Oklahoma Farm Report masthead graphic with wheat on the left and cattle on the right.
Howdy Neighbors!
Ron Hays, Director of Farm and Ranch Programming, Radio Oklahoma Ag Network  |  2401 Exchange Ave, Suite F, Oklahoma City, Ok 73108  |  (405) 601-9211


Agricultural News

Noble Foundation Finds Alternative Culling Method Increases Profits

Tue, 08 Jul 2014 10:58:07 CDT

Noble Foundation Finds Alternative Culling Method Increases Profits

By Jon Biermacher, Kellie Curry Raper and Billy Cook

By summer, cow-calf producers start thinking about weaning their spring calf crop and how best to manage and market older, unproductive and open cull cows. To help provide producers options for managing and marketing cull cows, researchers at the Noble Foundation and Oklahoma State University teamed up and conducted a study that evaluated the economics of two alternative management and marketing systems for retaining open beef cows.

A total of 161 cows (48 in 2008, 42 in 2009 and 71 in 2009) from a black-hided Angus herd maintained at the Noble Foundation's Red River Farm were retained in either a dry-lot feed system or in a stockpiled native grass pasture grazing system. In the drylot system, cows were provided a low cost diet of rye hay, mineral and a 20 percent cubed supplement while the native pasture system allowed cull cows access to stockpiled native grass pasture.This system allowed cows grazing access to stockpiled native grass. In addition, at the time of weaning in October, body weight, body condition score (BCS), and USDA grade and dressing percentage were obtained for each cull cow. Approximately every 30 days for a five-month period, weight, BCS, and USDA grade and dressing percentage were collected again on each cow through March (about 150 days in total).

Using feed, pasture and labor costs, and body weight, BCS, and USDA grade and dressing data collected in the study, net returns were calculated for each management system at each of five sequential marketing periods (November, December, January, February and March). In addition, the body condition scores were used to categorize cull cows into three independent size categories, including thin (BCS<5), medium (5 < BCS ? 6) and heavy (BCS>6). In each period, net return was calculated as the difference between the revenue that would be generated at marketing minus retention, feed, labor and pasture costs minus the revenue that would be generated if cows had been sold at the time of weaning. This allowed us to compare the potential profitability that a producer could expect to earn for each marketing period beyond when cows are typically culled and sold at weaning in the fall. This is also the time of year when the market for cull cows is typically at a seasonal low.

At first, we excluded the body condition scores collected in the study and accounted for the net benefits of all culled animals, regardless of their condition, and found that it was more economical to retain them on stockpiled native grass pasture and market them in February. On average, in this scenario, open cattle earned an additional $32 per head compared to marketing them at weaning in October. However, when body condition scores were used to separate cull cows by size, the results suggested that it would be more economical for producers to go ahead and market their heavier cows (BCS>6) at weaning in October and retain the medium and thin cows on stockpiled native grass pasture until at least February. This strategy resulted in an additional net return of $60 per head above what would have been earned selling them at weaning in October. So producers who have the ability to place BCS on their cull cows at the time of weaning can expect to increase the salvage value of thin and medium-sized animals beyond selling them at the time of weaning in October. Thin (BCS<5) cows realized a positive net return of $20 per head in the dry-lot system during the February marketing period, which was $40 lower than the pasture system.

Our results suggest that there are economic alternatives for producers to add value to the beef cows culled out of their spring-calving herds prior to taking them to market. However, we note that producer resources (land, labor and management) are important when making these decisions. For more information and specific details about this study, including the management and marketing systems discussed in this article, please see the following publications:

Marketing Cull Beef Cows: Does Body Condition Score Matter?

Net Returns from Feeding Cull Beef Cows: The Influence of Initial Body Condition Score



WebReadyTM Powered by WireReady® NSI


Top Agricultural News

  • Upcoming Rural Economic Outlook Conference at OSU to Provide Applicable Updates for the Ag Industry   Tue, 27 Sep 2022 17:24:21 CDT
  • Congressman Lucas Hopeful Biden Administration Will Provide More Necessary Funds in 2023 Farm Bill   Tue, 27 Sep 2022 17:12:45 CDT
  • Oklahoma Grain Elevator Cash Bids as of 2 p.m. September 27, 2022  Tue, 27 Sep 2022 16:13:21 CDT
  • September 27, 2022, Market Wrap-Up with Justin Lewis  Tue, 27 Sep 2022 14:18:07 CDT
  • LMA Hosts 2022 Washington D.C. Fly In   Tue, 27 Sep 2022 14:07:12 CDT
  • Chairman David Scott Applauds USDA's American-Made Fertilizer Production Grants  Tue, 27 Sep 2022 13:11:41 CDT
  • American Farmland Trust, Edelen Renewables and Arcadia Announce Partnership to Combat Climate Change by Advancing Smart SolarSM  Tue, 27 Sep 2022 12:02:23 CDT
  • U.S. Red Meat Industry Commemorates 45 Years in Japan  Tue, 27 Sep 2022 11:15:07 CDT

  • More Headlines...


    Ron salutes our daily email sponsors!

    Oklahoma Beef council Oklahoma Ag Credit Oklahoma Farm Bureau National Livestock Credit Ag Mediation Program P&K Equipment Oklahoma City Farm Show Union Mutual Stillwater Milling Oklahoma Cattlemen's Association KIS FUTURES, INC.


    Search OklahomaFarmReport.com

    © 2008-2022 Oklahoma Farm Report
    Email Ron   |   Newsletter Signup   |    Current Spots   |    Program Links

    WebReady powered by WireReady® Inc.