Keeney`s Corner

A current and reflective discussion of cattle breeding from outside the registered mainstream
 
HomeUsergroupsRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 oh no Burke, say it ain`t so...

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
AuthorMessage
EddieM



Posts : 895
Join date : 2010-09-24
Location : South Carolina

PostSubject: Re: oh no Burke, say it ain`t so...   Sun Mar 13, 2016 9:09 am

MKeeney wrote:
EddieM wrote:
BT wrote:
Profit is usually enhanced by putting the pounds in more and smaller packages and then selling each pound for more money. Profit per acre is usually improved by increasing the stocking rate.
 
OK, small is good, Burt.  Do you raise lowlines or even better, ...sheep!  If not, then you do not believe what you write.

Improving stocking rate is fine but you omit that it takes increased infrastructure to make real world increased stocking rates work.  Increased infrastructure is OVERHEAD that you start off not liking.

BT wrote:
This comes from improving land productivity and/or changing the cow.
A little double talk here, Burt, if you have been studying up on soil health.  There are two directional ways to view a forage/animal system.  One is soil up and one is animal down.  Take your pick but don't mix.  Mixing is for tossed salads.

BT wrote:
True efficiency is total herd efficiency, not per-cow efficiency. True efficiency is measured by the total receipts from the herd and the direct cost of running the herd. Total sales receipts are driven by number of cows, number of calves or yearlings sold, how early in the calving season the calves were born, calf and yearling growth rates and the prices received for each class of animal sold.
Lot of fluff here, Burt.  You can sell a potload of dumpy little short dinks here that come off of the pastures like flies to a fresh pile or you can take a lot less medium sized quality calves to the same sale barn around here and either one will total the same cumulative dollars of the better sized calves might even bring more.  And it is NOT an issue of individual calf weight but of individual calf frame size.  Same for cull cows sold by the pound or bred cows marketed for top prices.  Get a grip and move on to something real.  Or sell used cars, chinchillas, emus or something else besides worn talk of small is better unless you like coins instead of bills.

I catch a little pharoneese in Burke`s comments, but not in the extreme you cast ...I would bet size is regulated more by feed and management than by pud genetics...and the recommended use of terminal bulls sure takes things way out of the Pharo context where "the puds do all things best"

No doubt that he is smarter than one article worth of info. But the blanket statements are useless to anyone unless they are laying in bed at night and are shivering. To help folks with articles there has to be a balance of doing something simple like going to a sales barn and see what differentiates prices. There is a difference in a proud tight wad that stays at home to read propaganda to save money by all means, including thinking that smaller cattle save money and an average Joe who knows where the breaks are in prices, what he can produce, what it costs and reasons out the better way. Somewhat the difference of blind follower versus a cattleman whose business is cattle. If you want to be a follower be a lemming. All's well that ends well, ... well almost.
Back to top Go down
LCP



Posts : 70
Join date : 2012-04-16
Location : north central SD

PostSubject: Re: oh no Burke, say it ain`t so...   Mon Mar 14, 2016 9:08 am

Breaking the mentality of "bigger is better" has to do with the whole system, not just the genetic component. Someone mentioned the difference in 5wts vs 6 wts. I sold some 5 wts last month, and figured the average value of gain for the guys selling 750-800 lb steers was about $0.45 vs my 5wt steers. I doubt it had much to do with genetics, and a lot more to do with age and feed. That's labor and feed costs that they were not getting paid much for.

His statement on overheads I thought pertained to the ones you don't really need, more specifically I would assume the ones that don't pay for themselves. Fence and water development generally pay for themselves I think. Especially if done right. Depreciation and life expectancy on fence and water are much different than the overheads I believe he is referring to.

I think it's also worth noting, he's speaking to the average mainstream commercial producer in this magazine. I'll go out on a limb and say it's more likely the average reader has cows that are a bit big for his environment, and has been told from everybody else how important big weaning weights are. Not to mention all the ads in the same magazine for new shiny equipment.

Back to top Go down
Grassfarmer



Posts : 850
Join date : 2010-09-27
Location : Belmont, Manitoba, Canada

PostSubject: Re: oh no Burke, say it ain`t so...   Mon Mar 14, 2016 1:57 pm

At risk of going off at a tangent I'm confused with this 5wt versus 6wt or 8wt thing. We've always grown calves out slowly aiming for 1.5 to 1.7lb gain over winter. I thought it was economical and it gave us heifers the size we wanted them to breed and steers to sell in the spring or summer them to sell into the fall yearling market. Other people said that you have to grow them faster so you have more gain to spread the yardage cost over.  I'm another of those that don't have enough accounting sense to know my profitability but increasingly I'm finding we aren't getting paid for the fact our steers are "green" when we sell them towards spring. Seemed up here during the BSE decade things had to be done at lowest cost hence more calves were roughed through the winter for the fall yearling market. Since cattle prices moved up to higher levels it seems like those in the fattening/backgrounding feedlots can't afford to own the cattle unless they are growing them at much faster rates. Just wondering if things have changed the same way in the US or if its a Canadian anomaly?

There is an article in the March Cattleman magazine page 22 on this topic.

http://www.agcanada.com/canadiancattlemen/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/CCT160307.pdf#_ga=1.53643560.1283490176.1379940992
Back to top Go down
http://www.luingcattle.com
PatB



Posts : 455
Join date : 2010-09-25
Age : 53
Location : Turner, Maine

PostSubject: Re: oh no Burke, say it ain`t so...   Mon Mar 14, 2016 4:41 pm

Grassfarmer wrote:
At risk of going off at a tangent I'm confused with this 5wt versus 6wt or 8wt thing. We've always grown calves out slowly aiming for 1.5 to 1.7lb gain over winter. I thought it was economical and it gave us heifers the size we wanted them to breed and steers to sell in the spring or summer them to sell into the fall yearling market. Other people said that you have to grow them faster so you have more gain to spread the yardage cost over.  I'm another of those that don't have enough accounting sense to know my profitability but increasingly I'm finding we aren't getting paid for the fact our steers are "green" when we sell them towards spring. Seemed up here during the BSE decade things had to be done at lowest cost hence more calves were roughed through the winter for the fall yearling market. Since cattle prices moved up to higher levels it seems like those in the fattening/backgrounding feedlots can't afford to own the cattle unless they are growing them at much faster rates. Just wondering if things have changed the same way in the US or if its a Canadian anomaly?

There is an article in the March Cattleman magazine page 22 on this topic.

http://www.agcanada.com/canadiancattlemen/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/CCT160307.pdf#_ga=1.53643560.1283490176.1379940992

Can you make more money by feeding grain to the cattle before marketing into your market? Can the added growth cover the expense of extra feed, labor, yardage and interest to purchase the feed? Is there enough potential profit to justify the change in management and feed resources needed? I changed to grassfed because there was more profit at the end of the day then feeding grain even though I was selling less overall pounds in my market.
Back to top Go down
Bob H



Posts : 371
Join date : 2011-02-17
Location : SW Idaho

PostSubject: Re: oh no Burke, say it ain`t so...   Mon Mar 14, 2016 7:47 pm

Grassy the change has been the cost of corn. When it was 7 dollars or more per bushel the cost of gains were well over 1 dollar per lb and that was just 20 months ago. Now it is about half of that or 3.60 per bushel And the cost of gain to grow cattle is in the 50 cent range. The cost of finishing is in the 70 cent range it makes growing cattle less profitable on grass and grass price's will have to get cheaper as this current grain market continues.
With all that said it still does not make raising cattle on grass any less profitable it just makes them less profitable than feeding corn if you are selling them into the same commodity market.

The next problem that we have run into is the corn feeders are keeping the purchase price of light cattle to high to make a profit. There are some folks who have not lost their 400 dollars per hd yet who are still pushing also but their turn is coming. ie California grass quys, folks who purchased high priced calves on the video in the summer of 15 etc

We are having to switch some thoughts around and be patient. Bob H
Back to top Go down
Grassfarmer



Posts : 850
Join date : 2010-09-27
Location : Belmont, Manitoba, Canada

PostSubject: Re: oh no Burke, say it ain`t so...   Mon Mar 14, 2016 8:05 pm

Thanks Bob that helps my understanding. Although we have moved to an area of cheaper land, grass (pasture) costs are dearer here while grain costs are likely lower. It looks like the opportunity here would be putting the steers destined for the commodity market into a pen at weaning with a bunk feeder of light oats and only enough forage to keep them healthy. Sell them before they get too well fleshed.
Back to top Go down
http://www.luingcattle.com
PatB



Posts : 455
Join date : 2010-09-25
Age : 53
Location : Turner, Maine

PostSubject: Re: oh no Burke, say it ain`t so...   Mon Mar 14, 2016 8:53 pm

Grassfarmer wrote:
Thanks Bob that helps my understanding. Although we have moved to an area of cheaper land, grass (pasture) costs are dearer here while grain costs are likely lower. It looks like the opportunity here would be putting the steers destined for the commodity market into a pen at weaning with a bunk feeder of light oats and only enough forage to keep them healthy. Sell them before they get too well fleshed.

Adapt and change what you are doing to return the most profit back to your operation.
Back to top Go down
Grassfarmer



Posts : 850
Join date : 2010-09-27
Location : Belmont, Manitoba, Canada

PostSubject: Re: oh no Burke, say it ain`t so...   Mon Mar 14, 2016 8:58 pm

PatB wrote:

Adapt and change what you are doing to return the most profit back to your operation.  

Not using AI or wasting time running tests for "defects" that's for sure.
Back to top Go down
http://www.luingcattle.com
Tom



Posts : 25
Join date : 2010-10-09

PostSubject: Re: oh no Burke, say it ain`t so...   Tue Mar 15, 2016 10:04 pm

Burke mentioned to me on more than one occasion, that he would like a herd of Hereford x Salers cows, bred to mainstream Angus for a terminal cross. I don't think those cows would be all that small.
Back to top Go down
Kent Powell



Posts : 606
Join date : 2010-09-24
Location : SW Kansas

PostSubject: Re: oh no Burke, say it ain`t so...   Wed Mar 16, 2016 1:33 am

PatB wrote:
Grassfarmer wrote:
Thanks Bob that helps my understanding. Although we have moved to an area of cheaper land, grass (pasture) costs are dearer here while grain costs are likely lower. It looks like the opportunity here would be putting the steers destined for the commodity market into a pen at weaning with a bunk feeder of light oats and only enough forage to keep them healthy. Sell them before they get too well fleshed.

Adapt and change what you are doing to return the most profit back to your operation.  

The job of the range cow has not changed for the 130 years there have been cows fenced in around here. What the heck do they need changed to do? I can only imagine how good they would be if every generation hadn't been so determined to change them for some short term perceptual fallacy. What has happened in the last 30 years has been beyond what I thought possible.
Back to top Go down
http://powellangus.com
MVCatt



Posts : 141
Join date : 2010-09-24
Age : 42
Location : SW Penn

PostSubject: Re: oh no Burke, say it ain`t so...   Sat Mar 19, 2016 10:28 pm

Kent Powell wrote:
The job of the range cow has not changed for the 130 years there have been cows fenced in around here.  What the heck do they need changed to do?  I can only imagine how good they would be if every generation hadn't been so determined to change them for some short term perceptual fallacy.  What has happened in the last 30 years has been beyond what I thought possible.

Some interesting numbers also made me think about Kent's post.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSrLTvwcX6w
Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4625
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: oh no Burke, say it ain`t so...   Sat Apr 09, 2016 8:01 am

more honesty from Burke...

http://beefmagazine.com/blog/burke-teichert-how-manage-your-way-out-hard-calving-cowherd?NL=BEEF-01&Issue=BEEF-01_20160408_BEEF-01_901&sfvc4enews=42&cl=article_1_b&utm_rid=CPG02000000643974&utm_campaign=9138&utm_medium=email&elq2=3d771fff6e634f13a7f01aadcc2389db

I want more than a live calf as well; I want a replacement heifer...the current crop of ce bulls are getting the job done...three heifers on right in comparison to a "green" from a cow...
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4625
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: oh no Burke, say it ain`t so...   Sat Sep 03, 2016 7:05 am

once again, the best ...my add to it, you reach a point where you will close the herd, use your own bulls, have greater predictability and build prepotency if the desire is to be a breeder rather than a producer...

http://beefmagazine.com/blog/burke-teichert-how-cull-right-cow-without-keeping-records
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
EddieM



Posts : 895
Join date : 2010-09-24
Location : South Carolina

PostSubject: Re: oh no Burke, say it ain`t so...   Sat Sep 03, 2016 7:57 am

Burt has the eye. He can remember the look of every cow and every calf without ear tags. cheers Wonder how hard that is when he sorts and sells? Especially knowing a cow that raises a sorry calf, ... Sure sounds simple. Shame he didn't dwell on the selection of the bull to make better cows. Sounds like culling is the key. Maybe it was just time for another article.
Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4625
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: oh no Burke, say it ain`t so...   Sat Sep 03, 2016 12:31 pm

he doesn`t need to remember anything more than the program criteria...anyone who can`t see the difference between the average calf and a poor calf probably shouldn't be producing cattle, let alone breeding cattle...but I bet more "breeders" exist in that category than "producers" for many "breeders" get their livelihood outside the cattle business...as for selecting THE bull, I doubt paperwork or eartags could overcome the human error...after several years of this program, just pick A bull and roll on...Burke is my favorite writer in the business because he has more cattle experience than the rest...and yeah, we agree:)
you can see the Burke philosophy at work next year...I`m adding a bit to the title... From the Paper versus the Pasture to the Plate; the journey never ends..
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
RobertMac



Posts : 377
Join date : 2010-09-28
Location : Mississippi, USA

PostSubject: Re: oh no Burke, say it ain`t so...   Tue Sep 06, 2016 9:09 am

Tom Lasater was implementing "Burke's philosophy" before Burke was born.
The key for the foundation herd is to close the herd and use your own bulls.
This is where "breeders" go off course and commercial cattlemen are told by academics to avoid.
Back to top Go down
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4625
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: oh no Burke, say it ain`t so...   Tue Sep 06, 2016 12:36 pm

I see Burke`s suggested program as more about fewer problems instead of more performance ...I can now attest that 6 essentials might have been too many; or maybe they added marbling and ribeye at the expense of the first 6...anyhow, come up, I`ll show you pinkeye in Beefmasters...
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
MKeeney
Admin


Posts : 4625
Join date : 2010-09-21

PostSubject: Re: oh no Burke, say it ain`t so...   Fri Apr 07, 2017 7:42 am

You're simply the best, better than all the rest
Better than anyone, anyone I've ever met
I'm stuck on your heart, and hang on every word you say ...Tina Turner

http://www.beefmagazine.com/cow-calf/here-we-go-again-terminal-vs-maternal-round-2
Back to top Go down
http://www.keeneyscorner.com
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: oh no Burke, say it ain`t so...   

Back to top Go down
 
oh no Burke, say it ain`t so...
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 5 of 5Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
 Similar topics
-
» oh no Burke, say it ain`t so...
» DAHBOO 77 - LAKE ERIE: SEARCH FOR PLANE THAT WENT MISSING AFTER TAKEOFF FROM BURKE LAKEFRONT AIRPORT

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Keeney`s Corner :: farm and ranch life-
Jump to: