Treating cattle for sickness in the feeding phase may be costing
more than you thought.
“Of course healthy cattle have lower treatment costs. But they
also perform much better in the yard and on the rail. That
combination sets up the huge gaps between who makes money
feeding cattle and who doesn’t,” says Gary Fike, beef cattle
specialist for Certified Angus Beef LLC (CAB).
To be exact, those factors lead to a $190 net difference between
cattle treated twice and those that never needed treatment.
Fike shed light on the effect of health treatments on feedlot
performance, carcass traits and profitability at the Midwest
section meetings of the American Society of Animal Science last
month. The information was drawn from Iowa Tri-County Steer
Carcass Futurity (TCSCF) data on nearly 50,000 head of cattle
fed in 18 Iowa feedlots since 2002.
Cattle that remained healthy during the feeding phase had
heavier delivery weights, final weights, stronger gains and
fewer days on feed than their treated counterparts. Cattle that
were never treated in the feedlot arrived weighing 650 pounds
(lb.); those that ended up being treated once weighed 617 lb.,
and those treated twice entered the yard at 601 lb.
“There’s a lesson in those numbers,” Fike points out. “The
cattle that were not treated are a little older and heavier when
they arrive, which tells me they spent more time at home being
backgrounded and getting all those sickness problems
straightened out before they ever left the ranch.”
Darrell Busby, TCSCF manager, presented related research at
the meetings. That study focused on the cost of lung adhesions,
which data revealed amounts to more than $40 per head. Busby
says that cost is the result of the same issues uncovered in the
study of health treatment costs.
“The cattle with lung adhesions weigh 8 lb. less than those with
none,” he says. “That indicates there are a lot of things that
happen prior to the feedlot that cause these lung adhesions.”
In the study, lung adhesions were defined as blemishes that
require a knife to remove the lung tissue from the ribcage of
the carcass. “Our data is recognizing that these severe cases of
lung adhesions, which represent about 4% of the population, are
what cause the most damage in terms of lost performance, lighter
carcass weights and lower marbling scores,” Busby says.
Cattle with lung adhesions had to be administered health
treatments 2.2 times more than those without. Similar to the
data Fike presented, Busby says that hike in treatment cost
(nearly $7 more for individual drug treatments) isn’t the only
place cattle with lung adhesions lose.
The percentage of carcasses that met Certified Angus Beef ®
(CAB®) brand acceptance dropped from 18% to 12% when lung
adhesions were present. A similar quality drop was found between
cattle never treated and those treated twice (19% vs. 11%).
“Those healthy cattle lay on intramuscular fat more easily
thanks to that added gain,” Fike says. Noting the significant
marbling deposition differences between groups of cattle, he
adds, “We know these stress-free, healthy cattle can really
bring home the carcass quality. A database of this size is just
a big exclamation point at the end of that statement.”