Fall 2002



Making Management Decisions Based on El Niño Forecast

El Niño is a weather phenomenon we have heard a lot about in the news lately, but what does it mean to Florida livestock producers? Basically it means that, we can expect higher than average rainfall from November through March. This expected increase in rainfall will be a welcome change from the past two years. So what does El Niño mean for livestock producers in the Panhandle?

  • We should finally have great weather for winter pastures
  • Low areas may get too wet for small grains
  • Good year to raise stockers, if prices are right or if you are raising your own
  • Good gamble to invest in winter pastures for a change

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has predicted rainfall to be 20% above average for the Panhandle of Florida over the months of November and December and 22% above average for the months of January through March. The graph that follows shows the 102-year average rainfall for these five months, the average during El Niño years and what we received last year at the Marianna Research Station. As with all weather forecasts, however, this is simply a scientific guess based on previous El Niño years.

When we look at actual weather data from the Marianna Research Station Records for El Niño years, the same trend is seen. So we can expect quite a bit more rain than we have seen the past two years. This is good news if producers have planted winter pastures.

Return to top


A Matter of "Pride and Prejudice": Adding Value to Your Calves

Source: Oklahoma State "Cow-calf Corner"

Have pride in your calves and avoid discounts at sale time due to prejudice

Considerable VALUE can be added to weaned feeder calves by applying some routine management practices while they are still "on the cow". Doing these operations while the calf is still young (2 months of age or less) is kinder and gentler to the calf. Calves that have been castrated and de-horned and healed-up from these operations suggests to the buyers that: "this rancher is proud of the product that he or she markets".

Attitudes about de-horned calves apparently are changing. Sale barn surveys conducted in the mid 1980's in Kansas illustrated that the difference in horned calves and calves with no horns was really quite small. They reported only a difference of about $.50 per hundredweight or $2 - $2.50 per calf. However, two similar surveys conducted in Eastern Oklahoma in 1997 and again in 1999, revealed that horned calves were discounted a much greater amount in the late 1990's. This time the difference in horned steer calves was $3 - $3.50 per hundredweight or $15 - $17.50 per 500 pound steer calf. The advantage in heifer calves was about half as much. In a low margin industry such as the cow calf business, finding every advantage is key to success/survival. Dehorning calves at an early age (OR using a genetic dehorner such as a polled bull) can help avoid discounts at sale date.

Castrating bull calves at an early age is another key step to improved prices on sale date. Data was collected at 14 Eastern Oklahoma sale barns during October 1997. The average discount in price was $3.56 per hundredweight for bull calves of similar breed and weight to steers. For a 500-pounder, the difference in take home dollars is another $17.80. More recent surveys in Arkansas list even greater discounts ($4.50/hundredweight) for bulls. Some producers may be tempted to sell bull calves because "bulls grow faster than steers" and therefore weigh more at weaning. While there is no question that bulls generally are heavier at weaning time, research has repeatedly shown that steer calves, given growth promoting implants at about 2 months old, will weigh the same as the intact bull and consistently receive the higher selling price per pound.

De-worming spring-born calves in the first week of June is another management practice that can return more dollars than it cost. Calves de-wormed at the OSU Research Station near Haskell, Oklahoma weighed 21 pounds more at weaning than calves that were not de-wormed. Added weight gain is routinely valued at $.55 per pound. Therefore, de-wormed calves sold for an average of $11.55 more per head than calves from the same herd that were not de-wormed.

Blackleg vaccines routinely cost about $.50 or less per dose (if the producer administers the vaccine him/herself.) This is extremely inexpensive insurance against a disease that is present in the soil of many areas of Oklahoma. One calf lost to blackleg could have potentially purchased 800 to 1000 doses of the vaccine.

The procedures outlined above are important to increasing the value of calves sold from your operation. Many cattle producers can and will perform the management procedures such as castration, dehorning, implanting, blackleg vaccinations, and de-worming. These hours of hard work are certainly well rewarded at calf marketing time. Not every small Oklahoma cow/calf operator has the facilities, the strength of youth, or the time away from other employment to do all of the procedures we have discussed. Therefore, some producers will choose to take the calves to their local veterinarian to have some or all of these procedures done for them. A small survey of northeast Oklahoma veterinary clinics found that all five of these management procedures could be done for $14.00 to $19.50 per horned bull calf. This cost would include the vaccine, implant, and de-wormer. Obviously, less expense is needed if the calves are heifers or already polled. Research on sale barn calves raised and sold in Eastern Oklahoma suggests that implanted, dehorned, de-wormed, castrated steers would be valued at $40 to $46 more per head than if they had been left as "wormy cutter bull calves".

Do you like putting more money in your pocket than you take out? Do you like the idea of being proud of the calves that you unload at the sale each year after weaning?

  • De-horn calves
  • Castrate bull calves
  • Implant steer calves
  • De-worm calves
  • Vaccinate for blackleg

Return to top


The Cow that Loses a Calf at Birth Could Save Others

John Hall, Extension Animal Scientist, Beef, VA Tech

When a cow loses a calf at birth, it is always a great disappointment for cattlemen. However, this cow can still be useful and help save calves. The first thing you should do is get this cow up and milk her out. It takes a good head gate and a helper, but it can be done. Store the colostrum in quarts or pints in the freezer. Thaw frozen colostrum in warm water not in the microwave.

Cows will continue to produce antibodies in their milk for the first 48 hours, but the concentration will continue to decrease. So, you can milk a cow several times to get more colostrum. However, be sure to label the colostrum as first milking or second milking. Use the first milking the first time you feed a weak newborn calf. Remember they need to get colostrum within 12 hours of birth and preferably by 4 hours after birth. Calves will need 1 to 2 quarts of warm (101°F) colostrum.

Return to top


Proper Hay Utilization

Dan T. Brown, UGA Extension Animal Scientist

Hay is the basis (or backbone) for the majority of the beef cattle operations in Georgia in terms of providing supplemental feed. Most beef herds are fed hay during the periods when grass is in short supply. Generally, this is during the winter months. It can also be at other times, such as during summer or early fall droughts. Hay is expensive! Therefore, proper hay utilization is very important not only to reduce costs but also to insure that the animal’s nutrient requirements are being met. Correct utilization starts with:

  1. Producing high quality hay - proper fertility and harvesting at the optimal state of production.
  2. Storage and handling - all hay should be stored under cover. Hay stored outside may easily have spoilage to a depth of 4-5 inches. With a bale diameter of 4-6 feet, this results in a loss of 25-35% of the dry matter. Use hay rings when feeding to reduce added wastage.
  3. Forage Test - only then do you know the nutrient content. Hay rations then can be properly supplemented for the different classes of livestock.
  4. Feed the poorest quality hay to the dry cows and mature bulls. Save the best hay for replacements and lactating cows.
  5. Estimate the hay tonnage needed. Do not waste but do have enough on hand to properly feed the cow herd for your normal feeding period (with a little put back for emergencies).

For optimum performance, animal nutrient requirements must be met on a daily basis. If the hay’s forage analysis does not meet these needs, then additional protein (CP) or energy (TDN) must be added.

The nutrient requirements for beef animals are as follows (dry matter basis):

Class CP (%) TDN (%)
Dry Cows/Mature Bulls 8 52
Lactating Cows 11.2 56-58
Young Growing Heifers/Bulls 11.2 63-65

Example Hay and Forage Analysis

(This doesn’t imply Normal Analysis.)

Hay CP (%) TDN (%)
Tift 44 8.0 52.1
Coastal 9.6 56.2
Tift 85 11.1 56.3
Bahia 7.8 48.5

If these were forage samples taken from a farm, then the bahia and Tifton 44 hay should be fed first to dry cows and mature bulls, and the Coastal and Tfton 85 should be saved for cows nursing calves, developing heifers and young cows. All of these hay types can be fed, but it will take different levels of supplements to balance their needs. If you need help balancing rations or getting hay tested, contact your local County Extension Office.

Return to top


Beef Breed Differences: Preliminary Results from the Meat Animal Research Center

Scott Greiner, Extension Animal Scientist, Beef, VA Tech

Over the past 25 years, considerable research has been conducted to characterize and compare the major beef breeds in the U.S. The most comprehensive studies have been conducted at the U.S. Meat Animal Research Center (MARC) in Clay Center, NE. Since 1970, over 30 breeds have been evaluated in a common environment and management system for characterization of economically important traits. Many of the largest and most widely used breeds in the U.S. were characterized 25-30 years ago at Clay Center. Since that time, considerable changes have been made to these breed populations as a result of selection. Therefore, research has been initiated at the U.S. MARC to evaluate relative changes that have occurred among the prominent U.S. beef breeds since their initial evaluation in the 1970's, and to provide a current evaluation for these breeds. The following tables present preliminary results from Cycle VII of the Germplasm Evaluation Program at the U.S. MARC.

Procedures for the evaluation of the breeds were similar to that utilized in previous GPE cycles. For the current breed characterization, sires from the seven largest U.S. beef breeds (based on number of registrations) were mated to mature Angus, Hereford and composite MARC III cows (1/4 Angus, _ Hereford, _ Pinzgauer, _ Red Poll). Approximately one-half of the sires sampled from each breed were among the top 50 in number of calf registrations in their respective breed, and about one-half were young, unproven sires of each breed. Calves were born in the spring of 1999 and 2000. Following a post-weaning adjustment period, steers were fed a high-energy diet and slaughtered (average of 239 days on feed). Steers were slaughtered serially in 5 groups spanning 43 days. Steers were harvested in a commercial facility, and individual carcass measurements taken after a 36- hour chill.

Sire breed of calf Unassisted calvings, % Birth weight, lbs. Survival to wean., % 200-d wean. wt., lb.
Hereford 95.6 90.4 96.2 524
Angus 99.6 84.0 96.7 533
Red Angus 99.1 84.5 96.7 526
Simmental 97.7 92.2 96.7 553
Gelbvieh 97.8 88.7 97.1 534
Limousin 97.6 89.5 96.9 519
Charolais 92.8 93.7 97.1 540

Sire breed effects for pre-weaning traits for calves born in 1999 and 2000 are shown below. Lighter birth weights and a higher percentage of unassisted births were reported for Angus and Red Angus compared to Hereford and the Continental breeds (Simmental, Gelbvieh, Limousin, Charolais). The three British breeds (Hereford, Angus, Red Angus) were similar for 200-day weaning weight. Limousin sired calves were lighter at weaning than all other breed groups. 200-day weaning weights for Gelbvieh topcrosses were similar to those of the British breeds. Simmental sired calves were heavier at weaning than all other breed groups. Charolais sired calves were heavier at weaning than Limousin, Hereford, and Red Angus.

Sire breed of calf Post-wean. lbs./d Slaughter wt., lb. Carcass wt, lb. USDA Choice, % Yield Grade Fat Th., in. REA, sq. in.
Hereford 3.46 1363 832 79.1 3.35 .55 12.74
Angus 3.40 1375 846 93.6 3.32 .58 13.48
Red Angus 3.40 1362 839 96.0 3.76 .60 12.21
Simmental 3.47 1390 854 61.2 2.95 .42 13.71
Gelbvieh 3.33 1348 826 63.0 2.80 .39 13.43
Limousin 3.30 1308 815 44.8 2.63 .41 14.02
Charolais 3.43 1370 843 75.7 2.77 .43 14.01

Postweaning growth and carcass traits for the sire breed groups are presented for the 1999-born calf crop only. Postweaning average daily gains were similar among all breed groups. The British breeds were similar in slaughter weight when adjusted to 448 days of age. Limousin topcrosses were generally lighter than other sire breed groups at slaughter. Differences between the breed groups in slaughter weight are also reflected in carcass weight. Among the British breeds, Angus and Red Angus sires were superior to Hereford in marbling score and percent Choice. Angus and Red Angus also had higher marbling scores than the Continental breeds. The Continental breeds were similar for marbling score. Continental breed topcrosses had less 12th-rib fat than British topcrosses. Additionally, Continental breed topcrosses had larger ribeye areas that British topcrosses except for Angus. Angus-sired calves had greater ribeye area than Red Angus and Hereford-sired calves, and were not different from the Continental breeds. Collectively, the British breeds produced progeny which were 88.8% Choice or higher, and 22.3% Yield Grades 1 & 2. The Continental breed sires produced progeny with carcasses that were 60.9% Choice or higher, and 57.0% Yield Grades 1 & 2 (data not shown).

Preliminary results from these breed comparisons indicate that differences between British and Continental breeds are not as great for unassisted calving percentage, weaning weight, postweaning gain, and slaughter weight compared to when the same breeds were evaluated in the 1970¹s. British breeds have emphasized selection for growth rate, whereas Continental breeds have emphasized improvement in birth weight and calving ease. Consequently, smaller differences exist between British and Continental breeds for growth rate and calving ease as compared to 25 years ago. However, significant differences exist between British and Continental breeds for marbling and percentage retail product (yield grade). These differences in carcass composition exist despite the increases in growth rate and corresponding carcass weight that have been characterized in the British breeds.

These results confirm that no single breed excels in all economically important traits. A well-designed crossbreeding system that captures the advantages of heterosis (hybrid vigor) and utilizes these breed differences in a complimentary fashion is the most effective genetic resource for an efficient beef production system.

Return to top


Bull Selection for Multiple Traits

William Herring, Extension Beef Specialist NFREC

With each sire purchase or AI selection decision, there is an abundance of information that should be provided for each bull by the seedstock breeder to a prospective customer. Most of this information is in the form of Expected Progeny Differences (EPDs). When comparing two potential sires, the difference between the bulls' EPD for a given trait predicts the progeny average difference that should result in the two subsequent sire groups for that trait. For example, if sire A has a birth weight EPD of +7, and sire B has a birth weight EPD of +2, then we would expect the average progeny birth weight difference to be 5 lbs ( 7 - 2) between the two sire groups. Low birth weight EPDs will not guarantee that your calves will all weigh 65 lbs at birth. They only predict progeny differences. This is true regardless of whether using production or carcass traits. While EPDs for most bulls purchased by commercial cattlemen will have low accuracy values, they still are the most accurate genetic description available.

Whether you market calves at weaning, or retain ownership, and market calves on carcass value, a number of traits actually affect profit. For example, if you do market cattle based on carcass value, revenue will probably be determined by yield grade, quality grade, and carcass weight. However, birth weight is still important since higher birth weights lead to calving difficulty resulting in higher calf loss and longer post-partum intervals in the breeding herd. At the same time, increased mature cow weight results in more pounds of salvage value for cull cows but is offset by higher maintenance costs. This simply illustrates the dynamic relationships that exist among traits within your production system.

Research at the University of Florida indicates that most traits for which EPDs are available do have differing degrees of importance. Table 1 provides estimates that indicate the relative economic importance of traits when using terminal Angus sires and marketing progeny based on carcass value. Results using other sire breeds are similar.

Table 1. Relative economic emphasis to maximize profit in a terminal beef production system.

Trait Emphasis
More weaning weight Greatest
More post-weaning gain
Less Daily dry matter intake
Lower yield grade 		High
More marbling medium
Less birth weight 		Medium

Another valuable resource, especially if you plan to use AI or more proven sires, is the Internet. Most breed associations now publish their most current genetic evaluations on the Internet. These sites are helpful because they provide descriptions of their genetic evaluation programs and offer tools to select animals based on EPDs and easily identify them by querying a database. For example, if you wanted to identify bulls with specific birth weight EPDs combined with minimum thresholds for growth and carcass trait EPDs, then those Internet tools can aid in that process. These sites can be easily accessed free of charge. Links to most breeds of beef cattle are available on the Oklahoma State Cattle Breed web site located at http://www.ansi.okstate.edu/breeds/cattle/. If you need assistance with this process or access to the Internet, contact your county extension office.

Return to top


Commodity Feeds May Keep Operations Going This Winter

Livestock Update, September 2002
John B. Hall, Extension Animal Scientist, Beef, VA Tech

The continued drought, limited hay supplies, and rising corn prices will make feeding the cow herd through the fall and winter a challenge. However, the continuing liquidation of cows in the West and movement of heifers into feedlots indicate that producers who can hold on to their herds will be rewarded with better calf prices in 2003 and 2004. The cow herd needs to be maintained with economical feedstuffs for the next 6 to 8 months.

Commodity feeds such as brewer's grains, corn gluten feed or soy hulls can offer economical options for cow-calf producers. These products are excellent cattle feed, but vary greatly in price, water content and nutrients. Because of this tremendous variability, it is often difficult to compare different commodity feeds. Producers need to be careful to compare commodity feeds on an equal basis. The value of commodity feeds need to be on:

  1. Amount of dry matter
  2. Cost per pounds of nutrients
  3. Animal intake factors
  4. Handling and storage considerations

The first step is to obtain a nutrient analysis of the commodity from the supplier. This should include dry matter (DM), crude protein (CP), and total digestible nutrients (TDN). Information on mineral content is also helpful to the extension professionals or nutritionists that will help producers design a feeding program. Sometimes estimates of energy content or TDN are not given in the standard analysis instead fiber content will be listed. Because of the variable nature of some commodities estimates of TDN from fiber may not be entirely accurate. Ask for a minimum TDN level to be specified.

Secondly, compare commodities on a dry matter basis. Commodity feeds range from 79% water for wet brewer's grains to 10% water (90% DM) for corn gluten feed. To compare the price of commodities on a DM basis use the following formula:

Cost per ton on DM basis = Cost per ton as delivered ÷ (% DM/100)

For example, a producer can buy wet brewer's grains for $25 per ton delivered, or dry corn gluten feed for $100 per ton delivered. Which is the better buy on a dry basis?

Cost of wet brewer's grain on a DM basis
= $ 25 ÷ (21/100)
= $25 ÷ .21
= $ 119.05

Cost of corn gluten on a DM basis
= $ 100 ÷ (90/100)
= $100 ÷ .9
= $111.11

In this case, corn gluten would be the better buy costing $ 8 less per ton than wet brewer's grain on a DM basis. But feeds need to supply nutrients not just dry matter.

Energy, second only to water, is the nutrient that is most needed by the cow herd. So, the main reason producers buy supplemental feeds is to supply energy to the cow. In addition, most commodity feeds contain levels of crude protein above the requirements of the cow. For all practical purposes, most commodity feeds are equal to each other in terms of protein. Simply comparing the cost of feeds on a dry matter (DM) basis would not be a fair comparison. Producers need to compare feeds on the TDN content of the dry feed (DM basis). To do this, divide the cost of the feed on a DM basis by the % TDN of the feed (DM basis) as in the following formula:

Cost per ton of TDN (energy) = Cost per ton on a DM basis ÷ (% TDN/100)

Using the same feeds from the above example, wet brewer's grains contain 85% TDN whereas dry corn gluten feed contains 80% TDN. Which is the better buy on a dry basis?

Cost of wet brewer's grain per ton of TDN
= $ 119.05 ÷ (85/100)
= $119.05 ÷ .85
= $ 140.06

Cost of corn gluten per ton of TDN
= $ 111.11 ÷ (80/100)
= $111.11 ÷ .8
= $ 138.89

Because of the energy level of the brewer's grains these two feed are less than $2.00 per ton difference on an energy basis. However, all commodity feeds are variable in their nutrient content even from load to load from the same plant. If the brewer's grains in the above example were only 70% TDN, then the cost per ton of energy would be over $170.00, over a $30 difference between the two feeds. The bottom line is: test the feeds and buy them based on a dry energy basis.

Thirdly, animal intake and digestion factors also must be considered. Brewer's grains are very high in water content and young cattle are not physically able to eat enough brewer's grains to meet their needs. Even for cows, very wet commodities should not make up more than 50 to 70% of the diet.

Fiber is also a very important consideration. Cows need sufficient fiber to keep the rumen working properly. Commodities such as soyhulls and corn gluten contain high levels of easily digestible fiber, so they can be fed as a high percentage of the diet. In comparison, brewer's grains, hominy and snack food by-products are lower in fiber, so producers need to be careful not to feed to much when feeding these commodities. In most cases, cows will still need 5 to 10 lbs of hay per day.

The true digestibility for some commodity feeds may be less than indicated by nutrient analysis. Research from North Carolina State indicates that the performance of young growing cattle was only 84% to 88% of predicted performance when corn gluten was the primary energy supplement. Similarly, performance of calves fed brewer's grains was only 90% to 95% of expected gains. Producers need to keep these considerations in mind when selecting different commodity feeds.

Finally, transportation and storage of commodities may dictate which feeds can be used by a particular operation. Wet feeds have a very short storage life during warm weather, some only last a few days. Large amounts of wet commodity feeds may not work for smaller operations, while large operations may need deliveries 2 to 3 times per week. Also, commodities can be bulky and not flow well in traditional grain storage structures and handling equipment. Often a bunker or covered commodity shed is needed. Visit with other producers that are using the commodity feed you are interested in to get information about storage and handling.

Commodity feeds will probably keep many operations in business this year. A careful comparison of these feeds on a dry nutrient basis with consideration to storage and handling is important. Work with your extension animal science agent or nutritionist to develop a feeding program for your herd.

Return to top


Annie’s Forage Notes

Ann Blount and Ron Barnett NFREC Forage Breeders

A New Winter Oat Variety Released

Horizon 474 is a new winter oat variety developed by the University of Florida and the University of Georgia and released in 2002. It has considerable potential for both grain and forage production in the Southeast.

Horizon 474 produces excellent test weight grain, is early maturing, and has good crown rust resistance. Florida 501 has been a very popular variety and is still grown some 30 years after it was released. In comparison to Florida 501, Horizon 474 has a higher grain yield, higher test weight, has stronger straw, better crown rust resistance, and appears to be more winter hardy.

Horizon 474 is similar to Florida 501 in maturity and plant height. Horizon 474 is a white seeded oat, whereas Florida 501 has yellow seed. Horizon 474 is 7-10 days earlier in maturity than Horizon 314 a popular variety released several years ago.

Plant Variety Protection will be applied for and Horizon 474 has been released exclusively to Plantation Seeds, Inc., Newton, GA for promotion and marketing. Florida Foundation Seed Producers, Inc., located at Marianna, Florida, harvested 40 acres in May of 2002, so a limited amount of seed will be available for planting in the fall of 2002.

Return to top


Acorn Poisoning Could Cause Problems This Fall

Tom Troxel, Arkansas Extension Livestock Specialist

This year's larger-than-normal acorn crop poses a serious threat to cattle producers. Most animals are susceptible to acorn poisoning, although cattle and sheep are affected most often. Most species of North America oak trees are considered toxic. Clinical signs of illness occur several days after consumption of large quantities of green acorns in the fall.

Some cattle can apparently eat acorns with no ill effects, while others develop kidney and digestive problems that can lead to death. Dams consuming acorns during the second trimester of pregnancy have produced malformed calves. Symptoms of acorn poisoning include lack of appetite, rough hair coat, a dry muzzle covered with dry, crusty blood, abdominal pain, excessive thirst, frequent urination, and thin rapid pulse. There usually is not an increase in body temperature. Constipation is a common early symptom. The droppings are often tipped with dark blood, a condition followed by diarrhea with blood and mucous. Edema, or fluid in the tissue, occurs in the lower body. Large amounts of fluid may be found in body cavities. Tannic acid in acorns is poisonous and can cause death by severely damaging the kidneys. Sick cows may drink large amounts of water, which is eliminated by the damaged kidneys in a clear, diluted form.

The best way to prevent acorn poisoning is to keep cattle away from acorns, but if you fence off an area covered with acorns, you may have to leave the fence up for a while. Acorns retain high levels of tannic acid for several months. You can partially protect mature cows grazing on acorn-laden pastures by feeding them 4 pounds of the following mixture each day — cottonseed meal, whole cottonseed or ground soybeans (40 percent), cottonseed hulls or corn (44 percent), hydrated lime (10 percent) and liquid molasses or vegetable oil (6 percent). Use liquid molasses with either whole cottonseed or ground soybeans. For calves, feed 2 pounds of the mixture per head per day in a creep feeder.

The goal is to get the mature cows to consume about 0.4 pound of hydrated lime each day. Other mixes that provide this rate of intake can be used, but because hydrated lime is unpalatable, the mix should generally contain no more than 10 percent lime. It is difficult to thoroughly mix hydrated lime in supplemental feeds, so molasses or vegetable oil is recommended to prevent the lime from settling out of the mixture. If a mature cow is constipated because of acorns, administer 2 to 3 quarts of mineral oil orally. Continue treatment as needed.

Return to top


Florida Market Update

Tom Anton, Extension Economist Range Cattle REC

Overview

Florida cattle prices slipped during the month of October which is typical (Figure 1). However, the year’s lows of the late-spring and early-summer were not surpassed. Basis adjusted futures show a slight improvement in prices over the next few months, but it will be wise to keep an eye on the final corn harvest. Futures have slipped in the past week after good showings for the most of October. Supply is beginning to show signs of constricting, and demand appears to be strong.

Price Relief

Do not look for cattle prices to reach the levels of 2001 and early 2002. However, there may be some good news. Basis adjusted futures as of October 29, 2002 project prices to be between $1 and $7 below 2002 for February through April while May through June prices are projected at even to $5 above the same period in 2002 (Figure 2). These projections are below the three year average of 1999-2001, but 2000 and 2001 were very strong years for cattle prices. Corn prices will be key in determining if these futures projections rise or fall. With feedlot profitability being marginal at best, prices will have less pressure toward upward movement without favorable feed prices.

Cattle Cycle

The current cattle cycle is heading into its 14th year. With weather conditions as they are in many of the key cow-calf states, herd expansion is unlikely, and the USDA numbers seem to support that thought. With placements of heifers in feedlots continuing in the 35% range, there will be only enough replacement heifers to maintain the herd. At the earliest, we could see expansion in 2004 if producers begin to hold back additional heifers in 2003, but that will depend largely on the weather conditions and prices. With futures projecting spring 2003 prices only slightly better than the spring of 2002, there will likely be little profit incentive towards herd expansion. With the increases in direct marketing arrangements, the cattle cycle may be forever altered - it will take time before we can say for certain.

Corn Market

Over half of the corn harvest is complete, the government has continually adjusted its numbers, and corn futures have fallen over the bulk of October. However, concerns over the unharvested soybean crop and disappointment in the wheat export market have driven corn futures up some in the last couple days of October. If the corn harvest turns out as the current numbers indicate, it will only be slightly below the 5-year average. This should help keep corn prices relatively stable and help with the price recovery of the cattle market.

Comments

The current market conditions are conducive for some price increase. However, the uncertainty in the economy and feed grain prices are hindering such movement. With supply constricting, it is unlikely that further declines in market prices will occur, and futures projections continue to support this. Weather conditions will also play a factor. If conditions in the Great Plains and west do not improve, it will be another difficult year for those producers to maintain their herds, and we might see some sell-offs in the summer months.

Return to top


FAWN Weather Station in Jackson County

The Florida Automated Weather Network (FAWN) now has a weather station in Jackson County. You can log onto the FAWN web site and get current weather conditions or local weather history reports right at your desktop computer. The web site address is http://fawn.ifas.ufl.edu.

FAWN provides up-to-date weather information through a system of automated weather stations distributed throughout the State of Florida. Research scientists at the University of Florida work closely with extension agents to monitor the FAWN system and make sure it provides fast, reliable, and convenient access.

FAWN weather information is critical for agriculture, but it's not just for farmers. Other industries and private citizens have unique uses for FAWN. In construction, FAWN data on temperature and humidity aid in the mixing of concrete and improve prediction of drying times. Anglers use FAWN for reliable, localized information about weather conditions and fishing possibilities.

Overall, there are four parts to the FAWN system: collecting data, transmitting it to the collection site, processing the data, and redistributing it to the end user. FAWN database servers maintained by IFAS Information Technologies receive weather data from remote stations every 15 minutes. The information is processed and made available almost instantaneously through several different search methods accessible through FAWN web server, as well as an interactive voice-response system.

Return to top