Continuing to Do the Little Things Right

– Garth Ruff, Beef Cattle Field Specialist, Ohio State University Extension (originally published in The Ohio Cattleman)

Have you developed a marketing plan?

Summer is here, and there is no shortage of things to be done around the farm to keep producers busy. Spring born calves are growing and bulls are either turned out or will be in the near future. Summer is a time to manage pastures and continue making stored forages.

This is the time of year to start thinking about what your marketing plan for the spring calf crop may look like. It’s never too early to have this discussion. As calf prices remain high, I have gotten the question a couple of times asking about the return on investment with regards to preconditioning cattle in 2024.

My answer remains the same. “If it is the right thing to do when cattle prices are lower, it is still the right thing to do when cattle are selling high.” It’s your reputation and the perception of your cattle management program at stake. While cattle are selling well in the current market, any value-added practices implemented now will reduce the risk of Continue reading Continuing to Do the Little Things Right →

Play the Short, Medium, and Long Game Strategies to Maximize Returns

– Kevin Laurent, Extension Specialist, Department of Animal and Food Sciences, University of Kentucky

A method to control the calving season is to use CIDR inserts.

The current state of the cattle market is providing unique opportunities for producers to capitalize in a variety of ways by employing a variety of short-, medium-, and long-term strategies to maximize returns.

What does “Play the Short Game” mean?

Producers play the short game by maximizing pounds prior to marketing whether you market off the cow or after weaning, extra weight is extra dollars. So, how do we get extra weight?

Implant, deworm, and fly control for nursing calves: Research has shown that implanting nursing calves can result in an additional 10-30 lbs. at weaning, deworming an added 10-40 lbs. and fly control an additional 10-15 lbs. We cannot logically expect all three practices to be completely additive in response, but what if we employed all three strategies and gained a conservative estimate of an additional 30 lbs. In today’s market that extra 30 lbs. could be worth and additional $80-100/head depending on the weight class of the calf. All three of these strategies can be done for under $7.50/head. Not a bad return on the time and labor to work the calves in the midsummer.

What does “Play the Medium Game” mean?

Producers play the medium game by employing strategies this breeding season to have a tighter calving distribution and Continue reading Play the Short, Medium, and Long Game Strategies to Maximize Returns →

Costs and Returns for Illinois Beef Producers in 2023

– Bradley Zwilling, Illinois FBFM Association and Department of Agricultural and Consumer Economics, University of Illinois

Total returns in 2023 for Illinois beef feeding enterprises exceeded total costs by $2.04 per 100 pounds of beef produced in preliminary findings for farms enrolled in Illinois Farm Business Farm Management. The 2023 returns were lower than the 2022 total returns above all costs (2022 was the highest since this study began) by $19.73 per 100 pounds produced.  Total returns have exceeded total economic costs in five out of the last ten years.  The 2023 level of return above all costs was $1.89 per 100 pounds beef produced above the average return above all costs for the 2014 through 2023 period.  Figure 1 illustrates average returns, cash operating costs and total costs for this same period.


Higher Total Returns
The higher prices received contributed to the higher total gross returns for these enterprises. Total gross returns per 100 pounds produced increased from $141.65 in 2022 to . . .

Continue reading Costs and Returns for Illinois Beef Producers in 2023

EDITOR’s NOTE: Producer’s wishing to participate in Ohio’s Farm Business Analysis and Benchmarking program may reach out to Clint Schroeder, Program Manager, at 567-242-6693 or via email at schroeder.307@osu.edu.

Cattle and Beef Market Definitions

– Dr. Andrew Griffith, Assistant Professor, Livestock Marketing Specialist, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Tennessee

Necessary terms a cattleman should know.

I received some questions from a gentleman recently concerning some of the terminology used to describe cattle. These questions had to do with certain classes of cattle and what weights of cattle fall into certain categories. This certainly spurred some thoughts in how important is for cattle producers to not only be familiar with cattle terminology, but fully understand the meanings of industry terms.

Several years ago, I put together a publication with common terms in the cattle industry – Cattle and Beef Market Definitions. This is not an exhaustive list of cattle and beef market terms, but it contains many of the necessary terms. It is certainly a list that anyone in the industry should know and understand well. Knowing these terms can assist in communicating effectively with others in the industry when it concerns cattle and beef. These terms can also help in communicating with those outside the industry.

Growing On-Feed Inventory, Lower Placements and No Sign of Heifer Retention

– Dr. Kenny Burdine, Extension Professor, Livestock Marketing, University of Kentucky

USDA’s July Cattle on Feed report was released on Friday July 19th. These monthly reports estimate inventory in US feedlots with one-time capacity exceeding 1,000 head, which represent more than 80% of total on-feed inventory in the United States. The July report is also a quarterly report that includes data on the steer-heifer mix in feedlots. This brief article will walk through last week’s report and some of the implications of it.


Total on-feed inventory declined during the month of June with July 1 inventory estimated at just over 11.2 million head. This trend is normal as on-feed numbers tend to decline seasonally from winter to late summer. Compared to 2023, July 2024 inventory was actually about 0.5% higher. On the surface this seems odd given the recent declines in the size of calf crops, but I maintain that Continue reading Growing On-Feed Inventory, Lower Placements and No Sign of Heifer Retention →

The Summer Grazing Plan

– Clif Little, OSU Extension Educator Agriculture and Natural Resources, Guernsey County

A summer annual can reduce grazing pressure during a summer slump.

Successful grazers have a plan for all situations. Let us look at an inevitable period and discuss some management options. Farms have different management options based on resources, unique to each grazing operation.

Each summer brings slowed forage growth. Temperature, rainfall, grazing management, and forage species all influence the extent of forage regrowth during the summer. One should strive to maintain proper grazing heights throughout the season, especially during dry periods. Grazing height is of utmost importance in terms of reducing plant stress, maintaining forage species diversity, productivity and maximizing livestock forage consumption. A post grazing residual plant height of 3 inches will reduce the negative affects hot and dry weather can have on cool season perennial grass. Grazing too close during the summer will slow pasture recovery when rain and cooler weather returns. Furthermore, animals grazing endophyte infected tall fescue too close in the heat of the summer, may Continue reading The Summer Grazing Plan →

Drought Leading to Deteriorating Pasture Conditions in Southeast

– Josh Maples, Assistant Professor & Extension Economist, Department of Agricultural Economics, Mississippi State University

The percentage of Southeast pasture that is rated as poor or very poor is just over 30 percent according to the latest reports by USDA-NASS. This is up sharply from a month ago when less than 10 percent of pasture was rated poor or very poor. The 5-year average for the region at this time of year is around 10 percent.

The Southeast region includes AL, AR, FL, GA, KY, LA, MS, NC, SC, TN, VA, and WV. There is variation within the region as the drought map below shows. The percentage of pasture rated poor or very poor is greater than Continue reading Drought Leading to Deteriorating Pasture Conditions in Southeast →

Managing Nitrates and Prussic Acid in Forages

– Dr. Chris D. Teutsch, University of Kentucky Research and Education Center at Princeton

Sorghum species can accumulate both nitrates and prussic acid.

Nitrates can accumulate to toxic levels in commonly grown forages. This most often occurs when heavy nitrogen fertilization is followed by drought. Nitrates are taken up by the plant, but not utilized since plant growth is restricted by the drought. Any factor that slows plant growth in combination with heavy nitrogen fertilization can result in nitrate accumulation. Some plants tend to accumulate nitrates at greater rate; these include, but are not limited to commonly used summer annual grasses, corn, crabgrass, small grains, annual ryegrass, bermudagrass, Johnsongrass, tall fescue, and some annual and perennial weeds commonly found in pastures and hayfields.

In contrast to nitrates, prussic acid or hydrogen cyanide can be formed in commonly used sorghum species such as forage sorghum, sorghum-sudangrass hybrids, sudangrass, and Johnsongrass. Under normal conditions these forages contain little free cyanide. However, when freezing, drought stress, wilting, or mechanical injury damages plant tissue, an enzymatic reaction occurs and free cyanide is produced. Being aware of the factors that Continue reading Managing Nitrates and Prussic Acid in Forages →

Grazing Management Lunch and Learn: Stockpiling Forages

Join us on-line Wednesday, July 24.

Successful stockpiling is a result of planning, timing, and a little luck. Stockpiled grazing is a management strategy that will help producers extend the grazing season. Using stockpiled forages can be a cost-effective way to feed beef cattle and sheep during the fall and winter months. In addition to lowering feed costs, it reduces manure handling costs as well.

You’re invited to join the Ohio Department of Agriculture for their Grazing management Lunch and Learn Series on-line next Wednesday, July 24 beginning at 12:15.  Bob Hendershot, retired NRCS State Grazing Specialist will be featured.

Find more detail and registration information linked here or contact Jarrod Hittle.

The different classes of slaughter cows

– Dr. Andrew Griffith, Assistant Professor, Livestock Marketing Specialist, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, University of Tennessee

Boning utility cows in BCS 4-6 may yield the greatest return.

Following last week’s discussion on slaughter cow prices, a question was asked concerning the different classes of slaughter cows. Slaughter cow grades are based on fat cover. A breaking utility cow is in a body condition score (BCS) of 7-9 which means she is fat/obese. A boning utility cow is in a BCS of 4-6. Most producers will want their breeding herd in a 5-6 BCS. Lean/light are in a BCS of 1-3, which means they are extremely thin.

This is a very generalized explanation of slaughter cow grades, and there are more specifics that determine the final price. For instance, if an animal is expected to produce more lean beef than another animal relative to their total weight then it will receive a higher price. Some things to look for include looking at the fat over the ribs, hooks and pins. If the ribs are well covered then it is good to look at the fat cover on the hooks and pins to get an idea of the quality of animal.

In today’s market, there is a strong demand for lean grinding beef, which is what is supporting slaughter cow prices.