CATTLEFAX TRENDS

TIGHT CALVING DISTRIBUTION BENEFITS

The IBBA is proud to bring you the CattleFax Trends Publication. Look for this article each month in the Brangus Journal and Frontline Beef Producer. If you would like to learn more about CattleFax, please go to www.cattlefax.com.

Calving is a stressful yet rewarding time of the year, as producers get the first glimpse of the mating decisions that were made nearly a year ago. Many sleepless nights and potential weather challenges can make calving season seem like it drags on forever. However, calving season should create the opposite feeling. There are several benefits to setting the cowherd up for a tight calving distribution. The advantages to a shorter calving window positively impacts the cows, calves, labor resources, and ultimately an operation’s bottom line.

In a perfect world, most of the cows would calve within 45 days, while a more practical target is 60 days. The results from CattleFax’s annual Cow-Calf Survey show about 4345% of producers were able to achieve a 45-day calving season the last few years. Obviously, this is not feasible for every operation due to constraints from a logistics or facilities standpoint.

CattleFax breaks down the survey participants into three equal groups – high, average, and low – return producers, based on profitability. Last year, nearly half of the most profitable operations calved within 45 days, while another 36% were mostly completed by day 60. This left only 16% of high return producers that had a calving season that lasted 61 days or more. On the other hand, nearly a quarter of the least profitable operations calve for more than 61 days.

The main reason highreturn producers are placed in that category is because they find a way to be the most efficient. Those operations sell the most pounds – which is a function of headcount and weight, while still keeping costs in check. A lot of the reason for generating the most revenue stems to a tighter calving window. There are many factors that impact one of the most important measurements – weaned calves per cows exposed – but the accompanying chart shows there is a clear relationship between calf crop percentage and calving season length. This is mostly due to cows having more time to recover after calving. While the 2 percentage points from the middle and last interval in 2020 may not seem like much, it has a significant impact on profitability. For a 400-head cow operation, that is an additional eight calves to market and eight fewer replacements needed to maintain the herd. If replacements are retained from the calf crop, that also means more heifers are available to sell.

Over the years it is easy to see that high-return producers do not sacrifice nutrition and herd health, allowing those operations to maximize calf crop percent while still maintaining a short calving season. High-return operations are not only improving nutrition but improving nutrition management. For example, the day a cow gives birth, her nutrition requirements change drastically. Operations that separate cows and their calves from the still pregnant cows

allows for more focus to be put on the specific needs of pairs. The sooner pairs are separated, for cows to recover from calving, the better the breed back percentages should be. There are also significant health benefits for calves that comes with pairing out as well.

While on the topics of tighter calving window and paring out, it should be noted that reduced labor could also be another advantage, depending on the operation. Obviously, calving more cows in a shorter period of time will likely require a more intensive labor demand during that stretch. But a long-drawn-out calving season can lead to less interest being paid to the late bred cows and more attention on the pairs. With a tighter calving distribution, less labor is needed to care for the cows yet to calve – freeing up more time to manage the newborn calves and their dams.

Quality genetics is another area where high-return producers do not cut corners. The obvious measurement that supports this claim is the difference in bull costs between the most and least profitable operations. A higher quality bull battery coupled with strict management protocols regarding calving distribution, should equate to continued improvement in genetics in the cowherd, assuming replacements are retained. By culling females that fall outside of the tighter calving window, advancements in the single most important economical trait – fertility – will be made over time. The fact that nearly half of the high-return producers calve within 45 days and over 80% within 60 days, while still achieving the best weaned calf crop percent each year, supports this notion.

As mentioned earlier, the other way high-return producers market more pounds is via weaning weights, which is influenced by calving distribution along with other variables. The old rule of thumb is that a calf gains about two pounds per day, all else equal. Reducing the calving season by just 10 to 15 days should have a significant impact on your bottom line. Because the sample for the annual survey is made up of producers from all parts of the country, the change in weaning weights, depending on calving season length does not show a two-pound average daily gain for calves. However, every year there is clear evidence that heavier weaning weights come from herds with a tighter calving window. Based on the most recent survey results, decreasing the calving length from 60 days or more to less than 60 days caused weaning weights to increase by 25 pounds, on average. That is leaving a lot of money on the table. For instance, at $160/cwt that is a difference of $40 per calf. That is in addition to selling more head from the weaned calf crop discussion earlier in the article.

A uniform calf crop should also improve the marketability of the calves. Buyers want to purchase load lots of even calves so they can all be managed the same way. Few people truly want to pull half the cattle from grazing because some are getting too big while the rest still have more time due to a large variation in starting weights. The same goes for a feedlot setting, as it requires more time, labor, and puts unnecessary stress on cattle if sorting is required. If a uniform set of calves are put on-feed, in theory, there should be minimal differences in performance and conversion from a maturity and weight standpoint – keeping costs in check.

Transitioning to a tighter calving distribution is no simple task and will take time. It is not recommended to make major changes in one year, due to some additional costs or lost revenue associated with the process. But it is important to have a plan. Shortening the breeding season by ten days each of the next few years is one strategy that could be implemented. This year may present an opportunity to begin the process because of the summer weather outlook. Currently, hot, and dry conditions are forecast for a large portion of cow-calf country, especially in the Southern Plains and most of the Rocky Mountain region. If Mother Nature is going to force culling, turning bulls out for less time will make the decision easier as far as which cows go to town. Another option is to utilize your veterinarian’s skills and technology to cull late-bred cows at the time of preg checking. Nonetheless, an operation with a long calving season should seriously consider implementing a strategy to capitalize on the many advantages of a tight calving distribution.