AGRICULTURAL ALTERNATIVES Feeding

The is the leading beef producer in the world. Between 24 and 27 billion pounds of beef are produced annually in the United States. Beef consump- tion has been gradually decreasing since the 1970s, when it was over 70 pounds per capita, to less than 55 pounds today. While domestic consumption has been declin- ing, foreign demand has been very strong with the U.S. exporting record amounts of beef in recent years. Traditional cattle-feeding enterprises grow weaned calves (450 to 600 pounds) and yearling steers or heif- ing per animal drops as the number of animals in the ers (550 to 800 pounds) to slaughter weights of 1,100 operation increases. Because of the high risks and the to 1,400 pounds. Cattle-feeding operations exist in all economies of scale that favor larger operations, beef- regions of the United States, but most large operations feeding enterprises are not as well adapted to small-scale are in the Great Plains from Colorado and Nebraska to and part-time as are beef cow-calf operations. . Most cattle-feeding operations are relatively small. However, less land is required for a cattle-feeding opera- Over 95 percent of all operations have fewer than 1,000 tion than for a cow-calf enterprise. head, but these small market around 15 percent of the cattle fed each year. In the northeastern United States, a mix of beef breeds, crossbreeds, or beef Starting a Beef Feeding (mostly Holstein steers) are typically finished in feedlots. Enterprise Cattle feeding is a high-risk business. During some Thorough planning and preparation are essential for you years, an operation may not recover out-of-pocket costs. to have a successful beef-feeding operation. Operators The beef industry is very cyclical and cattle prices can should determine where they will obtain feeder calves, fall dramatically when beef operations reduce herd sizes which feeds will be required to finish the cattle to desired because of drought and the high cost of feed. Entry into market weights and grades, and what type of shelter will the cattle-feeding business usually has few restrictions. be needed (because most cattle are on hand over Although facilities range from small lots with a few head the winter months). Feeders also should design a health to modern facilities with more than 50,000 head, there program in cooperation with a veterinarian, decide what are economies of scale in cattle feeding. The cost of feed-

This publication was developed by the Small and Part-time Farming Project at Penn State with support from the U.S. Department of -Extension Service. the starting and slaughter weights and grades should Purchasing Feeder Cattle be, and assess marketing alternatives. Visit successful cattle-feeding operations to help determine what facili- Anyone purchasing feeder cattle must keep up-to-date ties are needed, such as a handling chute and head gate on market conditions. Graded feeder-calf sales are held to properly restrain animals when they are vaccinated, in both fall and spring; some feedlot operators use cattle implanted, or treated in a health program. brokers and tele-auctions to obtain their feeder cattle. Feeder-cattle prices can fluctuate considerably in almost every season of the year. Higher-grade feeder cattle sell Facilities for a higher price per pound than lower grades. Lighter- Various materials can be used for feedlot fences, includ- weight cattle of the same grade cost more per pound ing boards, wire panels, high-tensile wire, and steel cables. than heavier feeder cattle. Although feeder grade is not Barbed wire is not recommended. A seven- or nine-wire supposed to be influenced by the amount of fat on an high-tensile fence is one of the most economical barriers. animal or its overall condition, cattle in better shape are Another effective fence is a combination of high-tensile usually assigned a higher grade and sell for a higher price wire (which can be electrified) with three or four 2-by- per pound. The difference between the purchase and the 6-inch planks spaced between the wires. sales price (the cattle margin or price spread) of feedlot Housing for feeder cattle does not have to be exten- cattle is often greater for healthy, but thinner, lower-grade sive or weather tight—open-sided sheds and more com- feeder calves or yearlings because these animals are more pletely enclosed structures are equally effective. Younger likely to increase in quality between purchase and sale cattle require more shelter than older cattle, especially time. Additional costs for thinner, lower-grading cattle for protection from winter winds. All facilities should be include higher medical treatment costs, lower sales prices, designed for the number of cattle fed and include a good and higher death-loss rates. Even with these disadvan- manure management program. tages, lower-grading feeder cattle can be profitable; oper- Most feedlots use concrete feed bunks that allow cattle ators should consider the entire market for finished cattle. to feed from one or both sides, although feed bunks of Market prices are better for higher-grading, uniformly treated lumber also can be used. Feed can be delivered finished cattle than for less uniform, lower-grading cattle. through a mixer wagon, conveyor with a belt or chain, or Feeder-cattle purchases represent a large part of costs a bucket loader. for feeding cattle. Many feeder-cattle producers offer To reduce mud, use concrete pads for areas around cattle that have been weaned and vaccinated and received waterers and feed bunks. Mounds that are 3 to 5 feet high booster vaccines for respiratory disease, the primary offer cattle relatively dry ground to rest on. The feed- health problem encountered in feeder cattle. The objec- lot area should be well drained with topsoil removed to tives for purchasing feeder cattle are to buy calves that expose clay or other fairly impervious surface. Regard- have the genetic ability to grow and add sale weight, less of the type of feedlot surface, it must be cleaned efficiently convert feed to weight gain, have a high poten- periodically. The facilities should be designed to prevent tial for reaching “Choice” quality grade after feeding, manure runoff into steams or other waterways. Retention and stay healthy during feeding. Feeder cattle are usu- lagoons and diversion ditches should be planned with the ally sorted by breed, sex, weight, color, and feeder grade advice and approval of regulatory agencies. when being offered for sale, which increases the unifor- mity of marketing the finished cattle. and Backgrounding Health Maintenance Program Some cattle feeders purchase lightweight feeder calves (350 to 550 pounds), graze them during the spring and Because preconditioned and heavier feeder cattle tend to summer, and then finish them in the feedlot starting in have fewer health problems, purchasing preconditioned late summer or fall. Backgrounding is a special type calves can be a good investment for the cattle feeder. of program that usually combines systems and Preconditioning includes weaning 21 to 45 days before lightweight cattle. These cattle require extremely good shipping, vaccinating for diseases prevalent in the area, nutrition, management, and health programs, but back- dehorning, castrating, implanting, treating for external grounding can be profitable. Well-managed, high-quality and internal parasites, and starting the cattle on grain- can be used effectively with these type of cattle. based feed from a feed bunk. If heavier cattle are used More information on grazing and backgrounding can (700 pounds or more), preconditioning is not as impor- be found in Agricultural Alternatives: Beef Background- tant. Because respiratory and enteric (digestive) diseases ing Production. can affect cattle of all ages, they should be properly vac- cinated, preferably before they are moved to the feedlot. If there is any doubt about an internal parasite infection, fecal samples should be taken to a veterinarian to deter- mine the severity of infection. Control of external para- application of chemicals and the disposal and transport sites such as lice and flies is also important; inexpensive, of waste. Depending on the watershed where your effective treatments are available. Feeders can reduce is located, there may be additional environmental regula- potential health problems by carefully planning a health tions regarding erosion control, pesticide leaching, and maintenance and disease prevention program with the nutrient runoff. Contact your soil and water conservation assistance of a veterinarian. district, extension office, zoning board, state departments of agriculture and environmental protection, and your local governing authorities to determine what regulations Nutrition may pertain to your operation. Cattle weighing 700 pounds or more should be fed a ration containing 11 percent crude protein in a ration composed of grain (usually corn, but and wheat Risk Management are often also used), protein sources, and roughage. You should carefully consider how to manage risk on Larger-framed cattle tend to require a ration with a your farm. First, you should insure your facilities and higher percentage of grain to achieve the same carcass equipment. This may be accomplished by consulting quality grade as cattle with smaller frame sizes. There- your insurance agent or broker. It is especially important fore, the ration that is fed depends on the type of cattle to have adequate levels of property, vehicle, and liabil- and the desired market grade. The weight and grade ity insurance. You will also need workers’ compensa- required by the market receiving the cattle also must be tion insurance if you have any employees. You may also considered when selecting a ration. Cattle weighing 650 want to consider your needs for life and health insur- pounds or less initially can be fed a growing ration rather ance and if you need coverage for business interruption than a finishing ration. Growing rations supply addi- or employee dishonesty. For more on agricultural busi- tional or other in place of grain. To achieve ness insurance, see Agricultural Alternatives: Agricultural the desired carcass grade, the ration can be modified to Business Insurance. For more information on farm liabil- include less forage and more grain as the cattle grow. ity issues, see Agricultural Alternatives: Understanding The feeding system for a cattle-feeding enterprise Agricultural Liability. should remain flexible. For farmer-feeders, corn Second, check to see if there are multiperil crop insur- and occasionally hay crop can be incorporated ance programs available for your crop or enter- into the feeding program. The extent that con- prises. There are crop insurance programs designed to tribute to a ration is determined by the price of feed help farmers manage both yield risk and revenue short- grains or food processing by-products with equivalent falls. However, individual crop insurance coverage is not feed value. Increasing forages in the diet of feedlot cattle available for all crops or livestock enterprises. If indi- will generally increase the cost of weight gain (due to vidual coverage is not available for what you produce, slower weight gain and higher carrying costs) when grain you may be able to use the AGR/AGR-Lite program to prices are reasonably low. Specific ration composition is insure the revenue of your entire farm operation. To use determined by the combination of available feedstuffs AGR-Lite you must have five years of Internal Revenue that will minimize the cost of weight gain, provide a bal- Service (IRS) Schedule F forms. For more information anced diet, and reach desired endpoints for the market. concerning crop insurance, contact a crop insurance This feed combination will vary as grain prices change. agent or check the Pennsylvania crop insurance educa- Performance enhancers such as growth-stimulating tion website at extension.psu.edu/crop-insurance. implants can also be used. Research has shown that they provide the greatest return of almost any feedlot practice with complete safety to consumers. The final market for your beef and consumer acceptance, however, will dictate Initial Resource Requirements whether you should use performance enhancers. for Slaughter-Beef Production Environmental Impacts ■ Land: less than one acre ■ Labor: 4 hours In the normal course of operations, farmers handle pes- ■ Capital Feeder steer: $850–900 ticides and other chemicals, may have manure to collect and spread, and use equipment to prepare fields and har- Feeder heifer: $775–850 vest crops. Any of these routine on-farm activities can be Yearling: $800–850 a potential source of surface water or groundwater pollu- ■ Existing buildings, improvements, insurance, tion. Because of this possibility, you must understand the and fencing: $100–125/animal regulations to follow concerning the proper handling and Another way to manage risk in the livestock industry For More Information is by forward contracting through the futures market. You can use the futures market to both “lock in” your Becker, J. C., L. F. Kime, J. K. Harper, and R. Pifer. Agri- cost for purchased feed and the price you receive for cultural Alternatives: Understanding Agricultural Lia- your livestock. The idea behind forward contracting is to bility. University Park: Penn State Extension, 2011. reduce income variability and set a price well in advance of when the animals are sold. Waiting until the sales Comerford, J. W., L. F. Kime, and J. K. Harper. Agri- date to determine the price for your cattle involves much cultural Alternatives: Beef Backgrounding Production. risk. Although you may receive higher prices in some University Park: Penn State Extension, 2013. years, lower prices are also a distinct possibility. Obtain- ing a higher price than expected is certainly good news, Comerford, J. W., L. F. Kime, K. E. Knoll, and J. K. but obtaining a lower price may have a major negative Harper. Agricultural Alternatives: Dairy-Beef Produc- impact your ability to weather the volatility inherent in tion. University Park: Penn State Extension, 2008. the cattle market. Using the futures market allows you to eliminate this concern and lock in a price that meets Greaser, G. L., and J. K. Harper. Agricultural Alterna- your business goals and cash flow requirements. How- tives: Enterprise Budget Analysis. University Park: ever, using the futures market does not ensure that you Penn State Extension, 1994. can generate a profit. During periods of high feed costs and low livestock prices there are often very few livestock Kime, L. F., J. W. Adamik, E. E. Gantz, and J. K. Harper. producers who can generate a profit. Agricultural Alternatives: Agricultural Business Insur- ance. University Park: Penn State Extension, 2004.

Sample Budgets Thomas, H.S. The Cattle Health Handbook. North Included in this publication are three sample budgets Adams, Mass.: Storey Publishing, 2009. summarizing costs and returns for feeding beef cattle. The first is for feeding steers; the second is for feeding Thomas, H.S. Storey’s Guide to Raising Beef Cattle. 3rd heifers; and the third is for feeding yearlings. These bud- ed. North Adams, Mass.: Storey Publishing, 2009. gets should help ensure that you include all costs and receipts in your calculations. Costs and returns are often Websites difficult to estimate in budget preparation because they are numerous and variable. Think of these budgets as an Iowa Beef Center approximation and make appropriate adjustments using www.iowabeefcenter.org the “your estimate” column to reflect your specific pro- duction conditions. Additional livestock budgets can be Oklahoma State University found in the Agricultural Alternatives website, extension www.ansi.okstate.edu/breeds/index.htm .psu.edu/business/ag-alternatives. More information on using livestock budgets can be found in Agricultural Ohio State University Alternatives: Enterprise Budget Analysis. Cattle Handling and Working Facilities Available through Ohioline e-store at estore.osu.edu-extension.org Maximizing Fall and Winter Grazing of Beef Cows and Stocker Cattle ohioline.osu.edu/b872/index.html Scoring Cows Can Improve Profits L-292 ohioline.osu.edu/l292/index.html

Penn State animalscience.psu.edu

University of Missouri muextension.missouri.edu/xplor/agguides/ansci Sample Budget for Slaughter Steer Bought at 550 pounds and sold at 1,300 pounds, based on 80 head Average daily gain (ADG): 3.5 pounds Market Total Your Item Weight Unit Price per Steer estimate Receipts Finish steer (1% death loss) 1,296.3 pounds $1.24 $1,607.41 Variable Costs Feeder calf 550 pounds $1.57 $863.50 Feed costs Corn 1.2 tons $229.00 $274.80 Protein 0.86 tons $548.00 $471.28 Salt, minerals, and Bovatec or Rumensin 104 pounds $0.48 $49.92 Corn silage 1.5 tons $68.67 $103.01 Total feed costs $899.01 Other variable costs Health program $12.00 Electricity $10.00 Repairs on equipment and building $12.00 Marketing and trucking $12.00 Miscellaneous $4.50 Interest on investment and operating costs $54.03 Total variable costs $1,867.04 Fixed costs Labor charge 4 hours $10.00 $40.00 Insurance $4.59 Depreciation (building and equipment) $68.55 Repairs $9.18 Interest on investment $26.35 Total fixed costs $148.68

Total costs $2,015.71

Prices Received per Pound $1.20 $1.24 $1.30 Returns Above Variable Costs $(311.48) $(259.62) $(181.85) Net Returns $(460.15) $(408.30) $(330.52) Sample Budget for Slaughter Heifer Bought at 525 pounds and sold at 1,100 pounds, based on 80 head Average daily gain (ADG): 3.5 pounds Market Total Your Item Weight Unit Price per Heifer estimate Receipts Finish heifer (minus death loss) 1,096.75 pounds $1.41 $1,546.42 Variable Costs Heifer costs 525 pounds $1.48 $777.00 Feed costs Corn 1.2 tons $229.00 $274.80 Protein 0.86 cwt. $548.00 $471.28 Salt, minerals, and Bovatec or Rumensin 104 pounds $0.48 $49.92 Corn silage 1.5 tons $68.67 $103.01 Total feed costs $899.01 Other variable costs Health program $13.00 Electricity $12.00 Repairs on equipment and building $12.00 Marketing and trucking $12.00 Miscellaneous $4.50 Interest on investment and operating costs $51.53 Total variable costs $1,781.03 Fixed costs Labor charge 4 hours $10.00 $40.00 Insurance $4.59 Depreciation (building and equipment) $68.55 Repairs $9.18 Interest on investment $27.28 Total fixed costs $149.60

Total costs $1,930.63

Prices Received per Pound $1.35 $1.41 $1.50 Returns Above Variable Costs $(300.42) $(234.61) $(135.91) Net Returns $(450.02) $(384.21) $(285.51)

You should monitor local markets and contact suppliers to determine current prices for all items contained in this sample budget. Sample Budget for Slaughter Yearling Bought at 700 pounds and sold at 1,300 pounds, based on 80 head Average daily gain (ADG): 4 pounds Market Total Your Item Weight Unit Price per Yearling estimate Receipts Finish heifer (1% death loss) 1,296.30 pounds $1.28 $1,659.26 Variable Costs Yearling 700 pounds $1.15 $805.00 Feed costs Corn 1.8 tons $229.00 $412.20 Protein 0.9 tons $548.00 $493.20 Salt, minerals, and Bovatec or Rumensin 167.4 pounds $0.48 $80.35 Corn silage 1.58 tons $68.67 $108.50 Total feed costs $1,094.25 Other variable costs Health program $10.00 Electricity $8.00 Repairs on equipment and building $8.00 Marketing and trucking $12.00 Miscellaneous $4.50 Interest on investment and operating costs $57.89 Total variable costs $1,999.64 Fixed costs Labor charge 4 hours $10.00 $40.00 Insurance $4.59 Depreciation (building and equipment) $68.55 Repairs $9.18 Interest on investment $27.28 Total fixed costs $149.60

Total costs $2,149.24

Prices Received per Pound $1.28 $1.25 $1.33 Returns Above Variable Costs $(340.38) $(379.27) $(275.56) Net Returns $(489.98) $(528.87) $(425.17)

You should monitor local markets and contact suppliers to determine current prices for all items contained in this sample budget. Prepared by John W. Comerford, associate professor of animal science; Lynn F. Kime, senior extension associate in agricultural economincs; and Jayson K. Harper, professor of agricultural economics. extension.psu.edu

Penn State College of Agricultural Sciences research and extension programs are funded in part by Pennsylvania counties, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

This publication is available from the Publications Distribution Center, The Pennsylvania State University, 112 Agricultural Administration Building, University Park, PA 16802. For information telephone 814-865-6713.

This publication is available in alternative media on request.

The Pennsylvania State University is committed to the policy that all persons shall have equal access to programs, facilities, admission, and employment without regard to personal characteristics not related to ability, performance, or qualifica- tions as determined by University policy or by state or federal authorities. It is the policy of the University to maintain an academic and work environment free of discrimination, including harassment. The Pennsylvania State University prohibits discrimination and harassment against any person because of age, ancestry, color, disability or handicap, genetic informa- tion, national origin, race, religious creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, or veteran status and retaliation due to the reporting of discrimination or harassment. Discrimination, harassment, or retaliation against faculty, staff, or students will not be tolerated at The Pennsylvania State University. Direct all inquiries regarding the nondiscrimination policy to the Affirmative Action Director, The Pennsylvania State University, 328 Boucke Building, University Park, PA 16802-5901; Tel 814-863-0471.

Produced by Ag Communications and Marketing © The Pennsylvania State University 2013

Code UA298 Rev8C07/13mpc