Seedstock

How Data, Genomics and Collaboration Are Transforming Cattle Genetics and Herd Profitability

Tue, 18 Nov 2025 14:50:11 GMT

Avoiding the pitfalls of the past, Marty Ropp and his team at Allied Genetic Resources (AGR) integrate science, service and transparency to advance genetic potential across the beef supply chain.

Ropp was the featured guest in “ The Future of Beef Show ” podcast, episode 14 .

Ropp and the podcast hosts explore the evolution and future directions of genetic improvement in the beef industry. He shares his unique journey from swine to beef genetics, emphasizing the critical role that data, technology and customer collaboration play in driving progress and profitability for ranchers and the broader supply chain.

Raised in the pig genetics industry, his formative years included education at Bethel College, Kansas State University and the University of Missouri, where he earned a master’s in pig genetics. In 1998, a pivotal year for the pork industry when market collapse forced many out of business, Ropp transitioned into beef genetics, thanks in large part to Jerry Lipsey, former American Simmental Association (ASA) CEO. Ropp says his 12 years at ASA set the stage for his founding AGR in 2010.

Lessons Learned

The 1998 crisis in pork is a foundational lesson for Ropp. He describes how the industry’s failure to adopt technology, gather and apply data, and engage with customers led to widespread business failures. Many pig genetics providers focused on tradition and appearance, neglecting scientific data and market signals — ultimately opening the door for larger, technology-driven players who could deliver what the market needed.

He says this experience shaped his determination to avoid repeating those mistakes.

“This is not sustainable, and it won’t last, and then it didn’t,” Ropp explains. “And so, I’ve been trying to apply that thought process to what I do in the beef industry ever since.”

What is AGR?

AGR is a member-owned company designed to be a full-service genetic provider for the beef industry, offering services and products that help ranchers and cattle producers improve genetics, collect and apply data, and ultimately increase the profitability and value of their herds. The company combines seedstock, feeder calf marketing, genomics and data services under one umbrella, with an emphasis on actionable genetics, customer support and continuous innovation.

He explains he started AGR because he saw critical gaps in the genetics industry.

“The idea that genetics providers needed to do more than just what they were doing, which was making what they wanted to make, and marketing them as the best genetics in the world — they needed to build closer relationships with their customers, and ultimately become part of the food business, part of the supply chain,” Ropp says.

AGR’s core mission is to increase the total value across the beef industry through better genetics, rather than simply re-distributing existing value among producers and stakeholders.

“Our program is designed to add to that pie, take cost out and add income,” Ropp summarizes. “Anything like being more involved with systems farther down chain, try to get more value from the genetics that we’ve produced and our customers make — anything like that has to be in our future plan.”

Here are some key takeaways from the discussion:

1. Data and technology drive progress. The future of cattle breeding relies on rigorous genetic evaluations, genomic testing and using data to improve both profitability and sustainability for ranchers and producers.

“We 100% believe in the genetic and genetic evaluation of data and genomic evaluation — 100% use that data to prove sires move forward as fast as they can on the back end. Then the feedback has to come,” Ropp says. “That data-driven genetic improvement for the future is what we need, and that’s how we stay engaged.”

2. Customer relationships and service. AGR emphasizes close, long-term relationships with customers, helping them through customized genetic evaluation, actionable recommendations and support services extending beyond seedstock sales.

3. Value creation through data. Collecting and utilizing high-quality commercial and seedstock data is critical. However, data’s value depends on creating actionable insights that directly improve breeding decisions and market outcomes, rather than simply accumulating or selling raw data.

“The data is necessary and valuable,” Ropp says. “But again, if you can’t feed that into a system that pays for improvement down chain, then that data is only valuable from a cost reduction ... and not really from an industry participation standpoint.”

4. Genomics for all sectors. While genomics is standard among seedstock producers, new efforts like the Right Bull program are bringing actionable, simplified genomics solutions to commercial producers, even in group-managed operations.

“Investment in genomics by itself does not drive any profitability; those genomics have to be used in tools and actionable tools that you can take advantage of immediately,” he says.

For more about the Right Bull program: Avoid Costly Bull Mistakes: Genomic Solutions for Smarter Ranching

5. Feedback loops and incentives. Effective genetic improvement requires a feedback loop where improvements lead to measurable value for the commercial producer: higher calf prices better conception rates, incentivizing continued participation.

6. Industry collaboration and partnerships. AGR and its divisions actively work with both members and non-owners, as well as with technology companies, breed associations and other stakeholders to advance genetic progress across the beef industry.

Ropp sees a need for more comprehensive commercial data, better feedback loops and systems that translate genetic progress into tangible rewards for producers. He advocates continuous innovation — using new technologies, transparent service models and collaborative partnerships to ensure that genetic improvements benefit the entire industry, not just a select few.

Check out the podcast to learn more about Ropp’s strategy of fusing technology, data and expert service to deliver actionable solutions helping ranchers achieve sustainable profitability and industry resilience.

How Three Ranches are Using Horses Today

Wed, 15 Oct 2025 18:28:37 GMT

The use of horses on the ranch is a tool that continues to be essential on many ranches today. Though it is a time-honored tradition for many, it is also how large ranches with diverse terrain manage daily cattle operations.

Horses are used in a variety of ways depending on the location and size of the ranch. At K4 Ranch, located 35 miles north of Prescott, Ariz., horses are used daily on their nearly 1 million acres where they manage cattle. In business since 1941, horses have been a staple to their functionality resulting in the addition of raising quarter horses.

“We raise a large number of horses to be used primarily for ranch work and secondly our production sale, The Legacy Ranch Horse Sale,” says Sarah Kieckhefer of K4 Ranches. “It is very important to us to raise performance horses that we use first and foremost as ranch horses for a solid foundation before we go into the arena or for breeding.”

Using horses to check and gather cattle is typically their only option with the rugged terrain.

“We use horses for everything involving cattle,” Kieckhefer says. “Our country in Arizona and California is rough terrain with mountains and ravines so motorized vehicles just don’t work.”

Their Diamond A Ranch, a division of K4 Ranch is the largest ranch in Arizona, running their largest number of cows and employs a large crew with seasonal cowboys and eight camps with full-time cowboys. They also have ranches in California and Oklahoma that they run cows and stocker cattle on.

“On our large ranches with rough or brushy terrain, a good horse can go where a pickup, ATV or side-by-side can’t,” Kieckhefer explains. “Horses can cover long distances, cross canyons and handle steep or rocky country, and a horse allows you to move quietly, ease cattle along and reduce stress, which leads to fewer wrecks and better weight retention.”

(Courtesy of Poss Angus)

Gathering and Sorting

Poss Angus, a registered Angus operation in Scotia, Neb., uses horses to gather, sort and pull heats during the breeding season. In the summer months they doctor and gather cattle on grass.

“Most of our pastures are rough clay hills with ponds and trees, so having a horse to get to where the cows are is definitely necessary,” says Nathan Poss, head cowboy. “Ninety percent of the time, if there is cattle work being done of any kind, there is a horse or two being saddled.”

Poss Angus manages roughly 800 head with a bull sale every February and occasionally a female sale in the fall.

“I don’t typically use a horse in the picture pen but always to video bulls,” Poss adds. “By using a horse in the video pen, it is easier to move the bulls back and forth across the pen. Videoing can also turn into a long couple days, so it’s nice to have a young horse putting in the steps instead of me.”

Poss’ main responsibilities are the health and care of the cattle, including feeding, doctoring, calving and processing.

“I enjoy taking the ranch work and utilizing it to make young horses better through the work. Another great benefit in my mind is when working cattle horseback, the cattle gain respect for you and your horse, over time I feel like those cattle work and handle much easier,” Poss explains. “In my opinion, if it comes down to catching a single animal, a horse must be used. By using a horse instead of a four-wheeler, it keeps the environment quiet, and you can always go the same pace as the animal to help steer them in the direction you need to go. Four wheelers and rangers are also used very heavily on our ranch. Quickly moving a group to another pasture, tagging, putting out salt and mineral, those are all equivalent times to use a four-wheeler or ranger.”

(Courtesy of The Pitchfork Ranch)

Branding and Moving

The Pitchfork Ranch in Meeteetse, Wyo., uses horses heavily during branding seasons and moving cattle on and off mountain pasture. Primarily a commercial cow-calf operation focused on pounds of beef produced per acre, they also retain some cattle every year for their beef program that sells directly to consumers.

Their cattle have to thrive at elevation and harsh winters, then range calve in the spring. The Pitchfork Ranch also hosts an annual ranch horse sale in the spring.

“We use horses in all of our cattle work. In the spring we calve in an 8,000-acre pasture where we then pair cattle out into our branding groups,” says Lindsey Anson, who manages The Pitchfork Ranch. “We head and heel calves at branding and then start working our way up country where cattle summer at 10,000' elevation in the Absaroka range. In the fall as cattle come off the mountain, they are then paired out again horseback into contemporary sex groups until we ship in the first half of November.”

Similar to K4 Ranch and Poss Angus, using horses is often because of the terrain.

“Our terrain also doesn’t allow for the use of motorized vehicles very often so the work has to be done on a horse. Part of our summer range is also in a wilderness area where we still have to pack in salt and mineral horseback,” Anson explains. “Our cattle seem to handle better horseback. In the subtleties of reading cattle, you can make minor adjustments on horseback that you aren’t able to do with something motorized.”

From Selection to Breeding: A Veterinarian’s Guide to Productive Heifers

Mon, 25 Aug 2025 17:15:09 GMT

Heifers are one of the largest and most expensive inputs for a herd.

“Where do you want to be in five years? Where do you want to be in 10 years with your cow herd?” These are questions Dr. Jennifer Koziol, Texas Tech University associate professor of food animal medicine and surgery, encourages cattle producers to consider when selecting replacement females.

Koziol emphasizes the importance of strategic selection, advising producers to think long-term when selecting the next generation for their cow herd.

She recommends selecting heifers based on multiple factors beyond just appearance, including:

Birth Timing
- Select heifers born earlier in the breeding season. Early birth indicates better reproductive potential and means these heifers come from more fertile dams.

“We want to pick heifers that were born earlier in the year... from dams that were the most fertile,” Koziol explains.
Genetics
- Choose heifers from cows with long herd longevity
- Consider future herd goals such as carcass quality or maternal traits
- Look beyond just physical appearance
Environmental Compatibility
- Select heifers that match your specific environment by considering frame scores appropriate to your region. A cow’s size should match available feed resources.
Long-Term Perspective
- Think about herd goals five to 10 years in the future and select heifers that will contribute to those objectives
- Consider traits like fertility, growth and adaptability
Physical Traits
- Assess frame scores
- Examine feet and leg structure
- Look for overall structural soundness

Bottom line: She encourages producers to select replacements with a purpose, rather than just choosing the most attractive heifers.

“Focus on strategic, goal-oriented selection that supports long-term herd improvement,” she says.

Koziol was featured in a recent “ Doc Talk ” hosted by Dr. Dan Thomson. During the podcast, she shared strategies for producers to consider whether retaining or purchasing replacements.

She offers practical, research-backed guidance to support herd health and long-term profitability.

“I’m really passionate about thinking about how we do a better job on the preventative side, so we don’t get the backside and have problems,” she says.

Vaccination and Health Management

Heifer health is key to long-term success in the herd. Koziol shares the following guidance on heifer immunization:

Use modified live vaccines at weaning to get the heifers’ immune response up and going
Administer a booster four to six weeks after initial vaccination
Repeat vaccination four to six weeks before breeding

She refers to research from Auburn University supporting this vaccination strategy, noting it provides the best immune response for first-calf heifers.

Nutrition and Growth Patterns

She says nutrition strategy isn’t one size fits all.

“We can really let those growth patterns of the heifers be driven by our feed resources,” Koziol says. “We know that we want to target those heifers to be about 55% to 60% of their mature cow weight at breeding.”

She explains producers can adjust average daily gains based on feed abundance. Adding heifers can “coast” when feed resources are limited.

Reproductive Assessment

“Reproductive tract scoring and pelvic measuring are two great things to make sure we’re breeding heifers that are going to do a good job for us,” Koziol suggests. “Work with your veterinarian to find problems and get rid of the problems before we either waste money breeding them, or we have to call our vet out in the middle of the night for a c-section.”

Reproductive tract scoring (RTS) helps identify which heifers are prepared for breeding. This process includes evaluating the uterus to make sure it and the ovaries are functioning and make sure the heifer is cycling. The original RTS system was a five-point system.

She suggests using an updated three-category system developed by Kansas State University:

Ready category: Heifers actively cycling and prepared for breeding
Intermediate category: Smaller reproductive tracts, not yet cycling
Problem category: Incomplete reproductive tracts or potential fertility issues

She suggests combining RTS with pelvic measuring. The goal with pelvic measuring is to find heifers that are too small or abnormally shaped. The target pelvic area is approximately 130 centimeters squared.

“We’re looking for those heifers that are either too small or abnormally shaped, because those are going to be ones that have increased chances of dystocia,” she explains. “We don’t really have to select for bigger. We just have to find the ones that are too small.”

She suggests conducting the assessments four to six weeks before breeding. The assessments can help determine which heifers should be bred or if they should be culled.

Biosecurity Considerations

If you decide to buy replacement heifers or bred heifers, Koziol recommends producers consider these three measures to prevent disease transmission and to ensure smooth herd integration:

Quarantine new animals for four to six weeks before commingling
Verify vaccination records and disease status of incoming heifers
Introduce new animals well before breeding season

Economics and Sustainability

She summarizes as expenses continue to increase, being economically minded is key to being sustainable and profitable.

Koziol reminds producers to view heifer development as a long-term investment — focus on preventative measures to reduce future veterinary costs.

Considering her suggestions, producers can identify and cull problematic heifers to use as an alternative income stream instead of an economic burden to building a productive and efficient herd.

There’s a Lot of Info in That Little TSU

Tue, 29 Jul 2025 17:06:26 GMT

“The sky’s the limit if you have that sample,” says Jim Butcher, a Simmental seedstock producer from Lewistown, Mont.

He’s talking about all the things you can learn about the genetic potential of your cattle that is contained in a tissue sampling unit (TSU). The genomic information you get from each sample can, collectively and individually, help you more quickly move your herd’s genetic progress forward in an intentional, science-assisted direction.

There’s lots of info in that little vial.

(Allflex)

For commercial cow-calf producers, submitting the DNA sample in a TSU will return a scoresheet on each animal ‘s genetic merit for different indexes and specific traits, says Leoma Donsbach, owner and founder of Data Genie, LLC.

She calls herself a data accountant, helping customers attach the data on their operation to their record-keeping system. She says almost all her customers use TSUs to collect DNA and obtain genomic data.

Genomics are becoming more and more popular with commercial beef producers, she says.

“For replacement females, the ability to have a snapshot of that female’s genetic potential leads to increased confidence in keeping that heifer. You can say, ‘This heifer is more likely to be here until age six or seven by looking at her stayability metrics.’”

Say, for example, you’ve done your visual appraisal and picked 50 heifers as potential replacements, but you only need to keep 40. Visually, those heifers are very similar. But genetically, they could be very different, depending on what genes they received from their parents.

That’s where the TSUs and the genomic data they provide come in. First, test all 50 replacement candidates.

“Then breed them and find out which ones are bred,” she says. Even if everything went right, that still leaves some extras. “You can go back and use the genomic data to select the traits you want and/or use a maternal or terminal index to make those final decisions. You use it like comparing genomically enhanced EPDs when buying bulls.”

Beyond replacement selection, you can extrapolate the DNA data on your heifers when marketing your steers, she says. “On average, your steers will have similar genetics to your heifers. That information may add to their sale price.”

Then There Are The Bulls

Just like heifers, bulls can be full siblings and still be remarkably different in their genetic makeup.

“We’re great phenotype collectors of birth weights, weaning weights, all that,” Butcher says. “But you really don’t know what you have until you know what genes that particular animal picked up.”

When seedstock producers send in a TSU, they get back genomically enhanced EPDs. That, Butcher says, allows him to supply more accurate information about young bulls for his customers and help them make the best bull-buying decisions they can within their budget.

Indeed, not every bull is suited for every ranch. Studying the genomically enhanced EPDs gives you greater confidence in the true genetic potential of young bulls.

“You lessen the probabilities that you’re buying an animal that won’t help you move your program forward,” Butcher says.

Your Next Read: Building the Next Generation Cow Herd Using Genomic Testing

When Is the Best Time to Wean?

Thu, 24 Jul 2025 20:05:10 GMT

If conditions warrant, now might be the time to start thinking about weaning for spring calving herds. But weaning strategies are not one plan fits all, and what your neighbor does might not be the best decision for your herd.

The average suggested weaning age is 205 days. Four beef cattle extension specialists discuss the factors to consider if early weaning is the best option.

“Early weaning can be one of the most effective management strategies from both a grass/forage and cow nutrition standpoint,” says Jason Warner, Kansas State University extension cow-calf specialist.

According to Ron Lemenager, Purdue University beef specialist, the earliest recommended age for weaning a beef calf is between 60 days to 80 days, with 70 days being a common benchmark to ensure calves have a functioning rumen.

“When you wean at less than 70 days of age, the chances of having that calf turn out to be a little, potbellied orphan-looking calf goes up,” he says.

Warner adds weaning 60-to-90-day-old calves requires good, tight facilities to keep them in and feed bunks and watering troughs that the calves can reach.

Lemenager explains the decision to early wean is based on two things:

Feed resources: the kind of quality and quantity of feed.
Body condition of the cows.

John Hall, University of Idaho extension beef specialist, says there are two age ranges for early weaning. Very early weaning is weaning calves at 90 days prior to the breeding season. Producers can use this strategy to try and induce cycles in thin cows. He says calves weaned this early will require a unique management plan.

He describes early weaning as when the calf is between 150 days to 180 days of age.

“The nice thing about that 5-month-old calf is it’s only getting about 30% of its nutrition from the dam,” Hall explains. “So, making the switch when the calf is already used to eating a lot of forage is ideal.”

Megan Van Emon, Montana State University extension beef cattle specialist, encourages producers to plan to make sure the weaning process — no matter how the age of calf — goes smoothly.

“The earlier you can make the decision, the better,” she says. “Not only for the producer, but also for those calves to be prepared.”

Four Factors to Consider

The specialists share these points to aid in your early weaning decision:

Pasture and Forage Conditions
Drought is the primary trigger for early weaning. All four specialists encourage producers to assess pasture conditions, rainfall patterns and forage availability. If pastures are short and producers are concerned about overgrazing, then early weaning should be considered.

“In times of reduced forage availability — primarily drought — early weaning should be considered as a method to preserve the forage base by removing the forage demand from the calf and also reducing forage intake by the cow,” Warner says.

Van Emon explains the “take half, leave half” grazing principle becomes difficult when grass is only 3" to 4" tall, emphasizing the need to leave enough root reserves for future grazing.

Most of the research data suggests that for every two to two-and-a-half days that a calf is weaned, there is one more day of available forage for grazing for the dry cow.

“We can conservatively save or extend our forage resources by a third,” Lemenager explains. “Cow forage intake goes down and calf consumption of forage is eliminated in that grazing environment.”
Cow Body Condition
Hall says if cows are at a body condition score (BCS) 4 or lower by mid-summer, they’re in nutritional trouble and it’s likely their calves are not doing well in terms of growth rate either.

Early weaning removes the lactation demands, which will allow the cow to start regaining condition before winter. Lemenager also suggests early weaning can help reduce winter supplementation needs.

Lemenager and his family also have a cow herd in Indiana. They typically wean at about 6 months of age.

“That gives me an extra month of cows being able to pick up some body condition before the winter,” he explains.

Van Emon says research predicts for every two weeks earlier you wean, a cow will gain about a tenth of a body condition score.
Feed Resources Available for Newly Weaned Calves
It is important to have high-quality feed available for early weaned calves, as they require better nutrition for continued growth. Hall recommends producers work with a nutrition consultant or other extension specialist to create a nutrition plan for the newly weaned calves.
Facilities and Labor
Early weaning requires appropriate facilities with secure fencing and can require additional labor. Van Emon encourages producers to consider if they have the resources available to manage early weaning effectively.

Hall reminds producers the primary goal of early weaning is to maintain or improve cow condition and stretch limited forage supplies while supporting calf growth.

By carefully evaluating the factors suggested by the extension specialists and implementing proper management strategies, you can make early weaning a successful part of your operation when conditions warrant the strategy.

Your Next Read: Step-by-Step Weaning: How to Choose the Best Method

Is It Time to Pull Bulls?

Mon, 14 Jul 2025 21:01:05 GMT

The old rule of subtracting three months and adding seven days to the current date on the calendar is good to remember when deciding if it’s time to pull herd bulls from breeding pastures.

If we pulled bulls on July 14, we could expect calving to potentially last until April 21. Short breeding seasons equate to short calving seasons. Short calving seasons offer the benefit of a more uniform and accordingly more valuable calf crop at weaning.

Short breeding seasons are the goal; however, most breeding seasons fall into a range of 45 to 90 days. There are several factors to consider when making this management decision.

Bull management and proper care can be accomplished more effectively after bulls are removed from cows. Younger bulls that are still growing will benefit by going back into a dry lot management scenario where it is easier to provide supplemental feed and gain back body condition lost during breeding season. This is the equivalent of re-charging a battery to get them on track for the next breeding season. If using multiple bulls in a pasture, it is logical to leave an older bull (or bulls) on the job while pulling out the younger bulls.
When is the date of your latest calf born? Typically, cows need 60 to 75 days post-partum to be prepared to breed back. Two-year-old cows nursing their first calf are typically the greatest rebreeding challenge.
Pregnancy checking can be done sooner when bulls are pulled earlier. Identifying and culling open cows in a timely fashion saves forage and capitalizes on cull cow value now as opposed to lower values moving later into fall.
What is your plan for open cows at pregnancy check? Cull open cows are at record high prices. That being said, a bred cow has more value than an open cow. Do you have a fall calving herd to roll opens into?
If a high percentage of cows return to heat after 40 days of breeding, have bulls rechecked for fertility and cows and bulls examined for reproductive diseases by your veterinarian. Change bulls, if necessary, and re-evaluate the previous year’s nutrition program.

Open Heifers Explained: What You Need to Consider to Increase Preg Rates

Mon, 30 Jun 2025 21:09:29 GMT

A producer has a group of 112 heifers. The heifers were synchronized, and after a 45-day breeding season only 80% were confirmed pregnant.

During a recent “ Bovine Science with BCI ” podcast, Kansas State University veterinarians Brad White and Bob Larson explore potential causes for the issue — from bull problems to nutritional and health-related factors. They also share practical strategies and management tips producers can implement to improve reproductive success and set the herd up for a better breeding season.

Larson says, while the pregnancy rates weren’t optimal, the results weren’t catastrophic. The first breeding cycle performed well.

Reviewing the pregnancy data they determined:

57% of heifers became pregnant in the first 21-day breeding cycle.
After synchronization the heifers were artificially inseminated and then turned out with bulls. Larson says the goal or expectation should be 60% to 65% every 21 days so 57% is not too low.
39% of remaining heifers got pregnant in the second 21-day cycle.
Larson explains this is the rate that is the biggest problem and concern.
The final breeding period (about four days) added a few more pregnancies.

White explains about those who conceived in the first cycle, “Those heifers kept out of this scenario are going to be great cows for the herd. They’re bred at the right time.”

According to the veterinarians the potential reasons for the less-than-ideal pregnancy rates after the first cycle include:

Heifer Factors
Heifers were initially developed in a dry lot with a high body condition score (7 out of 9) then moved from dry lot to native range after initial breeding. Larson says the potential body condition loss could have impacted fertility as a negative energy pattern can pause a female’s estrus cycle.
Bull Factors
The producer turned out the 112 heifers with five bulls — three yearlings and two mature bulls. With the conception after the first cycle, the bulls had approximately 48 heifers to service. Larson explains the biggest concern is the synchronization created a concentrated breeding period and the bulls might have struggled with multiple heifers in heat simultaneously. Another fertility consideration is social dynamics and breeding behavior.
“The only solution I have for that is more bull power,” Larson says. “And that can get expensive, really fast, when you think about dollars per pregnancy during that second 21 days, when you know 60% of them are already pregnant.”

After reviewing the case, Larson gave these recommendations to the producer:

Target and maintain heifer body condition score around 6 (not 7)
Avoid significant body condition changes during early pregnancy
Carefully time movement from dry lot to pasture
Consider smaller heifer groups
Potentially rotate bulls between groups
Explore heat detection and re-breeding options
Evaluate bull power and allocation strategies

The discussion highlights the complexity of heifer breeding, emphasizing that multiple factors can influence pregnancy rates. Larson summarizes careful observation, strategic management and understanding the biological and social dynamics of the herd are crucial to improve reproductive success.

Your Next Read: 5 Strategies to Help Cattle Cope with Heat

Montana Veterinarian Encourages a Fresh Look at Deworming Protocols

Thu, 26 Jun 2025 22:17:26 GMT

“We’ve always done it this way” is known to be the most dangerous phrase in business, and the cattle business is no exception, says Perrie Neal, DVM, from Hardin, Mont. With more than a decade of experience working with cow-calf producers, she says it never hurts to take a fresh look at your herd’s deworming program to identify potential areas of improvement.

Neal manages her own herd of registered and commercial Angus alongside her husband and father-in-law. When possible, she likes to test out products and practices on their own cattle before she makes recommendations to her customers.

“It’s great to have that firsthand experience,” she says.

Over the last few years, Neal has worked to optimize the timing of her deworming program — and now she tries to deworm calves as early as possible each season for maximum benefit.

“Weaning weights are really important, especially in our registered cows,” she says. “By administering a dewormer early in the season, you can help ensure calves won’t have to carry a heavy parasite load and are more likely to meet their genetic potential.”

Neal also has looked closely at the dewormer route of administration and product efficacy — and encourages her customers to do the same.

“Convenience is a big factor when it comes to deworming programs, so a lot of my customers have historically used pour-ons for that reason,” she explains. “But a lot of times, the injectable dewormers can improve labor efficiencies and help ensure more accurate dosing.”

That’s one of the reasons Neal says she has come to appreciate Valcor^® (doramectin and levamisole injection), a dual-action, single-dose, injectable dewormer.

“We weighed calves as they came in the chute, and my husband would yell out the number as they got on the scale,” she says. “I was able to quickly adjust the dosage depending on the weight of the calf. I love that about the product.”

The Importance of Calf Preconditioning

“Preconditioning calves is another thing that I’ve been highly recommending to producers in the last few years,” Neal says.

Preconditioning programs promote calf growth, enhance immune function and minimize stress as calves move from their ranch of origin to the stocker or backgrounder operation and then to the feedlot.

“Preconditioning can help set calves up for their next production phase, but it also benefits any calves that producers want to retain as replacements,” Neal explains. “We used to just precondition the bulls and the replacement heifers, but over the last few years we’ve switched to preconditioning everything, and we’ve seen a lot less sickness across the board.”

Neal encourages producers who are thinking about taking a fresh look at herd health or deworming protocols, to consult their herd veterinarian. These local experts can help you identify products and practices that make sense for your operation.

Your Next Read: 5 Strategies to Help Cattle Cope with Heat

Beef Producers Be Aware: Dangerous Asian Longhorned Tick Continues Migrating West

Wed, 18 Jun 2025 13:24:33 GMT

The Asian Longhorned Tick (ALHT) poses a serious threat to cattle health. ALHTs carry Theileria, which is a protozoan parasite that infects red and white blood cells. It can lead to anemia and, in some cases, death.

ALHTs are native to eastern Asia, eastern China, Japan, the Russian Far East and Korea but were introduced to Australia, New Zealand and western Pacific Islands. In other countries, it can also be called a bush tick, cattle tick or scrub tick.

In the U.S., ALHT was first detected in New Jersey in 2017. Since then, it has spread to more than 20 states with recent confirmations in Illinois , Michigan and Iowa .

According to USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) ALHTs are known to carry pathogens, which can cause disease and may also cause distress to the host from their feeding in large numbers. For example, a dairy cow may have a 25% decrease in milk production after becoming a host.

A female can reproduce without a mate and lay up to 2,000 eggs at a time. This can cause great stress on a heavily infested animal and result in reduced growth and production. A severe infestation can kill the animal from excessive blood loss.

Asian longhorned tick life stages and relative actual size.

(Photos of unfed ticks by Centers for Disease Control. Photos of engorged ticks by Jim Occi, Rutgers, Center for Vector Biology.)

What does it look like?

Unfed ALHTs range from a light reddish-tan to a dark red with brown, dark markings. While the adult female grows to the size of a pea when full of blood, other stages of the tick are very small — about the size of a sesame seed.

Adult females are a grey-green with yellowish markings. Male ticks are rare.

APHIS reports it only takes a single tick to create a population in a new location.

The above photos are of a AHLT engorged (on the left) and an adult AHLT not engorged.

(New Jersey Department of Agriculture)

ALHTs need warm-blooded hosts to feed and survive. They have been found on various species of domestic animals — such as sheep, goats, dogs, cats, horses, cattle and chickens — and wildlife. The tick has also been found on people.

What are the health risks?

APHIS says ALHTs are not known to carry Lyme disease, but they can cause tickborne diseases affecting humans and animals such as:

Rocky Mountain spotted fever
Heartland virus
Powassan virus

APHIS says those diseases have not been confirmed outside of a laboratory setting in the U.S. In addition, U.S. ALHT populations can transmit U.S. Theileria orientalis Ikeda strain (Cattle theileriosis) in the laboratory.

In an Iowa State University release , Grant Dewell, Extension beef veterinarian and associate professor, says cattle affected by Theileriosis will show signs of lethargy, anemia and difficulty breathing. They may develop ventral edema, exercise intolerance, jaundice and abortions.

“Although signs of Theileriosis are similar to anaplasmosis, younger animals and calves often display more severe signs compared to mature cows and bulls,” he says. “Due to anemia from both tick infestation and Theileria, the risk of death can be elevated. If cattle producers suspect either Theileria or ALHT, have a veterinarian collect appropriate samples and submit them to a veterinary diagnostic lab.”

According to an Oklahoma State University press release , under laboratory conditions ALHT is a competent vector of numerous pathogens that can cause disease in humans, including Rickettsia rickettsii (Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever), Heartland Virus and Powassan Virus.

In “ Clinical Infectious Diseases, ” Bobbi Pritt, MD, MSC, with the division of clinical microbiology at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., reported a human bite that occurred in New York in 2019. She says though the report of a human bite isn’t surprising, it proves the invasive longhorned tick continues to bite hosts in its newest location.

“This is extremely worrisome for several reasons,” she writes. “One reason is Asian longhorned ticks can carry several important human pathogens, including the potentially fatal severe fever with thrombocytopenia syndrome (SFTS) virus and Rickettsia japonica, which cases Japanese spotted fever. While these pathogens have yet to be found in the United States, there is a risk of their future introduction.”

Also, Pritt says several other human pathogens have been detected in the ticks, but it’s not clear if the ALHT species are able to transmit them to humans. They include Anaplasma, Ehrlichia, Rickettsia, and Borrelia species. Lyme disease is caused by Borrelia burgdorferi bacteria.

She warns the organisms are present in states where ALHTs have been found and that it’s possible the tick — known to be an aggressive biter— might be able to transmit Heartland virus given its close relationship to SFTS virus.

How to Tackle Ticks

According to APHIS, various strategies effectively mitigate tick populations on hosts and in the environment.

Regular tick treatments should be effective against ALHTs. Consult your veterinarian or agriculture extension agent about which products to use.
Check your livestock for ticks regularly.
Safely remove ticks from people and pets as quickly as possible. If you think you’ve found an ALHT, seal it in a zip-top bag and give it to your veterinarian for identification.
Habitat modifications can help prevent ticks on feedlots and pastures. This may include mowing grass, removing trees, reducing shade by thinning trees, understory removal and placing mulch barriers.
Apply acaricide using label instructions to tick habitats, such as woodland edges and grassy patches, during times when ticks are most actively seeking hosts. Although it varies by year, ALHTs are generally active from March to November. Consult your state and local regulations for approved acaricides.

“Cattle producers should aggressively control external parasites this summer,” Dewell summarizes. “Insecticide ear tags alone are not enough to control ticks. Consider incorporating a back rubber or regularly applying a pour-on during the summer. Pyrethroid-based products are also available that include a tick control label. If an increase in tick infestations is observed, an avermectin pour-on may be the best intervention.”

Your Next Read: 1,500-lb. Carcasses the New Normal, Not the Exception

1,500-lb. Carcasses the New Normal, Not the Exception

Wed, 18 Jun 2025 16:26:38 GMT

Today the entire beef industry — from producers to processors — is economically incentivized to produce heavier animals. Ty Lawrence, West Texas A&M University animal science professor and director of the BCRC, predicts that carcass weights will continue to increase, potentially reaching 1,500 lb. in the near future.

Lawrence was a keynote speaker during the 2025 Beef Improvement Federation (BIF) Symposium in Amarillo last week. He says the industry has already seen harvests of cattle approaching that weight, with some producers currently feeding cattle up to 2,300 lb.

“We can feed cattle today to much bigger weights and be more profitable than you’ve ever considered,” Lawrence says.

BIF attendee and Kansas beef producer Joe Epperly from Wamego, Kan., summarizes, “The most hard-hitting comment at BIF was Lawrence’s 1,500-lb. carcass prediction by the end of his career. The implications of that to genetic selection, cost of production and cow size are far ranging. It will be a challenge for producers in every segment to meet.”

More than 400 beef producers, breed association leaders and industry professionals participated in two and a half days of educational programming focused on beef industry profitability and sustainability.

Tuesday, June 10, the event kicked off with the Young Producer Symposium. Wednesday’s general session focused on “Beef Industry Profitability: Conflicting market signals and profit drivers in the beef value chain.” Thursday’s general session theme was “Sustainability: Improving our product through selection, applications of technology and data integration.”

Wednesday and Thursday afternoon technical breakout sessions focused on a range of beef-production and genetic-improvement topics.

Bradley Wolter, a symposium attendee from Aviston, Ill., says, “Larger carcasses will be a critical part of bridging the supply gap in the near term. Identifying genetic association with late-term mortality and morbidity requires further research and coordination on the part of breeding entities.”

He says the chasm remains between exponentially larger finished carcasses that optimize fixed packer costs verses a target of smaller cows for biological optimum on the ranch.

“More collaborative, holistic data analysis with integrated research is needed to avoid industry sub-optimization and ensure competitiveness on the world stage,” Wolter summarizes.

Scott Greiner, Virginia Tech professor and Extension animal scientist, agrees with Epperly and Walter saying the message that resonated with many in attendance was the continued emphasis on increasing carcass weights by the feedlot and packing sectors, and the impact it will have at the cow-calf sector as it relates to cow size and production costs.

“This trend is not new, but I think the way things were conveyed by several speakers in terms of the economics and market signals, sure seems like bigger is what will continue to be a primary emphasis,” Greiner says.

Ken Odde, 2025/26 BIF vice president from South Dakota, says: “Two of the real questions about feeding cattle this long [to 1500-lb carcass weight] is what happens to the carcass traits as you do that? What happens to feed efficiency?”

One of the sessions that stood out to Odde during the symposium was a presentation on a project at South Dakota State University in the Advancements in End Product Improvement breakout session — “Extended days on feed: Influences on growth performance, efficiency and carcass characteristics of steers and heifers of different proportions of Angus and Limousin genetics.”

Is the U.S. Behind?

“From conversations in the hallway, I learned that the U.S. beef industry is behind on methane research, and if we are going to compete in the global marketplace, we need to get a move on,” Epperly says. “Australian Angus will release a methane research EPD in 2025, and we have barely enough data in the U.S. to see differences. That Australian data includes a lot of American bulls, so we will have data whether some American breeders like it or not. The optics for some are unfavorable, but whatever we can do to keep the doors open for our product the better off we will be.”

Likewise, symposium speakers referenced the Brazilian beef industry and how it is poised for continued success and rapid growth given its bountiful resources, not the least of which is its people.

“You see it not only in its scaled adoption of AI, but through the numerous young geneticists who make up the audience,” Walter says. “The U.S. industry needs to continue to invest in its genetic improvement through both public and private partnerships to maintain a position of world leadership.”

Young Producer Focus

“The Young Producer Symposium opened with a message about ‘Standing on the shoulders of giants,’” says Elizabeth Dressler, a graduate student who attended the symposium. “This resonated with me as I thought about all the research and progress the beef industry has made over the years. I thought it was a great way to open the conference by paying respect to the work that has been done in the past, as we look into the future the rest of the conference.”

Wolter adds there’s an excitement among young people in the beef industry.

“These young leaders are creatively engaged with our consumers unlike the previous generation,” he says. “I believe that will only create more demand and opportunities for an industry despite some questions and uncertainties with how cattle interact with their environment.”

Exploring Next-Generation Phenotyping that Drives Commercial Profitability

Tue, 10 Jun 2025 12:15:24 GMT

Traditional genetic improvement programs have been built on collecting phenotypic data such as birth, weaning, yearling and carcass weights.

“Those phenotypes have driven the industry’s increase in productivity — productivity on the rail and in the feedyard,” says Troy Rowan, University of Tennessee assistant professor of beef cattle genomics. “Commercial data is going to be more and more important. The seedstock producer has traditionally been our main collector of phenotypic records. We understand we need to measure things like disease resistance and fertility in the environments that matter to the commercial producers. So, we’ve got to integrate those commercial records. And there’s new technologies coming online that are going to help us get there easier and in a more consistent and accurate way.”

Rowan recently authored a white paper that examines industry research and results from the Imagine: AGI’s Beef Genetics Forum , which took place Sept. 25-26, 2024. Hosted by Angus Genetics Inc. the event was attended by professionals from academic, research, allied industry and ranching backgrounds.

“The big question the Angus Association wanted to ask their producers and folks from across the industry is, ‘What are we missing?’ and ‘What are the technologies and approaches that are going to allow us to work toward increasing profitability,’” Rowan explains.

One of the major themes of the paper is the numerous technological developments poised to affect phenotype collection. Examples include computer-vision technology and wearable sensors.

“By using these technologies to measure traits on continuous scales rather than the categorical scales we currently use for traits like hair shedding or foot angle, we can increase precision of phenotype measurements and consequently improve the quality of EPDs (expected progeny differences) over time,” Rowan says.

He also discusses the types of data most important and economically viable for the industry to pursue. Advancing terminal and maternal traits, health and other challenging areas of production will require data integration and more advanced tools.

“We should work on developing genetic selection tools that capture all elements of commercial profitability, continuing to improve yield and the eating experience of our end product while also making our cow herd more efficient, adapted and productive,” Rowan summarizes.

In the paper, Rowan says the greatest opportunities moving forward rely on capturing and leveraging commercial data throughout the value chain.

“This will require radical collaboration and coordination between industry partners,” he writes. “While individual data points from a commercial herd or a processing plant may not be individually valuable, capturing multiple sources of data in the aggregate will enable genetic evaluations to fill important gaps in their systems with high-quality tools.”

He says the efforts that leverage new technologies and integrate new data sources will require five main considerations:

Phenotypes are, and will always be, the backbones of genetic evaluation: While much of our forward-looking focus is on new and novel phenotypes measured by increasingly complex technologies, we still have far from complete reporting for our core economically relevant traits (ERTs). No amount of genomic testing can make up for a lack of phenotypic reporting. In the immediate term, the continued adoption of whole-herd reporting will improve genetic predictions and open opportunities to extract new phenotypes.
Standardization of phenotype collection, both by producers and via algorithms, will be essential. “From the inception of genetic evaluations, we have worked to standardize trait definitions and best practices for recording,” Rowan says. “This motivated the creation of the Beef Improvement Federation, which continues to publish best practices. Next-generation phenotyping technologies will have many more variables that can impact raw phenotypes, making the standardization of recording, processing and cleaning even more important.”
Seedstock producers may not be able to shoulder the full financial burden of phenotypic collection. “Seedstock producers have traditionally borne the full cost of phenotyping with the understanding that records will help increase the accuracy of EPDs for their animals,” he explains. “However, as we seek to measure more expensive phenotypes, the economics of phenotyping will become more difficult.”
Genetic evaluations will have to balance the deluge of new technology with the resulting payoff in EPD quality and utility. “Not every phenotype is worth measuring,” Rowan says. “As new technologies come online, genetic evaluations will need to consider the costs and return on investment carefully.”
Data sharing will be essential to leveraging the impact of phenotypic collection across industry segments. Economically important phenotypes can be collected at every step of the beef supply chain. From cow-calf operations to feedlots to processors to consumer feedback, data is constantly being collected. When we can tie this data back to an individual animal and its genetics, the possibilities of improving efficiency, animal well-being and consumer experience are limitless.

To hear more discussion about the white paper, you can listen to “The Angus Conversation” podcast: Genetic Innovation Requires Leadership and Data — The Phenotype Paradox in the Beef Industry.

Your Next Read: Unlocking Odde Ranch Success: How Profitability, Tech and Education Drive Innovation

Cow Herd Scorecard: Evaluating Performance Post Calving

Wed, 14 May 2025 21:59:31 GMT

Tracking performance and evaluating herd success is a year-round process. Similar to tracking athletes, consider developing a scorecard to monitor your herd.

Understanding how your herd is performing throughout the year is important when considering management, nutrition and culling decisions.

For spring-calving herds, now is the time to evaluate and review calving success and failures.

“This is a good time of year to review your records, and if the numbers aren’t where you want them to be, you can make management adjustments under the guidance of your veterinarian, nutritionist or another adviser,” says Jason Warner, Kansas State University cow-calf Extension specialist. Warner was a guest during a recent K-State Beef Cattle Institute Podcast .

A herd’s postcalving scorecard should include:

pregnancy percentages
death loss
calving ease/calving complications – prolapse or retained placenta
udder scores
body condition score
mothering ability and disposition
calving interval

Two areas Warner tells producers to focus on are the number of live calves born compared to the number of cows exposed to bulls at the start of the breeding season; and the number of cows that became pregnant early in the breeding season.

A top priority for Bob Larson, K-State veterinarian, is to have calves born early in the calving season.

“The goal is to have 65% of the calves born in the first 21 days, and 85% to 90% of the calves born within the first 42 days of the season,” Larson say. “If that happens, I know that the cows were in good body condition at the start of the breeding season and the bulls were fertile.”

Larson references USDA’s National Animal Health Monitoring Service (NAHMS) for national averages on abortion and calf death loss.

“The national average is between 1% to 2% for calf death loss and that will vary from year to year within the same operation,” Larson said. “If the producer is calving out a high percentage of heifers, that can influence the calf death loss percentage.”

Scorecard Prep
Ron Lemenager, Purdue professor and beef Extension specialist, suggests producers consider creating a spreadsheet to calculate important percentages, prior to filling out their postcalving scorecard.

He encourages producers record and monitor these numbers each calving season:

Number of cows exposed
Number of cows pregnant
Number of cows pregnant / Number of cows exposed = % Pregnant
Number of pregnant cows kept to calve
Number of cows that calved
Number of cows that calved / Number of pregnant cows kept to calve = % Calving
Number of Live Calves
Number of Live Calves /Number of cows that calved = % live calves born
Number of live calves after one month
Number of difficult or assisted birth (dystocia, prolapse)
Number of cows with bad udders
Number of cows BCS 5 or 6
Number of cows with poor disposition and poor mothering ability
Number of cows that calved in the first 21 days
Number of cows that calved in the second 21 days
Number of cows that calved in the third 21 days
Number of cows that calved after 63 days

Lemenager explains using the spreadsheet to calculate the percentages can help producers identify specific problem areas in their calving and breeding processes and allows them to troubleshoot their herd’s breeding performance.

“Tracking herd performance allows producers to zero in on their problems and determine what issues are really facing the herd,” he summarizes.

Understanding the challenges facing a cow herd can help producers determine what nutrition or management strategies can be used to improve their herd’s postcalving scorecard in future years.

Your Next Read: Spring Cattle Processing Tips to Enhance Herd Health and Diminish Stress

Body Condition Scoring Bulls: Now is the Time to Make Sure Bulls Are Ready for Turnout

Mon, 31 Mar 2025 16:55:46 GMT

As cattle producers prepare for pasture turnout and breeding season, it is important to evaluate bulls and make sure they are ready to go to work. Along with breeding soundness exams to ensure a bull is fertile and ready for his job, another tool for producers to use is body condition scores (BCS) to make sure the bull is in good condition — not too skinny or too fat.

Phillip Lancaster, Kansas State University beef cattle nutritionist, and Brad White, K-State veterinarian, offer advice on how to assess bull body condition .

According to Lancaster, producers can use the same scoring system for bulls as they do females.

“We use the same system for all classes of cattle, 1 to 9 scale ,” Lancaster explains. “That scale is related to body fat composition.”

Bulls should be evaluated like cows: observing the amount of fat the bull is carrying on his back, ribs and hooks and pins.

“As an animal moves from one point on the body condition score to another, they are either gaining or losing body fat and potentially muscle mass,” Lancaster says. “If they start with a lower body condition score and lose weight, that change will lead to a decline in more muscle mass than fat. Conversely, if they are at the other end of the scale, the animal will lose more fat than muscle mass.”

Bulls require more weight change to move between BCS points due to their larger size.

“A rule of thumb,” Lancaster says, “is about 7% of their normal weight at a body condition score of 5 is what they should gain or lose.”

He gave the example of a 2,000-lb. bull that had a weight change of 150 lb. leading to a score change. In contrast, Lancaster says, a cow will shift a body condition score at 100 lb. due to the differences in size and muscle mass.

Monitoring BCS has special implications for yearling bulls who are still growing, White explains.

“Yearling bulls typically have a different body condition than mature bulls at pasture turnout, and the goal is to have the bulls in a positive energy balance heading into breeding season so that they can maintain it through the season,” he says.

Monitoring body condition scores is important year round. White reminds producers the goal should be to keep bulls in a positive energy balance during breeding season, which allows for fat deposition.

White also gave an example that for a cow to improve a body condition score the standard thought is to increase body weight 100 lb. At 2 lb. per day gain, it takes a female 50 days. In comparison, a bull will need longer, so it is important to be proactive.

“Now is the time to make sure the bulls are in the right body condition so that there is time for them to gain weight a head of turnout,” White says.

Your next read: Wanted: Bulls Ready to Work

Gene Editing: Livestock Genetic Improvement Through DNA Editing

Mon, 17 Mar 2025 17:18:10 GMT

Traditional cattle breeding has always involved modifying the genetics of animals, but the term “genetic modification” is often associated with more modern biotechnologies like genetic engineering and gene editing.

“Often when people hear the expression ‘genetic modification’ what comes to mind is the whole GMO debate and scary memes on the Internet, or that if you eat GMOs something bad will happen to you,” says Alison Van Eenennaam, UC Davis animal biotechnology and genomics extension specialist. “That narrative has been very hard to correct.”

Van Eenennaam was a featured speaker during Kansas State University’s Cattlemen’s Day on March 7. Genetic engineering, which has been around for about 30 years, involves introducing transgenic constructs from other organisms, such as Bt corn. However, this technology has seen limited use in animal production due to consumer pushback against GMOs and the difficulty of introducing new traits into animals, Van Eenennaam says.

A newer technology called genome editing or gene editing has emerged in the last decade.

“Gene editing is basically just conventional breeding, but done more intelligently,” she summarizes. “This allows for the targeted manipulation of an animal’s DNA without introducing foreign genetic material. For example, researchers have developed a ‘PRRS-resistant’ pig by knocking out a gene that the virus uses to infect the animal. Gene editing can also be used to introduce beneficial alleles from one breed into the elite germplasm of another, without diluting the desired genetics.”

In cattle, gene editing has been used to create knockouts for traits like disease resistance and heat tolerance, as well as knock-ins to introduce desirable alleles like the polled trait.

“In 2009, we were able to define the entire sequence of the cattle genome, which gave us a look at the genetic variation that exists between cattle breeds,” Van Eenennaam says. “In the case of cattle, that’s about 3 billion base pairs of DNA that make up the cattle genome.”

She explained there are two ways to gene edit cattle — cloning and microinjection into zygotes. “The key difference is that cloning starts with an edited cell line, while microinjection edits the zygote directly,” she says. “Ultimately, the goal is to produce a homozygous, non-mosaic animal where both alleles carry the desired edit, ensuring the trait is passed on to offspring.”

Van Eenennaam explains a few of the cattle-focused gene editing projects have centered around traits like polled, disease resistance, heat tolerance and muscle development.

In the swine industry, she says gene editing is being used to improve a pig’s resistance to Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Syndrome (PRSV), a devastating disease that costs the swine industry about $1.2 billion per year in the U.S.

A gene editing project that could have a big impact the beef industry is surrogate sires or “artificial insemination on legs.” The process produces bulls that are generating semen from a different cell line. For example, a tropically adapted bull working in an environment where he is well suited, but his semen could be genetically, an Angus sire.

“You can basically do AI on legs, because you could naturally service with elite germplasm,” she says. “There’s a lot of different applications that have some potential to really benefit the beef industry.”

Gene editing technology still faces regulatory hurdles in the U.S., as well as the need to overcome perceptions among countries that buy U.S. beef.

Van Eenennaam says the main risks with gene editing are more reputational than safety-related, as activist groups may try to lump gene editing with GMOs. She encourages more discussion highlighting how gene editing can address issues like animal welfare and disease resistance in ways that align with consumer values.

Excited about the potential of gene editing to improve livestock production in a targeted and precise manner, she summarizes that regulatory approaches will be crucial in determining which applications reach the market and who can bring them forward.

You can watch her K-State Cattlemen’s Day presentation here: https://youtu.be/d7N7a6mYwDk

Your Next Read: Modern and Precise: Using Gene Editing to Change the Blueprint of an Organism

Uncover the Economic Power of Bulls

Tue, 18 Mar 2025 13:21:51 GMT

When cattle producers consider making bull purchases for their cow-calf operation, those bulls need to be evaluated relative to the benefits each offers the bottomline, according to Mark Z. Johnson, Oklahoma State University Extension Beef Cattle Breeding Specialist. Johnson says producers need to find the value proposition of those bulls.

Value proposition is defined as how a product or service can meet a customer’s needs and help them achieve their goals.

He shares these key points for producers to remember.

The initial cost of the bull is only one part of the profit equation. Value added to calves is equally important.
Identifying the trait (or traits) of primary economic importance is critical to determining the value proposition of each bull.
Producers need to have a budget and it needs to be realistic.
When multiple traits have economic importance, determining the value proposition of a bull is more challenging. It will require looking at current levels of production in traits of importance in order to determine where to focus selection pressure.

Put pencil to paper
Johnson gives the example for a cow-calf producer who needs two more Angus bulls for the spring and has narrowed down the selection list to the following five bulls to purchase private treaty.

ID	CED	BW	WW	YW	CEM	HP	MW	Marb	$B	Price
1	12	0.2	70	120	9	13	76	0.35	154	$10,000
2	4	2.9	82	141	12	6	96	0.79	180	$8,000
3	15	0.1	78	145	14	17	86	1.80	215	$12,500
4	5	3.5	91	157	8	5	99	0.71	185	$7,500
5	11	0.7	63	108	8	10	65	1.90	189	$5,500

The bulls are all spring yearlings and will be approximately 15 months of age at turnout and accordingly should be expected to cover 15 cows this year. All the bulls have passed a Breeding Soundness Exam and sell with a registration paper and a breeding soundness guarantee.

“The buying decision boils down to identifying the right bulls for your operation,” Johnson says. “The right bulls to buy are the ones most capable of adding value to the calf crop sired relative to their purchase price.”

The bulls selected need to:

Complement the females to which they will be mated
Offer genetic values of economic relevance to the marketing endpoint of the calves they will sire.

As an example, your operation intends to use the bulls as terminal sires on spring calving cows, four to six years of age. After weaning, the calves will run on cool season grass until marketed as yearlings. In this operation the trait of primary economic importance is Yearling Weight (YW).

What bulls would you buy and why?
Johnson says to calculate the profit potential of each bull, assume each bull will sire 125 calves over their lifetime of service. Each will have the same salvage value and the value of a pounds of YW sired will be $2.50.

Table 1. Use the least expensive bull as the baseline to compare.

(Mark Z. Johnson/Lori Hays)

Table 2. The “Value Proposition” of each bull over their lifetime of service.

(Mark Z. Johnson/Lori Hays)

Read more: Answer These Cow Herd Questions to Help Make Smart Bull Selections

Three Questions to Ask Yourself When Preparing to Purchase Bulls

Wanted: Bulls Ready to Work

Wed, 05 Mar 2025 17:33:44 GMT

The job description of a bull is simple: get cows bred.

Saulo Zoca, University of Tennessee assistant professor and beef cattle reproduction specialist, says the economic impact of a bull is significant; “The bull has only one job, and that is to get cows pregnant.”

In the last USDA survey report, 92% of beef cows and 76% of beef heifers were exposed only to natural service, no artificial insemination performed. These figures support the importance bull reproductive health.

Zoca stresses the importance of the breeding soundness exam (BSE) comparing it to a car insurance policy for a bull.

“The BSE is just that snapshot of one day, but it’s the best thing we have available for us to evaluate fertility, so we need to be doing it,” he explains.

Along with a physical exam, a BSE evaluates scrotal circumference, semen motility, and morphology, which are all indicators of a bull’s ability to breed effectively.

Collecting a bull is part of breeding soundness examination.

(Maggie Malson)

Zoca suggests testing bulls 30 to 60 days before the breeding season to allow time for management decisions.

“If a bull is deferred, you have some time to retest. If a bull fails, it gives you some time to go and figure out another bull to use in your operation,” he adds.

AJ Tarpoff, Kansas State University extension veterinarian, agrees with Zoca about the importance of the BSE and bull health.

“Our bulls are one of our biggest single animal investments. However, often we forget to include them when considering herd health planning,” Tarpoff says. “I think the No. 1 reason for that is just out of convenience.”

Tarpoff explains bulls may need bigger chutes and handling facilities due to size because of this a producer may neglect bull health. To tackle that concern, veterinarians have set aside a day or set of days to focus on bulls and invited producers to bring in bulls for testing and vaccinations.

Garrett Stewart, DVM, has hosted Bullnanza for his clients near Washington, Kan., for 13 years. Hosted Tuesday through Friday the last week of March, Washington Vet Clinic clients can haul their bulls to the clinic and get them BSE tested as well as updated vaccinations, deworming and other ancillary therapies, helping to ensure their health and breeding soundness.

Stewart says the timing of the event benefits producers by giving them a chance to solve any problems they may find or have time to find another bull to replace one that is infertile.

He says it also serves as a producer appreciation event, with food provided and a networking opportunity to learn about new products from industry nutrition and health representatives.

BSE is an important process to determine if bulls are fertile and able to effectively breed cows. But Zoca reminds producers that bulls fail.

“An important thing to remember is when your veterinarian does the breeding sounds exam, and the bull fails, it’s not your veterinarian that is failing the bull. The veterinarian is not taking the test. It’s the bull that is taking the test.”

What is a Good Bull Worth in 2025?

Wed, 05 Feb 2025 17:13:51 GMT

The spring bull buying season is here, so it’s time to revisit the age old question. The question has been asked forever, or at least as long as we have been breeding cattle with a notion of trying to make the next generation better. It is a classic and timeless question. It is an important question. At this time of year, when many bulls are being marketed and we are planning ahead for spring breeding season, it is a question that is asked a lot!

The Answer

I remember first hearing the answer nearly 40 years ago as a student at OSU.

“A good bull is worth the value of five calves he sires.”

I’ve heard that answer again many times over the years. It is a good answer and a good rule of thumb to follow, the problem is it doesn’t exactly narrow down the range. If we do a little “cowboy math,” this answer may in fact lead to more questions.

What is considered a “Good Bull”?

For this discussion, qualifications to meet “Good Bull” status are:

A bull that sells with a registration paper, which includes pedigree information and a complete set of genetic values (including EPDs and Bio-economic indices) to be considered in the selection process.
A bull that has passed a Breeding Soundness Exam (BSE) and selling with a breeding soundness warranty (terms will vary).

When are we marketing our calves? What is their value?

According to the most recent (Jan. 21, 2025) Oklahoma Market Report:

524 lb. weaned steer calves (Large, 1) are worth about $3.50/lb. for a value of approximately $1,834 per head. Therefore, if my future marketing plan is to sell weaned steers, $1,834 x 5 = $9,170 is the answer.
912 lb. yearling steers (Large, 1) are worth about $2.53/lb. for a value of over $2,300 per head. Therefore, if my future marketing plan is to sell yearling steers, $2,300 x 5 = $11,500 is the answer.
1,500 lb. finished beef steers are worth $2.00/lb. live for a value of $3,000 each. Therefore, if my future marketing plan is to retain ownership through finishing and sell fed cattle on a live weight basis, $3,000 x 5 = $15,000 is the answer.

So, in the current market, a good bull is worth somewhere between $9,000 - $15,000 to a commercial cow-calf operation. Where exactly in that range depends on your marketing plan and the market conditions at that time. Not an exact number because there are many variables in play.

One key point illustrated here is that the longer you own the offspring before marketing, the greater the value of the bull to your operation. Retained ownership gives you more time and opportunity to capture the value of your investment in genetics. It is noteworthy that we haven’t considered the value added to replacement females a bull will sire. Bulls used to sire the next generation of cows have an even greater long-term economic impact on the profit potential of your operation and should be valued accordingly.

I encourage cow-calf operations to consider their production system and marketing plan. Doing so should dictate where to apply selection pressure. Genetic values pay when you purchase bulls capable of improving genetic potential for the specific traits that will translate to added value at your intended marketing endpoint.

Keep the following chart in mind as another way to evaluate ownership cost of bulls on a per calf sired basis.

(Johnson/OSU)

Your next read: Weathering Winter Challenges: Tips for Feedlot Success

Making Genetic Progress in the Fescue Belt

Thu, 25 Jul 2024 19:38:02 GMT

“In Kentucky and Tennessee, we’ve been fortunate to have some cost-share dollars that have been going into a genetic improvement program that each of the states has done independently,” said Dr. Darrh Bullock, University of Kentucky extension professor, Lexington. Bullock gave his presentation “Genetic Improvement Programs in the Fescue Belt: Do Incentives Raise the Bar or Just the Price?” during the Beef Improvement Federation (BIF) Symposium June 11 in Knoxville, Tennessee.

Bull cost-share programs

The Kentucky Beef Cattle Genetic Improvement Program and the Tennessee Agricultural Enhancement Program, both established in the early 2000s, were designed to assist cattle producers in making genetic progress through bull cost-share initiatives. Bullock explained bulls must meet expected progeny difference (EPD) requirements and be genomically tested to enter the program. Bulls are categorized by their general strengths, including calving ease, terminal production and trait balance. These programs are built on science and technology, including EPDs from various breed associations, genomic data and research from the U.S. Meat Animal Research Center.

While implementing bull cost-share programs has led to faster genetic progress in cattle, that is not the only goal of the projects. “The educational part is huge,” Bullock explained. “For us to go out and actually educate commercial cattlemen on the best way to buy bulls, as well as other management practices, is a huge aspect of these programs.”

Continued education is a requirement to participate in either program; specifically, sound management practices, such as breeding soundness exams (BSE), Beef Quality Assurance (BQA) training, vaccination programs and crossbreeding, are encouraged.

Program successes to date

Highlighting some successes of these programs, Bullock touched on behavior changes observed in producers and a comparison between beef genetics in the fescue belt and the national average. Since the start of each initiative, breed associations have seen an increase in data submissions and use of genomic technology by seedstock producers. Commercial producers have gained a better understanding of EPDs and the benefits of genomically enhanced EPDs. Based on data provided by the American Angus Association, cattle in Kentucky and Tennessee are currently better than average for multiple EPDs and important selection indexes. Bullock also pointed out that genomic testing in these regions has significantly increased. While only a small percentage of bulls sold each year in Kentucky and Tennessee go through the cost-share programs, these initiatives are proving to have a significant impact on beef genetics in the region.

To watch Bullock’s full presentation, visit

For more information about this year’s Symposium and the Beef Improvement Federation, including additional presentations and award winners, visit BIFSymposium.com .

Dr. R.L. “Bob” Hough Presented BIF Pioneer Award

Tue, 07 Jun 2022 17:14:27 GMT

The Beef Improvement Federation (BIF) presented Dr. R.L. “Bob” Hough, Lone Tree, Colorado, the BIF Pioneer Award June 3 during the group’s annual research symposium in Las Cruces, New Mexico.

The Pioneer Award recognizes individuals who have made lasting contributions to the improvement of beef cattle, honoring those who have had a major role in acceptance of performance reporting and documentation as the primary means to make genetic change in beef cattle.

During his tenure at the Red Angus Association of America, it became the first breed association to implement a Whole Herd Reporting program and adopt the concept of economically relevant traits. Using these systems, they implemented the industry’s first data filters and developed nine new expected progeny differences (EPDs) – including the first Reproductive Sire Summary. Hough also developed the first USDA Processed Verified Program for entry into approved Angus product lines, and concurrently with Gelbvieh, developed groundbreaking value-based marketing systems.

“Hough was the long-time executive at Red Angus, as well as executive at Limousin. He has also worked in production agriculture and academia where he received early promotion and tenure,” says David Nichols of Nichols Farms, Bridgewater, Iowa. “Red Angus went from the 11th to the 4th largest breed during his tenure.”

Hough served on the BIF Board, served as a Guidelines chapter editor, multi-times Guidelines author, standing committee chair, and has been a general session speaker at the annual symposium. In addition, he was the cofounder and first chair of the Ultrasound Guidelines Committee, as well as president of the Beef Breeds Council, and director of the National Pedigree Livestock Association and Genetic Evaluation Council. Additionally, Hough has received the BIF Continuing Service and Ambassador Awards, and with receipt of the BIF Pioneer Award he joins Dr. Bob de Baca as the only people to be recognized with all three awards.

More than 300 beef producers, academia and industry representatives attended the organization’s 54th Annual Research Symposium and Convention in Las Cruces, New Mexico. BIF’s mission is to help improve the industry by promoting greater acceptance of beef cattle performance evaluation.

Treat calf scours early for best results

Mon, 01 Nov 2021 13:12:19 GMT

Diarrhea in neonatal calves is one of the leading causes of morbidity (sickness) and mortality (death) in North America and Europe and continues to be a major cause of economic loss to the beef cattle industry. There are five major infectious causes of diarrhea in calves less than 21 days of age: E. coli K99, Rotavirus, Coronavirus, Cryptosporidia, and Salmonella. Other factors such as inadequate colostrum, poor sanitation, stress, and cold weather can make calf survival almost impossible. Regardless of the cause, diarrhea results in loss of electrolytes and water in the feces of calves and decreases milk intake. Ultimately, this leads to dehydration, metabolic acidosis (the blood is more acidic than normal), electrolyte abnormalities, and a negative energy balance from the lost nutrients and lack of milk. Oral electrolyte solutions have typically been used to replace fluid losses, correct acid-base and electrolyte levels in the blood, and provide nutritional support with the added benefit of being relatively inexpensive and easy to administer. Recent research has resulted in better methods to assess and treat a calf with diarrhea as well as better guidelines for choosing an oral electrolyte solution.

The most common mistake made in the use of oral electrolyte replacement therapy is waiting too long before administering these formulas or not giving them often enough to affected calves. Administered early and frequently, these fluids help the calf maintain strength and normal body temperature and allow it to continue nursing. Administering fluids too late, when the calf is already depressed and down, or administering too little so that the calf continues to lose more fluid than it is receiving orally, allows the dehydration to worsen and the calf’s condition to deteriorate. When dehydration and acidosis get severe enough, the gastrointestinal tract loses function and orally administered fluids are no longer of any value. In these cases, the only effective means of preventing death is to have a veterinarian administer intravenous fluid therapy.

A quick assessment of a calf with diarrhea will determine if oral fluid therapy or if intravenous (IV) is needed. The choice depends on the severity of both dehydration and metabolic acidosis (low pH of the blood). Dehydration is relatively easy to monitor by how far the eyeball is set back into the skull and the loss of skin elasticity. Metabolic acidosis is assessed by the calf’s ability to stand and suck. In general, a standing calf with a strong to moderate suckle reflex or that demonstrates a “chewing action” can be given oral fluids. Mildly dehydrated calves showing mild skin tenting when the skin on the neck is pinched, minimal sinking of the eye into the head, eyes and mucous membranes are still moist, and extremities are still somewhat warm are ideal candidates for oral fluids.

Thumb rules for the use of oral electrolyte fluid supplements for scouring calves:

1. Reconstitute the oral electrolyte supplement and administer it according to manufacturer’s recommendations.

2. Administer the reconstituted fluid formulation at approximately 5% of body weight, which is 2 quarts for an 80 pound calf. How many times per day this is necessary depends on how much fluid the calf is receiving by nursing and how much fluid is lost through the diarrhea. In many cases, the progression of the disease is not very rapid and the problem lies only in the missed opportunity to administer oral fluids at an earlier stage when response is best. Continued assessment of the scouring calf’s condition is required in order to make good decisions regarding the frequency of fluid administration.

3. Only administer oral fluids if the calf still has a suckle response. It is usually better to administer oral fluids by bottle with voluntary suckling. This enhances passage of the fluid to the abomasum via the esophageal groove. Oral fluids can be given by esophageal feeder when the suckle reflex is weak, but this method places fluids into the rumen. Any calf with a very weak or absent suckle reflex should be given IV fluid therapy because, if oral fluids are given to a calf with ileus (no gut motility), the fluid is not absorbed but instead pools in the rumen resulting in bloat and/or rumen acidosis. ANY calf that is severely depressed and unable to stand requires intravenous fluids.

4. It is extremely important that the oral fluids chosen for rehydration will be able to increase blood pH from an acidic state to a more neutral state. This is normally accomplished by alkalinizing agents such as bicarbonate, acetate, or propionate found in oral electrolytes. Although all have similar effects, acetate and propionate are preferred over bicarbonate in nursing calves because they do not interfere with milk digestion.

5. If calves are depressed and refuse to nurse, a hypertonic oral electrolyte product such as Calf-Lyte II HE or Enterolyte HE can be used. A “hypertonic” oral electrolyte product has a very large amount of glucose (sugar) in the preparation and has “HE” on the label (for “high energy”). Hypertonic solutions can give greater nutritional support because of the higher glucose level yet they can cause abomasal bloat and increased diarrhea if the calf is unable to absorb this large amount of sugar. If nursing is not resumed within 12 hours, calves will get too weak to respond to oral treatment alone.

6. Milk or milk replacers should NOT be withheld from scouring calves. None of the oral electrolyte formulas provide adequate protein and energy to replace milk. Some experts used to recommend a “rest the gut” approach, suggesting that continued milk feeding worsens diarrhea. However, research has shown that milk feeding does not prolong or worsen diarrhea, nor does it delay healing of the intestines. Calves should be maintained on their full milk diet (continue nursing) plus oral electrolytes when possible as long as they exhibit diarrhea.

Electrolyte fluid administration is by far the most effective treatment for calves with scours. Because affected calves are often weak and chilled, additional nursing care may be necessary for survival. In this regard, providing warmth, dry bedding, protection from the elements, and adequate nutritional support are all critical. Fluid therapy is most effective when it is administered aggressively and early in the course of the disease. The most critical factor may be the early recognition of affected calves. Caught early, most calves will respond very favorably to oral fluid therapy. Remember milk is better at maintaining a normal blood glucose level than any electrolyte solution so allow the calf to continue nursing. If the calf becomes so severely dehydrated it is weak and unable to rise, or if it has no suckle, intravenous fluid therapy may be the only way to save the calf’s life. Other treatments, such as antibiotics, may be beneficial but they are far less important than fluid and electrolyte replacement when it comes to calf survival.

Improved diagnostics are now available to ascertain the cause of neonatal calf diarrhea. The UKVDL has a Calf Diarrhea Multiplex PCR panel which tests for the major diarrhea pathogens in calves less than 21 days old including: E.coli K99, Rotavirus, Coronavirus, Salmonella spp., and Cryptosporidia. Submit one fecal sample per calf early in the course of disease and before any treatment has been given. The test is highly accurate as it detects the DNA or “molecular fingerprint” of the various pathogens and results are available within 1-2 days. At least 5 grams of feces must be submitted in a labeled, leak-proof container maintained at a cool temperature during transport. Do not submit fecal samples in gloves; screw cap tubes or vials are preferred in the laboratory. Call the UKVDL (859) 257-8283 or check the website

http://vdl.uky.edu for more information.

Using Sexed Semen to Navigate the Genetic Fork in the Road

by Garrett Ulmer, University of Tennessee beef cattle genomics graduate student

Some cattle are excelling at rapidly producing a high-quality end product; however, they are usually not the low maintenance females that producers want to have in their cow herd. Similarly, the ideal bull for producing replacement females may not produce high-value feeder or carcass cattle. Rather than focusing breeding goals on being heavily terminal or primarily maternal, sexed semen allows commercial herds of all sizes to “take both roads.”

Intentionally making quality replacement females while maximizing terminal value from non-replacement animals. Kenny Wells from ABS Global detailed innovations in this space during the Advancements in Producer Education breakout session. The session part of the Beef Improvement Federation (BIF) Symposium June 11, 2024, in Knoxville, Tenn.

Wells emphasized that competing industries have already capitalized on creating breeding programs which allow them to achieve maximum profitability. Pork producers leverage optimized genetic lines along with maternal and terminal heterosis to increase in product value of offspring. Dairy farmers have refined their maternal unit for milk production with female sexed semen while also making use their former byproduct, dairy steers, by utilizing terminal beef genetics.

Sexed semen is not just a tool for dairy producers. Beef operations can use it to meet maternal and terminal goals within the same calf crop. During his presentation, Wells discussed ways that ABS has deployed sexed semen in beef settings. One example is the 60/40 Sync Program, which builds on the idea of segmenting your cow herd so that your most fertile cows are bred to produce your replacement heifers, while the rest will produce a more terminal animal.

The 60/40 Sync Program works by synchronizing and fitting all females with an estrus detection aid, just as recommended for fixed-time AI protocols. Females that display estrus with fully activated patches, usually around 60%, are then time AI bred with female sexed semen from maternally designed bulls. The remaining females that have not displayed estrus, around 40%, are time AI bred with conventional semen from terminally focused bulls and all cows are exposed to a terminally oriented sire for clean-up. This program aims for the resulting calf crop to be made up of 35% maternally designed heifer calves to retain in the herd and 65% terminally focused animals, the majority of which are steers, to market.

Wells discussed how the strategic use of sexed semen could allow even very small producers to implement a structured crossbreeding program by using different breeds of bull as maternal and terminal sires. Programs like the 60/40 also have long-term reproduction benefits within herds. It allows the most fertile cows to have heifer calves born early in a calving season. This “head start” results in older replacement females that conceive earlier and have heavier calves throughout their productive lives. Wells was clear that even though this program may not maximize pregnancy rate to AI, it does create the opportunity to generate the “right” calf from every mating.

Wells’ presentation discussed a multi-year demonstration of the 60/40 program between ABS and the Bair Ranch in central Montana. The study assigned 250 cows to either a control group, which followed a fixed-time AI protocol using conventional semen, or a test group, which implemented the 60/40 Program. Over four years of data collection, the Bair Ranch averaged 25-30% of the calf crop being maternally designed heifers resulting from sexed semen — exceeding the ranch’s target of 23-24% to keep as replacements every year. Key takeaways included that female sexed semen resulted in an average of 91% heifer calves and that female sexed and overall pregnancy rates in the 60/40 test group were lower than those of conventional semen. Their work also indicated that the 60/40 program reduced the relative proportion of calves being born in the first interval when compared to the control. However, more 60/40 calves were born in the second calving interval, suggesting that 60/40 sync likely doesn’t significantly impact the length of the calving season.

Wells was clear: For the 60/40 program to work, producers must choose the right genetic inputs for their respective programs. With sexed semen, producers can adjust areas of their herd that previously they could not: more selection pressure can be applied to terminal traits without throwing maternal quality out of balance, and maternal traits can be selected for without reducing terminal profitability. The implementation of crossbreeding also allows for significant increases in efficiency through heterosis, particularly for lowly heritable maternal traits such as fertility and health.

Taken together, 60/40 Sync Program provides a framework for a more efficient, sustainable, and resilient breeding system. The concept laid out by Wells represents a flexible and adaptable strategy for producers to focus on making fertile, feed efficient, and moderate replacement females while enhancing growth and carcass quality on their terminal calves.

To watch the Well’s presentation, visit

For more information about this year’s Symposium and the Beef Improvement Federation, including additional presentations and award winners, visit BIFSymposium.com .

Your next read: Meat Industry Groups Respond to Report from the 2025 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee

The Fall Cattle Drive Now Includes Calving Season at Idaho Ranch

Before winter arrives, American ranchers are rushing to get cattle and calves settled and sorted.

That fall drive includes fall-calving cows. It’s a growing trend as more herds shift to delivering a fresh crop of calves ahead of seasonal snow showers.

“Oh, he’s a little one,” Tucker Shaw says as he and his son, Joe, hoist a calf to weigh it on a mobile scale. “He’s just 60 pounds.”

The Shaw Cattle Co. is nestled against the bleached bluffs of Western Idaho along the Boise River just outside Caldwell. With roughly 1,400 calves expected this fall, the Shaw team is on the hunt to tag and treat a new crop of babies.

“We’ll take off in the mornings and very first thing two or three of us will go in different directions to do inventory,” says Tucker.

Tucker and Joe Shaw tag baby calves.

(Maggie Malson)

“We’re getting 40 to 50 calves a day, every day and so it’s a nonstop job just to get through the calves to make sure everything’s healthy, mothered up and nursing,” explains Sam Shaw.

These calves are the future of an operation that began with their grandfather.

“He worked for a guy in high school that had registered Hereford cattle,” recounts Tucker. “That guy, when he graduated, promised him Hereford heifer.”

World War II came calling but when their grandfather returned home, that promise was kept.

“There was a letter waiting at his folks’ house when he got back from World War II that said, remember, I still owe you a heifer,” Tucker says. “That heifer is what got my family into the cattle business.”

They lived in McCall, Idaho, at the time but in 1959, the family moved from the mountains, south, to their current location just outside of Caldwell.

The Shaw Cattle Co. calves roughly 1,400 cows each fall.

(Maggie Malson)

“We moved here just because of the winters,” explains Sam. “The winters were a lot milder than it was in McCall and this is great cow country.”

Plentiful irrigation water and abundant permanent pasture have helped the Shaw Cattle Co. thrive as a Hereford, Angus and Red Angus seedstock business.

“Our normal rainfall is about ten inches a year, so everything has to be irrigated,” says Tucker. “As long as we’ve got water, it’s a great place to be.”

Today, the operation sells roughly 500 bulls a year supported by a robust artificial insemination (AI) and embryo transfer (ET) program.

“We’re identifying those cows that are the elite cows in our operation and trying to propagate those genetics,” Sam says. “We don’t get just 1 or 2 calves out of them a year but we’re trying to get 10 or 15 calves out of them every year.”

They are also using DNA testing and genetic mapping to make selections and add depth to their understanding of the herd.

“Part of the registered cattle industry is that over the years, we keep adding more and more layers of data,” explains Tucker. “That gives us more information about our cattle and the breeding stock that we’re able to offer to our customers.”

A new baby calf stands tall at Shaw Cattle Co.

(Maggie Malson)

As the latest calf crop lands hock deep in green grass, this ranch family is excited about the work.

“Today we probably have somewhere between 35 and 42 to tag,” Tucker says. “It looks like Monday we tagged 65 calves that day and so that was as big of a day as we’ve ever had.”

They’ll keep hunting newborn calves curled up and waiting to be discovered.

“I love seeing the next generation of genetics,” smiles Sam. “You get to look at these cattle and see, yeah, either we messed up or no, we did it right.”

That’s an important job and it comes with a long tail.

“The genetics we produce today, our customers won’t reap the benefits of for 3 to 5 years,” explains Sam. “Ultimately it’s to produce a better product for the consumer.”

This fall as each calf is checked, counted, cared for and celebrated this family of ranchers is driving forward with a focus on future seasons of the operation.

Secure Food Supply Resources Available to Livestock Producers

In the event of a foreign disease outbreak, livestock producers need to be prepared. Resources have been created by industry experts for those raising food animals, including beef and dairy cattle, pigs, sheep and goats. Knowledge and preparedness can help livestock producers across the U.S. develop and put contingency plans in place for their individual operations. These guidelines can be found at securefoodsupply.org , as well as additional species-specific websites.

“The Secure Beef Supply plan has been developed for cattle producers to prepare them and help them in efforts to protect their livestock against foreign animal disease outbreaks, specifically Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD),” says Meranda Small, Idaho State BQA Coordinator, who presented this information at the Idaho Cattle Association Annual meeting. “Producers have a role to play in helping be prepared for an outbreak.”

“FMD, while harmless to us as human beings, causes blisters and animals with cloven-hooved, which includes cattle, pigs, sheep and goats,” Small says. “It also has the ability to impact and equally affect wildlife species such as deer, elk and bison, giving them the opportunity to move the disease across state lines and from one location to another.”

Sergio Arispe serves as an Oregon State University Extension livestock and rangeland field faculty and associate professor in the College of Agricultural Sciences. He also serves as the lead for the Secure Beef Supply project to mitigate risks of a foreign disease outbreak.

“The purpose of traceability is for transparency, not only within the livestock industry, but with our trade partners as well,” Arispe says, who also presented at the ICA meeting. “Movement permits demonstrate that steps have been taken to safely move animals or products.”

Arispe says it’s important for producers to be knowledgeable and prepared if and when an outbreak might occur. Producers can create a five-step contingency document, which addresses cattle inventory and potential movement, financial planning, enhanced biosecurity, communication and cattle health management.

The Secure Food Supply project helps producers, livestock haulers and processors create contingency plans in case of disease outbreak.

(Secure Beef Supply)

“At any given time there are about 3 million animals on our highways, or in our planes or boats,” Arispe says. “There will be at least a 72-hour national standstill declared by the USDA for all cloven-hoofed animals if foot-and-mouth disease is ever found in the U.S. A lot of producers don’t know that, and that’s only the beginning.”

According to Small, stamping out or depopulation is one control method that is used by animal health officials to stop disease spread. This method was used by the UK during their 2001 outbreak. Additional control methods include stopping both domestic movement of animals and animal products for a period of time. Exports of animals with clinical signs would also stop. Emergency vaccination would be considered, but also has export implications.

“The first goal is always to identify disease as fast as possible, put the controls in place to limit the spread, and stop the virus without having to implement vaccination,” explains Idaho State Veterinarian Scott Leibsle, who was on hand to answer audience questions. “You can still achieve the highest level of trade status, which is free from the disease without having to vaccinate for it. If you have to start vaccinating for it, then that lowers the trade status of any nation. There are countries that are free from FMD, but they’re still having to vaccinate for it and we don’t accept trade from any of those countries that vaccinate for foot and mouth disease.”

Your Next Read: Stabenow Finally Releases Full Text of Senate Farm Bill; Here’s What It Means for Agriculture

Terminal Crossbreeding: A Missed Opportunity

Crossbreeding is one of the most underexploited breeding tools in the beef industry. The industry’s recent push for larger carcass weights while keeping cow costs at a minimum has brought terminal crossbreeding programs to the forefront. Dr. Mark Thallman, a research geneticist from the USDA Meat Animal Research Center in Clay Center, Neb., laid out a vision for terminal crossbreeding that allows producers to get the best of both worlds during the Advancements in Producer Education breakout session. The session part of the Beef Improvement Federation (BIF) Symposium June 11, 2024, in Knoxville, Tenn.

Thallman’s main message was that if the growth potential of a herd’s cows and bulls are the same, that profit potential is likely being left on the table. This is due to the antagonism between cow resource needs (costs) and terminal output (revenue).

“Terminal crossbreeding programs mean breeding cows that are strong in terminal traits to bulls that are strong in terminal traits,” said Thallman, “We did this extensively in the 1970s, but the biggest challenges were producing a sufficient number of replacement females and issues with calving difficulty.”

To address this deficit of replacement females in terminal crossbreeding programs, Thallman proposed several solutions that might fit production systems across the U.S., from one-bull herds to large commercial operations. In herds where having an entirely separate maternal herd is impractical, an optimal approach would be to purchase young cows, pregnant with their second calf, allowing for using a purely terminal bull without concern for introducing calving difficulties. This system would require herds focused on breeding these maternal replacements, likely leveraging sex-skewed semen.

Thallman underlined that genetic selection in these schemes should be driven through bull selection.

“Culling should be minimal and based almost solely on the immediate effect on profitability,” he emphasized, “We shouldn’t cull commercial cows with the hopes of improving genetics.”

This is a function of the low heritability of these traits and the limited selection intensity that can be achieved on females in commercial herds. To this end, he drew attention to the need for continued development of EPDs for maternal traits.

While much of Thallman’s talk drew on the conventional wisdom of crossbreeding that we have known for decades, his call for a more targeted creation of divergent maternal and terminal populations would require some changes across the industry. In particular, breeds would need to adopt more targeted breeding objectives focused on terminal or maternal suites of traits. The most important of these would be mature size, as maternally oriented breeds should be much more moderately sized than high-growth terminal breeds.

Finally, this vision for industry-wide terminal crossbreeding would require a somewhat new segment of the industry to develop aimed exclusively at producing replacement females. These ideas would encourage breed complementarity, maximize heterosis and help make the entire beef production chain more efficient.

To watch the Thallman’ presentation, visit

. For more information about this year’s Symposium and the Beef Improvement Federation, including additional presentations and award winners, visit BIFSymposium.com .

Your next read: Profit Tracker: Beef Packers Take a Big Hit, While Pork Packer Margins Remain Steady

Seedstock

How Data, Genomics and Collaboration Are Transforming Cattle Genetics and Herd Profitability

Lessons Learned

What is AGR?

How Three Ranches are Using Horses Today

Gathering and Sorting

Branding and Moving

From Selection to Breeding: A Veterinarian’s Guide to Productive Heifers

Vaccination and Health Management

Nutrition and Growth Patterns

Reproductive Assessment

Biosecurity Considerations

Economics and Sustainability

There’s a Lot of Info in That Little TSU

Then There Are The Bulls

When Is the Best Time to Wean?

Four Factors to Consider

Is It Time to Pull Bulls?

Open Heifers Explained: What You Need to Consider to Increase Preg Rates

Montana Veterinarian Encourages a Fresh Look at Deworming Protocols

The Importance of Calf Preconditioning

Beef Producers Be Aware: Dangerous Asian Longhorned Tick Continues Migrating West

What does it look like?

What are the health risks?

How to Tackle Ticks

1,500-lb. Carcasses the New Normal, Not the Exception

Is the U.S. Behind?

Young Producer Focus

Other Key Topics

Exploring Next-Generation Phenotyping that Drives Commercial Profitability

Cow Herd Scorecard: Evaluating Performance Post Calving

Body Condition Scoring Bulls: Now is the Time to Make Sure Bulls Are Ready for Turnout

Gene Editing: Livestock Genetic Improvement Through DNA Editing

Uncover the Economic Power of Bulls

Wanted: Bulls Ready to Work

What is a Good Bull Worth in 2025?

Making Genetic Progress in the Fescue Belt

Dr. R.L. “Bob” Hough Presented BIF Pioneer Award

Treat calf scours early for best results

Using Sexed Semen to Navigate the Genetic Fork in the Road

The Fall Cattle Drive Now Includes Calving Season at Idaho Ranch

Secure Food Supply Resources Available to Livestock Producers

Terminal Crossbreeding: A Missed Opportunity