Most cow-calf producers don't generate a positive return to equity for the efforts they put forth. The cow-calf sector of the cattle industry is among the most heavily subsidized in agriculture--it is subsidized by "off-the-farm income. This sector has limited sources of "on the ranch revenue: the selling of weaned offspring and the selling of culled animals (bulls, cows and replacement heifers). However, adopting management techniques for better reproductive efficiency, increasing production and reducing production costs can significantly improve a producer's profit margin

Posey, R. Daniel

Texas A&M University

E-347
06-057Seven Management Techniques
That Move Cow-Calf Producers Toward Profitability
Profitability is defined as net return to owner’s equity; retained earnings (or profits) increase owner’s equity.1 Simply put
Assets – Liabilities = Producer’s Equity
If profit is defined as a net return, several methods can be used to reach 
such a goal: (1) increase revenues, while maintaining the same expense 
level; (2) decrease expenses, while maintaining the same revenue stream;  
(3) do both, maximizing revenues and decreasing expenses.
But most cow-calf producers don’t generate a positive return to equity for 
the efforts they put forth. The cow-calf sector of the cattle industry is among 
the most heavily subsidized in agriculture – it is subsidized by “off-the-
farm” income. This sector has limited sources of “on the ranch” revenue: 
the selling of weaned offspring and the selling of culled animals (bulls, 
cows and replacement heifers). However, adopting management techniques 
for better reproductive efficiency, increasing production and reducing 
production costs can significantly improve a producer’s profit margin.
Reproductive Efficiency
Reproductive efficiency is an important issue for cow-calf producers. If 
expressed in economic terms, reproductive efficiency is 10 times more 
important than production (defined by weaning weights). Reproductive 
efficiency is 20 times more important economically than product (defined as 
carcass characteristics).10
A herd that produces more calves per exposed female will increase 
revenues by selling more calves. The average cow-calf producer has a 
calving rate of 88 to 91.5 percent.8 The first goal of all producers should be 
to maximize the reproductive efficiency of their herds. 
R. Daniel Posey, DVM, DABVP
Clinical Assistant Professor, Department of Large 
Animal Clinical Sciences College of Veterinary 
Medicine & Biomedical Sciences 
Texas A&M University
Four important management techniques that can improve 
reproductive efficiency are
1) Conduct breeding soundness examinations on all bulls  
 every year.
2) Palpate and remove all non-producers.
3) Maintain cows in moderate body condition score at  
 calving.
4) Appreciate the hidden values of vaccinations against  
 reproductive diseases.
Examine Bulls
As the first step toward improving reproductive efficiency, 
make sure to use a fertile bull. The bull is responsible for 
every calf born in the herd, so it is important for him to be 
healthy and fertile. All bulls should be examined for breeding 
soundness every year prior to breeding season. However, 
only 14 percent of producers examine their bulls for breeding 
soundness every year. A bull that is evaluated for breeding 
soundness has a 6 percent or greater fertility advantage over 
unevaluated bulls.1 Although this doesn’t sound like a large 
percentage advantage, in production it is huge.
The 90:90 rule of thumb assumes that 90 percent of all cows 
calve and 90 percent of these calves wean, so the average 
producer can expect a weaned calf crop of 81 percent. If the 
weaned calf crop were to be reduced by another 6 percent 
because the bull was not fertility tested, the producer now 
has a 75 percent weaned calf crop. Using a bull that has been 
examined for breeding soundness could add 6 percent to the 
average weaned-calf crop of 81 percent, resulting in a weaning 
percentage of approximately 87 percent.
Bull fertility drives reproductive efficiency. Based on spring 
2000 calf prices, a 6 percent increase in calf crop would 
represent a return of approximately $17 for every $1 invested 
in a breeding soundness exam.1 Every bull should be critically 
evaluated every year for breeding soundness.
Palpate Cows
A second management technique to improve reproductive 
efficiency is removal of cows and heifers that for various 
reasons do not get pregnant or wean a calf. The best way to 
eliminate non-producers is to evaluate each individual cow 
critically as to health and physical soundness and to palpate 
each cow in your herd.
Producers should evaluate culling strategies to choose the most 
economically effective decision procedures. As a general rule, 
all cattle with health or soundness problems should be culled, 
as well as all cows that fail to conceive. By removing non-
producers from your herd, you select those females that thrive 
in your management system and environment.
Because most productive cows calve during the spring due to 
availability of forage, herds are traditionally palpated in the 
fall. There are several reasons for this timing:
• Pregnancy status can be determined easily.
• Scheduling is made easier for other management   
 techniques like deworming, vaccinating, health   
 evaluations and culling due to failure to reproduce that  
 also must be accomplished.
• Fall palpation allows removal of non-producers from the  
 herd before the most expensive time of the year. (Winter  
 feeding comprises up to 40 percent of the total annual  
 maintenance costs for a cow, so it is economically   
 important to remove “freeloaders” from your herd before 
 winter sets in.)
Palpation is a valuable management tool for increasing the 
herd’s reproductive efficiency by selecting for the more fertile 
females that thrive in your management system.
Maintain Body Condition
 The third step toward improving reproductive 
efficiency involves maintaining your herd in moderate body 
condition at calving. A cow should calve at a body condition 
score (BCS) of 5 of higher, while a heifer should calve at a BCS 
of 6. Problems associated with low body condition at calving 
may surface as follows:5
• Cows don’t cycle post-calving.
• Cows require an increased number of bull services for  
 conception.
• Cows experience longer intervals between calvings.
• The herd has more open cattle.
• Cows are more susceptible to disease.
• Calves have decreased weaning weights due to poor  
 milking ability.
There is direct correlation between BCS at calving and 
subsequent pregnancy rate. When BCS at calving moves from 4 
to 6, the pregnancy rate in the subsequent breeding season can 
increase from 50 percent to 88 percent.3 
Body condition scores also can help guide nutritional 
management, an important economic issue for all cow-calf 
operations. Sixty percent of a cow’s annual maintenance is 
associated with feed costs. Every producer should evaluate his 
or her nutritional management practices and make appropriate 
adjustments to forage management, protein supplementation 
and mineral programs. Using body conditions scores can help 
producers make nutrition decisions by identifying cattle that 
need attention.
Conditioning can be added to your herd most efficiently 
during the period between weaning and calving. It is almost 
impossible to add condition during the suckling phase, 
especially during the first 8 weeks of lactation because of high 
nutritional demands.
Maintaining moderate body condition at calving is critical to 
reproductive efficiency. Cows should calve at BCS 5 or higher, 
and heifers should calve at BCS 6.
Vaccinate
A fourth management technique to improve reproductive 
efficiency is to instill in producers an appreciation for the 
hidden value of vaccinations. Help producers understand that 
routinely vaccinating herds protects them from immunological 
wrecks. Most herds are immunologically challenged frequently 
from a variety of sources: commingling with a neighbor’s herd, 
runoff from nearby water sources, purchased animals, and 
carrier animals within a herd.
Producers should protect all herds with a good herd health 
program, including a customized vaccination regimen, a 
biosecurity protocol and a disease surveillance system. Each 
herd has its own immunological needs–one size does not fit all. 
Producers should design an immunological program for each 
individual herd.
Increasing Production
Increasing production also can move producers toward 
profitability. But remember, techniques that increase production 
without knowing their cost can negatively impact a ranch’s 
financial performance. Producers can increase production with 
two cost-effective strategies for increasing weaning weights: 
deworming of suckling calves and growth implant application.
Deworming and using growth implants will increase weaning 
weights of calves. Increasing herd immunity through the 
appropriate use of vaccines will improve weaning percentage. 
Weaning percentage per exposed female probably is the single 
most important measure of production performance.2
Three important management techniques can improve 
production:
1) Deworming of suckling calves
2) Growth implant application
3) Appreciation of the hidden impact of vaccinations on  
 weaning percentage.
Deworming
Deworm suckling calves at 2 to 4 months of age. Such timely 
and strategic deworming leads to conservative estimates of an 
additional 19 to 37 pounds of extra weaning weight.9 Type of 
dewormer used does not make a significant difference in such 
weight gains, which are associated with removal of parasites. If 
it costs $2 to deworm a suckling calf, return on investment will 
be $5 for every $1 invested, even based on a low calf market 
of $50/cwt. This estimate does not take into account added 
benefits of stress reduction and calf health. 
Growth Implants
Use growth implants at the same time you deworm suckling 
calves, 2 to 4 months of age, so you can take full advantage of 
implants’ growth effects. (Calves must be at least 45 days of age 
to be implanted.)
Implants can be used safely in steers and heifers to improve 
weight gain during the suckling phase. Implantation does 
not interfere with conception rates for heifers, but it decreases 
days to first heat cycle and increases pelvic size. If replacement 
heifers can be identified prior to implant time, they should not 
be implanted, although it is safe to implant them once with 
some types of growth implants.
The average calf will gain a conservative estimate of 37 to 
50 pounds of extra weaning weight.4 Implants cost between 
$1 to $2 each, returning $18 to $25, even based on a low calf 
market of $50/cwt. This is a phenomenal rate of return for a 
management technique.
Deworming and implanting of calves have moderate additive 
effects on each other. 
Vaccines
A good vaccination program can increase weaning percentage 
by decreasing illness and death. The highest proportion of calf 
losses occurs at nor near birth.10 Using easy-calving bulls and 
eliminating cows and heifers with small pelvic sizes will impact 
greatly the number of calves born alive and so will increase the 
percentage of calves weaned.
The next highest proportion of calf losses occurs during the 
first two weeks of a calf’s life. Vaccinating a cow or heifer 
prior to calving increases the chances of her producing higher 
quality colostrum. Colostrum should be nursed for the first 6 
hours after birth to pass antibodies that will protect calves for 
their first 2 to 4 months of life, so colostral management with 
vaccines is key to calves’ surviving the neonatal period. When 
calves receive their first vaccinations at 2 to 4 months of age, 
they become immunologically independent.
Cost Reduction
The key to ranching longevity is reducing production costs to 
survive cattle-market bad times and take advantage of market 
good times. Cost reduction can move individual producers 
toward profitability and ensure sustainability of the cow-calf 
sector. 
The last 5 years have seen a trend toward teaching producers 
how to market their cattle. Discussions have centered around 
issues like carcass traits, niche-marketing, genetic selection 
and value-added products. But cost reduction assumes even 
greater importance than marketing, because it allows producers 
to survive market bad times, then take advantage of good 
times. Because cattle markets are dynamic, producers must 
proactively set market strategies by determining unit cost of 
production (UCP). Once unit cost of production is known, a 
cost reduction plan can be formalized. 
To determine UCP, producers should adopt standardized 
performance analysis (SPA), used by Texas producers for more 
than 10 years. The SPA process organizes production and 
financial information into a standard format for analysis.
Producers can use SPA to reduce production costs in these 
areas:
• Change attitudes: Handle a ranch like a business.
• Minimize investment in depreciable assets: Rent, lease  
 or limit purchased machinery and vehicles. 
• Avoid hay production: Buy hay.
• Monitor and control feed-purchase expense: Get sound  
 nutritional advice.
• Buy replacement heifers: Don’t raise them.
• Use terminal bulls.
• Stay away from seed stock production. 
• Minimize investment in horses (if cows have to pay for  
 them).
• Don’t over graze.
• Take a holistic view of ranching: Implement total   
 resource management, including wildlife management.
• Use a controlled breeding season: Match calving to  
 forage availability and optimize grazing. 
• Practice proper herd health management.
• Avoid industry fads.
• Don’t spend money to reduce taxes, especially if   
 investments do not lead to equity.
• Separate ranch and personal checking accounts.7
Remember the Seven Management Techniques  
That Move Cow/Calf Producers toward Profitability
1) Conduct breeding soundness examinations on all 
bulls every year.
2) Palpate cows and heifers and remove all non-
producers.
3) Maintain cows in moderate body condition at calving.
4) Appreciate the hidden value of vaccinations.
5) Deworm suckling calves.
6) Use growth implants.
7) Reduce cost by determining your production unit-cost
References
1. Chenoweth, P.J. (2000). Rationale for using bull breeding 
soundness evaluations. Compendium, Food Animal Section, 
22:2. S48-S54.
2. Hamilton, E.D. (1995). Standardized performance analysis. 
Standardized Performance Analysis of Beef Cattle Operation. 
The Veterinary Clinics of North America, 199-213.
3. Hardin, R. (1990). Using body condition scoring in beef 
cattle management. The University of Georgia College of 
Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Cooperative 
Extension Service, circular 817.
4. Landblomn, D.G. & Nelson, J.L. Effects of worming and 
implanting compared among backgrounded steer calves. 
Dickinson Research Extension Center, North Dakota State 
University.
5. Mangione, D.A. Scoring cows can improve profits. Ohio State 
University Extension Fact Sheet, Department of Animal 
Science, L292.
6. McGrann, J.M. (1999). Factors influencing profitability of the 
cow-calf operation. TAES IRM-SPA Handbook, SPA 50.
7. McGrann, J.M. (2002). Cow-calf management – production 
and financial data analysis. Texas A&M University and Texas 
Cooperative Extension, Texas A&M University Beef Cattle 
Short Course.
8. McGrann, J.M., & Abello, F. Cow reproduction has not 
improved in the past twenty years. Department of Economics, 
Texas Cooperative Extension, Texas A&M University.
9. Smith, S.C., Barnes, K.C. & Lusby, K.S.. Effects of deworming 
on performance of grazing cows and their calves in eastern 
Oklahoma. Oklahoma Cooperative Extension Service, 
Division of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, 
Oklahoma State University, #-944.
10. Wiltbank, J.N. (1990). Challenges for improving calf crop. 
39th Annual Florida Beef Cattle Short Course Proceedings.



English

Seven Management Techniques that Move Cow-Calf Producers towards Profitability

https://oaktrust.library.tamu.edu/bitstream/1969.1/200418/1/beefsevenmanagementtechniques.pdf

Seven Management Techniques that Move Cow-Calf Producers towards Profitability

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Texas A&M University