characterizing change in the beef industry

Post on 30-Dec-2015

35 Views

Category:

Documents

1 Downloads

Preview:

Click to see full reader

DESCRIPTION

Characterizing Change in the Beef Industry. Justin W. Waggoner, Ph.D. Beef Systems Specialist Kansas State University Garden City, KS. Change. Discussion. Changes in the cattle feeding industry from feed yard closeout data Mature animal size Animal Performance - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Characterizing Change in the Beef Industry

Justin W. Waggoner, Ph.D. Beef Systems SpecialistKansas State UniversityGarden City, KS

Change

Discussion

Changes in the cattle feeding industry from feed yard closeout data Mature animal size Animal Performance

Implications of these changes on nutrition and management of the nation’s cowherd

Data Collected from 1990-2009(9,373,819 cattle)

K-State Focus on Feedlots

Previous K-State faculty Chris Reinhardt, Ron Hale, Gerry Kuhl, Larry Corah,

Jack Riley, Calvin Drake

Participating yards Brookover Ranch Feed Yard Decatur County Feed Yard DM & M Feed Yard Fairleigh Feed Yard Hoxie Feed Yard HyPlains Feed Yard Kearney County Feeders Poky Feeders Pratt Feeders Supreme Cattle Feeders

K-State Focus on FeedlotsMarket Weights (1990-2009)

900

1000

1100

1200

1300

1400

1500

Ja

n-9

0

Ja

n-9

1

Ja

n-9

2

Ja

n-9

3

Ja

n-9

4

Ja

n-9

5

Ja

n-9

6

Ja

n-9

7

Ja

n-9

8

Ja

n-9

9

Ja

n-0

0

Ja

n-0

1

Ja

n-0

2

Ja

n-0

3

Ja

n-0

4

Ja

n-0

5

Ja

n-0

6

Ja

n-0

7

Ja

n-0

8

Ja

n-0

9

lbs

/ h

ea

d

Steers Heifers

1990 2009 Change %

Steers, lbs 1187 1343 + 156 13.18

Heifers, lbs 1041 1218 + 177 17.00

K-State Focus on FeedlotsAverage Daily Gain (1990-2009)

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

Ja

n-9

0

Ja

n-9

1

Ja

n-9

2

Ja

n-9

3

Ja

n-9

4

Ja

n-9

5

Ja

n-9

6

Ja

n-9

7

Ja

n-9

8

Ja

n-9

9

Ja

n-0

0

Ja

n-0

1

Ja

n-0

2

Ja

n-0

3

Ja

n-0

4

Ja

n-0

5

Ja

n-0

6

Ja

n-0

7

Ja

n-0

8

Ja

n-0

9

lbs

/ h

ea

d /

da

y

Steers Heifers

1990 2009 Change %

Steers, lbs/d 3.09 3.54 + 0.45 14.47

Heifers, lbs/d 2.76 3.21 + 0.45 16.35

100

125

150

175

200

Ja

n-9

0

Ja

n-9

1

Ja

n-9

2

Ja

n-9

3

Ja

n-9

4

Ja

n-9

5

Ja

n-9

6

Ja

n-9

7

Ja

n-9

8

Ja

n-9

9

Ja

n-0

0

Ja

n-0

1

Ja

n-0

2

Ja

n-0

3

Ja

n-0

4

Ja

n-0

5

Ja

n-0

6

Ja

n-0

7

Ja

n-0

8

Ja

n-0

9

Da

ys

Steers Heifers

K-State Focus on FeedlotsDays on feed (1990-2009)

1990 2009 Change %

Steers,d 143.3 155.0 + 11.8 8.20

Heifers, d 137.6 152.6 + 15.0 10.9

K-State Focus on FeedlotsFeed Conversion (1990-2009)

5.00

6.00

7.00

8.00

9.00

Ja

n-9

0

Ja

n-9

1

Ja

n-9

2

Ja

n-9

3

Ja

n-9

4

Ja

n-9

5

Ja

n-9

6

Ja

n-9

7

Ja

n-9

8

Ja

n-9

9

Ja

n-0

0

Ja

n-0

1

Ja

n-0

2

Ja

n-0

3

Ja

n-0

4

Ja

n-0

5

Ja

n-0

6

Ja

n-0

7

Ja

n-0

8

Ja

n-0

9

lbs

DM

I / lb

ga

in

Steers Heifers

1990 2009 Change %

Steers, F:G 6.51 6.07 - 0.44 6.69

Heifers, F:G 6.75 6.35 - 0.40 5.93

Today’s Fed Cattle

1990 Vs. 2009

Fed Cattle (steers and heifers): 15% larger at slaughter Spend 13.4 more days on feed Gain weight 15% faster 6.31% more efficient 0.42 less lbs feed/lb gain

$25

$40

$55

$70

$85

$100

Jan

-90

Jan

-91

Jan

-92

Jan

-93

Jan

-94

Jan

-95

Jan

-96

Jan

-97

Jan

-98

Jan

-99

Jan

-00

Jan

-01

Jan

-02

Jan

-03

Jan

-04

Jan

-05

Jan

-06

Jan

-07

Jan

-08

Jan

-09

$ / c

wt g

ain

Steers Heifers

Driving forces: Economics(Cost of gain)

1990 2009 Change

Steers, $/cwt. gain 49.92 78.83 + 28.91

Heifers, $/cwt. gain 52.08 83.54 + 31.47

Driving Forces: the rest of the story

Technologies Ionophores Implants

Improved cattle management (nutrition, health etc.) and technology use

Genetics Grid marketing practices Branded beef programs

Commercial Beef Production, lbs beef/cow

600

650

700

750

800

850

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

Be

ef

Pro

du

cti

on

, lb

s/c

ow

1990 2009 % Change

Beef Prod. Lbs/cow 697 819 17.5

NASS, 2009; K. C. Dhuyvetter, 2010

Weaning Weight Trends

Weaber and Fennewald, 2009

Yearling Weight Trends

Weaber and Fennewald, 2009

Mature Weights of Cows by Sire Breed

Hereford 1,419

Angus 1,410

Red Angus 1,409

Simmental 1,404

Gelbvieh 1,323

Limousin 1,391

Charolais 1,371

Breed 5-year-old weight, lbs

U.S. MARC, Germplasm Evaluation Program, 2009

50 lbs Difference in Average Bodyweight!

Mature Cow Weights

How has the selection for heavier weaning and yearling weights influenced the mature size of the nation’s cow herd?

Questions: Magnitude of change? Implications of change?

How big is Today’s Cowherd?

Common logic “Mature cow weight = weight of finished offspring”

Meat Animal Research Center Germplasm evaluation program 37,000+ cows Mature Cow Weight correlated with hot carcass weight of

progeny (0.81) Progeny hot carcass weight = 0.599 * (mature cow weight)

Nephawe et al., 2004

Mature Cow Weights(Focus on Feedlots)

Market Carcass Mature

Year Wt., Wt.(62% DP)1 Cow Wt., 1990 1186.8 735.8 1228

2009 1343.2 832.8 1390

+ 162

Estimated Mature Cow Weight Based on Steer Market Weight

Difference

K-State Focus on Feedlots; Nephawe et al., 2004

1Carcass weight = market weight * 0.622Mature cow weight = carcass weight/ 0.599

Mature Cow Weights(Federally Inspected Slaughter)

FI Live Carcass Mature

Year Wt., lbs Wt.(62% DP)1, lbs Cow Wt., lbs 1990 1140 706.8 1179

2009 1296 806.1 1346

+ 167

Estimated Mature Cow Weight Based

on live slaughter weights (Steers and Heifers)

Difference

NASS, 2009; Nephawe et al., 2004

1Carcass weight = market weight * 0.622Mature cow weight = carcass weight/ 0.599

15.0

18.0

21.0

24.0

27.0

30.0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12Months Since Calving

Meta

boliza

ble

Energ

y, M

cal/

d

1400 lb Cow

1200 lb Cow

Effect of Cow Body Weight on Maintenance Energy Requirements

~ 9 % increase

Beef NRC, 2000

27 28 28 27 27 2624 24 24 24 24 25

3031

3130

2929

27 27 27 27 27 28

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12Months Since Calving

Dry

Matt

er

Inta

ke, lb

s/d 1200 lb Cow

1400 lb Cow

Effect of Cow Body Weight on Dry Matter Intake

Beef NRC, 2000

Estimated Dry Matter Intake (Annual Basis)

Cow Wt, lbs Annual dry matter intake, lbs1

1200 9225

1400 10263

+1038Difference

11% increase in annual dry matter intake!

Beef NRC, 2000

1based on 30 days per month

Beef Cow Calf System Efficiency

Goal: Convert forage into lbs of weaned calf

Measure of efficiency feed consumed (cow) per lb of weaned

calf

Feed Consumed (cow) per lb calfAnnual Basis

Annual

Cow Wt, lbs DM Intake, lbs 500 550 600 650

1200 9225 18.5 16.8 15.4 14.2

1400 10263 20.5 18.7 17.1 15.8

Calf Weight, lbs

1400 lb cow has to wean at least 50 lbs more calf !

Is there optimum ?

Tough question period…..

Factors: Environment • Available forage resources

Reproduction Marketing strategy• Sell at weaning/ retain ownership

Bottom Line

1990-2009

Fed cattle Harvested at larger weights Gain weight 15% faster Require 0.42 less lbs feed/lb gain

Increased commercial beef production per cow by 17.5%

Consequence

Mature weight of the nation’s cowherd has increased

1990 = 1203 lbs (1179-1228 lbs)

2009 = 1368 lbs (1346-1390 lbs)

Have we changed?

top related