Chapman, C. Kim

Zobell, Dale

English

DigitalCommons@USU

1998-99 Utah State University Ranch to Rail Summary ReportUtah State University Extension’s Ranch to Rail program is designed to give cattle producers informationon post-weaning feedlot performance and carcass data enabling them to better market their calf crop. It is notintended to promote retained ownership programs and it is not intended to compare or promote breeds or breeders.Rather, it gives producers the opportunity to see how their cattle fit into beef production and what changes inmanagement or selection they must make to remain competitive. Only steer calves from the 1998 calf crop wereeligible to be included in the program.The 1998-1999 Ranch to Rail program included entries from24 ranches from all areas of Utah and Eastern Nevada. The 92 headenrolled in the program were received at Johnson Feedlot in Aurora,Utah in early November with the program beginning on November18th. When they arrived at the feedlot the steers were eartagged,weighed, processed and assigned an in-value based on current marketprices received for steers at Producers Livestock Marketing Service inSalina. The steers were sorted into three feeding groups based on framesize, body type and weight. They were then placed on a warm-up rationfor two weeks before the program officially began. Managementrelative to feeding times, medication and rations during the feedingperiod was similar to other calves in the feedlot. Prices Used to Determine In-ValuesWeight Range Price400 to 449 $80.00450 to 499 $79.00500 to 549 $78.00550 to 599 $76.00600 to 649 $74.00650 to 699 $72.00700 to 749 $68.00750 to 799 $66.00800 to 849 $65.00As the calves passed 800 pounds, each individual steer was scanned via an ultrasound scanning device andthe data was entered into software from Kansas State University to determine the optimal marketing window takinginto account both economic and performance factors.  As individuals reached the weights and body condition whichhave been identified as acceptable by the beef industry, they were again scanned to ascertain whether they weresufficiently finished to grade Choice. The ultrasound imagery combined with weight, breed characteristics andvisual evaluation were used to determine when the cattle were to be slaughtered. The cattle were slaughtered andmarketed through E.A. Miller Packing in Hyrum, Utah. Carcass data was collected approximately 48 hours afterslaughter. Ribeye photos were taken of each carcass and these were sent to the owner of that steer along with thedetailed performance and carcass data. Feed, yardage, processing and medical charges were financed by the feedlot.All expenses were then deducted from the carcass sale proceeds and the balance was sent to the owner.Performance InformationWeights used to determinerate of gain were the weight at thebeginning of the test (following thewarm-up period) and the final saleweight. Average beginning weightwas 632 pounds and the average saleweight was 1224pounds. Days onfeed averaged 185 days and rangedfrom 140 to 245 days. Average dailygain for all steers in the program was3.26 pounds and ranged from 2.00 to4.58 pounds. Sixty eight percent ofthe calves gained over 3.0 pounds perday while only 4.4% gained less than2.5 pounds. There was very little illness in the calves once the test began, which partially explains why the rates ofgain were so high. The beginning weights of the calves ranged from 409 to 825 pounds, which resulted in calvesbeing sorted into pens based on weight, breeding and predicted days on feed. This system appears to have beensuccessful for the majority of the calves.Feed consumption per head was calcu-lated by dividing the total pen consumption bythe total number of head days for the pen. Eachsteer was then assigned its feed costs accordingto the number of days on feed. This was based onthe assumption that every steer had equal accessto feed. Sorting of the calves initially andthroughout the program enabled calves of similarweight to be fed together. Individual feed intakemay have varied within each group, but this vari-ation was probably only slight.Feed costs were calculated for eachgroup marketed at the time of marketing and re-flect current commodity prices for the feeds inthe ration at the time the calves were marketed.Feed cost of gain averaged $47.37 and rangedfrom $45.50 to $49.90.The total cost of gain included feed, yardage, shipping andbrand inspection fees. The total costof gain per cwt. averaged $54.17and ranged from $50.68 to $58.68.Carcass InformationThe steers were sold on a carcass basis when the ultrasound scan combined with live weight, breedcharacteristics and visual evaluation indicated a high probability of the carcass grading choice. The steers were soldin four market groups. Carcass weights averaged 732 pounds, with 95.56% of the carcasses falling within the 650 lb. to 850 lb.range preferred by most packers.Seventy two percent of the carcassesgraded Choice, 2% were Prime and 25.5%were Select. None of the cattle graded lowerthan Select.Eighty two percent of the steersproduced carcasses with yield grades below3.0. Only 17.8% of the carcasses had yieldgrades over 3.0. Average yield grade was2.41 and the range was from .71 to 3.81.Yield grade is influenced by theamount of fat a carcass is carrying and thecarcass’ muscle mass. The average back fatthickness over the ribeye was .29 inches andfat thickness ranged from .05 to .65 inches.Optimal fat thickness is between .25 and .45inches. Less than this optimal amount canlead to tough cuts due to cold shortening andthese carcasses often do not display enoughmarbling to grade choice. Thicknesses inexcess of the .45" level leads to excessivetrim waste. High fat deposition can be a fac-tor of either being held on feed too long, ge-netic disposition to deposit fat, or a combina-tion of both. The surface area of the ribeye isthe chief indicator of overall muscle masson the carcass. Ranch to Rail steer ribeyesaveraged 12.75 square inches and rangedfrom 10.1 to 17.8 square inches. Ribeyeareas in the range of 11.0 to 17.0 are themost marketable in the retail market, and91% of the carcasses fit that criteria. Ex-tremes on both sides of this optimal rangepresent marketing and fabrication prob-lems and selection should be made to min-imize these types of animals from the beefherd.Carcass Characteristics of Ranch-to-Rail steers for each marketing periodDays on Feed 140 168 217 245Date Sold 4/7/99 5/5/99 6/23/99 7/21/99Quality Grade Yield Grade No. No. No. No.Prime 3 1 1Choice 1 2 4 2 32 9 8 18 53 6 4 4Select 1 4 2 3 12 4 4 1 23 1 1Cutability (%)47   50 12 10 15 351  53 13 14 12 754  56 1 2 1The amount of ribeye area tends to increase ascarcass size increases. One way to measure ribeye arearelative to carcass size is to calculate the ribeye area per100 pounds of hot carcass weight. The average was 1.74square inches per cwt., and the range was 1.45 to 2.24.The higher values indicate greater thickness of muscle,but selection solely on this trait could increasemanagement problems associated with calving difficulty.Therefore, selection should be made for moderately highmuscling which would coincide with a 2.2 or smallerribeye area per cwt. of hot carcass weight. Nearly 99% ofthe steers on test fell into this range.FINANCIAL INFORMATIONAs seen in the budget outlined below, the average net return per head was -$21.89. The range in net return per head varied between a profit of $60.57 and a loss of $123.27. The profitablecalves tended to be those that came in at slightly heavier weights, had high daily gains and were marketed early inthe program. Those calves marketed later in the program were characterized by decreased efficiency of gain or wereextremely light coming into the program. This was especially true of the cattle in the final market group. Profitability of the steers in the last two marketings was further hampered as we began entering the historical mid-summer price slump. Carcass price for the last two marketings were $1.03 and $1.01, respectively, compared to$1.04 for the first two marketings.Nearly 27 percent of the calves in the program had a positive net return. Thirty two percent of the steersshowed a net loss of between $0 and -$25.00, while 41% had a net loss greater than -$25.00. These numbers do notreflect the cost of trucking from the ranch to the feedlot or interest on the feeder steer value, as these values werenot available for analysis.1998-99 Ranch to RailAverage Financial ResultsIncomeExpensesFeeder Steer ValueFeedYardageShippingBrand InspectionTotalNet$756.51$456.75281.6827.8210.401.75$778.40<$21.89>Utah State University Extension is an affirmative action/equal employment opportunity employer andeducational organization. We offer our programs to persons regardless of race, color, national origin, sex,religion, age or disability.Issued in furtherance of Cooperative Extension work, Acts of May 8 and June 30, 1914, in cooperationwith the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Robert L. Gilliland, Vice-President and Director, CooperativeExtension Service, Utah State University, Logan, Utah. (EP/09-99/DF)SummaryThe amount of variability in terms of feedlot performance, carcass traits and net return per head demon-strate the diversity found throughout the U.S. beef industry and in Utah. Producers must reduce this variability andproduce a product that meets the needs of all segments of the industry if they are to remain competitive withcompeting meats such as pork and poultry. Ranchers must take stock of their respective operations, reduce costswherever they can and then make adjustments in the genetics of their herd to insure they remain on track withmarket trends. The time is rapidly approaching wherein producers will be paid for the “value” of their productinstead of simply being paid for a commodity. Those that know what comprises value in their product will be thosewho will receive higher returns for that product. The purpose of the Ranch to Rail program is to give producers theinformation on their cattle which will aid them as they make these production decisions to increase their productionefficiency and profitability while providing a valuable marketable product to the beef industry.For Additional Information Contact:Dr. Dale ZobellExtension Beef SpecialistUtah State UniversityLogan, Utah 84322-4815435-797-2144C. Kim ChapmanExtension Animal Scientist250 N. MainRichfield, Utah 84701-2165435-896-9262 ext. 274435-979-6343 (cell)Sponsors/CooperatorsJohnson Feedlot - Aurora, UtahUtah State University ExtensionUSU Dept. of Animal, Dairy & Veterinary SciencesE.A. Miller Packing - Hyrum, UtahUtah Beef Improvement Association

1998-99 Utah State University
Ranch to Rail Summary Report

https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1001&context=extension_histall

1998-99 Utah State University Ranch to Rail Summary Report

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

DigitalCommons@USU