Jackson County Heifer Development Project Summary

The heifer development project was a five year project conducted on the site of the former Jackson County Farm north of Andrew, Iowa, for four years and on an area producer’s farm for the fifth year. Heifers arrived around December 1 each year and the average number of heifers each year was 43 with a low of 37 and high of 47. After a 30+ day warm-up period the heifers were put on a 112-day test from early January to late April. They were fed a shelled corn and legume-grass hay ration consisting of between 13% and 14% crude protein and a range of .44 to .58 megacal/pound of NEg over the five years. During the 112-day test heifers gained 1.86, 1.78, 1.5, 1.63 and 2.2 pounds per day, respectively, for years 1992 through 1996. The actual average breeding weight was less than the target weight in three years by 5, 12 and 22 pounds and exceeded the target weight in two year by 17 and 28 pounds. Estrus synchronization used a combination of MGA feeding and Lutalyse injection. Heifers were heat detected and bred 12 hours later for a three-day period. On the fourth day, all heifers not bred were mass inseminated. Heifers then ran with the cleanup bull for 58 days. The average synchronization response rate during the project was 79%. The overall pregnancy rates based on September pregnancy averaged 92%. The five year average total cost per head for heifer development was $286.18 or about $.85 per day. Feed and pasture costs averaged 61% of the total costs.

Jackson County Heifer Development Project Update

The heifer development project took place the past four years on the site of the former Jackson County Farm north of Andrew, Iowa. Heifers arrived around December 1 with 38 heifers delivered for 1992, 44 for 1993, 46 for 1994, and 47 for 1995. After a 30+ day warm-up period, the heifers were put on a 112-day test from early January to late April. They were fed a shelled corn and legume-grass hay ration consisting of between 13% and 14% crude protein and .48, .58, .44, and .54 megacal/pound of NEg respectively for the years 1992 - 1995. During the 112-day test heifers gained 1.86, 1.78, 1.5, and 1.63 pounds per day respectively for years 1992 through 1995. The 1995 heifers averaged 853 pounds at breeding (22 pounds under target weight). This compares with previous years in which the breeding weight was less than target weight in two years by 5 and 12 pounds and exceeded the target weight in one year by 17 pounds. Estrus synchronization used a combination of MGA feeding and Lutalyse injection. Heifers were heatdetected and bred 12 hours later for a three-day period. On the fourth day, all heifers not bred were mass inseminated. Heifers then ran with the cleanup bull for 58 days. The synchronization response rate in 1995 was 83%, which compares with the three year previous average of 77%. The overall pregnancy rates based on September pregnancy exams were 94.6% in 1992, 93% in 1993, 91% in 1994, and 91.5% in 1995. Development costs for the 326 days in 1995 totaled $269.14 per heifer. This compares with the average of $286. 92 for the three previous years. The four-year average total cost per head for heifer development was $282.48, or about $.84 per day. Feed and pasture costs represented 58% of the total costs, or $.49 per day.

Critical Control Points for Profitability in the Cow-Calf Enterprise

Financial, economic, and biological data collected from cow-calf producers who participated in the Illinois and Iowa Standardized Performance Analysis (SPA) programs were used in this study. Data used were collected for the 1996 through 1999 calendar years, with each herd within year representing one observation. This resulted in a final database of 225 observations (117 from Iowa and 108 from Illinois) from commercial herds with a range in size from 20 to 373 cows. Two analyses were conducted, one utilizing financial cost of production data, the other economic cost of production data. Each observation was analyzed as the difference from the mean for that given year. The independent variable utilized in both the financial and economic models as an indicator of profit was return to unpaid labor and management per cow (RLM). Used as dependent variables were the five factors that make up total annual cow cost: feed cost, operating cost, depreciation cost, capital charge, and hired labor, all on an annual cost per cow basis. In the economic analysis, family labor was also included. Production factors evaluated as dependent variables in both models were calf weight, calf price, cull weight, cull price, weaning percentage, and calving distribution. Herd size and investment were also analyzed. All financial factors analyzed were significantly correlated to RLM (P < .10) except cull weight, and cull price. All economic factors analyzed were significantly correlated to RLM (P < .10) except calf weight, cull weight and cull price. Results of the financial prediction equation indicate that there are eight measurements capable of explaining over 82 percent of the farm-to-farm variation in RLM. Feed cost is the overriding factor driving RLM in both the financial and economic stepwise regression analyses. In both analyses over 50 percent of the herd-to-herd variation in RLM could be explained by feed cost. Financial feed cost is correlated (P < .001) to operating cost, depreciation cost, and investment. Economic feed cost is correlated (P < .001) with investment and operating cost, as well as capital charge. Operating cost, depreciation, and capital charge were all negatively correlated (P < .10) to herd size, and positively correlated (P < .01) to feed cost in both analyses. Operating costs were positively correlated with capital charge and investment (P < .01) in both analyses. In the financial regression model, depreciation cost was the second critical factor explaining almost 9 percent of the herd-to-herd variation in RLM followed by operating cost (5 percent). Calf weight had a greater impact than calf price on RLM in both the financial and economic regression models. Calf weight was the fourth indicator of RLM in the financial model and was similar in magnitude to operating cost. Investment was not a significant variable in either regression model; however, it was highly correlated to a number of the significant cost variables including feed cost, depreciation cost, and operating cost (P < .001, financial; P < .10, economic). Cost factors were far more influential in driving RLM than production, reproduction, or producer controlled marketing factors. Of these cost factors, feed cost had by far the largest impact. As producers focus attention on factors that affect the profitability of the operation, feed cost is the most critical control point because it was responsible for over 50 percent of the herd-to-herd variation in profit.

Standardized Performance Analysis (SPA) Summary for 1999-2000 Veterinary Medicine Students

Nine Iowa State University veterinary medical students completed SPA records on herds from Iowa, North Dakota and South Dakota. The Iowa herds were included in the SPA summary for Iowa, but the six North and South Dakota herds were summarized separately. These six herds had an average herd size of 371 cows and had a financial return to capital, labor and management of $175 per cow. Total financial cost per cow averaged $286 for these herds with a range of $211 to $388. Feed utilized averaged 4,442 pounds of dry matter per cow and the average pounds of calf produced per exposed female was 506 pounds.

Effects of Initial Body Condition, Frame Size and Concentration of Dietary Energy on Carcass Value of Finished Steers

Yearling steers were sorted into four groups based on hip height and fat cover at the start of the finishing period. Each group of sorted steers was fed diets containing 0.59 or 0.64 Mcal NEg per pound of diet. The value of each carcass was determined by use of the Oklahoma State University Boxed Beef Calculator. Sorting to increase hip height decreased the percentage of Choice carcasses and fat cover, increased ribeye area, and had no effect on carcass weight or yield grades 1 and 2. Sorting to decrease initial fat cover decreased carcass weight, carcass fat cover, and percentage of choice carcasses and increased the proportion of yield grades 1 and 2 carcasses. Concentration of energy in the finishing diet had no effect on carcass measurements. Increasing the percentage of yield grades 1 and 2 carcasses did not result in increased economic value of the carcasses when quality grades were lower and when there was a wide spread between Choice and Select carcasses, as occurred in 1996. With less spread between Choice and Select, as in 1997, sorting the cattle to increase yield grades 1 and 2 resulted in increased value, especially for close-trim boxed beef. The results of this study emphasize the importance of knowing how carcasses will grade before selecting a valuebased market for selling cattle.

Effects of Sorting Steer Calves on Feedlot Performance and Carcass Value

Three groups of steer calves totaling 480 head were sorted into smaller and larger frame sizes, and those groups were sorted into groups with more and less backfat. There was no difference in age among the four sorted groups. The larger steers and steers with less fat had faster rates of gain and tended to have superior feed efficiencies. Steers with more initial fat were fed fewer days. The larger framed steers and steers with less fat had heavier carcasses, less carcass backfat, more yield grade 1 carcasses and a lower percentage of Choice carcasses, but they also had greater value per carcass when evaluated using a grid paying premiums for quality and yield grades. The greatest profit to the feedyard was realized from the smaller framed steers and those with less initial backfat. For similar profit it was calculated that the larger steers should have been discounted as feeders $3.50 per hundred compared with the smaller steers and the steers with more fat discounted $5.00 per hundred compared with those having less initial fat. The results of this study suggest that sorting based on initial fat thickness may have more potential for enhancing the value of finished cattle than sorting based on frame score.