• You will need to login or register before you can post a message. If you already have an Agriville account login by clicking the login icon on the top right corner of the page. If you are a new user you will need to Register.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Late Weaning

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Late Weaning

    I saw some conversation about late weaning on another thread and thought I would bring it to the top for a bit more discussion.

    There were some points about accidents (which I don't personally believe in LOL) and I thought I would throw in a situation that happened to us that was "unexpected".

    Each of the past 6 years, we have been testing our bulls with Ultrasound, DNA and Linear measurement tools. A growing number of our customers, and in particular the ones who are focusing on carcass quality characteristics in their herds, are using these tools to change their herds.

    As much as growth and performance have been the focus of the conventional industry for year; carcass quality, including yield and eating quality can also be manipulated.

    When someone says they "have" to do things a certain way in our industry, it is most often based on profit or a bank payment or some other financial situation that individual has put themselves in.

    Having and wanting, often overlap, but can sometimes work against each other at the same time.

    Anywhoo, before I loose you all with a Terry Singeltary like letter (LOL) I will go into the unexpected finding in our data. Unexpected to everyone I speak to except for Gearald Fry and maybe a few others who study the work of this Bovine Genetic Engineer.

    We were generally calving in April and May and weaning in November or December depending on feed and weather conditions. A few years ago we decided to keep the calves on for the winter and boost the feed for the cows to keep them looking good with the calves on. I personally feel that that was the cheapest and easiest way to winter our herd even though we did not have the same yearling weights on our calves.

    The bonus came from the DNA and Ultrasound results when we saw a marked increase in the Rib Eye area "per hundred pounds" on our data. At least a 10% increase. When I spoke to Gearald about these results, he was quite nonchalant saying that butterfat, even if it is a small amount over the winter was the key ingredient. Every other feed stuff that we try to replace in a calf's diet does not measure up or cause the Rib Eye measurement to increase this way.

    The following year we weaned early again, (thinking profit and return) and saw the drop. This years crop of bulls was again weaned in March after May calving and we will see if our theory holds up.

    As much as we all like to figure things out, Mother nature usually holds the answer. I live in the west country of Alberta where the white tails and the mule deer and the elk grow to amazing sizes. Jumping the fences that we tend to corral our cattle in and birthing and weaning in a natural way. It seems that the deer and elk that I see and probably all of you as well, are just as strong and healthy as they were long before we came in to this country and started manipulating and domesticating livestock to suit our financial needs.

    #2
    So are you saying that rib eye size is as much environmental (feed) as it is genetic? Or not genetic at all other than the genetics that create a cow that has a good amount/quality of butter fat in her milk?

    Comment


      #3
      Nothing we could do. It's a big area that's
      effected.

      Comment


        #4
        Yep and when do you think the rocket scientists that trade will notice.

        I have been watching fields that have the inputs to grow a 50 bu crop drown out, get aster yellows, stop flowering due to heat and everyone keeps saying this is a large crop. Bullshit.

        Comment


          #5
          Our fertilizer that went in should have given a 60
          but yes flood, heat, aster yellow, and it will be
          lucky to hit 25.
          Specs and bs from the experts, keep the world
          going round and round.

          Comment


            #6
            I would say that we can manipulate it with feed per. And in particular; butterfat through some crucial growing months.

            Comment


              #7
              So if it can be manipulated by feed (in this case a milk
              component) why would you select for it genetically -
              particularly in a maternal breed?
              I'd be prepared to wager if you are selecting for
              increased carcass quality and yield it will be
              antagonistic to butterfat in any case.

              Comment


                #8
                Aster yellows and pod blast, looks like going to be below average. Time will tell but I thing the basis will be narrowing in the future.

                Comment


                  #9
                  The trade will wait and hope for a bumper crop till 2013. Charts are taking elevator down now. Why pay more, enough farmers have to sell even a poor crop.
                  Another torrential 1" flood today on top of the mud and sloughs.
                  Harvest could be a nightmare.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Fricking rain storm just hit two canola could get
                    hailed would be ok now. Miss the wheat.
                    Flowering in 30 plus not good no matter how nice
                    you think it is.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      I'd be prepared to wager that you would challenge any thought in any human mind including your own grassfarmer...LOL What would we do without you...

                      First off, why not select genetically and use butterfat to increase rib eye size ---- per hundred pounds.

                      Secondly, why would you think that it is antagonistic to select for rib eye size vs butterfat?

                      Rib eye size is only a benefit if we have any customers left that would like to eat a rib eye steak rather than all the burger we are producing these days on carcasses that are built for lean yield supported by implants and beta agonists.

                      Could you imagine the effect that this could have on our industry if even a few of us put it into practice. 10% is a lot of increased rib eye area, and that was only our one little unsupported experiment.

                      One last point about the maternal breed comment. I personally don't believe that there is room in an efficient and implant/ractopamine free industry for maternal AND paternal selection. Once again, I believe this is a choice based on profit from gain alone, rather than quality and efficiency of the cow herd. A feminine cow bred to a masculine bull will always produce a quality carcass animal. Crossbred or purebred. It's natural.... LOL

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Bucket, our crop has little to do with
                        actual trade.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Just had another 1.5" in 10 minutes with 100KPH wind and lots of penny size hail... getting closer to zero bu every storm.
                          Water unreal!
                          Never seen such fury in all my years.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Think it through Randy - your same cows/ different
                            years/different feeding protocol resulted in a 10%
                            increase in rib eye area scan results on the bulls. You
                            were not changing the bulls genetically you were
                            changing them by feeding them butterfat - there will
                            be no genetic difference in the offspring of the bulls.
                            Indeed leaving calves on the mothers may be masking
                            your ability to select the ones with genetically higher
                            rib-eye areas.
                            I didn't say that it was antagonistic to select for ribeye
                            vs butterfat. I said that i would wager that ribeye area
                            and butterfat will be antagonistic traits - there is a
                            difference. Isn't meat always antagonistic to milk?
                            Think dairy cows versus beef cow at opposite ends of
                            the spectrum.

                            I say for efficient production with or without
                            implants/ractopamines there has always got to be
                            room for maternal AND paternal selection. Through
                            mating the two strains the highest levels of efficiency
                            are achieved. As far as selection in a maternal or
                            commercial cattle herd is concerned don't forget the
                            old maxim:
                            In overall economic importance, fertility is five times
                            more important than the growth traits and ten times
                            more important than carcass traits.

                            Keep the carcass selection for the Charolais and Limo
                            bulls/breeds, select the maternal cows to be cows.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              It is some awful scary weather and harvest
                              is a long way away!

                              Comment

                              • Reply to this Thread
                              • Return to Topic List
                              Working...