One of the more overused clichés in the English language is “paradigm shift,” but that is exactly what is needed in today’s beef industry. Merriam-Webster defines paradigm shift as “an important change that happens when the usual way of thinking about or doing something is replaced by a new and different way.” Therefore, it is really just a fancy way of saying that the time for change has arrived. Luckily, there are examples in our industry’s history that can help serve as guide.
First, let’s look at where we are now. For decades, we have known that the payweight in the western commercial databases for calves sold around weaning time have remained flat. However, an analysis of the phenotypic trends presented in the American Angus Association sire summary also demonstrates little to no increase in expressed weaning and yearling weights for purebred bulls and heifers over the past 20 years. This is somewhat surprising, as you would think the seedstock cattle would be managed in a better environment with more feed resources than most commercial cattle, and therefore would be able to express more growth over time.
Although the average producer is not experiencing the improved calf payweights expected, they are experiencing other effects of selecting for ever-higher production. This includes increased mature cow weight and accompanying maintenance requirements, as well as declining cow herd reproduction and longevity. The nation’s cow herd is also less able to withstand stress that comes with things like drought; thus, we have a cow herd whose numbers have declined to a 75-year low.
So, while the average commercial producer suffers the consequences of building a cow herd with more production potential than their environment can sustain, most seedstock breeders continue to produce and market to their commercial customers’ bulls with ever increasing, and ultimately unrealized, growth potential.
If you want to gauge the mindset of today’s mainstream seedstock producer, consider this: among the world record-selling beef bulls in the U.S. in recent years are sires with weaning weights over 1,000 pounds. This shows a disconnect between seedstock selection priorities for ever more production, and the reality of the need for moderation in commercial cow-calf producers’ herds.
Ideally, the genetics we build into our nation’s cow herd will be such that the various segments of our industry—primarily the cow-calf, feedlot and packer—all have a reasonable opportunity to be profitable.
Utilizing tools
Since production is relatively flat, and many seedstock producers sell bulls nationwide, we also need more objective tools to place the right bulls into the right environment. For instance, it is not unusual for a High Plains seedstock operation that manages cattle on hard grass to market bulls ranging from the Gulf Coast to the Fescue Belt or to the High Plains desert. For bulls going to fescue or the Gulf Coast, producers will want to know about hair shedding, and likewise, ranchers managing cattle on fescue or on extensive desert pastures need to know about foot soundness, and the list goes on.
Some believe we are not seeing the expected performance from our cattle because the objective genetic predictions don’t work. In reality, our EPDs and genetic predictions are outstanding tools, but like any tool, they must be used correctly. When used properly, they allow a producer to dial in their cattle with tremendous precision to the proper level of production potential to match the environment and feed resources in which the cattle will be managed.
However, they are too often used with a show ring mentality, where the animal with the most or least wins the class, regardless if that level of production is appropriate for a particular operation. Our problem is we have been far too slow in developing a broader suite of predictions that provide objective tools for reproductive and functional traits.
A case study
Luckily, our industry has gotten into and gotten out of trouble multiple times, so there are already many historical lessons on how to make a paradigm shift. Of these, there is perhaps no better example of implementing necessary change than the Simmental breed. They are the only breed I am aware of to land on cattle feeders’ “no-buy” list and successfully work their way off it. And not only get off the list, but become one of the cornerstone breeds of today’s beef industry.
Simmental started with an association based on sound performance and commercial principles. However, by the 1980s, the breed had moved away from these founding principles and got lost in show ring fads and pre-Reagan tax schemes. Soon the cattle got too big, had too much milk and had major structure problems, straightening out the joints to make them taller during the frame race.
They became known for having a lack of vigor at birth and arrival at feedlots, and wouldn’t finish within an acceptable weight range. The biggest death knell came when the USDA Meat Animal Research Center determined in 1984 that Simmentals had higher maintenance requirements per pound than even Jerseys. Combined with having horns and the dilutor gene, they became unsellable to commercial producers or feedlots. And then there was their tagline, “Breed ’em all Simmental,” which reflected the breed’s belief that it could be all things to all people, a belief that Shorthorn and later Hereford had held before them, and one that other breeds would repeat after them.
It was Dr. Jerry Lipsey who took over the helm as executive in 1996 of this functionally defunct breed. He promoted backing the cattle down frame wise, and moderating the milk potential and birth weight. Spotted, kinky hair coats were replaced with primarily solid black or some solid red slick hair coats, and the horns came off. They embraced a wide-ranging performance data collection program, progeny testing and carcass testing in order to identify the genetics that would work in the commercial cattle industry. “Breed ’em all Simmental” was replaced with fitting into crossbreeding systems, and following Gelbvieh’s lead, developing a highly successful hybrid program.
Simmental also embraced genomics, joining with Dr. Jim Gibb to start what is thought to be the beef industry’s first genomic company, Frontier Beef. The American Simmental Association also developed the first genomically enhanced EPD and pioneered multibreed EPDs to facilitate objectively designed crossbreeding systems. It was a 15-year project, but the end result was that the breed regained relevance and became an industry leader.
The future of the cow herd
There are so many lessons here, but the primary one is a long-term commitment to a strategy. The decisions made today by the seedstock industry will determine the makeup of our mature commercial cow herd 10 years from now. This is a long game where making the right decisions and having consistency in a seedstock operation’s direction and priorities is what is needed.Some programs excel at this, but in general, the marketing structure of the seedstock industry is built on fads and selling change.
Reproduction is still the biggest driver of profit in a commercial cow-calf operation. We need more seedstock breeders like the late Dave Nichols of Iowa, who followed a strict policy for more than 50 years that no open cows were carried through the winter, and no cow was turned out to grass without a calf at her side. Every cow was treated the same, so there were no favorites that needed to be given a second chance. The reason the cow was open in the fall or didn’t have a calf at side in the spring was immaterial, it was simply an unemotional yes or no decision.
Despite the apparent need for the beef industry to have a paradigm shift that brings more genetic balance between the sometimes-contradictory needs of the cow-calf, feedlot and packing sectors of our industry, early indications are we are heading right back to the type of cow herd that got wiped out in the last drought. In general, extremes are still what are selling, while optimums are what are called for.
Once the macro view of balancing the interests of the different segments of the industry is considered, a commercial producer must design cattle with the genetics that are right for their particular operation. When you take the micro view, each commercial operation has a unique blend of environment, management, feed resources and market, and must have genetic inputs that are custom fit to meet the needs of this matrix. This calls for genetic inputs that are optimum for that operation, as one size does not fit all.
Our industry is at a critical juncture. Are we going to rebuild a cow herd for the future with a new way of thinking or are we just going to try to rebuild the herd with the same line of thinking that resulted in the nation’s cow herd hitting a 75-year low? Cliché or not, it is time for a paradigm shift. — Dr. Bob Hough, WLJ correspondent
