Effects of Preconditioning on Health, Performance and Prices of Weaned Calves

Transcription

1 F-3529 Effects of Preconditioning on Helth, Performnce nd Prices of Wened Clves Dvid Llmn Extension Beef Cttle Specilist Robert Smith Extension Veterinrin According to the Americn Heritge Dictionry, to precondition is to condition, trin, or ccustom in dvnce. There is no stndrdized definition for this term s it pplies to beef clves prior to, during, nd/or fter the wening nd shipping period. However, preconditioning is generlly used to indicte mngement prctices implemented round the time of wening tht re intended to optimize the niml s immune system nd nutritionl sttus while minimizing stress. The outcome of this process is dded vlue to the entire beef production system. This dded vlue is relized through reduced incidence nd ssocited costs of sickness, improved performnce in terms of weight gin nd feed efficiency, reduction in drug use nd the lbor required to tret nd mnge sick cttle, nd improved beef product qulity. Cow/clf producers benefit through the development of reputtion for high qulity cttle, utilizing mngement skills nd feed resources to dd further vlue to home rised clves, nd the opportunity to cpture lrger portion of the revenue in cses where some level of ownership is retined. Orgnized efforts to encourge stndrdized mngement of beef clves prior to wening nd shipment begn in In September of tht yer, pproximtely 200 niml nd veterinry scientists met t Oklhom Stte University to discuss the problems nd scientific bsis for developing nd encourging these mngement prctices (Gill, 1967). It ws t this meeting tht the concepts of vccinting clves prior to wening or shipping (pre-vccinting) nd conditioning clves were combined to coin the term preconditioning. In beef cttle, the term conditioning generlly referred to combintion of mngement prctices such s dehorning, deworming, cstrting, wening, nd trining clves to et out of bunks or wter troughs. Industry-wide doption of the preconditioning concept hs been pinfully slow. Controversy surrounding the topic is still prevlent tody. However, recent developments in the U.S. beef industry promise to propel the preconditioning concept forwrd t fster rte. Numerous vlue bsed mrketing progrms re now vilble to beef cttle producers. This mrketing pproch serves to increse informtion flow nd mngement coordintion up nd down the production chin. In this wy, stronger signls nd incentives re creted to encourge the dpttion of the best mngement prctices, such s those ssocited with preconditioning. Oklhom Coopertive Extension Fct Sheets re lso vilble on our website t: The effects of sickness on performnce nd crcss trits Previous work indictes tht niml helth nd medicine costs re the most importnt niml performnce mesures determining feedlot cttle profitbility (Grdner et l., 1996). For exmple, compred with steers without lung lesions, steers with lesions plus ctive lymph nodes hd round $74 less net return (Grdner et l., 1998). The effects of sickness on performnce nd profitbility re lso clerly demonstrted in dt collected on over 16,000 hed of cttle in the Texs A&M Rnch to Ril progrm (McNeil et l., 2000)(Tble 1). In this dt, nimls treted one or more times for bovine respirtory disese (BRD) were considered to be sick. The number of cttle treted for sickness in given yer rnged from 14% to 34%, with n verge of 22.4%. Averge medicine costs for ech niml treted vried considerbly mong yers with low of $21 to high of $38 per hed. This dt shows tht the frequency of the occurrence of BRD nd ssocited medicine costs is difficult to predict. This difficulty rises from yer-to-yer environmentl vrition nd mngement differences. Consequently, the true vlue of precon ditioning progrms is moving trget nd will vry over time nd in different situtions. In the Rnch to Ril study, cttle identified s being sick gined 0.32 lb/hd/dy less compred to cttle tht were never treted. This reduction in weight gin trnsltes to less Tble 1. Influence of sickness on performnce, profitbility nd qulity grde in eight yers of the Texs A&M Rnch to Ril progrm Item Helthy Sick Number of cttle 12,306 4,047 Medicine tretment cost, $/hd ADG, lb** Net return, $/hd** USDA Choice or higher, %** USDA Stndrd, %* Source: McNeil et l *Helthy vs. Sick differs (P =.02). **Helthy vs. Sick differs (P <.01). Division of Agriculturl Sciences nd Nturl Resources Oklhom Stte University

2 sleble crcss weight. Perhps more importnt question, nd one tht is yet to be ddressed in published literture, is the ffect of BRD on feed efficiency. Sickness reduced the number of crcsses grding choice by 12% nd incresed the number of stndrd grding crcsses by 5%. Obviously, this impct presents mrketing limittions reltive to grid pricing systems tht re lrgely driven by qulity grde. When deth loss, medicine costs, nd reduced crcss vlue were considered, cttle tht were identified nd treted for sickness returned n verge of round $88 less compred to cttle tht were never treted for sickness. In n Oklhom study (Stovl et l., 2000), cttle tht were not treted for BRD grded 66% choice, while cttle treted only once grded 59% choice, nd cttle treted more thn once grded 41% choice. These experiments point out tht the effects of sickness re vrible but hve the potentil to drmticlly impct niml performnce, profitbility, nd product qulity. How does preconditioning ffect postwening performnce? Most clves re helthy when they leve the rnch of origin, but stress cused by wening, trnsporttion, inclement wether, nutritionl deprivtion, commingling, nd processing lowers their level of disese resistnce. This lower resistnce to disese comes when disese exposure is high. Vccintion, deworming, nd blnced nutrition re ll intended to increse the level of immunocompetence (or disese resistnce). Wening, cstrting, dehorning, trining the cttle to et feed from bunk, nd other mngement prctices ssocited with preconditioning re designed to reduce the impct of stress during the shipping nd receiving period. When disese exposure is combined with extremely stressful conditions, the disese chllenge my override the cttle s cpcity for disese resistnce. In other words, the fct tht cttle hve been preconditioned does not gurntee they will not get sick. Little reserch includes the lrge numbers of nimls tht would be required to estimte the true benefit of preconditioning. Multiple yers of dt re necessry to determine the vribility in the benefit of preconditioning due to yer-to-yer wether nd psture conditions. Tble 2 includes dt from study conducted with lrge number of heifer clves from single rnch (Crvey, 1996). The comprison involved 380 preconditioned clves nd 1,600 wened nd shipped clves. Preconditioned clves received vccintions nd dewormer t wening. Modified live vccines were boostered 10 to 14 dys lter, nd clves were shipped 45 dys fter wening. During the preconditioning period, clves were turned out on grss trps nd fed concentrte pellet with free-choice grss hy. Finished cttle were mrketed on live weight bsis. Consequently, economic dt presented in Tble 2 does not reflect potentil differences in crcss trits nd ssocited crcss vlue. In this study, preconditioned heifers hd improved performnce nd feed efficiency. Preconditioning drmticlly reduced medicine costs nd deth loss. In fct, the preconditioning progrm dded lmost $61/hed to the vlue of the heifers or $11.04/cwt to the initil wening weight. In second nd similr experiment, Crvey (1996) compred 15 lots of preconditioned cttle to 15 lots of similr, Tble 2. Effects of 45-dy preconditioning on feedlot performnce nd profitbility Performnce Feedlot in wt. lb Feedlot wt gin. lb Dys on feed Dily gin lb Feed:Gin, DM bsis Medicine, $/hed Deth loss, % Feedlot cost of gin, $/cwt Economics Preconditioning costs, $/hed - 40 Feedlot cost of gin, $/hed Fed heifer vlue, $/hed Vlue minus totl costs, $/hed Difference in net vlue, $/hed Source: Crvey, 1996 Southwest Nutrition nd Mngement Conference. Tble 3. Effects of 45-dy preconditioning on feedlot performnce nd profitbility Non-precon- Precon- Item ditioned ditioned Non-precon- Precon- Item ditioned ditioned Performnce No. hed Feedlot in wt. lb Feedlot out wt. lb Dys on feed Dily gin lb Feed:Gin, DM bsis Medicine, $/hed Deth loss, % Cttle pulled for tretment, % Feedlot COG, $/cwt Economics Feedlot COG, $/hed Fed cttle vlue, $/hed Vlue minus totl costs, $/hed Difference in net vlue, $/hed Source: Crvey, 1996 Southwest Nutrition nd Mngement Conference. but non-preconditioned cttle (Tble 3). Cttle in the nonpreconditioned tretment were purchsed through order buyers nd were of mixed origin nd bckgrounds. The preconditioned clves hd been certified through the Hi-Pro Producer s Edge progrm, which requires two rounds of modified live virl nd Psteurell vccine, s well s 45 to 50 dy wening period. Similr to the previous experiment, niml performnce ws improved nd medicine costs were drmticlly reduced. Remember tht these cttle were mrketed on live bsis, so

3 potentil vlue differences bsed on crcss qulity re not reflected in the budget presented in Tble 3. The preconditioning progrm dded lmost $56 to the vlue of the cttle. In other words, the cttle feeder could hve pid $9.67/cwt more for the preconditioned clves nd profited the sme mount if the finished cttle were sold on live weight bsis. With this dt set, the ctul weight gin nd costs during the preconditioning period re unknown; however, if we pply the sme costs s used in the previous experiment ($40) nd ssume tht the vlue of ech pound of dded weight is worth $.55, the brekeven weight gin during preconditioning would be 73 lbs, or 1.6 lbs per dy for 45 dys ($40 / $.55 per lb = 73 lbs). More dt is needed to identify the true vlue of preconditioning for vrious cttle types, phses of the industry (feedyrd vs. stocker), time of the yer, region of the country, nd different mngement regimes. Using the dt vilble, preconditioning does pper to result in substntil reduction in sickness, deth loss, nd medicine costs. These improvements pper to result in better niml performnce nd lower cost of feedyrd gin. There is even more vlue to preconditioning when crcss qulity is considered. Bsed on the limited dt vilble, it ppers tht premiums of $3 to $8/ cwt my be justified for cttle tht hve undergone mngement protocols similr to the ones mentioned bove. Premiums in this rnge would encourge more cow/clf producers to dopt the prctice, while preserving some of the dded vlue for the stocker nd/or finishing segments of the industry. Does the industry currently rewrd cttlemen for preconditioning clves? Reserch is now vilble tht ttempted to quntify the effect of vlue dded helth progrms on the price pid for beef clves sold through specil feeder cttle uctions or through video uctions. Tble 4 includes sle prices for clves in six specil preconditioned clf sles held in Lincoln County, Oklhom during the 1980s. Sle requirements included the following: A minimum of 10 hed (could be mixed steers nd heifers) Within 30 dys prior to sle cttle hd to be cstrted, heled, dewormed, nd treted for externl prsites. A minimum of 30 dys prior to sle, cttle hd to be wened nd vccinted with IBR, BVD, PI 3, 5-wy Lepto, nd 4-wy clostridil vccines. Cttle were to be fed minimum of 200 pounds of commercil preconditioning feed within 21-dy period prior to the sle. Actul sle prices were compred to weighted verge sle prices for U.S. number one medium nd lrge frme clves selling during the sme week t the Oklhom Ntionl Stockyrds in Oklhom City, Oklhom. According to this dt, it is evident tht cttle buyers were willing to py premium for preconditioned clves, nd this premium tended to grow over time. An importnt observtion, however, ws tht enrollment in this preconditioning progrm dropped drmticlly fter the mrket significntly improved in Demnd from buyers remined high but when clf prices were high, cow/clf producers lost interest nd the sles hd to be discontinued. This hppened in spite of the fct tht premiums hd incresed over time from five or six percent to ten or eleven percent of totl clf vlue. For severl yers, Superior Livestock Video Auction, Inc. hs encourged the use of stndrdized nd certified vccintion nd wening progrms. Since, 1994, sle price on over 14,000 lots, representing over 1.75 million cttle hve been recorded nd evluted for difference in sle price depending on vccintion nd wening sttus. Tble 5 shows the totl number of lots for ech yer nd the percentge of lots consigned nd mrketed under four different ctegories. Enrollment in the two levels of certifiction shown here strted extremely slow but continue to increse over time. Since 1995, the number of cttle identified s hving no vccintions hs stedily declined. In 1995, only 15.6% of the lots included in this dt set were enrolled in one of the certifiction progrms, wheres in 2000, 37% of the lots hd qulified for one of the two certifiction progrms shown. Even though prticiption is incresing in the certified progrm tht includes minimum 45-dy wening period, prtici- Tble 4. Premiums pid for 400 to 500 pound clves mrketed through Lincoln County Preconditioned Clf Sles b. OKC Price c Lincoln Co. Price Premium Premium Premium Gender Yer $/CWT $/CWT $/CWT $/Hed % of totl cost Steers Heifers Source: Wyne Sherhert (Unpublished dt). b Sles were held during the fourth week of October ech yer. c Weighted verge price for U.S. number 1 medium nd lrge frme clves selling during the sme week t the Ntionl Stockyrds in Oklhom City, Oklhom

4 Tble 5. Number of sle lots by yer nd vlue dded helth progrm for beef clves sold through Superior Livestock Video Auctions. Vlue dded helth progrm dministered to sle lots, % of totl Totl number Not certified b Vccinted of lots in dt Not vccinted Vccinted Not wened Wened Yer nlysis Certified c Certified d , , , , , , , Source: King et l., 1994 through 1998 CSU Beef Progrm Report nd Pfizer Animl Helth Finl Reports, 1999 through Averge lot size ws pproximtely 123 hed ech yer. b Clves in this ctegory were vccinted ginst one or more of the following viruses t some time between birth nd the dte of sle: IBR, BVD, PI3, nd BRSV. c Vc 34. For certifiction requirements see King nd Odde, d Vc 45. For certifiction requirements see King nd Odde, ption is still extremely low despite the potentil vlue to the buyer nd the industry s whole. Tble 6 includes the verge price pid for clves tht were not vccinted or certified, s well s price differences (premium, $/cwt) pid for clves with vrying vccintion, certifiction, nd wening sttus. Using only the dt from 1995 through 2000, the verge premium pid for clves identified s hving one or more virl vccintions with no certifiction, ws $0.80/cwt. When stndrdized nd certified vccintion protocol ws used, the verge six yer premium ws incresed to $3.34/cwt. when clves were certified s being vccinted nd wened under the Vc 45 requirements. When clculted reltive to totl clf vlue, Vc 45 clves hve returned n verge premium of four to five percent. Intuitively, the vlue of preconditioning should differ between cttle shipped directly from the rnch nd those tht re collected nd mrketed t centrl uction fcilities. Becuse the potentil exists for greter exposure to disese nd niml stress, the premium for preconditioned clves mrketed through uction fcilities should be greter compred to those shipped directly from the home rnch. More dt is necessry to dequtely document whether this premium difference exists. Wht does preconditioning cost the cow/ clf producer? When clves re vccinted, wened, nd retined for t lest 45 dys prior to shipment, preconditioning costs relisticlly rnge from $35 to $60 per hed. Cttlemen often ignore indirect costs such s interest, their own lbor, nd equipment deprecition. The nutrition progrm typiclly mkes up 45% to 60% of the totl budget (Tble 7), nd should receive creful considertion. High qulity psture, such s winter nnul forges; stockpiled cool seson grss species (fescue, brome etc.); nd stockpiled bermudgrss should result in lower cost nd greter returns compred to dry-lot feeding progrms. Tble 6. Effect of vlue dded helth progrms on the price of beef clves sold through Superior Livestock Video Auctions. Vlue dded helth progrm dministered to sle lots Not wened Wened Not vccinted Vccinted Vccinted Vccinted Yer Not certified Not certified b Certified c Certified d Price, $/cwt Premium over non-vccinted nd non-certified, $/cwt Source: King et l., 1994 through 1998 CSU Beef Progrm Report nd Pfizer Animl Helth Finl Reports, 1999 through Averge lot size ws pproximtely 123 hed ech yer. b Clves in this ctegory were vccinted ginst one or more of the following viruses t some time between birth nd the dte of sle: IBR, BVD, PI3, nd BRSV. c Vc 34. For certifiction requirements see King nd Odde, d Vc 45. For certifiction requirements see King nd Odde, Clves cn be held in pen or dry lot for three to four dys before being turned out to psture or grss trps. Personnel t the Noble Foundtion, ner Ardmore, Oklhom, nd severl Oklhom cttlemen, hve hd success wening clves in the psture. Electric fence keeps the cows nd clves seprted. It is suggested tht supplementtion progrm be continued fter the clves re turned out to psture. This trins the clves to feed nd ssists the producer in monitoring the cttle throughout the progrm. In mny frm situtions nd in yers of drought, the high qulity psture lterntive my not be vilble

5 In these cses, hy coupled with supplementtion or concentrte-feeding progrms re implemented. The number of nutrition progrm lterntives is virtully unlimited. Tble 7 shows budgets for four different scenrios: hy with low level of supplement; hy nd one percent of body weight feed; free-choice receiving feed; nd psture with supplement. Obviously, feed prices, lbor vilbility, nd buyer preferences will hve n importnt influence on these clcultions; therefore, these budgets must be viewed only s exmples. An OSU designed computer progrm (OSU Precon) cn be used to estimte costs of preconditioning nd brekeven sle price for the cttle. This progrm is vilble through county Extension offices or cn be downloded through the Internet t The nutrition progrm hs direct influence on cttle fleshiness, fill, future performnce, nd price. Smith et. l. (2000) found tht cttle clssified s full were discounted $3/ cwt to $4/cwt compred to cttle with verge fill. Similrly, cttle clssified s fleshy were discounted one to two dollrs per cwt compred to cttle considered to be in verge condition (Smith et l., 2000). Previous reserch hs shown tht fster rte of gin during the growing period results in slower rte of gin during the subsequent grzing or finishing phse. However, if the clves re sold fter preconditioning, nutrition progrms bsed lrgely on hy re seldom profitble. This is becuse hy is very expensive energy source when evluted on cost per pound of weight gin bsis. Slower rtes of gin during preconditioning, nd minimum nutritionl inputs re justified when ll or percentge of ownership will be retined in the cttle. It is recommended tht moderte rte of gin (1.5 to 2 lbs) be trgeted in situtions where cttle will be sold, concentrte feeds re inexpensive, nd lbor vilbility is dequte. Summry Bovine respirtory disese costs the beef industry becuse ffected nimls hve reduced performnce, incresed cost of production, nd reduced crcss qulity. Bsed on the limited dt vilble, preconditioning (defined s the combintion of pproprite vccintion, 45-dy wening nd blnced nutrition) significntly reduces morbidity nd mortlity s well s improving weight gin nd feed efficiency. Dt is not vilble documenting the potentil benefits of preconditioning reltive to crcss qulity. Further informtion is needed to better identify the true vlue of preconditioning progrms in different situtions. This informtion is necessry to forecst relistic price tht buyers cn py for preconditioned clves, while llowing cow/clf producers to rep some of the dded vlue. Conservtively, preconditioning my cpture $50 to $75 per hed of dditionl vlue from wening through the pcking phse compred to production system where wening, vccintion, nd other mngement prctices ssocited with preconditioning occur fter shipment from the rnch of origin. References Crvey, M.D Preconditioning Effect on Feedlot Performnce. In: Proc. Southwest Nutrition nd Mngement Conference, p. 33. Tble 7. Exmple budgets of 45-dy preconditioning progrms with vrying feeding mngement Hy nd Hy nd 1% of body Free-choice rtion Psture nd Item Supplement b weight feed c with hy d supplement c Costs, $/hed Interest Helth products nd medicine Deth loss Lbor Equipment Hy Feed Psture Totl Brekeven projection ADG, lb Sle weight, lb Sle price, $/cwt Brekeven price, $/cwt Hy used in ech sitution is bermud, sorghum sudn or cool seson species with > 10% protein nd > 52% TDN. Vlue of weight gin beyond 500 lb wening weight = $0.60 per lb. Sle price ssumes no premium for preconditioning clves. b Supplement contins 20% protein nd cost is $175 per ton. c Feed contins 14% protein nd cost is $150 per ton. d Rtion contins 14% protein nd cost is $145 per ton

6 Grdner, B.A., H.G. Dolezl, F.N. Owens, L.K. Brynt, J.L. Nelson, B.R. Schutte nd R.A. Smith Impct of helth on profitbility of feedlot steers. Okl. Agr. Exp. St. Res. Rep P-965:102. Grdner, B.A., S.L. Northcutt, H.G. Dolezl, D.R. Gill, F.K. Ry, J.B. Morgn nd C.W. Sherhrt Fctors influencing profitbility of feedlot steers. Okl. Agr. Exp. St. Res. Rep. P-951:164. Gill, D.R Mngement of clves nd dpting the clf to its future environment. In: Proc. Preconditioning Seminr, Oklhom Stte University, Stillwter, OK. p 59. McNeill, J.W. nd F.T. McCollum III Texs A&M University Rnch to Ril Annul Summries. ( ) Avilble t: frmeset.html. Accessed December 20,

7 3529-7

8 The Oklhom Coopertive Extension Service Bringing the University to You! The Coopertive Extension Service is the lrgest, most successful informl eductionl orgniztion in the world. It is ntionwide system funded nd guided by prtnership of federl, stte, nd locl governments tht delivers informtion to help people help themselves through the lnd-grnt university system. Extension crries out progrms in the brod ctegories of griculture, nturl resources nd environment; fmily nd consumer sciences; 4-H nd other youth; nd community resource development. Extension stff members live nd work mong the people they serve to help stimulte nd educte Americns to pln hed nd cope with their problems. Some chrcteristics of the Coopertive Extension system re: The federl, stte, nd locl governments coopertively shre in its finncil support nd progrm direction. It is dministered by the lnd-grnt university s designted by the stte legislture through n Extension director. Extension progrms re nonpoliticl, objective, nd reserch-bsed informtion. It provides prcticl, problem-oriented eduction for people of ll ges. It is designted to tke the knowledge of the university to those persons who do not or cnnot prticipte in the forml clssroom instruction of the university. It utilizes reserch from university, government, nd other sources to help people mke their own decisions. More thn million volunteers help multiply the impct of the Extension professionl stff. It dispenses no funds to the public. It is not regultory gency, but it does inform people of regultions nd of their options in meeting them. Locl progrms re developed nd crried out in full recognition of ntionl problems nd gols. The Extension stff eductes people through personl contcts, meetings, demonstrtions, nd the mss medi. Extension hs the built-in flexibility to djust its progrms nd subject mtter to meet new needs. Activities shift from yer to yer s citizen groups nd Extension workers close to the problems dvise chnges. Oklhom Stte University, in complince with Title VI nd VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Executive Order s mended, Title IX of the Eduction Amendments of 1972, Americns with Disbilities Act of 1990, nd other federl lws nd regultions, does not discriminte on the bsis of rce, color, ntionl origin, sex, ge, religion, disbility, or sttus s vetern in ny of its policies, prctices or procedures. This includes but is not limited to dmissions, employment, finncil id, nd eductionl services. Issued in furthernce of Coopertive Extension work, cts of My 8 nd June 30, 1914, in coopertion with the U.S. Deprtment of Agriculture, Smuel E. Curl, Director of Coopertive Extension Service, Oklhom Stte University, Stillwter, Oklhom. This publiction is printed nd issued by Oklhom Stte University s uthorized by the Den of the Division of Agriculturl Sciences nd Nturl Resources nd hs been prepred nd distributed t cost of 20 cents per copy