Interesting reading on Sullivan flyer !!!!!

Help Support Steer Planet:

GONEWEST

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 24, 2008
Messages
921
Location
GEORGIA
NATE:

Not many cattle get slaughtered NOW at a year old, but in  he 80's and early 90's they did. That's back when all the cattle were too big and all that. Steers should be able to go to the feedlot RIGHT AFTER WEANING. And be slaughtered at 13 mos., 1200 - 1300 lbs.  Not to some wheat / rye grass pasture in OK to live 6 mos. And then killed at 20 mos. But that's what happens today. Of course those big cattle won't work for most areas of the country where cattle are raised today. But in reducing frame size to the 4 frame bull in that Loving sale catalog, you have reduced growth to an unacceptable point. And it may not be as simple to YOU as more pounds = more dollars, but there has never, ever, not once been a quality grid negotiated that will pay for 25 -30 extra pounds of carcass weight, and have a black hide. PLUS with the price of corn and the use of alternative feeds in feedlots, the high quality carcass is becoming less and less common. All the carcass genetics on the planet won't surpass days on corn as the main ingredient to a British cross quality carcass. So to anyone that sells POUNDS of product, it IS about pounds produced PER production unit. Someone on another thread listed some kind of low line data where you could stock twice as many of those on an acre so even though they were small, they produced more pounds per acre. That is of course flawed logic because there are fixed costs per production unit that aren't related to size. For example a bull isn't going to cover 80 cows just because they are half as big as a normal animal, etc.  As far as EPD's go,  in any breed many question the accuracy of the EPD's. They are only as good as the data that they are made up of. NO ONE  with their head out of the sand believes that their is enough accurate reporting of data to make the EPD's accurate. Then each breed has some bias in their model. Like the some of bloodlines for high carcass numbers in Angus cattle. There are lots of these rich guy high dollar Angus farms near me that go for these carcass numbers. Sorriest cattle you've ever seen. Ridgeback, slab sided, hard doing,  hocks hit together when they walk. They might get a high YIELDING carcass, but thats it. And the Simmental with the bias built in to the EPD's with how high growth effects milk numbers. There was a recent two page article int he register from the association explaining how it would all work out..........when the cow was about 15 and IF you used the right bulls that had data to compare. So forgive me if I don't put too much faith in $EN.

As far as docility goes, I helped a buddy work ten shorthorn weanlings yesterday. They had been weaned and hand fed for for about a month. Very calm, it seemed. When we got them into a tight space it was like a rodeo. Many Angus are very calm. Just like anything else we talk about, it comes down to the individual situation, what you have to work with and what you expect to get out of it. Some expect an ideal pristine  breed. I expect money.

RN:

Thursday I sold my worst bull calf at the sale barn. He was 1/2 Simmental (double half blood), born mid September, solid black, horned, bull with club calf hair. He weighed 515 lbs. He brought 1.71 a pound, $880.65. That's in GA where we get docked heavy for transportation costs. If that is what my worst 5 month old calf brings at the sale barn, I sure wish they would push back some more. All it would take for this calf to finish at 1200 in 13 mos is to take him straight to the feed lot and skip the wheat pasture miiddle man.  I don't remember what the load of 8 0r 9 weight black Simmentals brought in SD last week, but I'll find out and post it here for you. When you can drag one of those little short, fat red ones to the sale barn at 5 months old and get $900 for him, then maybe you can discuss performance.

As to FULL OF BS:

If feed cost .14 a pound and your pre weaning calf is an AVERAGE feed converter, every dollar you spend feeding him makes you $3.50. If your calf can gain his full potential on a cheaper feed source then that would be great.



 

r.n.reed

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
611
GW,  Great horse by the way,We could trade #s all day.I keep my wheatback pennies in a trophy I won for a heifer that weaned a 722# calf.Its cold today so I'm wearing the jacket I won for my bull that was the top gainer in a bull test out in Oregon,gained over 5#s a day for the whole test.My inbred regressive odds and ends topped the local sale here a couple weeks ago selling a minimum of .20/lb over anything with exotic blood and every week since I have had trailers stopping in the yard on their way to or from the sale barn wanting to know if I have any more.Can't even take my Thurs.aft.nap anymore :)These might be impressive statements but they do not gaurantee in all scenarios that I would of made the maximum profit.Every cattleman has to be continuosly evaluating their operation and making changes to survive and looking at the big picture.I can hardly believe myself that those feedlots would be hesitant on buying those simi steers.They are evidently punching#s that make them hesitant to jump in though.Like you have said before the buck decides.Are you sure you don't want to get in on the Shorthorn thing while its still on the ground floor :)
 

nate53

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 26, 2011
Messages
419
Location
North East, Missouri
GONEWEST said:
NATE:

Not many cattle get slaughtered NOW at a year old, but in  he 80's and early 90's they did. That's back when all the cattle were too big and all that. Steers should be able to go to the feedlot RIGHT AFTER WEANING. And be slaughtered at 13 mos., 1200 - 1300 lbs.   Not to some wheat / rye grass pasture in OK to live 6 mos. And then killed at 20 mos. But that's what happens today. Of course those big cattle won't work for most areas of the country where cattle are raised today. But in reducing frame size to the 4 frame bull in that Loving sale catalog, you have reduced growth to an unacceptable point. And it may not be as simple to YOU as more pounds = more dollars, but there has never, ever, not once been a quality grid negotiated that will pay for 25 -30 extra pounds of carcass weight, and have a black hide. PLUS with the price of corn and the use of alternative feeds in feedlots, the high quality carcass is becoming less and less common. All the carcass genetics on the planet won't surpass days on corn as the main ingredient to a British cross quality carcass. So to anyone that sells POUNDS of product, it IS about pounds produced PER production unit.

1.  You are right not many, as in basically none are harvested at a year of age.  Too much money left on the table at this point.
2.  Your statement about more pounds = more dollars and that the grid has never made up for 25 - 30 extra carcass lbs. would be correct, you just need to get closer to 100 extra carcass lbs.  Unless your not comparing selling hot carcass weight off grid with no premiums to selling it on the grid with premiums??  I know of people who have gotten $220 in premiums per head on the grid within the past six months (these were not 4 frames), they would have been 5-6 frame
3.  Their is more cattle grading choice or higher over the past few years than ever before (look it up USDA)
4.   It is about pounds produced per production unit minus cost and you have to compare apples to apples (as in quality on the grid to quality on the grid - quality at the sale barn to quality at the salebarn).  Because those 1300lb sale barn cattle might just be worth more than those 1400lb sale barn cattle when analyzed on the grid and then again they might not be its just not as simple as that.   ;)
5.  In general you are correct but their are cattle out there that are exceptions to this rule.
6.  Maybe shorthorns need more performance in the first year (maybe), but the mature weights don't need anymore (at least from the limited amount that I've seen)
7.  Cattle prices are good! :)
8.  R.N. Reed keep doing what you are doing! 8)

 

mark tenenbaum

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 23, 2009
Messages
5,765
Location
Virginia Sometimes Iowa and Kansas
Substantiated and notorized in Georgia? Why would you have to have the performance of commercial cattle notarized? I didnt have alot of cattle-but here are a few names of bulls over the years-the last 2 being raised by Mark Mueller-DMCC- Now some of these cattle were in the early to mid 90s and things have changed-but not all of them were large framed. UB Fleetfoot-sire Byland Goldwalk,Dam-Byland Lavender-BW(at Byland) 85-205 actual-850wieghed at Annefield Angus, UB Bullington-Sire Deertrail Awesome-same dam-Bw 83-205wt-738, UB Kamalla-Sire AF Warrior Dam Byland Marjorie-bw 105-WW Wieght 836, UB MAD MAX-BW 96-ww wieght-838  at Annfield LIKE ALL THE OTHERS 2010:UBDMCCPanama Red-bw 83-ww 738 UBDMCC Cold Shot-Sire ALM Chiller,Dam Deertrail Roan rose by UB Junior Walker BW 88-ww 678 yw 1178-a bunch of hiefers over the years-yearling wts adjusted at shows such as Louisville,Denver,Illinois State fair etc.As far as registered Shorthorns out of the above bulls or thier progeny there are more by some than others-but bulls like Mad Max-and JR Walker had alot of descendents-in the hundreds.Basically using  the Loving herd numbers dosent make for much discussion even for the Shorthorns in Kansas.-Theres a breeder called Kieth Lauer who has kept an extremely documented herd for 30 plus years,and sells alot of commercial bulls,his cattle go way beyond the 1000 pound yearlings etc. We had some of his cows-and Ed Grathwohl sold him a good number of bulls.PS-if you ever travel through Iowa-count how many feedlots have uniform sized Holstien steers(-EAT MOR CHIKKKEN)-So if you are that concerned about the dollar only-and beef/carcass quality dont come into play-youd make a lot more money backgrounding holstien steers and retaining ownership.Holstien bull calves arent even as popular as Shorthorns. And lets skip the spelling and puncuation:your last entry had some miscues that just swished my prissy demeanor,and almost loosened my loafers. O0
 

trevorgreycattleco

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 22, 2010
Messages
2,070
Location
Centerburg, Ohio
Gonewest, good points but I dont think I agree with you. thats the beauty of America. Your opinion is what shorthorn breeders face all the time. We need to put the proof on paper such as Mr Reed and Mr Tenenbaum just did. Simmentals are just another branch of angus to me anymore. My buddy had simmys for years. He now runs angus because he said he couldnt tell the difference anymore and the angus just held up better. just a opinion. you sound like your making money. good for you. Maybe just maybe a Kansas pasture cant provide a 800 lb ww without extra feed? Just a guess. Does Gardiner Angus have lots of 800+ lb ww?
 

RyanChandler

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 6, 2011
Messages
3,457
Location
Pottsboro, TX
r.n.reed said:
Chandler said:
r.n.reed said:
I will correct my mistake,thank you for calling that to my attention.

Im sorry to see you say that Mr. Kaper,  I couldn't have agreed with you more.  
Chandler,I am sorry you are disapointed.I do not begrudge someone elses success in a business venture and what someone else does or the legacy they leave has no impact on my personal goals or the direction I am taking my herd and a very small impact on its success.
Owell you made if up by using the word "begrudge.". Everytime I hear the word all I can think about is a a caller on a radio show talking about the Clinton/lewinski scandal... The caller says, in an ethnic  O0 voice, " I don't like being lied to, but I can't begrudge a man for gettin  some bootay!"  It's been a decade and I still laugh my ass off!
 

GONEWEST

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 24, 2008
Messages
921
Location
GEORGIA
Nate:

I'm with you on everything about more cattle grading choice. Of course I don't work n a slaughter house and grade carcasses. But I read about it all the time and read about how new feed stuffs don't finish cattle as well as corn. I read about the demand for choice beef being down and I read cattle being killed after less days on feed because feed costs so much? But I have no first hand knowledge and I can't find anything from the USDA, but that's ok.

RN:
Yes he was a good horse. It was a sad day when he got sick. Thought he was going to be ok but it didnt turn out that way.

I'm sincerely proud for you about winning your trophy and jacket for and for your achievements. But they don't give trophies here to bulls that gain 5 pounds or heifers that wean 700 pound calves. It is just the difference in environment I am sure.  And congratulations on topping your sale barn by .20/ lb. I don't believe i have ever seen a set of calves top all the rest of the animals at a sale barn by that much. I think it's great.

But you really didn't address my point with any of those. If they topped the sale per pound and still only brought $600 a head that's not so good. If they were 8 mos old and were 5 weight calves that's still not so good. What I said was when one of those little fat red ones brings you $900 at 5 months old, then they will be up to par. I understand that some areas don't have the resources for that, but no one ever says, " This type of animal works best for ME, where I am." Instead it's just "this is what I got and it's the best." Or someone tries to belittle others who do something different than they do, yet could buy and sell them. That's what these discussions turn into without fail.

Mark:

I am not sure where you got the commercial cattle thing from. Every mediocre example you've given in your two posts are from registered bulls. Why did you think I was having weights so closely monitored on commercial cattle? But the reason it was so closely accounted for is that we knew we were near a world record actual 205 day weight. So that's why it was documented so closely. I'm not sure what your point is in continually listing all these bulls and their weights or what the importance is of listing someone who raised bulls over 1000 pounds at yearling??? And I wasn't trying to correct your spelling OR punctuation. I was pointing out your use, or lack their of, of the English language. It wasn't a misspelled word, a typo, or a comma out of place. I have no reason to do that.

Trevor:

I would agree more than you know that may Simmental cattle have been dumbed down to Angus standards on growth and milk and how stupid it was for the breed leadership to take it in that direction. If you will read all of my posts concerning this topic I specifically mentioned that KS and other places as well don't have the resources to support maximum performance. What I ALSO said was that you are just leaving money on the table if you do NOT supply that extra feed. And the point was if you don't have animals that can take advantage of that extra feed, you're not making as much as you could be. I showed mathematically using high feed costs and conservative feed efficiency numbers how every dollar of feed they eat returns 2 to three and a half times your investment at current prices. It's math. It's not debatable. My point was that in these particular KS cattle, only three bulls had a chance to produce calves that could take advantage of the ability to gain weight according to their numbers. They happened to be the three largest framed bulls in the catalog. I'm not sure what you meant by I need to put proof on paper like Mr. Reed and Marky Mark. But if you will explain it to me I will try to give you what you want.

 

trevorgreycattleco

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 22, 2010
Messages
2,070
Location
Centerburg, Ohio
gonewest, I wes referring to any shorthorn breeder. We need lots of folks to put on paper what their shorthorns are really doing such as the two gentleman did earlier. I for one have enjoyed reading your thoughts and crunching your numbers. Its food for thought for sure. Always room for improvement.
 

mark tenenbaum

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 23, 2009
Messages
5,765
Location
Virginia Sometimes Iowa and Kansas
Oh I guess we need to interpret between wether and weather-so that the rest of the mere mortals on here understand.The punctuation etc were basically things I saw in your responses,which most people on here dont care about one way or the other-and are pretty much irrelevent to the ideas being put across. The discussion per se-is about purebred( registered) cattle on the Shorthorn end,and the examples I listed are are facts plain and simple.There are also a good number of cattle related to some of the ones listed,that were also documented,its not fool proof,but its a tool,thats one reason people register cattle.So the mediocroty stems from your pompous assertion that only simm cross and or black unregistered cattle make any sense to the cattle industry or perform at any level. It must be a real feat to keep a consistent group of progeny when you dont know the breeding.  One of the bulls listed spent his life breeding commercial cows,and being a roan,some of the calves got docked,but the owner was really happy because they all outgrew the calves out of Angus bulls,so he ended up making more $ . The blue roans he had broke the bank,there again,this was in Maryland and Va. Weve also bred them to Maines,Angus,and Simmx-some of them got there quicker to start,but by the time they were yearlings,it really was dependent upon the cow side,(genetics again)and the differances were not more than 50-60 pounds either way,and sometimes the opposite on the ones that got fed out. By the way-how are the BWS on the simmi crosses that grow like that: must be a purebred back in the woodpile.Granted the registered Simms have come along way in that dept. according to thier breeders.There again a 6-7 month old bull that wieghs upwards of 700 pounds still is not some unique unreachable goal with the calves alot of people have had lately-even though thier dams may be smaller framed than the ones in the past. O0
 

TwinMaple

Active member
Joined
Nov 24, 2008
Messages
29
trevorgreycattleco said:
gonewest, I wes referring to any shorthorn breeder. We need lots of folks to put on paper what their shorthorns are really doing such as the two gentleman did earlier. I for one have enjoyed reading your thoughts and crunching your numbers. Its food for thought for sure. Always room for improvement.

Trevorgrey:
Thought I'd put on paper what our Shorthorns did from last year's calf crop. First of all we do not creep feed our calves - what you see is done on moma's milk and grass only.
31 calves - all sired by our Shorthorn bull, Muridale Touchdown (a Saskvalley Bonanza son) out of Shorthorn cows
Calves born from January to April
All weaned in October with the exception of one bull calf weaned Sept 1

7 calves weaned over 800 pounds.... (4 heifers, 2 steers, 1 bull)
6 calves weaned over 700 pounds.... (2 heifers, 3 steers, 1 bull)
11 calves weaned over 600 pounds...( 7 heifers, 4 steers)
6 calves weaned over 500 pounds ....(1 heifer, 5 steers)
1 heifer (twin with bull) weaned over 400 pounds


 

Attachments

  • 2011 Weaning Weights.jpg
    2011 Weaning Weights.jpg
    450.8 KB · Views: 265

RyanChandler

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 6, 2011
Messages
3,457
Location
Pottsboro, TX
You do realize some of those calves listed were 10 MONTHS OLD when you recorded weaning weights, right??  A more accurate weaning weight would be about 65% of what's listed.
 

knabe

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
13,639
Location
Hollister, CA
Isn't weaning 205 days

Does one have to actually wean cattle to report a weaning weight at 205 days?

Since weaning is done on the same day, but birth wieghts are on multiple days, most weaning weights are adjusted.

How do people decide when to wean?  When the average is close to 205 or just when convenient, or measure actual 205 and wean whenever they want on an individual basis?
 

TwinMaple

Active member
Joined
Nov 24, 2008
Messages
29
Chandler said:
You do realize some of those calves listed were 10 MONTHS OLD when you recorded weaning weights, right??   A more accurate weaning weight would be about 65% of what's listed.

Sorry, I thought it would be obvious that the weights were not adjusted weaning weights. They are the actual weights of the calves as
they ran across the scales the day we took them off their mothers - the weights we would be paid on if there were a buyer there
that day.
 

mark tenenbaum

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 23, 2009
Messages
5,765
Location
Virginia Sometimes Iowa and Kansas
The 205 day wts on a couple of mine that were listed were on or within 1 day of 205 days,all of the calves had been weaned at 6 months +-. In alot of breeds-the 205 day wt is the weaning wt. or as adjusted by the date of wieghing.Those are good numbers by todays standards by Twin Maple-for any breed. I have assimilated this opinion from reading sale reports etc from alot of different breeds. Too bad these calves are registered,making them "mediocre",or,if you havent completed the paperwork-maybe they are OK,but still  subject to an array of equally juvenile stipulations. (lol) O0
 

r.n.reed

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
611
GW,  I f you would of carefully read my post you would of seen my comment that the data I posted did not guarantee the maximum profit.They were just put out there to point out the meaninglessness of your story about the 500lb calf that sold for 800 plus dollars.What was his dams calving interval, c-section or natural birth,avg feed cost per cow,creep fed or not,cost of creep feed,age at weaning,was the calf ever sick and require treatment,did you have to make a special trip to the sale barn because he wasn't;t ready with the others,did he freak out because he was by himself and break 3 8.00 2x6's
This whole deal started because you jumped on a few of us for not adhering to the Sullivan doctrine and dared to think differently based on our own operations and what is real in our own world.
Are you any different for knocking the Loving cattle without going through the details of their operation as well as every potential buyers program as well?
The feedlot buyers in Texas that were brought up by Chambero, a non Shorthorn breeder mind you,did not just wake up one day and say were not going to buy Black Simis.I f they are going to stay in business they looked hard at the past history of that type of cattle,their projected cost per day and potential days on feed and sale price and decided to bid more for english cattle.The next feedlot might do it totally different.One cookie cutter size does not fit all operations and once again the dollar decides.
My calves sold .20/lb over exotic influenced calves,maybe not a true test as there were not many there and 4to5 over the other english calves.Not sure where you came up with the 600.00 figure on my calves.5 wght.calves bring a lot more than that,especially when they top the sale.
 

GONEWEST

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 24, 2008
Messages
921
Location
GEORGIA
r.n.reed said:
GW,  I f you would of carefully read my post you would of seen my comment that the data I posted did not guarantee the maximum profit.They were just put out there to point out the meaninglessness of your story about the 500lb calf that sold for 800 plus dollars.What was his dams calving interval, c-section or natural birth,avg feed cost per cow,creep fed or not,cost of creep feed,age at weaning,was the calf ever sick and require treatment,did you have to make a special trip to the sale barn because he wasn't;t ready with the others,did he freak out because he was by himself and break 3 8.00 2x6's
This whole deal started because you jumped on a few of us for not adhering to the Sullivan doctrine and dared to think differently based on our own operations and what is real in our own world.
Are you any different for knocking the Loving cattle without going through the details of their operation as well as every potential buyers program as well?
The feedlot buyers in Texas that were brought up by Chambero, a non Shorthorn breeder mind you,did not just wake up one day and say were not going to buy Black Simis.I f they are going to stay in business they looked hard at the past history of that type of cattle,their projected cost per day and potential days on feed and sale price and decided to bid more for english cattle.The next feedlot might do it totally different.One cookie cutter size does not fit all operations and once again the dollar decides.
My calves sold .20/lb over exotic influenced calves,maybe not a true test as there were not many there and 4to5 over the other english calves.Not sure where you came up with the 600.00 figure on my calves.5 wght.calves bring a lot more than that,especially when they top the sale.

RN:

I guessed $600 because you didn't say anywhere what they weighed and I figured your "inbred regressive odds and ends" would have weighed in the 4 range at the same age. Of course they would have to be the same AGE and not the same WEIGHT for your comparison to have any meaning. As far as "jumping on" anyone for the sake of Sullivans it's not true. Do I believe cattle that weigh more put more money in the producers pocket no matter the production scenario, I do. Some will weigh 800 and some will weigh 400. But their counter parts that weigh 600 and 300 won't make as much. It's not about which one weighs the most no matter what, its about which one weighs the most within the parameters of each set of circumstances, wouldn't you agree to that or not? As to the Lovings, you can't find a single derogatory remark I made about that program. That was the set of animals that was given as an example. All I did was use that set to show that the bulls that would have made the most money for their owners according to the numbers were the 3 bulls that happened to be the largest framed bulls and the least profitable animal would have been the lower framed bull. I thought it was a great group for this discussion because it is obviously a production oriented program, its in a low resource location,  and the breeding is similar among all the bull listed. I think it's a great set for this discussion. There are high performing animals and low performing animals all in the same production scenario. Which ones do YOU think would have made the most money for their owner if they would have been steers and sold at the same age?

Sullivan just seems to be a target on this venue because it pertains to shorthorns. What I THOUGHT the original post was about was the statement that the breed needs more performance and it just happened to be made by Sullivan. I would agree with that statement WHETHER it was made by him or someone else, even President Obama. If you can't agree that the highest performing animals within a group are the most profitable, we will have to just agree to disagree and live in separate worlds. Nothing wrong with that.
 

r.n.reed

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
611
GW, I still say the total picture needs to be evaluated to truly measure profit,I guess we will agree to disagree.The calves  were aprox 6 mo old.
What are your thoughts on Midnight Lute as a stallion?
 

PDJ

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 14, 2011
Messages
124
As a side note, did anyone else notice that the Loving bull with the 4 frame was out of a 14 month old heifer?  Wonder what affect this would have on both the 64 pound birthweight and the small frame size...
 

OH Breeder

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 14, 2007
Messages
5,954
Location
Ada, Ohio
PDJ said:
As a side note, did anyone else notice that the Loving bull with the 3.25 frame was out of a 14 month old heifer?  Wonder what affect this would have on both the 64 pound birthweight and the small frame size...

Lot 12 catalog said FS 4 or am I missing something?
 

sue

Well-known member
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
1,906
TwinMaple said:
Chandler said:
You do realize some of those calves listed were 10 MONTHS OLD when you recorded weaning weights, right??   A more accurate weaning weight would be about 65% of what's listed.

Sorry, I thought it would be obvious that the weights were not adjusted weaning weights. They are the actual weights of the calves as
they ran across the scales the day we took them off their mothers - the weights we would be paid on if there were a buyer there
that day.
No creep fella  no creep feeders at this point means alot to me in this business... not saying I have gas in th e car and I ready to buy a bull from this deal... but we can see in some shape the mama's are doing something ( i just hope they dont weigh 2200 lbs?)  . 
 
Top