331 Economic comparison of march and may calving systems in the nebraska sandhillls

A 3-yr study evaluated the economic differences between a March and May calving production system of crossbred beef cows and their offspring from the Gudmundsen Sandhills Laboratory, Whitman, NE. Both herds were treated as a common when not in treatment period. Adjusted calf weaning BW was higher (P...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of animal science 2019-07, Vol.97 (Supplement_2), p.131-132
Hauptverfasser: Broadhead, Devin L, Stockton, Matt, Erickson, McKay, Musgrave, Jackie A, Funston, Rick N
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:A 3-yr study evaluated the economic differences between a March and May calving production system of crossbred beef cows and their offspring from the Gudmundsen Sandhills Laboratory, Whitman, NE. Both herds were treated as a common when not in treatment period. Adjusted calf weaning BW was higher (P) for March Calves (226.4 ± 1.1 kg vs 193.4 ± 2 kg). Pregnancy rates (89% vs 91%) were similar through both systems. The stochastic economic model used for the analysis was based on 9 yr of USDA AMS data. The model accounts for most assumptions within each system, including all labor, cull and replacement cow costs and feed costs. This analysis was on the total calf costs, total pair feed costs and average market net return at weaning. March systems wintered on hay had a positive net return 2 out of the 9 yr (Average of -$88.76/calf) and on cornstalks 8 out of 9 years in Dawson County, NE (Average of $62.75/calf). March systems on winter range feed 0.41 kg DM/(cow • d) of supplement had a positive net return 4 out of the 9 yrs (Average of $25.23/calf). The May system, no matter the treatments of range or meadow and with or without supplement, had a positive net return 2 out of the 9 years (Average of $-65.77 and $-83.90/calf). Within this analysis, even with the input costs being higher for March, the net return was still greater in a March vs May system. Further analysis will be done on different trts within each system.
ISSN:0021-8812
1525-3163
DOI:10.1093/jas/skz122.233