expertise starts here for beef producers success is …€¦ · 10 mcal, which means a weight loss...

Success is within your grasp

| OptimizingwinterfeedingforcowsThey are strong but not invincible. Here’s some rules to follow.

| Colostrum:neverenough,andalwaystoolate!A statement that speaks for itself.

| ComfortandADGareinseparableSome figures to measure the impact of comfort.

| Investmentorexpense:theessentialquestionWhen expenses generate recurring net income, we’re talking about investment.

| ImpactofgainwhenstartingcalvesinthefeedlotThere’s no point in just running; it’s important to leave on time.

Your work andour expertiseaiming for results

Phot

o : J

ason

Bro

ck

EXPERTISE STARTS HERE FOR BEEF PRODUCERS

SUPPLEMENT201511

1089

02-1

1-15

108902_MOB Automne_ang.indd 1 2015-11-06 14:46

By Jean-Philippe Leblanc, agronomist, Opti Boeuf S.E.N.C.

Ah yes, winter’s coming!

How is it possible

to optimize feed for cows?

The theory

First step: take, for example, my forage analysis. I need them because each group of animals must be fed in terms of its production cycle (milking, dry cows or in transition).

Feeding for a ruminant starts by feeding the bacteria in the rumen; this is why the energy to protein ratio (Table 1) needs to be respected. If there is an imbalance, the rumen’s bacterial flora will not succeed in optimizing the assimilation of nutrients from forages.

Take as an example a pregnant dry cow spending the winter outside and receiving a poor quality forage (<9.5% C.P.) and corn silage (9.5% C.P.). Despite a high energy diet on paper, the lack of protein will prevent the bacteria from “seeking out” this theoretical intake. The good side to this story is that correcting the protein level is easy to do and not expensive in the majority of cases. The question is, how can this happen without forage analysis and a feeding program?

Now, imagine the needs of this same cow during a -20°C day with the wind blowing at 30 km/h (Figures 1 and 2). Interestingly, the wind affects animals much more than cold temperatures do. It’s simply because in addition to the increase in energy needs, behaviour is modified: when the

wind blows, animals spend less time at the feeder! For example, with a wind of 35 km/h and a temperature of -10°C, a cow runs a deficit for maintenance energy of 10 Mcal, which means a weight loss of nearly 1.8 kg.

Therefore, adding a windbreak, providing for regular feed intake and an abundance of bedding are essential if you want to reduce winter feeding costs (also see the article Comfort and ADG are inseparable! on page 6).

In practice

In addition to the physiological state and theoretical requirements, there is also the “ration in the rumen”. Is feed really available all the time, and for all animals? It’s important to remember that if an ani-mal must consume 10% more food, it will spend 10% more time at the feeder and this will take time away from others. For cows kept outside, a lot more feeder space will be needed in the winter than in the summer.

Optimizing

winter feeding

for cows

TABLE 1 Nutritional needs of a beef cow (650 kg) according to its physiological state

Dry cow Transition Lactating

DMI (kg/day) 11.7 11.7 16.25

CP (kg/day) 1.2 1.4 2.4

Energy (Mcal/day) 13.0 15.0 23.5

Energy/CP 10.8 10.7 9.8

FIGURE 1 The effect of temperature on the daily maintenance requirements of a beef cow*

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0-25 -15 -5 0 5 15 25

Temperature (degrees Celsius)

E.N

.e (M

cal)

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

-5

-10

-15Wind speed (km/h)

E.N

.e (M

cal)

5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Energy deficit (Mcal Ene)

2SUPPLEMENT201511


Let’s continue. Modern hard-core bales make producers’ lives easier for some things but can complicate cows’ lives, strangely enough. If bales are not roto-cutted or shredded, eating for the cow becomes more difficult. One must also think about the cold weather as a slightly moist bale of silage is an excellent accumu-lator of the cold which then puts the bale at risk of freezing once placed in the feeder. Therefore, this ‘frozen’ forage takes much longer to consume and digest.

Finally, make sure that your herd always has access to an adequate amount of clean water; this allows them to tho-roughly warm up. Snow works well for the strongest animals, but not so well for the weaker ones!

A bit of minerals too

In the winter, natural vitamin intake is often low. In the majority of cases, it needs to be supplemented. This is generally the same thing for major minerals and trace elements. Add 100 g/cow/day of Opti Boeuf Cow-Calf Mineral, Pro-Bloc Boeuf or Transi-Boeuf Mineral.

Winter is not the easiest season for the animals. A theoretical and practical fee-ding program adapted to their needs and applied from the beginning will ensure an efficient use of your feed. Talk about it with your expert-advisor. Enjoy the winter! ■

FIGURE 2 The effect of wind speed at -10°C on daily maintenance requirements for a beef cow*

18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0-25 -15 -5 0 5 15 25

Temperature (degrees Celsius)

E.N

.e (M

cal)

30

25

20

15

10

5

0

-5

-10

-15Wind speed (km/h)

E.N

.e (M

cal)

5 10 15 20 25 30 35

Energy deficit (Mcal Ene)

*650kg dry cow that is 180 days pregnant with a good body condition

Lower critical temperatures for beef cattle

State of coat Lower critical temperature (°C)

Summer coat or wet winter coat 16

Dry fall coat 7

Dry winter coat 0

Thick and dry winter coat -7

(Source: Mesonet model)

Critical temperature in winterBy Bruno Langlois, agronomist

Cattle are well adapted to our climate. Within a certain temperature range, they don’t expend any energy to warm themselves up or to cool themselves down.

However, beyond the lower critical temperature level, an animal will use its energy (increase in consumption or use of body fat) to warm itself up. This energy is then no longer available for weight gain, pregnancy or even maintenance. In other words, for each degree Celsius below the critical temperature, the energy requi-rements for maintenance increases by 2%.

Models have enabled us to clearly establish the lower critical temperatures. In the following table, it can be seen that one can enormously under-estimate the amount of energy needed for the winter. For example, an animal with one third of its winter coat covered in dirt fights the cold well before freezing. Its winter will be long!

3SUPPLEMENT

201511


Sour

ce :

????

????

????

If you read somewhere

“Regarding colostrum,

nature loses 44% of the time”,

would you be surprised?

It’s enough of a catchy title

to an article so that I can talk

to you a bit about this.

Let’s review the role of colostrum:

1. Warms up the calf;

2. Provides a huge amount of nutrients;

3. Ensures total immunity for the calf during its first weeks of life.

Regarding this third role (we will revisit the other two in the next issue of Maga-zine OptiBoeuf ), it should be understood that the placenta doesn’t let antibodies (IgG) be transferred to the fetus. At birth, the calf has an operational immune sys-tem that will not become functional for the next 3 to 6 weeks (Franklin, 2004). During this time, there are only the antibodies transferred by the colostrum (passive immunity) to protect the calf against bacteria and viruses.

Successful transfer of passive immunity

Here, two concepts are important: time and quantity. The ability for the intes-tine to absorb IgGs decreases quickly. Twelve hours after birth, the ability to absorb will have decreased by 50%, and after 24 hours, absorption is practically nothing (Figure 1). Furthermore, it should be considered that a calf needs to drink at least 4 litres of colostrum throughout the first 12 hours after birth.

This may seem easy, except that we may wonder if this always works. A summary of a study conducted with 2,500 dairy calves located on 50 farms, showed that 44% of calves that feed from their

mother voluntarily failed the test for pas-sive immunity transfer (Elizondo-Salazar, 2015)! On the other hand, 756 calves that received nearly 6 litres of colostrum “manually” in the first 12 hours of their life had a success rate of 97% for the same test (Table 1). What a difference!

The results of this “field” study confirm the results of a 30% failure rate for trans-fers reported in beef (Jarmuz, 2001). At this point, one litre of Dehydrated Bovine Colostrum (available at your cooperative) becomes an excellent alternate solution for at least 25% of the calves born. It only contains bovine colostrum from the first and second milking in addition to having other advantages:

• Quick and easy to use;

• Stable feed value;

• Destruction of pathogens during dehydration.

In conclusion, remember, just because a calf sucks doesn’t mean it actually nursed! Unless giving colostrum with a bottle, it is impossible to know the amount actually consumed. Fortunately, you can make the difference.

In the next issue, I will talk about the impact of colostrum on weight gain for calves. ■

By Marie-Christine Fauteux, agronomist, M. Sc., Opti Boeuf S.E.N.C.

Colostrum: never enough, often too late!

4SUPPLEMENT201511


TABLE 1 Success rate of passive immunity transfer according to the method of feeding colostrum (Adapted from Ledley, 2015)

Method Quantity consumed in the first 12 hours (L) Success rate for the immunity transfer test (%)

Voluntary nursing Unknown 56

With the bottle 6 97

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

00 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 24

Age at first feeding (h)

Seru

m Ig

G (g

/l)

“Every year on our farm more than 320 cows calve between March 1st and April 15th. We don’t take any chances at birth. For example, if we doubt that a calf has had a drink in its first 2 hours of life, we give it some Dehydrated Bovine Colostrum without asking any questions. It’s easy and quick to use for everyone, including our employees.

It’s just one of the ways that we can achieve a survival rate of more than 96% during this very intense time.”

Simon GodboutFerme Godbout SENC, Poularies, AbitibiOwners: Jean-Guy, Lise, Nancy and Simon Godbout475 cows An X SimProduction of backgrounded calves and replacement females

Dehydrated Bovine Colostrum: we benefit from knowing

“One of the things about Dehydrated Bovine Colostrum that we enjoy is its health side. Dehydration destroys pathogenic organisms that are always present in frozen colostrum. Since it’s quick and easy to prepare, we don’t hesitate to make it for frequent use. It makes a huge difference in the vigor and survival rate of calves. For us, it is a ‘Plan A’ tool.”

Guillaume and Étienne BarretteFerme Barrette et Frères S.E.N.C, Saint-Edmond-les-plaines, Lac Saint-Jean250 calvings in May and June

FIGURE 1 IgG uptake depending on the age

Uptake of IgG decreases rapidly after birth. The serum IgG concentration was determined in calves fed 1 L of colostrum at six-hour intervals starting at seven different ages. (Adapted from White, 1993.)

5SUPPLEMENT

201511


Quite often producers

ask me if it is worth it to

semi-finish their calves.

That’s a difficult question to

answer, even though 750 lbs

calves were selling for $3/lb

in early September.

It is possible for me to evaluate the approximate daily gain and cost of gain when I calculate a feed program. But is the ration the only factor in deter-mining the ADG? Not at all! In reality animal comfort is often the most unde-restimated factor.

Feed efficiency and ADG are directly related to the energy maintenance requi-rements of the animal. Supplying shelter from the wind is essential in maintaining performance. Warren Rusche, a cow-calf specialist for South Dakota State Uni-versity, estimates that if we reduce the wind speed from 30km/h to 8km/h, the energy maintenance requirements dimi-nish by 30%. The addition of a simple windbreak, portable or permanent, will help increase performance. A less expensive option is using round bales as a wind break, keeping in mind that it’s more efficient when leaving a small space between the bales.

Another important element in keeping animals clean, dry and comfortable is bedding. It acts as a cushion between the animal and the ground, which enables the animal to maintain its core temperature with less energy. Animals gain the most when they are lying down ruminating, not when they are eating.

This study by Anderson et al(table 1), conducted on feedlot animals outdoors over two winters, illustrates the impact of straw on ADG and feed efficiency. According to the study, the additional revenue is $1.94/hd/d (0.86lb gain X $2.25/lb) when animals are bedded with straw. Unbelievable!

Another limiting factor in semi-finishing is the amount of mud and manure in the pen. In studying the performance of 299 lots of Holstein calves over 15 years, Rayburn and Fox (table 2) found that just 4 cm of mud and manure reduced gain by 0.7 lb/hd/d, and at 12 cm the gain was reduced by 43%.

How can we explain the decrease in consumption and therefore gain? Hard to say but the impact is real and more important than we might think.

One final point is the appearance of the animal. Buyers will usually pay more for a clean calf than a dirty one.

To return to the initial question of profitability in semi-finishing; if you combine a well-balanced feed program, wind protection and bedding, you have all the requirements to maximize the profit on your calves.

By Jason Brock, P. T., Opti Boeuf S.E.N.C.

Comfort and ADG:

Inseparable

TABLE 1 Impact of straw on gain and feed efficiency on feedlot animals in winter.

No bedding Moderate bedding

Ample bedding

Quantity of straw for 4 mos. (kg straw/head) 0 175 310

Consumption (kg DM/d) 9.97 9.96 10.05

ADG (lb) 2.83a 3.69b 3.53b

Feed conversion (consumption/gain ) 7.77a 5.95b 6.28b

Carcass weight (lb) 674a 715b 721b

Carcass yield (%) 61.95a 62.33ab 63.43b

Marbling* 361a 392b 415b

Adapted from Anderson et al, 2006. A different letter beside the result corresponds to a statistically different result of p<0.05 * : marbling score : 300-399 = select, 400-499=low choice

SUPPLEMENT201511

6


Ferme Anglo-Acres S.E.N.C :

Facts of winter“Last winter we hadn’t quite finished our wintering site for our steers. They spent part of the winter outside without a decent windbreak. Even with a well-balanced free-choice ration they gained very little. As soon as we brought them back to the barn where they were more comfortable, the difference in weight gain was noticeable by eye.”

TABLE 2 Impact of thickness of mud and manure on performance

Thickness (cm) Consumption DM (Kg/hd/d) ADG (lbs) Conversion

0 6.86 3.02 5.02

4 5.83 2.38 5.41

8 5.32 2.05 5.73

12 4.8 1.70 6.22

Adapté de Rayburn et Fox, 1990

Frank Boyle and Chantal Agnew,Saint-Chrysostome65 cows An X Sim, Sale of F1 females and steer fattening for on-farm sale (BON BOEUF boutique).

SUPPLEMENT201511

7


For a third consecutive year,

culled beef and calf sales

have given a breath of fresh

air to cow-calf operations.

For the 2015 financial year,

it may even be that your

accountant will suggest

you find some additional

expenses…

Excellent news if you are in

this situation! However,

one must still be careful.

A 10- to 12-year cycle

Everything points to the fact that we are at the peak of the price cycle which characterizes beef production and that we will soon begin the descent. In this context, three major rules apply:

1. The end may justify the means, but never the reverse. Lay all the possible options out on the table for achie-ving your goals before making your choice.

2. Plan payments in consideration of the lowest revenue per calf. Often, it is preferable to spread payments out over the full term of the loan. In the end, you may pay a little more interest, but you maintain sufficient liquidity to handle events.

3. Invest using leverage for a quick tur-naround on profit

Although several leveraged investments can increase the overall operational efficiency and profitability of a farming operation, the timelines for a profitable return on investment may be very diffe-rent (Table 1). At this stage of the price cycle, timelines less than 24 months should be given priority; they allow for more frequent adjustments in terms of anticipated revenue…which is impos-sible to predict!

A typical case

Six years ago, Betty and Jos (fictitious names) seized the opportunity to add 40 cows to their herd which at the time had 125. Despite everything, their liquidity was negatively affected. This

year, their financial situation is finally recovering. Their goal is to take advan-tage of the situation and become less dependent on purchasing forages. They listed four potential ways for this to happen:

1. Sell some cows;

2. Buy 15 ha of land ($70,000 borrowed over 12 years);

3. Fertilize and lime their hay fields;

4. Fertilize, lime and renovate their pastures.

With current prices, the first option is profitable in the short run but leads to a lot of unknown factors in the future. If they choose the second one, since they are not really sure that their cost of production is less than the current cost of purchasing forages, the risk of a lack of cash over a long period of time is very real. Furthermore, Betty and Jos should probably buy machinery because already there isn’t enough “good weather” time to harvest every-thing. The third option, funny enough, is quite interesting. Having hardly limed or fertilized their fields in 5 years (except with manure from their cows), they are certain that the increase in yield will be significant. Finally, Betty and Jos chose the fourth option. Here’s how Betty explained it:

“This year, we spent an additional amount of $7,500 to achieve our goal, but we are not sure of anything for next year. Therefore, we decided to invest in a wheel that will turn all by itself in the future (Figure 1). We calculated that for every day of additional grazing we save between $2 and $2.50 per cow. This

By Bruno Langlois, agronomist, La Coop fédérée

Investment or expense: the essential question!

8SUPPLEMENT201511


includes round bales, but also tractor fuel and use, the renovation of feeding sites located in the fields, etc. In fact, if we can succeed at drawing out the pasture season by at least 21 days, our expenses will be covered.

By our calculations, we’ll get there quite easily with the planned improvements. In addition to having to buy less forage, we think that the calves will gain at least 15 additional pounds if the cows are not short of grass. This will give us a profit of 53% that we can reinvest in the next year!”

Even though this typical case is just a simulation, it clearly illustrates the reasoning to be followed by top mana-gers: the realism of the scenarios and the expectations in terms of a cyclical market. For some, this would constitute an expense (fertilizer, lime, seeds) yet it becomes an investment loaded with powerful leverage. The winter season is a good time to talk about this with your La Coop expert-advisor.

Food for thought!

SUPPLEMENT201511

9

*Labour Unit/Person = 2,500 hours worked

TABLE 1 Characteristics of several operational levers for cow-calf producers

Impact Strategy

Timeline for Complete

Investment-Reimbursement

Potential gain for calves

Productivity (lb calves sold/LUP*)

Superior male genetics <18 months

Calves sold

Productivity (calves sold/LUP*)

Possibility of stretching out sales

Survival rate of calves

Reproduction management

Potential genetics of females

Number of cows

<12 months

12 -18 months

18 - 48 months

<48months

Yield from pastures

Calf/acre production

Duration of grazing

Cost of feed and raising animals

Nitrogen fertilizing

Liming

Renovation (Re-seeding)

Tile & surface drainage

< 12 months

12 - 24 months

12 - 24 months

36 - 72 months

Yields from hay fields

Feeding capacity (cow/ha cultivated)

Duration of harvesting work

Cost of producing forages

Nitrogen fertilizing

Liming

Tile & surface drainage

< 12 months

12 - 24 months

36 – 72 months

xx

xx

xx

x

xx

x

xx

xx

xx

x

FIGURE 1 Betty and Jos’ decision-making tree

Potential annual profit

53 %+ 15 lbs/calf X 135 calves

X $2/lbs = $4,050

Amount invested:

$7,500

Savings: 165 cows

X 21 d X $2.20/cow/d

= $7,623

Fertilize 60 ha (100 kg/ha urea)

re-seeding 15 ha (Élite Cow-Calf Pasture mix)

Lime 20 ha (2.5 tonnes/ha)

- 200 bales

- labour

- renovating feeding sites in fields

+ 21 d of grazing

15 kg D.M./d

X 165 cows X 21 d


By Bruno Langlois, agronomist, La Coop fédérée

When prices paid

by slaughterhouses are higher,

the opportunity to add

weight to a carcass may

be more affordable.

Nonetheless, the financial

advantage may melt away

like snow in spring if a solid

livestock and economic

performance cannot be

maintained throughout

the period that the animal

is raised.*

Basic concepts

I’m not telling you anything you don’t already know by saying that feed effi-ciency and the total cost of weight gain are excellent performance indicators. Figure 1 shows that the daily gain for each day spent in the feedlot becomes the determining element in the equation.

Daily consumption is a function of the energy concentrated in the ration and often acts as a constant. In practice, the nutritional parameters of a well-ba-lanced ration “push up against” their maximum levels. During this period, the differences in performance are generally explained by the quality of diet, the ani-mals’ comfort (see the article by Jason Brock on page 6) and genetics.

It’s more the first and last month of raising an animal that contains certain issues regarding weight gain. In other words, to capture the unrealized daily gain through each of the 58 days, we must push very hard for the remaining time (Table 1).

In an “It could be worse” scenario, there must be an excellent quality diet, excel-lent genetics and excellent comfort in order to maintain a very high ADG during more than 4 consecutive months, if the ADG is not high in the period when cal-ves are first on feed in the feedlot and just before being sent to the abattoir.

In practice, in this type of scenario, the rate decreases on some occasions during the mid-term. Therefore, the producer ends up with a lighter carcass or must extend the time to raise the animal with a significant increase in costs.

Feedlot operators understand this well. Some have modified their implant strategy and use ractopamine (Opta-flexx). In doing so, they put themselves in an “it could still be better!” scenario. In this case, an improvement in results comes from leveraging metabolic effi-ciency. It now remains to get to work during the period when the calves are first on feed so that the “WOW” scenario can be achieved.

Starting calves in the feedlot

Antibiotics now available on the market allow for better health management during this critical production phase. However, are low rates of morbidity and mortality enough to qualify the period when calves start on feed as successful? Not necessarily.

In fact, Table 2 shows that the ADG for each healthy calf has a lot more impact on the ADG of the group than the num-ber of sick animals. The message is not to stop protecting the calves’ health, but rather to focus on their feeding for the first 28 days.

Impact of gain when starting

calves in the feedlot

*Magazine Opti Bœuf, issue 2015 01

10SUPPLEMENT201511


La Coop PSP (productive, simple, perso-nalized) program for the period when calves start on feed is characterized by the amount of organic selenium, B com-plex vitamins and many other nutrients they require. It allows calves to quickly show their potential gain and also helps them to more effectively convert vacci-nation into immunization.

Furthermore, the wide range of avai-lable products (Intro-Parc Mineral and Supplement, PSP 028 Supplement, with or without ionophores, with or without natural feed additives, etc.) allows us to build you a program in terms of the level of risk for animals purchased and the markets being targeted.

Remember the tale of the tortoise and the hare: “There’s no point in running; it’s important to leave on time!” Talk about this with your La Coop expert-advisor. ■

SUPPLEMENT201511

11

TABLE 1 Impact of gain in the beginning and at the end of raising the animal, over the final average daily gain for one 200-day production period and an ADG of 3.9lb (Total gain of 780lb)

Scenarios

ADG “It could be worse!” “It could still be better!” “WOW!”

Actual 0 – 28 d (lbs) 2 2 3.2

Actual 170 – 200 d (lbs) 3.2 3.7 3.7

Needed 29 – 169 d (lbs) 4.42 4.32 4.08

QDCG 29 – 169 d* +++ ++ +

* Quality of diet, comfort and genetics required to achieve goal

TABLE 2 Impact of morbidity and gain at start of animals in the feedlot (28 days for a group of 100 calves)

Scenarios

Disastrous Good Better

Sick calves 30 15 15

ADG of sick calves (lbs) 1.07 1.07 1.07

Gain of sick calves (lbs/calf) 35 35 35

ADG of healthy calves (lbs) 2.5 2.5 3.2

Gain of healthy calves (lbs/calf) 70 70 90

ADG of the group 2.1 2.3 2.91

FIGURE 1 Equation components for feed efficiency, daily gain and total cost of gain

Feed efficiency = Total gain (lb)/ Feed consumed (lb)

Total gain = Day 1 gain + Day 2 gain + Day 3 gain +…+ Day x* gain

Daily gain = (consumption of ration X concentration of nutrients X metabolic efficiency) – maintenance needs

Total cost of gain = (Feed + Financing + Veterinarian fees + Feedlot expenses)/day X production period

*x = number of days until slaughter = production period


w w w.o p tib o eu f.co o p The Co-op and Opti Boeuf are registered trademarks of La Coop fédérée.

The Co-op network offers you all the technical-economic expertise necessary to maximize the profitability of your enterprise by adapting its range of products to your goals.

Talk with one of our expert-advisor in cattle production for custom recommendations.

PROFITABILITYSTARTS

HERE

* For the list of specially marked Opti Boeuf products, ask your The Co-op expert-advisor. Equivalent discounts applicable for bulk orders.

Conditions apply. Only at participating cooperatives.

Order 13 units of the same specially-marked Opti Bœuf product, and only pay for 12*.

• Feed • Supplements • Minerals • Pro-Bloc

PROMOTION | October 1st to November 30th 2015

12 + 1 = 12


expertise starts here for beef producers success is …€¦ · 10 mcal, which means a weight loss...

Documents