OH Breeder said:
-XBAR- said:
I think its the way cows are FED in colder climates that is responsible for dystocia moreso than the cold weather itself. I just had a cow calve that was from Jungles that she herself had a 113 lb bw. I watched her like a hawk knowing I was in for a pull. Her bull calf weighed 68 lbs last week. She hasn't seen a drop of feed since last march.
For me it has been more of stage of gestation and temperatures verses diet. I tried to feed protein tubs and free choice hay verses milled feed. I had larger birth weights with tubs than grain. We had one of the mildest winters warmer than normal and our birth weights were down. Someone already stated what I have found to jbe true in a lot of the articles I have read- the colder temperature causing increase circulation / blood flow.
Im not disputing you but my question then becomes: With that mild winter, I would assume your cows nutrition requirements weren't as high therefore they had less intake? At least here, when the winters are mild, there is more forage available and I don't have to feed as much. When its snowing, those cows will stand at the hay ring all day. Those protein tubs, or at least the ones I use, are considerably higher protein that most any other feed source.
Cattle Cards said:
Just in time to confuse everyone some more. It has been my observation that the frame size of the cattle in the north seams to be larger than in the south. Like 5.5 frame scores in TX and closer to 7 in the midwest. Breeding larger cattle would also mean bigger calves. Is that correct? Do we have smaller cows, on average, in the south? Or am I imagining it?
Perhaps on average but mature weight/size has nothing to do with bw. I've ran both Gert and Brangus bulls over angus cross commercial cows. Both bulls were 8+ FS and if they threw a 80lb calf, it was a big one. I packed the Gert bull at 9 and he was a bag of bones- a 1950lb bag of bones.
