his mother’s milk.

Calves are fully functional ruminants by 60-90 days of age, and are fully capable of making use of good quality forage, but milk is always their first choice for nutrients, rather than their last. So every day they will go to their mother and consume as much milk as they can. And as the calf grows and it’s appetite climbs, mother’s milk decreases, effectively pushing the calf to go to grass more and more in order to supplement his nutrition.

This constant demand for milk by the calf places a tremendous pull on the dam’s nutrient reserves. Early in the season, when grass is both lush and plentiful, the cow can actually produce a greater quantity of milk than the small calf can utilize because of the lactation curve and the abundant nutrient supply available to the dam. However, as grass matures and nutrient supply declines, the cow will pull energy from her own reserves (her body fat) to sustain lactation to prepare the calf for the winter.

If we work backwards from calving, the target body condition for beef cows at the time of calving is usually a condition score 5.0, indicating muscling, and a slight cover of fat, but no fat pockets obvious, and 2-3 ribs visible. Cows which are in a thinner condition than this target usually have a greater post-partum interval, resulting in later conception or even an open cow.

So if the cow goes into the winter in low body condition, we need to feed those reserves back into the cow or risk late breeding next summer and late calving in subsequent years or even open cows next fall. It is estimated that for each 2 weeks we leave cows grazing late season pasture with calves after about September 1, cows lose about 0.25 of a condition score. And each full condition score requires about 80-100 lbs of cow body weight to regain.

If calves are only gaining 1-1.5 lb per day on their dam late in the season, we can do better. By weaning (especially utilizing low-stress weaning methods), we can improve the nutritional supply available to the calf, meeting all the needs for energy, protein, vitamins, and minerals. Weaning during favorable weather also has the advantage of reducing stress and the risk of disease brought on by inclement, cold, wet, fall weather.

In turn, the now dry cow can maintain and oftentimes actually increase body condition without the demands of lactation, resulting in cows going into winter in better flesh, requiring less supplemental nutrition to achieve the target body condition 5.0—meaning less out of pocket cost to maintain the herd.

The disadvantages of early weaning are lower weaning weights, and weaning and feeding calves separate from cows requires good quality feeds, equipment, facilities, and labor. But the advantages are reduced disease, improved daily gains late in the season, and improved cow body condition going into the winter.

It’s time to reconsider what we do and why we do it. “Because we’ve always done it this way…” is the worst reason to do anything. If there are legitimate, defensibly reasons for what you do on your operation, then keep on truckin’. If not, seek wise counsel to find perhaps better, more efficient, and more effective practices that may lead to better outcomes for your calves, your cows, and hopefully, your bottom line.

“What Good is Roughage?”

by Chris Reinhardt, feedlot specialist

Normally, we consider the energy value of roughage in the finishing diet to be, at best, very low. The energy value is obviously very low compared to corn, but it does vary by quality. The problem is that forages have one energy value in ruminants when it is the primary ingredient, and another, much lower energy value when it is fed in a high-concentrate, grain-based diet, especially if that grain is extensively processed.

Certain bacteria are more effective at fermenting the cellulose in forages vs. other bacteria, and those bacteria digest forage to a greater extent when the rumen pH is above 6.0, such as is common in the rumen of forage-fed cattle, than in the rumen of feedlot cattle, in which the rumen pH is more acidic, and closer to 5.0. Forages are not included in the finishing diet to provide energy; they are included to provide risk management.

Aside from the intrinsic energy content of forage as a nutrient source, forages provide 2 factors that we consider during finishing feedlot diet formulation: energy dilution and scratch factor. By including some percentage of forage in place of grain, that percentage of the diet provides a limit to the total volume of grain available within a single meal which is available for rapid fermentation, limiting acid accumulation within the rumen. Simple math tells us that the greater the percentage of forage that is included in the finishing diet, the lower the ceiling will be on the amount of acid that is produced and accumulated within the rumen, reducing the risk of acidosis. Because forage has a much lower energy value than grain in the finishing diet, cattle feeders typically try to get away with as little in the diet as is necessary. In fact, increasing forage percentage in the finishing diet results in a greater amount of feed intake and total energy intake daily. Trial and error and experience typically lead each cattle feeder to a level of forage that is effective at maintaining a balance of consistent intake, performance, and feed efficiency.

Scratch factor is a less well-understood factor. If we use the percentage of liver abscesses as a poorly digestible forages (cottonseed hulls, wheat straw vs. alfalfa hay or corn silage) in the finishing diet results in fewer liver abscesses than feeding more finely processed forages; therefore, the coarser forage provides a greater scratch factor and protection from severe acidosis.

So why then do we process the forage at all? Because excessively coarse forages, included at only 8-10% of the finishing diet allow cattle to sort the diet for whatever component, the forage or the grain, that they prefer, resulting in potential acidosis for those cattle which only got the grain, after the forage had been picked through and removed from the bunk first.

This is then where some of the science of feeding cattle becomes art: forages must be processed fine enough to prevent sorting within the bunk, but left sufficiently coarse to provide adequate scratch. If forages are excessively processed to ensure mix uniformity, then a greater percentage of forage should be included in the diet to avoid acidosis.

An alternative method has been proposed to simply increasing the amount of processed forage included in the finishing diet: pulse feeding forage. Coarsely ground or long-stemmed hay can be fed in the bunk, apart from the normal mixed finishing diet, on a once or twice weekly basis, at a rate of 2-3 lbs per head per week. This can accomplish 2 goals: (1) increase the amount of fiber mat within the rumen resulting in (2) a greater amount of scratch within the rumen to stimulate rumination and salivation, resulting in greater intake of the diet and greater energy intake throughout the finishing period.

“Heat Stress Abatement: Prevention IS the Cure”

by Chris Reinhardt, feedlot specialist

 Summer is upon us and is promising some record temperatures and heat conditions across the Midwest, and we’re just coming into the time of greatest concern for heat stress. As beef producers and those of us who support the beef industry, it’s our duty to prepare for all the possible contingencies that summer weather can bring. So, that being said, what are the tools we have in our toolbox to be better prepared to deal with the heat?

1. Pasture cattle fare better than confined cattle during heat events, provided that they can find adequate shade, elevated areas to catch more breeze, and abundant water quality and quantity to alleviate heat stress during the hottest times of the day.
2. Black-hided cattle sustain the greatest challenge due to absorption of more solar radiation compared to light-hided cattle, and the problem is exacerbated in heavy, long-fed cattle. Heat stress is caused by the combination of actual temperature, high humidity, lack of wind, and lack of cloud cover.
3. Shade works. Keeping solar radiation to a minimum during extreme heat events may eliminate the need for emergency intervention. Even some kind of temporary or portable shade structures which can be placed in pens prior to extreme heat events will give cattle relief and get you through the worst heat episodes.
4. Wind breaks contribute to heat stress. Even if no extreme heat stress may be evident, reducing potentially cooling breezes can make cattle less likely to consume and perform up to their full potential. If wind breaks are needed for the winter, consider some form of temporary wind break which can be removed for the summer months.
5. Building mounds isn’t just for during wet, muddy, conditions. Cattle will climb mounds for improved access to breezes. Cattle don’t lie: if they’re using shades and using mounds, they are probably more comfortable because of the mounds and the shades.
6. Extra drinking water space may provide comfort and alleviate the demand on the water system during peak heat hours. Remember: cattle cool themselves through evaporative cooling from their lungs and this can move a tremendous volume of water which needs to be replaced. Extra water space can be in the form of steel tanks or even feed bunks with tarps and sand bags on the ends to convert part of the bunk to an extended water tank. Not only is water volume the issue, but linear access space is also critical because dominant cattle may simply stand at the water trough to breathe the cooler air directly above the water source, preventing smaller or more timid cattle from getting a needed drink. Extra tanks provide both volume and linear access space.
7. Bedding a portion of the pen with straw or light-colored hay provides a reflective surface to provide cattle a cooler place to lie down and rest, thus reducing their activity and comfort during already stressful conditions.
8. Sprinkling cattle may be essential during extreme heat events. Spraying cattle is costly, time-consuming, and can contribute to increased mud and humidity within the pen, but it also may be the difference between life and death for extremely heat-stressed cattle. Be hyper-vigilant for signs of extreme heat distress: open mouthed, labored, panting. Both cattle surface temperature and soil surface temperature are reduced as a result of spraying water which then evaporates, taking heat out of the surface. Have a full water truck on hand when the forecast calls for elevated temps, high humidity, minimal wind, and lack of cloud cover.

As summer heat comes at us, we all need to be prepared. Shade, extra water space, mounds to elevate cattle to catch extra breeze, and removal of wind breaks can help cattle effectively alleviate heat stress. Preparation is much more effective at reducing the costs of heat stress than interventions after extreme heat stress is obvious.

“Don’t Wait….part ll”

 by Chris Reinhardt, feedlot specialist

 Spring is here—finally. However, many ranchers in the western regions have not received adequate winter and spring precipitation to sustain normal grazing pressure throughout the coming summer grazing season.

In addition to their substantial financial investment, ranchers have an emotional investment in their range lands as well. This is to be expected; their range resource is the source of their livelihood, the primary source of nutrients for their cow herd, and is likely to have been in their family’s possession for generations. Unfortunately, like anything else to which we become emotionally attached, this emotional attachment handicaps us from making completely objective decisions regarding the disposition of this precious asset.

An effective drought management plan is made up of a combination of objective measures of precipitation and forage growth with critical trigger dates when decisive action must be made with respect to grazing pressure in the interest of long-term preservation of range productivity. The objective measures help overcome some of the emotional attachment, and the critical trigger dates have been previously set based on knowledge of the stages of plant growth and the plants’ need for regeneration.

The critical dates will vary based on your geography, but one example of a simple set of sequential, “if-then” guidelines for ranchers in northeast Kansas may be as follows:

• April 1: IF          < 15% of average annual moisture (measured from November 1 through April 1)

has been received,

THEN    prescribed burns are cancelled.

• June 30: IF          < 80% of average annual moisture has been received,

THEN    decrease stocking rate by 30%. Removing calves from cows and the range will

reduce grazing pressure by approximately 30%.

IF          < 60% of average annual moisture has been received,

THEN    decrease stocking rate by 40% (both early weaning and additional light culling of

the cow herd).

• September 1: IF          < 70% of average July-August moisture has been received,

THEN    remove all cattle from the pastures. Adequate leaf are between August 15 and

the first killing frost is critical for root carbohydrate restoration; continued grazing

will harm next spring’s new grass growth, regardless of future precipitation.

• November 1: IF          < 80% of average annual precipitation has been received (measured from

                                                November 1 – October 31, considered the “water-year”, and moisture received

during this period is indicative of forage productivity),

THEN    drought conditions will likely persist into the following spring and herd

reductions should be anticipated.

Any adjustments to stocking density, including early weaning and herd culling, also must take into account changes to “normal” marketing. Producers may choose to feed calves to a more conventional weight to recapture reduced gross revenue.

These adjustments are not implemented lightly, but building a sound, scientific range management plan, and rigorously adhering to the trigger dates will yield long-range benefits. Protect your most valuable asset; keep your eyes way out in front and you will ultimately be rewarded.

“Don’t wait….”

by Chris Reinhardt, feedlot specialist

It has been a long winter for many ranchers throughout the plains, and many have grown weary of the seemingly relentless weather. However, many have not received adequate winter and spring precipitation to sustain normal grazing pressure throughout the coming summer grazing season.

A common wishful paradigm in ranching is that we’re only “one good rain away” from drought recovery. More often than not, that simply isn’t the case. The reality is that it takes a long time and a complex series of drought-related events to lead to damaged range, and it requires an equal if not longer time and series of management decisions before we can expect full recovery of pasture carrying capacity.

While ranchers in dry areas would always welcome even a minor rain event, even a large, brief rain cannot reverse the myriad effects of a long-term drought. To maintain a robust and productive range ecology, volume of moisture, timing of moisture, sustained moisture, and timing and intensity of grazing pressure and rest periods all play a role.

The astute rancher will recognize when a little late rain amounts to “too little, too late”. But effective long-term range management and an effective drought plan involve more than simply deciding sometime mid-summer that rain isn’t coming, declaring the grazing season “Over”, and weaning calves early. In order to protect and maintain the range ecology during ongoing drought conditions it is important to have critical dates marked on your calendar.

In a mixed grass range ecology, different grasses mature at different times of the year and respond differently to moisture, temperature, and grazing pressure. Ranchers who routinely maintain light or moderate grazing densities can better withstand a single year of lower than normal rainfall. However, even under moderate stocking density, multiple years of drought will lead to reduced plant populations.

The range ecology is complex, and a comprehensive drought monitoring plan will be also; however, a simple plan with timely intervention strategies is a good place to start. The Kansas Water Office (Topeka, KS, June, 2012) defines three stages of drought: (1) Watch, (2) Warning, and (3) Emergency. A Watch exists when the previous 3 month precipitation is £ 70% of normal; a Warning is when the previous 6 months precipitation is £ 65% of normal, and an Emergency exists when the previous 6 months precipitation is £ 60% of normal.

If the range is 30-40% behind “normal” or “optimum” for forage growth, it is obviously unlikely that a few rains will provide needed recovery in the short term. So if winter precipitation was below normal, and spring rains have not made up the difference, it’s time to take action by modifying stocking density. If late spring and early summer rains do not alleviate the situation, and the condition progresses further, plan to take more extreme cuts to stocking density.

Calves have the ability to thrive without their mothers, with appropriate management and nutrition, by 90 days of age. Producers should make plans for the possibility of early weaning now, not only after summer drought conditions demand it of them. The future quality and recovery of your pastures relies on your early and ongoing response to drought conditions. Be sure to consult your local extension specialist for drought monitoring guidelines specific for your geography. Develop a plan and stick to it; you’ll be rewarded in the long run.

“Grain Processing Matters”

by Chris Reinhardt, feedlot specialist

Livestock feeders often may feel like they are held hostage by the vagaries of the rest of the global market, particularly when it comes to feed cost. But there are a few things you can do to make sure you’re getting the most out of your substantial investment.

Making sure you have an active implant with less than 100 days working in the cattle at all times is one idea. Another is ensuring adequate extent of grain processing to get thorough digestion and efficient utilization of the grain.

For decades, Midwestern feedlot nutritionists have recommended that “a coarse crack” is sufficient to get acceptable levels of digestion without risking bloat and acidosis. Interestingly, however, in the high plains, away from the corn belt, the feedlot industry felt the need for extensive grain processing 40 years ago when we all lived in a kinder, gentler, grain market. Now that grain prices have risen to stratospheric levels, we need a new paradigm. Some research data suggests we can improve the efficiency of corn utilization by 4-5%—$20/head in today’s corn market—by fine grinding (1,000-2,000 microns) instead of coarse cracking the grain.

The other factor which can help us change our paradigm is our ubiquitous use of wet corn milling byproducts. These products are routinely priced at a value to corn, and are often included from 20-60% of the ration dry matter. This makes the diet a completely different beast than what nutritionists had to work with in the ‘70’s, ‘80’s, and ‘90’s. If all the ingredients are dry, finer particles will tend to sift through the diet mixture and fall to the bottom of the bunk. If these fine particles contain mostly rapidly fermentable starch, there’s a good risk of bloat.

Although the particle size of distillers grains is very fine, due to their fibrous nature, distillers grains fines do not present nearly as great of risk for causing bloat as corn fines. And the high moisture content improves the positional stability of the total mixture such that the fine particles remain mixed as opposed to settling to the bottom of the bunk. Those fines which do settle out will be a blend of corn fines and distillers grains, with a reduced risk of bloat.

Grinding corn to hog-feed consistency flies in the face of convention. But if you are using at least 20% (dry matter basis) of a wet milling byproduct ingredient, consider grinding the grain to a finer particle size to ensure maximum utilization of your sizable investment.

“Mud – Save Yourself Some Trouble”

by Chris Reinhardt, feedlot specialist 

As cattle people we grudgingly accept the various natural elements as part of the cost of doing business. Rain, snow, ice, and extreme temperatures are part of life in Kansas for ranchers and cattle feeders. And each of these factors that moves animals outside of their comfort zone, called the “thermal neutral zone”, steals a measure of performance. With respect to mud, however, we know that the cost of fighting mud in terms of lost performance is high, and we need to prevent these losses if we can.

Researchers have estimated that although pastern-level mud has little effect on performance, hock-deep mud is costly. Daily gain is reduced by 1/3 to ½ when cattle are fighting mud. Mud is the “gift” that just keeps giving, and hurts performance in several ways:

1. The energy required to reach the bunk or water trough increases dramatically when slogging through mud, so a large part of their daily energy intake is lost to this expenditure;
2. The stress of fighting mud will actually discourage cattle from making the trek to the bunk, thus reducing their intake;
3. Cattle have a hard time finding a comfortable place to lay down and rest, causing an increase in energy wasted just standing around instead of resting;
4. Wet hide from laying down in the mud will cause cold stress to increase because they don’t have a good, dry, insulating hair coat.

When we consider that under stress-free conditions, only about half of animals’ normal daily energy intake goes toward gain, all these increases in energy expenditures dramatically cut into what is left over for gain.

Preparing for mud won’t eliminate these costs, but we can reduce them. Here are some suggestions:

1. GET THE SNOW OUT! Feeders can save themselves and their cattle a tremendous amount of stress and lost performance by removing snow from feeding pens BEFORE it melts and becomes water—and MUD! A rule of thumb is that an inch of snowfall contains about 1/10 inch of rain moisture equivalent. But because the snow will melt slowly, the resulting moisture is allowed to permeate the pen surface and little will run off, creating extremely soft pen conditions. So think of 10 inches of snow like a 3-day drizzle dumping an inch of total moisture. A slow drizzle is better for crops and pastures because the ground can soak up the moisture; and it’s harder on pens for the same reason.
2. Build and repair mounds within the pen. Cattle should have about 25 ft² of mound space per animal in the pen. Mounds should have a slope of about 1:5 on the sides to facilitate moisture to flow away from the cattle and the ‘valleys’ between mounds should slope about 3-4% away from the bunk. The end of the mound nearest the bunk should connect to the concrete pad so cattle don’t have to slog through deep mud to get to the bunk.
3. Increase pen space per animal. Whereas 125 ft² of pen space is sufficient during dry summer conditions, 350 ft² may be not nearly sufficient during wet conditions. Adapt as conditions dictate.
4. Smooth pen surfaces whenever the weather allows. The longer muddy conditions persist, the worse the pen conditions become and cattle will have an even greater difficulty moving throughout the pen.

Living and raising cattle in Kansas has many rewards. By preparing pens ahead of time for the wet times of the year we can improve animal comfort and performance in order to reap the rewards.

“An Open Winter”

by Chris Reinhardt, feedlot specialist

Lack of precipitation during the winter is a double edged sword: moisture is essential for spring grass to come on strong and for water sources to fill; frozen moisture blowing sideways at 35 mph is hard on both man and beast. So although we openly breathe a sigh of relief for every winter day without a blizzard that same lack of snow fall means one more rain we’ll need come spring.

But there is an additional potential hidden pitfall to lack of snow cover: Managerial Overconfidence. Just because we can see grass on the hillsides or crop aftermath in the fields where cows are grazing, doesn’t mean we can let those cows entirely fend for themselves.

The first reality is that, although cows are designed to utilize low quality forages, such as dormant grass and crop residues, they can make much better use of it with appropriate supplementation. For example, a 1,300 lb cow can eat roughly 20 lb of low quality (<7% crude protein) forage without supplementation, and digest roughly 50% of it for a net intake of 10 lb of total digestible nutrients (TDN). If we supplement those same cows with 3 lb of soybean meal or 4.5 lb of distiller’s grains daily, those same cows will consume 24 lb of forage and digest 55% of it for a net intake of 13.2 lb of TDN—that’s a 32% increase! There’s no free lunch in production agriculture, but the returns from protein supplementation on a low quality forage diet is as close as we can get.

The second thing to realize is that just because we can see grass and not a snow bank doesn’t mean that the cows aren’t fighting off the winter cold. For 1,300 lb cows with a good, dry, winter hair coat, the thermoneutral zone is about 30-32°F. That’s the wind chill temperature, not simply air temperature. For every 10° that the effective temperature (wind chill) drops below 32°, the cow’s energy needs increase by 10%. So if the effective temperature drops from 30° to 10°, and feed isn’t in excess, we’ll need to supply an additional 5 lbs of hay. If temperature drops from 30° to 10° below zero, we need to supply an additional 10 lbs of hay.

Finally, know what your cows weigh. Genetics have changed dramatically in the past 20-30 years; cows are bigger and heavier. The average cow in the Angus Association weighs about 1,350 lbs. So unless the bulls siring your replacement heifers have had lower than average yearling weight EPDs, your mature cows probably weight 1,300 lbs too. The downside of underestimating your cows’ weight is that for every 100 lbs you underestimate cow weight, you’ll underfeed the cows by about 1 lb of hay and 0.33 lbs of protein supplement. You’ll save on feed costs in the short run, but cow body condition will slowly slip downward, and cows will be undernourished at calving time, resulting in reduced calf health, greater number of days required to breed back, and reduced breed back percentage. Make a point to weigh a handful of cows at some point when they’re in good body condition. If they’re thin, add 100 lbs per cow to the scale weight to reflect what the cow’s target weight should be.