vaccines must be administered, al- lowing adequate time for immu- nity development in a low-stress atmosphere. The fi rst thing producers have to
consider is whether they have the facilities, the labor, and the know- how to embark on a 45-day precon- ditioning program, Homeyer says. “Vaccinat ions alone aren’t
enough,” Homeyer says. “If produc- ers are weaning their own calves, those calves have to be separated from the cows. For immunity to increase, calves have to be on a high nutritional plane, so there has to be adequate forage or feed. Un- like cows, weaned calves are much more hands-on and require regular attention.” A second consideration, closely
aligned with the fi rst, is the oppor- tunity cost. “Even if producers have the fa-
cilities, labor and feedstuffs, is the preconditioning program the best use of those resources?” Homeyer says. “People need to think about what opportunities they may be giving up.” Another consideration is the im-
pact of the VAC program on the cur- rent management scheme. Weaning is inherently stressful, and stress can impede the immune response triggered by vaccines; therefore, it is not a good idea to wait un- til weaning the calves to castrate and dehorn, which are also major stressors. Many people prefer to perform all of these management procedures at once. “As a producer, are you willing
to change your production sched- ule to maximize the effectiveness of your vaccination regimen?” asks Homeyer. A fourth and arguably the most
important consideration is the pro- ducers’ marketing plan.
tscra.org
“A producer has to sell to a buy-
er who recognizes the benefi t of the VAC program and is willing to pay for the benefi t,” says Homeyer. “Just running the cattle individually through an auction market may not earn a premium.” Generally, cattle sold through
the local auction market are anony- mous, and there is no mechanism for recognizing added value, he says. Plus, because individuals from one ranch are comingled with other cattle to make load lots, it is more effi cient for stocker operators and feed lots to treat them all alike in- stead of tracking individuals. Buyers prefer to operate on a
load lot basis. As a result, it may be diffi cult for small producers to recoup their investment in value- added vaccinations, unless they can participate in a program like the Northeast Texas Beef Improvement Organization (NETBIO) based at the Sulphur Springs Livestock Auc- tion. NETBIO created a health and nutrition protocol that encouraged producers to implement best man- agement practices so their cattle could be sold in the organization’s consignment sales. In 2010, NETBIO sponsored 6
sales, marketing 38,527 head sold in matched load lots and grossing more than $23.4 million. The ef- fort has grown to include more than 500 member-producers in 40 northeastern Texas counties and 4 states. Buyers who value the ability to quickly acquire large numbers of uniform cattle come from across the nation in person and via video auc- tion, allowing small- and mid-sized herd owners to enjoy the benefi ts of high-quality volume. “When it comes to marketing,
producers may have to be willing to do something different to make value-added vaccination a paying
proposition,” Homeyer says. While value-added vaccinations
may bring in additional income, it is important to ask if there are other things that might add as much to the operation’s bottom line without incurring additional expense, Ho- meyer says. For instance, produc- ers, who have a year-round calving season, could move toward a 60-day calving season to help improve calf uniformity. “In the cattle industry, there is
no silver bullet,” Homeyer says. “It’s important to look at every alterna- tive for increasing the bottom line, put a pencil to each of them, and then see which makes the most sense.”
Editor’s Note: This is the fourth in a 12-part series focusing on using partial budgets to answer ques- tions in a technique commonly known as “penciling it out.” Be- cause Texas and Oklahoma are so diverse and each ranch is unique, the series was not designed to pro- vide a 1-size-fi ts-all answer. In- stead it was created to help produc- ers become familiar with a handy tool that can be used to strengthen the bottom line. The series has been developed in collaboration with Carl Homeyer, state agri- cultural economist for the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) in Temple. Ho- meyer earned his bachelor’s degree in range science and his master’s degree in land economics and real estate from Texas A&M Univer- sity. Before joining the NRCS in 2009, Homeyer operated his fam- ily’s Burleson County ranch, which also includes broiler houses, while owning and running several small businesses.
April 2013 The Cattleman 33
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102