The Relationship Between Cow Size & Production

[librarian]

This is an interesting white paper.  http://beefmagazine.com/cow-calf/relationship-between-cow-size-production
New to me was the information that,
“Another source of information on mature cow size weights comes from actual research data from USDA’s Germplasm Evaluation Program. They conducted a direct, head-to-head comparison of nine sire breeds, all representing the character of those sire breeds when bred to common genetic resource cows and allowed to grow to full genetic maturity, and weighed at five years old as a measure of mature weight,” Olson explains.

The average cow size across all breeds was 1,390 lbs., with less than 100 lbs. separating the heaviest and lightest breeds. Herefords came in heaviest, at 1,419 lbs., followed by Angus at 1,410 lbs., then Red Angus at 1,409 lbs. In the middle were Simmental cows at 1,404 lbs., and the lightest three breeds were Gelbvieh at 1,323 lbs., Limousin at 1,391 lbs. and Charolais at 1,371 lbs."

 

[OLD WORLD SHORTIE]

British breeds > Continental breeds
<rock>

 

[aj]

Very interesting topic. I think there is a relationship between big cows and calves that gain 6 # aday in the feedlot. The Angus have big cows now.......to big in my opinion. But here alot of commercial cow herds are straight Angus. I would think that there would be a happy medium in there some where when the maternal breeds would push for a smaller cow and a terminal breed used on them. But the industry hasn't(as a whole) gone there yet......it may naever.

 

[Freddy]

Very good article ,do you remember the old days when Angus screamed how you don't want those big Charolais cows with breeding problems and to much feed costs , are guilty of giving us a big line of BS ....
The rule I have always heard is that they should produce half their body weight to be profitable ,this article pretty much said the same thing ,they stated where to break even ,you needed more to make money ....

 

[librarian]

Yes, I am going to rethink using Charolais. Maybe make some of those yellow roans.  Hubback was supposed to have been a yellow roan.  What Charolais bulls would make a forage finishing terminal cross on 1300 lb Shorthorn cows? 

 

[Mill Iron A]

Hoodoo 100%, we have a pile of hoodoo cows and they are bigger ribbed easier fleshing, thicker, and more moderate than our red angus. I have a friend who has a predominantly hoodoo pb herd and his cows are 5 frame and 1200 lbs. Highly recomend going charolais, btw, I have seen so many that do the grass fed route think they need only british, the truth is char x will marble on grass and I don't feel like they have to have as much cover. There is an article out there of a guy who raises pb more traditional large fram charolais and grass finishes them. Very interesting.

 

[DevonMan]

Very Interesting article. Here is another one on cow size http://southdakotarancher.blogspot.ca/2010/07/cow-size-efficiency.html?m=0

 

[RyanChandler]

I'm as guilty of it as anyone, but this is why it is so difficult to discuss cattle in such generalized terms.  With as much variation within each breed as there is, its becoming harder and harder to describe cattle in terms of 'breeds.'  As we can tell by the mature weights, the spectrum has almost flip flopped w/ the continentals now on the lighter end.  There are cattle that will excel in a grass finishing system in every breed.  As long as you select individuals whose form (phenotype) allows them to be productive on grass only, you'll be successful; breed holds no weight here as it's a type issue. 

 

[doc-sun]

Very interesting topic. I think there is a relationship between big cows and calves that gain 6 # aday in the feedlot. The Angus have big cows now.......to big in my opinion. But here alot of commercial cow herds are straight Angus. I would think that there would be a happy medium in there some where when the maternal breeds would push for a smaller cow and a terminal breed used on them. But the industry hasn't(as a whole) gone there yet......it may naever.

like an angus x jersey cow bred to char or maine or simmy. 900 lb cow raises a 750 lb calf. my dad loved them.

 

[librarian]

Here is a little video of a HooDoo sired heifer
HooDoo Crook 9010 x Neal's 902 Purebred Charolais
And a picture of a HooDoo bull
http://bullbarn.com/charepd.asp?ID=206 
I just picked the bull I liked from the pictures and he turned out to be Hoo Doo, but named MC Rio. Lucky.

Yes about type, but I thought there was more heterosis breeding British to Continental. Is that correct?  Also was looking for something line bred. Thanks.  I knew Shoshone and 5L were crossing to Hoo Doo but hadn't really looked at the animals.
Lots 121 - 131 in this 5L Video Catalog are Hoo Doo genetics.
http://www.superiorlivestock.com/onlineVideoCatalog/?contractId=967&lot=121#lot

 

[DevonMan]

Have you heard of Linear measuring?

Linear measuring is designed to help the producer choose the body type or form (phenotype) of bull and cow that will be high in reproduction, meat production and low in maintenance. Measuring of the many different body parts allows the operator to recognize structural and functional defects, which are genetic defects, and potential problems that arise from improper breeding practices. Linear measuring teaches the operator about body form and function.

Linear measuring is not about a gene pool concentration.  That comes later. Linear measuring is about selecting animals for proper type or form (phenotype). Therefore the desired function can be achieved. Choosing the proper body type or form and mating those cows and bulls with each other (kin folk) will build a concentrated gene pool that is consistent, predictable and works best on grass.  Steers and heifers will finish in 16 to 18 months on grass.

Utilising Linear Measuring procedures and methods allows the operator to choose the body type or form that the environment around the animals calls for (weather, forage, management, etc.).

Linear measuring works as well for the dairy operator. The cows and bulls he builds from linear measuring will perform best on grass, be high in reproduction and low in maintenance.

Building herds of cows and bulls with the proper form and type sets the stage for healthy, calving ease cows with longevity as is outlined in the instructions. Mastering the instruction manuals teaches you about the many body styles and the effects they have on function and performance of the animal. These practices create grass-based genetics. This type of cow must work for the producer 10 months of the year or she will become fat on grass and therefore reproductively unsound.

Standards are listed below for use as a quick/summary reference.



Female Standards

    Hearth girth ≥ top line (the larger the girth the better).
    Shoulder width = Rump length (± .5 inches is allowed).
    Rump length is 38-40% of body (2/3rds) length.
    Flank is a minimum 2″ larger then hearth girth (a higher # is better).
    Rump width is minimum 40% of rump height.
    Rump width is 2.5 inches wider than rump length.
    Frame score of 3.5 – 4.5 is best.

Male Standards

    Hearth girth ≥ top line (the larger the girth the better).
    Rump length is 38-40% of body (shoulders to tail head) length.
    Rump length is 44% or more of rump height.
    Shoulder width is 2+inches wider than rump is long.
    Flank is 0-2 inches larger than heart girth.
    Frame score of 4.5 – 5.5 works best.
    Scrotal at widest point should be 38-40 centimeters as a yearling.

Click here for a more detailed explanation of Linear Measurement Male(http://americanherbataurus.com/ahs/sites/default/files/articles/linear%20measuring%20guidelines%20male.pdf) & Linear Measurement Female (http://americanherbataurus.com/ahs/sites/default/files/articles/linear%20measuring%20guidelines%20female.pdf)

 

[RyanChandler]

Great post, DevonMan.  Now if we can just get the show world to embrace these measurements in terms of identifying the most superior animal.  You'd be surprised how many people on here find it acceptable for a bull's flank to be larger than his heart girth.  I just write it off as them not knowing any better. 

"...selecting animals for proper type or form (phenotype). Therefore the desired function can be achieved."   

 

[Mueller Show Cattle]

This is interesting as I had a talk with a guy for quite sometime at the NWSS couple weeks ago on this topic and he got me thinking for my commercial operation. He runs Red Angus and all his cows are in the 950 to 1000lb size, no bigger. His debate was that he can run more head of cattle at that size than the larger cattle, which makes sense. Yet he is still shipping 500 to 550lb calves every year. He uses bulls to keep the size of his cows frame size down on replacements and of course uses low birth weight bulls with good growth rates but that will not add frame size to his herd. After a long talk with him I thought about changing the commercial side of my operation as hay in my area brings a premium. He runs his operation in Oklahoma. He runs 300 head because of smaller statue cows but his calves still bring a premium and his cows breed back without any problems. At the least it got me thinking cause my commercial operation cattle size is around 1,350 lb Angus based cattle. They have to eat more than a 950 to 1,000lb cow. He said they were all in good body condition cause I started thinking of body scores with that weight and he said they all breed back great and are in great condition. Is making me do more research, possibly buy some heifer calves down the line.

 

[RyanChandler]

A 1000lb cow that weans a 500lb calf is not more profitable than a 1300lb cow that weans a 650lb calf. 

 

[Mueller Show Cattle]

I would have to do a little research on the amount of hay a 1,000lb cows consumes in a year compared to the amount a 1,350lb cow consumes in a year. Here is this weeks cattle price from the Riverton Auction Barn. 522LB steers brought $207 a 100LB or $2.07LB while 601LB steers brought $189 a 100LB or $1.89LB, so the 601LB steers brought $55.35 more a steer. Without research I can not say for sure but I would have a hard time saying that the 1,300LB cow did not eat more than $55.35 in hay in a year than the 1,000LB cow espicially with hay cost in my area, that is less than 600LBS or less of hay in the mid Wyoming area, lot less than that with the drought 2 years ago. I know there is variable factors on the prices but that is one example with current cattle prices in Wyoming. But then you would have to see how many more 1,000LB cows you can run compared to 1,350LB cows, which in numbers with more calves you could offset the calf size difference amount with more calves, which is what the guy I was talking to was saying, do I have hard facts, no but I can't disprove it either at this point.

 

[Mueller Show Cattle]

Rick Rasby (Beef Specialist) from The University Of Nebraska put out an article in April 2013 which says on average a beef cow will eat 1.6 to 1.8 percent of her body weight in forage per day. So I am going to say 1.8 for me with colder temperatures. That would say that a 1,300LB cow would eat 23.4LBS per day and a 1,000LB cow would eat 18LBS per day, difference being 5.4LBS per day, multiply that by 365 days in a year you have 1,971LBS in hay a year difference. Our hay cost that would be over $150 more in hay. It is going to be hard to produce $150 more a calf with heavier calves especially when lighter calves bring more per pound than heavier calves. That is just an example if you were buying all your hay to feed the cows. If my calculations are correct it says that the 1,300LB is eating 23% more hay per day, with those figures if you had a set amount of hay per year you could see how many more 1,000LB cows you could run than 1,300LB cows. Not starting an argument just running some figures after I was already thinking about this from talking with the guy at the stock show.

I forgot to add those are dry cow numbers, lactating cows those numbers will go up it says 2.5 to 2.7 percent of body weight per day.

 

[RyanChandler]

Hopefully I have some time later to come back to this topic because I am really interested in it but I think the most important variable your calculations overlook is that fact that I could have sold both calves at 522lbs.  The difference being the calves out of 1300lb cows reached 522lbs 6 weeks prior than the calves out of 1000lb cows.

At this point, I would content that even though both calves are 522lbs,  the calves out of the 1300lb dams will appear much greener whereas the 522lb calves out of 1000lb calves likely carry some cover.  Framier green calves that show some post weaning potential will always bring more per lb than milk fat calves that are already filled out their frame.  Small framed calves take a beating through the ring.  (A 1000lb cow in good condition is about a frame 3)

The next thing to take into consideration would be the grass savings.  The calf out of the 1300lb cow was sold 6 weeks earlier. Not only is the calf no longer consuming valuable summer grass out of your pasture but his dam's energy requirements have been reduced GREATLY by no longer having to provide milk for her calf. When energy requirements are reduced, consumption is reduced. 

I'm sure there are many more variables to take into consideration as well but one thing I will never believe is that intake always proportionally increases as mature cow weight increases.  I have no data to support my claim but I do not see a 2000lb cow requiring exactly twice the resources that a 1000lb cow does.  I think you will see that after a certain weight, and I haven't determined that number yet, there will be diminishing margins as far as the additional inputs required to sustain the additional weight.  For example: A 1200lb cow might require 20% more input than a 1000lb cow. But a 1500lb cow might only require 40% more input than a 1000lb cow.  Opponents will say, "its simple math- calculate the basal metabolic rate and you'll have your answer."  I just don't believe the BMR gives an accurate representation of reality.  Find 10, 200lb men.  They WILL NOT all require the same energy intake to maintain 200lbs.  There should be no difference w/ cattle. 

Another question I pose to those proposing small cattle is, "why stop at 1000lbs?"  If your philosophy is grounded in the truth, then it should hold true for even smaller cattle as well. 

 

[Mueller Show Cattle]

You do bring up alot of valid points and would have to agree with them, you can sell the calves earlier on the heavier cows and do believe there probably would be some time type of drop off with feed with heavier cattle. As far as the 1,000LBS, I guess you could go lower, the gentleman I spoke with said his herd was 950 to 1,000LBS. I think if you got much lower than that you would get into the lowlines and miniatures which I can't say what type of prices they will bring at a regular auction barn. Most calves around me are sold anywhere from 400LB range up to 650LB range I would say on average, very rarely see them over the 650 mark for the bulk of calf sales. I think there is points on both sides, his point was more head cause of smaller cows so would have more calves. But I too also think this is an intersting topic and think there is points on both sides. One of my points to him was I said that I thought the larger cows would do better in my colder climate but he said that the smaller cows would do just fine with less hay needed to keep their body temperature up. Either way it brings up a whole lot of points to look at. I am not looking at changing my whole commercial herd but would like to see if I bought some of these smaller cows and ran them separately from my herd to see what the profit difference would be and agree there is a whole lot of variables with it.

 

[DevonMan]

In the world of theory:

Dry Mature Cows and Bulls - Straw and Poor Forage 1.4 to 1.6% - Medium Quality Forage 1.8 to 2.0% - Excellent Quality Forage 2.3 to 2.6%

We will go with the medium quality forage:

Let’s compare the feed efficiency of two different size cows:  One will weigh 1500lbs and the other 1100lbs. First the 1500lb cow. Cows eat 2% of their body weight per day. 1500lbs x 2% = 30lbs of forage. If hay is 12 cents per lb then it will cost $ 3.60 per day to keep the 1500lb cow. For a year the cost of hay is $1’314. For 6 months she will cost $657 or 5’460lbs of hay.

The 1100lb cow will eat 2% of her body weight. 1000lbs x 2% = 20lbs of feed. If hay is 12 cent per lbs then she will cost $2.40 per day or for a year $ 876. For half a year $438 or 3’650lbs of hay.

So if that is the case, then the 1500lb eats 10lbs or $1.20 more feed per day then the 1000lb cow. So if your land supports 50, 1500lbs cows. If you had 1100lb cows then you could support  66 cows.

If you sell the calves at 600lbs for a $2.00 per lb or $1200 apiece then you will lose $114 with the 1500lb cow or make $324 with the 1’000lb cow.
So then you will lose $5700 with the 50, 1’500lb cows. Or make $221’384 with the 66, 1’000lb cows. What do you want? Let me know if i am wrong.

Forage Intake from http://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/faq7811?opendocument

I highly recommend Gerald Fry's book - Reproduction & Animal Health - http://www.acresusa.com/reproduction-and-animal-health He talks about every thing relating to cattle size and the why of it. http://www.bovineengineering.com/edu.html

 

[hamburgman]

A 1000lb cow that weans a 500lb calf is not more profitable than a 1300lb cow that weans a 650lb calf.

bahahahaha

Feed costs not weaning weight determine profitability.  I know which cow ate more feed.