|
The cattle industry has stood at similar crossroads before,
waiting for both economics and emotion to lead it in one genetic
direction or another.
Today, one path leads toward further integration of Angus, which
by most accounts already represents at least two-thirds of the
genetics in the commercial industry. From a purebred standpoint,
Angus registrations dwarf the collective size of the next eight
largest breed associations.
Going down the other path would
move the industry further away from the straight-bred use of
Angus, toward more crossbreeding with purebreds of other breeds
used on Angus type cows, or via composites that include Angus as
one of its components.
Like Hereford in the 1960’s and
Shorthorn before that, Angus genetics dominate the beef cattle
industry today, both commercial and seedstock, because of its
ability to solve contemporary production challenges.
Unlike breed domination in the
past, Angus has been propelled by a robust international branded
beef program—certified Angus Beef—which has been limited in
growth only by supply.
Also different from previous
periods of breed domination is the fact that ethanol production
will apparently shift economic dynamics by forcing the cattle
feeding industry to adopt less efficient alternatives, including
more growth on forage ahead of the feedlot.
Which Way From Here?
“I can’t tell you whether we’ll continue to go more toward
purebreds or move toward composites and crossbreeding as an
industry,” says Mark Lacey of Lacey Livestock based at Paso
Robles, California.
But he can tell you why his
family’s operation is searching hard for ways to bring more
maternal heterosis back into their program without sacrificing
the market they have carved out for high-percentage Angus cattle
that fed optimally will consistently grade 85% and higher
Choice.
“I need a cow that can be a Body
Condition Score 2 or 3 and breed in the first 45 days. I’ve got
to be able to get them bred without feed,” says Lacey. The ranch
he manages is on the eastern side of the Sierras in High Desert
country where they get 5 inches of rain on a good year.
“We’re holding the line on
fertility but it seems to get tougher every year to get
second-calf and third-calf cows bred back on time. A larger
percentage shifts to later in the season each year, so there is
a reduction in breeding efficiency,” says Lacey.
For perspective, the Lacey family
has traveled familiar genetic roads in search of profit. They
used Angus and Hereford heavily, and then incorporated Gelbvieh
in the early 1980’s. In 1997 when the Harris Ranch Beef Company
(HRBC) began contracting with ranches to grow cattle for its
branded beef program, the Laceys embraced the opportunity.
Initially, only Angus bulls were permitted in that program,
Angus bulls that met specific performance requirements.
Today, Lacey says their
commercial herd is at least three-quarter Angus.
It’s not that Angus is
challenging the reproductive efficiency of the program, per se;
it’s the dilution of the heterosis that had existed in the herd.
“We’ve also seen a ton of health
issues that we didn’t see when we had more heterosis,” says
Lacey. “We’ve gone so far black that we’re losing immunity and
calf survivability.”
As well, Lacey is seeing the gradual deterioration in carcass
yield as heterosis declines. He explains, When the cows burn off
the fat in the winter, you see that we’ve lost a lot of shape in
these cattle.” He’s quick to acknowledge this has plenty to do
with their adherence to using bulls that qualify cattle for the
Harris program. In that program he explains ribeye size was
limited due to beef customer demands.
“At the same time, the breed was
increasing weaning and yearling growth. When you increase
yearling weight and hold ribeye area in check you’re going to
have problems with yield,” says Lacey.
Keep in mind this is an outfit
that undertook an extensive multi-year study that ended a couple
of years ago, by which they measured calf performance every way
from Sunday, using DNA to match calves to sires in multi-bull
pastures.
All of these concerns are why the
Lacey family has embarked on a multi-year project with HRBC and
California State University, Chico to evaluate incorporating
another breed into HRBC specifications.
“Our goal is to get a little
heterosis back into the herd and still be able to participate in
the Harris Quality Beef program. And, I don’t want to have to
buy replacement females,” explains Lacey. “I need an animal that
is productive, and I don’t care what color its hide is.”
Heterosis Necessity
Rather than describe the industry as too Angus or too much of
any other breed, Donnell Brown of the R.A. Brown Ranch at
Throckmorton, Texas says, “Maybe a better way to say it is that
we are becoming heterosis-deficient as an industry in an effort
to gain maximum genetic merit. I think the answer lies in
balancing genetic merit and heterosis.”
The R.A. Brown Ranch makes the
most of that principle as a seedstock supplier offering a
variety of purebreds and composites including the Hotlander—25%
each of Red of Black Angus, Simmental, Brahman and Senepol—developed
by Donnell and his dad, Rob. The firm also embraces the concept
in its commercial cattle operation, cattle feeding enterprise
and as a founder of Rancher’s Renaissance, a cooperative of
ranchers growing, feeding and marketing their beef through a
branded beef program tied to one of the nation’s three largest
beef packers.
“Our animals that best fit
today’s market and have some heat tolerance are three-quarter
Red Angus X one-quarter Simmental,” explains Brown. “Our best
heat tolerant animals are five-eighths Red or Black Angus X
one-eighth each Simmental, Brahman and Senepol. These don’t have
near the amount of Heterosis as our halfblood SimAngus or the
Hotlander, but genetically they do more things right and have
enough heterosis to have excellent productivity and
reproductivity.
“But there is still one test they
have to pass in order to keep up with their higher heterosis
cousins—longevity with long-term reproductive efficiency. I have
high hopes that they will do well, but our oldest females of
this breed makeup are 7 years old, compared to Hotlander cows
that are 15 years old and still producing. These traits are
essential to the profitability of cow-calf producers, but too
many have been focusing so intently on meeting the desires and
demands of calf buyers that some have lost sight of the fact
that these traits are essential to profitability back at the
ranch, in the cowherd, the factory. Heterosis has more influence
on these traits than anything else.”
In round numbers, John Holden of
the Westwind Ranch of Valier, Montana, explains, “My banker says
these guys are leaving about $70 per calf on the table by not
crossbreeding. I think they’ll have to go back to a crossbred
female because I don’t think you can afford to lose that much
efficiency.”
Holden is Polled Hereford breeder
who also bred and marketed Angus genetics until two years ago.
“Customers are starting to ask for moderate birth weights and
less mature size which will lead to earlier maturing cattle in
the feed lots,” he says.
Money left on the table has to do
with input costs such as the difference in early calving and
late calving alluded to by Lacey. But plenty has to do with
output, too.
“Data from the Meat Animal
Research Center suggests an F1 female will have 1.4 years more
productive life and wean an additional 600 lbs. of calf during
her productive life, compared to a straight-bred female,”
explains Bob Weaber, beef extension specialist at the University
of Missouri.
So, if a cow is eight when she
leaves the herd, figure she’s had six calves. That’s 100 lb.
more weaning weight per calf. “And that doesn’t begin to address
the fact that added longevity means fewer replacement females
over time. So, there is clearly an economic advantage for
crossbred cows,” says Weaber.
Straight Breeding Has its
Place
None of this is to suggest that crossbreeding and heterosis are
the answer in every situation.
As Weaber says, for some folks high percentage cows and
straight-breeding may offer the perfect solution relative to
their management scheme, resources and goals. For others, a
dearth of heterosis may outweigh those advantages.
“I would never say you couldn’t
be successful having one breed; we’ve known producers who have
done it for years,” says Lacey.
Plus, some of the performance pop
producers have traditionally expected from heterosis when moving
from a straight-bred approach may not be as apparent as
traditionally expected.
That’s what Lacey is seeing in
preliminary data from the current study his family’s ranches are
involved in, comparing Angus and Hereford bulls of similar
genetic merit. These are being used on a random assortment of
Lacey cows. You’d expect the Hereford sired calves—the Black
Baldies—to weigh more. They do, but not significantly more.
Lacey says, “I think the genetic merit of the bulls we’ve been
using may mask the weaning gains due to heterosis.” Bulls they
have been using in the HRBC program are in the top 5% of the
breed for nearly all traits.
Ironically, genetic principles
suggest at some point even those who want to straight-breed may
have to use another breed to change directions in a specific
trait.
“Once you go down the same
genetic road long enough, population genetics take over, and the
only way to turn it around faster given one generation per year
is to crossbreed,” says Lacey. He believes unabated increases of
milk production in the Angus breed serves as an example. He says
milking ability is so high that it’s hard to find an in-breed
option to hold milk steady or to reduce it. He’s not saying low
milk bulls don’t exist, but he is saying it’s a growing chore to
find bulls that excel in other traits he needs, which also offer
options other than increased milk production.
Similarly, Lacey says, “One of
the preeminent Angus breeders in the country told me the other
day that the quickest way to put muscling back in Angus cattle
is to use a Continental breed. Angus lines have become so
convergent, especially for those selecting for carcass that the
mistakes have been magnified and the gains have been muted.”
Moreover Lacey points out, “You’d
think by using only one breed it would be simpler. In the end,
if you’re only going to use one breed it takes more diligence
and knowledge about where your cowherd is…You can’t concentrate
on only one or two traits. You have to be able to find some kind
of outcross within the breed.”
Genetics as Current Events
Of course, history will also have its say about the pros and
cons of straight-breeding or crossbreeding.
“I think we are on the verge of
going back the other way on frame size in beef cattle. I
wouldn’t be surprised to see us go back to Frame Score 4s. The
reason for this being high priced cereal grains. The livestock
feeding and packing industry has been predicated and based on
cheap feed. The advent of bio-fuels is going to change that,”
predicts Holden.
It’s hard to argue against sweeping change at the hands of
ethanol when breakevens on feeder cattle placed in Texas
Panhandle feedlots in March were running in the mid $80’s, after
corn prices had slipped some. It’s harder to argue against when
you consider that the Distillers Grain byproduct many have
counted on to help replace feed corn will likely also be
utilized in cellulosic ethanol production once the process is
perfected.
Holden points out that animal fat
can be used in producing bio-fuels, too. Though it might seem
farfetched to imagine a day when beef fat might be used in such
production, Holden remembers that one of his grandfathers raised
Spotted Poland China Hogs that could lay down 2” of backfat.
There was a market for lard in those days.
Shorter term, Holden predicts,
“Some commercial producers will stick with Angus until the
cattle market breaks and the only way to increase pounds is with
crossbreeding… In my opinion, Hereford and Angus will dominate
the commercial cow herds with Black or Red Baldy cows being bred
to a third breed to maximize heterosis—F1 females with a
terminal cross, similar to the swine programs in large hog
operations.”
History at least suggests there
should be a cyclical resurgence in interest for Continental
breeds.
“Historically, Continental breed
registrations increase when commercial calf prices decline,
while English breed registrations increase when calf prices are
higher,” says Weaber. “Prices have been so good for so long on
all calves that we (the industry) have lost some focus on calf
weaning weight. As cattle and beef supplies grow cyclically, and
prices decline, weaning weight becomes a larger driver of
revenue. So, we’ve been at a pinnacle in the cyclical
marketplace that favors English genetics.” He constructed a
statistical regression model years ago that proves this reality.
“I think there is a correction
coming,” says John Burbank, CEO of Seedstock Plus. “My feeling
is that as the market turns there will be more decisions based
on economics and fewer based on emotion. We’re not going to
swing back to three-quarter-blood and purebred Continental. I
think we’ll hold to more of a 50:50 mix of Continental and
English this time.”
However, this is unique time in industry history. Ethanol aside,
never before has a national cattle population so small produced
so much beef. Never before has so much beef been marketed as
branded product, spreading the value of similar weight, similar
sex cattle historically wide. Spun differently, there has never
been more incentive to produce specification products than there
is today, and that will likely increase. That would seem to
favor more breed-specific or gene-specific production.
On the other side of the
equation, drought has already altered the cattle cycle in ways
that haven’t occurred in the past. Whether you chalk it up to
man or the epochal forces of nature, these are also the hottest
and driest times the nation has endured since the Dust Bowl
years of the 1930s. This obviously favors heterosis.
One thing most do agree upon is
the notion that breed consolidation and concentration will
likely continue. Popular consensus is that there is really only
a need for a couple of English breeds, a couple of Continental
breeds and some Bos Indicus genetics for the Gulf Coast states.
“I think some of these breeds are
so far behind Angus, to even be considered they’re going to have
to do a better job identifying cattle that will work,” says
Lacey. In his opinion the same could be said of seedstock
suppliers in general.
“With seedstock producers you get
into the situation where they keep and flush females for
different reasons than the commercial producer would,” says
Lacey. Well, it’s the same reason—money—but what rings the cash
register in the seedstock business is too often unrelated to
what rings it in the commercial world.
The fact is every commercial
producer buying bulls or females from a seedstock supplier is
buying the genetic trends, mores and mistakes of that seedstock
program.
“Everybody who buys cattle from
me tells me what they need and what I have to do to sell them a
product, yet there are seedstock suppliers telling me what
they’re going to sell me, rather than asking what I need or
want,” says Lacey. “Rather than telling their customers what
they need, I’d ask all seedstock suppliers to consider looking
to their customers for guidance in what they need to be
producing. I’d like to see them listen to their customers. Do I
hold out a lot of hope for that happening? No.”
The other safe bet is that
genetic decisions will continue to be driven as much by personal
preference and emotion as by fact and logic.
“This isn’t a business, it’s a
disease,” says Holden, only slightly tongue-in-cheek. “My banker
calls it a disability.” |
