optimum weaning weights

Help Support Steer Planet:

aj

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
6,420
Location
western kansas
This last week in Oakley, Kansas and Burlington Colorado........550 pound calves brought the same amount of dollars as 640 pound calves. Apparently the buyers want the lighter weights. So do we need to be pushing for maximum weaning weights and do we need to calve that extra month early. I realize that times differ.......prices of corn differ.....but does that extra 100 pounds pay off and what does it cost to get there. The feedlot people still want cattle that grow......but what is the optimum pay weight for the cow calf guy?
 
J

JTM

Guest
aj said:
This last week in Oakley, Kansas and Burlington Colorado........550 pound calves brought the same amount of dollars as 640 pound calves. Apparently the buyers want the lighter weights. So do we need to be pushing for maximum weaning weights and do we need to calve that extra month early. I realize that times differ.......prices of corn differ.....but does that extra 100 pounds pay off and what does it cost to get there. The feedlot people still want cattle that grow......but what is the optimum pay weight for the cow calf guy?
No we don't need the extra pounds. $$$ profit would be much better if you can get rid of those calves earlier. If you do you will have to feed less to the calves, have more pasture left over for the cows, and have more time to evaluate which ones stay and which ones go. With that said, I think the ultimate pay weight is actually at butcher time for me. We take major hits on our red calves but they are very valuable in a feed lot for converting feed and on the rail for quality and yield. Also, if we bring in "type" into the equation I would rather have more cows in a pasture with calves that wean at 550 than less cows in the same pasture with calves that wean 650. Your potential for more profit is with more cows not with more pounds per cow. When we race after growth a lot of undesirable things come along with taking care of those cattle. Those undesirable and untraceable traits cost money.
 

RyanChandler

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 6, 2011
Messages
3,457
Location
Pottsboro, TX
I think anytime this type of discussion comes up what always seems to be ignored is growth rate.  There is a tremendous amount of variation in calves growth rates even among calves out of cows of the same weight. Some 1200 pound cows will wean 30% of their body weight, some will wean 60%.  I agree it's generally poor practice to hold onto the 650 pound plus calves as you are never compensated enough for those additional pounds but if you do have 650lb calves, that doesn't necessarily mean you're using the wrong genetics,  it just means you should have (COULD HAVE) weaned them six weeks sooner.
 

cowboy_nyk

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 28, 2013
Messages
658
Location
Manitoba, Canada
Your markets are certainly different than our up here.  Our point of diminishing returns for marketing calves is generally closer to the 800lb mark.  I sold a handful of steers in September and the 750lb calf brought me $2,025.00 and a 513lb calf was $1523 with the same inputs.  Easy decision for me...
 

RyanChandler

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 6, 2011
Messages
3,457
Location
Pottsboro, TX
Definitely different for sure. I took some calves a month ago ranging from 465-590.  The 465 was the worst (looking) calf in the group and brought 48/cwt more than the 590# and ended up grossing $3 more.  With mid 4 weights bringing a dollar a pound more (than 8 weights), you might gross a hundred bucks holding on to a calf from 450 to 800. 
 

Medium Rare

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
459
Location
Missouri
It's fairly common for our market to leave the larger animals unrewarded as well.

It's why many producers sell unworked bawlers straight off the cow. The economics simply don't provide enough incentive to do the added work. It's the same reason creep feed generally doesn't pay on nonretained calves of good genetics.

I retain ownership on the better performing top half. The market doesn't reward me for the extra performance, so I might as well put the backgrounder's, feedlot's, and the sale commission checks in my pocket instead of theirs. Unless I dry lot background with a controlled ration, I can't even raise them as green as the buyers would like them to be. The way I see it, retained ownership is the best, maybe only, way to cash in on my genetic improvement work. I just sold a pair of fats a few pounds shy of 1,400lbs for what amounts to 1.77 live. If I had more time I'd concentrate on tapping into the end market on a much larger scale.

Like most cattle owners, livestock are a side job for me. Row crop work keeps me from being able to back the calving date into easier weather.
 

r.n.reed

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
611
Weight and price received are only part of the equation in determining optimum.The cost of production being the third part.Xbar referenced the percentage of the dams body weight weaned which I feel is one of the best measurements of this factor.
 

GoWyo

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 29, 2008
Messages
1,691
Location
Wyoming
aj said:
Pounds weaned per acre.......all this stuff is so hard to wrap up neatly.

Profit per acre.  Accounting for all of the costs is the hard part.
 

r.n.reed

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
611
Profit per acre is valuable but you need to evaluate the production or profitability of the individual cow. A manufacturing business might be profitable as a whole, but there may be production lines within that business that need more input to produce at an optimum level.You need to be able to make an informed decision on whether its time to repair or replace.
 

aj

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
6,420
Location
western kansas
I think the feedlots and back grounders around here competed so hard for a diminishing number of calves.......in order to keep teir doors open and employees hired they got burned last years. There were some losses of 400$ a head. I think it is now so cut throat that the feeders need that extra 100 pounds of gain to try and get back in the black. I think they know they are more effecient in putting on that extra 100 pounds and they have sent a message out of economic neccessity. There is just not enough cattle out there to sustain the number of feedlots. The longer they own the cattle the better chance of hitting a lick in there somewhere.
 
Top