|
Post by Glenn on Nov 23, 2015 11:44:56 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Carlos (frmaiz) on Nov 23, 2015 12:56:13 GMT -6
To supply the appropriate type of cattle for this alternative high-quality ground beef production model, Helming believes a signi cant portion of cow-calf producers would have to commit to producing cattle whose frame scores fall within the range of 3 to 5. He cited data suggesting that cattle having frame scores of 3 to 5 typically exhibit a 40%-42% improvement in dry-matter feed conversion rates when compared with cattle of frame score 6 or larger. “Today, close to 90% of U.S. beef cattle are frame 6 or bigger. I submit that bigger is not better. Smaller-framed animals with improved feed conversion and lower production costs are better. Lower production costs are much better,” said Helming. “To signi cantly reduce cow maintenance and beef cattle production costs, the size and weight of beef cattle need to be reduced signi cantly from what typically is the case today.” Helming said cattle of the right type could be grown to slaughter weight on grass and harvested forage. He is involved in a start-up business that involves growing cattle in a drylot on a ration of triticale silage and other forages to slaughter weights of 1,100 lb. to 1,200 lb. (steers) at 30-36 months of age. All animals will be processed as ground beef only. “We need more ground beef at a lower cost. I’m con dent that it can be done, probably in a multitude of ways,” said Helming, “but beef ’s cost to consumers must come down if the U.S. beef industry is to survive.” Yes, it is. And that is what we are doing. Last week we sold our annual production with an average of 354 kg.(781 lbs.) at 14 months. One lot of 21 calves-steers was 390 kg. (860 lbs.) and obtained the first prize in grass-fed category. Our average weight is slowly moving up and I expect that it can reach 420 kg. (927 lbs.) at 14 months in the future, through improved genetics. The sale was 95% feed-lot cattle and the price difference with our grass feds was 8%. Feed lot higher.
|
|
|
Post by larso on Nov 23, 2015 14:29:02 GMT -6
Interesting article, while I have never seen anybody make any money out of the space between the ground and the belly of a beast, I find chasing a particular frame score to be a waste of time. If your objective is to have your cow herd weaning a calf close to 50% of the cows body weight every year regardless, frame score will sort itself out according to what your environment dictates.
|
|
|
Post by btlrupert on Nov 23, 2015 16:34:49 GMT -6
Larso is on the money! Environment sorts out the extremes either way as long as the cattle are not followed daily by a feed truck...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 24, 2015 4:10:40 GMT -6
This is why people hate university cattle programs, instructors, etc.
He makes an observation of what has already been happening for the past decade and says it is his own prediction. Then talks about how smart and prescient he is because he has started a company to raise ground beef like he has reinvented the wheel.
My prediction is he is going to drain more than one bank account raising a steer 36 months for ground beef.
But Angus is a whole other world populated by professors, insurance brokers, surgeons, oil field billionaires, and other non agriculture related professions.
|
|
|
Post by Glenn on Nov 24, 2015 15:46:52 GMT -6
I'm not real sold on his idea about dual infrastructure, but believe his macro economic view has a better than 50% chance of being correct. Does not bode well for the cattle business in general.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2015 4:27:48 GMT -6
You know how sensitive we get when people say we need to shrink my highly efficient Brahman cattle down to Frame 3...hahaha
I agree that he has a 50% chance of being right on some macro issues. But: 1) Land prices continue to rise, in particular cattle pasture. It wont be long before I will have to sell and move because my place is worth too much. Every day I drive through my front pasture which is now worth more than our house. 2) Why was this in an Angus publication? Angus will NEVER be able to compete with an F1 Braford for low input ground beef. We can get a yearling finished for ground beef at 1100.
I guess I'm just grumpy because I had a good year. Lol
|
|
|
Post by picketwire on Nov 25, 2015 8:18:03 GMT -6
I agree it is interesting, but NOT very interesting. His view/analysis of world GDP and economic trends is spot on. However his 'model' of 'efficient' ground beef production is flawed. 3 to 5 frame cattle will be seriously overfat and approaching stale IF drylotted for 30 to 36 months and my experience (admittedly less years than Helming) says that kind of ground beef will not be low cost, will not be high quality and will NOT be highly desired. This industry under its current form, can be a low cost producer of ground beef without needing to drylot them for 30 to 36 months, irregardless of frame.
What is needed most in this industry, in this country, and all over the world is a little patience and a lot of fiscal discipline with a healthy dose of common sense.
|
|
|
Post by larso on Nov 25, 2015 15:03:59 GMT -6
As soon as someone talks drylots or feedlots I immediately think of large capital costs ie. infrastructure, machinery and labour. Now I'm not attacking feedlots per say but to use the word "efficient" or "low-cost" in relation to this type of beef production seems to me, flawed. You don't have to fill the cow up with diesel every morning for it to go out and eat grass in the paddock and to produce beef and the old Hereford can do it better than most. Isn't it better to look at systems like Kent ( Glen's post ) has adapted to increase production, to increase carrying capacity 4times is quite remarkable. I have doubled my carrying capacity using a simular system, I grow more grass with very minimal inputs than my neighbours and in no way am I wanting to blow my own trumpet, it was just a willingness to be open to change. You don't pay tax on a dollar saved and a system that increases production at the same time as lowing costs seems to me to be a better way to spend our research dollars.
|
|
|
Post by strojanherefords on Nov 28, 2015 10:29:25 GMT -6
This is why people hate university cattle programs, instructors, etc. He makes an observation of what has already been happening for the past decade and says it is his own prediction. Then talks about how smart and prescient he is because he has started a company to raise ground beef like he has reinvented the wheel. My prediction is he is going to drain more than one bank account raising a steer 36 months for ground beef. But Angus is a whole other world populated by professors, insurance brokers, surgeons, oil field billionaires, and other non agriculture related professions. In reading the article, it seems clear that the author just transcribed what Bill Helming said and failed to check the facts. Troy Smith did not recognize the role that trade plays in the American beef industry. The American consumer wants the high quality backstrap and cheap hamburger but does not want the less convenient variety meats and pot roasts. So, the United States beef industry exports offal and whole muscle cuts; and we import some steaks and cheaper ground beef.
If you use frmaiz's calves(780 lbs, 14 months) as a starting point, it would be more efficient and more environmentally friendly to combine the triticale and feed the grain. The article says that it will take another 16 to 22 months to forage finish the steers, while on grain it should only take 4 or 5 months to finish.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2015 8:11:58 GMT -6
Strojan there is a lot going on in that article. The author has a cut and paste approach which lacks a clear focus.
It is a symptom of the "all things for all people" marketing machine coming out of the big players in the AAA. That is why you can buy a 10 month old registered Black Angus bull for feeder price.
Agree with you that it is far more environmentally friendly to finish younger animals on grain. It is doubtful the pasture actually exists to forage finish to 36 months. Eventually the cattle industry will swing back to slaughtering younger animals, anyway.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2015 8:30:04 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Glenn on Nov 29, 2015 8:56:55 GMT -6
It might be interesting selling bulls this spring. Generally the trend would appear to be much lower prices, but two things in "our" favor: 1. Still not a lot of quality Hereford bulls out there so good ones should bring a decent price 2. Herd expansion nationwide. Lots of heifers have been kept the last two years. More cows = need for more bulls.
|
|