United States Department of Agriculture Beef 2017 Animal and Beef Cow-calf Management Practices in the Plant Health Inspection United States, 2017 Service Veterinary Services National Animal Health Monitoring System May 2020 Report 1 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits Mention of companies or commercial products does discrimination in all its programs and activities on the not imply recommendation or endorsement by the USDA basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and over others not mentioned. USDA neither guarantees where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, nor warrants the standard of any product mentioned. parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic Product names are mentioned solely to report factually on information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part available data and to provide specific information. of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all USDA–APHIS–VS−CEAH–NAHMS programs.) Persons with disabilities who require NRRC Building B, M.S. 2E7 alternative means for communication of program 2150 Centre Avenue information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should Fort Collins, CO 80526-8117 contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 970.494.7000 (voice and TDD). http://www.aphis.usda.gov/nahms #782.0420 To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Cover photograph courtesy of Dr. David Dargatz Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. Acknowledgements This report was a cooperative effort between two U.S. Department ofAgriculture (USDA) Agencies: the National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) and the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). We would like to thank the NASS enumerators who contacted beef producers and collected the data for this study. Their hard work and dedication were invaluable. We would also like to thank the personnel at the USDA–APHIS–Veterinary Services’ Center for Epidemiology and Animal Health for their efforts in generating and distributing this report. Additional biological sampling and testing for the Beef 2017 study were afforded by the generous contributions of collaborators: • USDA–APHIS, National Veterinary Services Laboratories • USDA–ARS, Russell Research Center • Kansas State University Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory • Virginia Tech University • Dairy One Forage Testing Laboratory • IDEXX Laboratories All participants are to be commended, particularly the producers whose voluntary efforts made the Beef 2017 study possible. Dr. Bruce Wagner Director Center for Epidemiology and Animal Health USDA APHIS VS / i Suggested bibliographic citation for this report: USDA. 2020. Beef 2017, “Beef Cow-calf Management Practices in the United States, 2017, report 1.” USDA–APHIS–VS–CEAH–NAHMS. Fort Collins, CO. #.782.0520 Contacts for further information: Questions or comments on data analysis: Dr. Chuck Fossler, (866) 907-8190 Information on reprints or other reports: Ms. Abby Zehr (866) 907-8190 For questions about this report or additional copies, please contact: USDA–APHIS–VS–CEAH–NAHMS NRRC Building B, M.S. 2E7 2150 Centre Avenue Fort Collins, CO 80526-8117 [email protected] ii / Beef 2017 Items of Note The Beef 2017 study was conducted in 24 of the Nation’s major cow-calf States (see map p 2) and provides valuable information to study participants, stakeholders, and the beef industry as a whole. Data collected for the study represented 78.9 percent of U.S. cow-calf operations and 86.6 percent of U.S. beef cows. Unless otherwise noted, estimates in this report refer to calendar year 2017. Where noted, estimates may refer to the previous 12 months from when the questionnaire was administered, which occurred in October and November of 2017. Operations were placed in three size categories: small (1 to 49 cows), medium (50 to 199 cows), and large (200 or more cows). On the majority of small (89.0 percent) and medium (66.6 percent) operations, the cow-calf operation was a supplemental source of income. On the majority of large operations (71.9 percent), the cow-calf operation was a primary source of income. The majority of beef calves (55.6 percent) were born in February, March, or April, with 12.3 percent of calves born in February, 22.4 percent born in March, and 20.9 percent born in April. Only 7.8 percent of calves born or expected to be born in 2017 had horns, indicating the widespread use of polled breeds. For horned calves that were dehorned, the average age at dehorning was 107.0 days. Among commercial cow-calf operations, a higher percentage of large operations (90.9 percent) castrated calves before sale compared with medium (80.5 percent) and small (55.1 percent) operations. Overall, 62.0 percent of operations castrated calves before sale. Overall, 42.5 percent of operations provided calf buyers with information about their calf health program (e.g., vaccinations administered, feed-bunk introduction, castration, etc.). By herd size, 35.2 percent of small, 59.9 percent of medium, and 78.8 percent of large operations provided calf buyers with information about their calf health program. Overall, 77.3 percent of operations raised commercial cattle (cattle primarily marketed for consumption); 5.9 percent of operations raised seedstock cattle only (cattle primarily marketed for breeding purposes); and 16.9 percent of operations raised a combination of commercial and seedstock cattle. Of heifers bred for calving in 2017, 76.8 percent were bred only by bulls, and 15.1 percent were bred by a combination of artificial insemination and bull breeding. Of cows bred for calving in 2017, 92.9 percent were bred only by bulls, and 5.5 percent were bred by a combination of artificial insemination and bull breeding. USDA APHIS VS / iii For the purposes of this report, a defined breeding season is one in which producers remove the bull(s) from cows and/or heifers for at least 30 days. The majority of operations (58.7 percent) did not have a defined breeding season. Overall, 58.3 percent of beef cows were on operations with one or more defined breeding seasons, and 41.6 percent of beef cows were on operations with no defined breeding season. Most operations monitored heifers and cows regularly during calving (93.2 and 89.0 percent, respectively). The majority of heifers (90.6 percent) and cows (96.2 percent) required no assistance at calving. Overall, 8.1 percent of operations had treated any cattle with pneumatic darts in the previous 12 months, and 1.1 percent of cattle were treated with pneumatic darts. The percentage of operations that used pneumatic darts increased as herd size increased, with 4.3 percent of small, 15.8 percent of medium, and 32.8 percent of large operations using this practice. Most producers (83.9 percent) were very likely to get information from a private veterinarian in the event of a foot-and-mouth disease outbreak (or an outbreak of another foreign animal disease) in the United States. In addition, most producers (93.8 percent) would contact a private veterinarian if they had an animal on their operation they suspected of having foot-and-mouth disease (or another foreign animal disease). By knowing who producers will turn to for information during an emergency, responders are able to target the dissemination routes of information critical to the emergency response effort. About one-third of operations (32.9 percent) had brought new cattle onto the operation during the previous 12 months. Beef bulls intended for breeding were the cattle class brought onto the highest percentage of operations (18.8 percent). The percentage of operations that brought a new bull onto the operation increased as herd size increased, with 14.5 percent of small, 28.8 percent of medium, and 42.8 percent of large operations bringing on new beef bulls intended for breeding during the previous 12 months. iv / Beef 2017 Individual-animal identifications (IDs) are important for disease traceback purposes. For example, if an animal is not properly identified before arriving at slaughter and turns out to be positive for an important disease such as tuberculosis, it can be difficult or impossible to identify where that animal originated, which might allow the disease to persist in the herd of origin. There are many types of individual-animal ID described later in this report. Overall, 62.9 percent of operations used plastic ear tags such as bangle tags on at least some cows. About one-fourth of operations used brucellosis vaccination ear tags (Bang’s tags) or hot-iron brands on at least some cows (26.1 and 26.6 percent, respectively). The percentages of operations that used brucellosis vaccination ear tags, hot-iron brands, and ear notches on at least some cows all increased as herd size increased. Higher percentages of medium and large operations than small operations used other plastic ear tags (e.g., bangle tags), freeze brands, or any method of ID on at least some cows. USDA APHIS VS / v Table of Contents Introduction 1 Terms Used in This Report 3 Section I: Population Estimates 8 A. Income Provided by Cow-calf Operation 8 B. Calf Crop 10 1. Calves born 10 2. Monthly calving distribution 12 3. Dehorning 20 4. Castration 27 5. Weaning 31 6. Marketing calves 36 C. Breeding and Calving Practices 42 1. Breeding herd description 42 2. Breeding practices 44 3. Calving percentage 52 4. Calving management 55 5. Breeding seasons 65 6. Bull management 74 D. Health Management 87 1. Veterinary consultation 87 2. Injections and implants 90 3. Pneumatic dart usage 93 4. Producer familiarity with disease 112 5.