2020_blog-header_Mitloehner-Alltech_Shoebar-Land-&-Cattle_TX_MJH-1798

Beefed up findings: Cattle solve global warming

“Keep the big picture,” my dad tells me every time I drive away.

He implies I should be aware of my surroundings while traveling, but there’s deeper meaning to that well-worn phrase.

I often find myself with tunnel vision – so captivated by one idea or way of doing things that I can’t imagine others.

Livestock seem to be scapegoats for global warming, but maybe society needs to see a bigger picture, consider different perspectives.

Frank Mitloehner, professor and air quality specialist at the University of California-Davis, wants to challenge common beliefs on animal agriculture and global warming.

Sure, he says, cattle add some methane to the air, but they make up for it. They counterbalance the amount of greenhouse gases emitted by fossil-fuel production and use in transportation.

2020_blog_Mitloehner-Alltech_Shoebar-Land-&-Cattle_TX_MJH-1363

At the recent Alltech ONE Virtual Conference, Mitloehner presented the science to prove cattle haven’t added new carbon to the atmosphere.

The greenhouse gases from livestock are very different from others. Yes, they have the same chemical makeup, but a distinctly different origin and fate.

“Carbon dioxide is a stock gas that accumulates over time,” Mitloehner said. “Methane is a flow gas.” That means it will stay at the same level if it is destroyed at the same rate it is released.

Methane’s fate links to the biogenic carbon cycle, which converts it to carbon dioxide that plants absorb by photosynthesis in a decade-long process. So yes, that takes 10 years but here’s the point: the cycle is current!

“The methane that our cows and other livestock put out will be gone after 10 years,” the scientist said.

2020_blog_Mitloehner-Alltech_Presentation-Slide

Knowing that, we can update the Global Warming Potential (GWP₁₀₀) formula that tallies annual greenhouse gases, he added. It’s a brilliant bit of math but didn’t account for the biogenic carbon cycle, “so it’s inappropriate to be used for livestock.”

It just needed an asterisk.

GWP* factors in that cycle, only adding methane to the yearly prediction if it’s released faster than it cycles out.

“If you have constant livestock herds, or even decreasing livestock herds, then you are not adding new, additional carbon to the atmosphere,” Mitloehner concluded.

The number of beef cattle in the U.S. has been consistent to lower since 1970. This year’s cattle consume what’s left of the 2010 methane as they graze.

Neat, right?

I find encouragement knowing science supports what we’re doing with cattle and our planet, if you take a big-picture view.

About the author: Maeley Herring

Growing up on a cattle ranch in North Texas and being immersed in that world from a young age, I have always considered myself fortunate. But I am truly blessed to work with the brand as an intern. I get to communicate with the heart of the cattle industry – people who dedicate their lives to their families, quality cattle and irreplaceable land.

Angus, Angus everywhere

Angus confusion. After more than a decade on the job, it feels like old news.

But every time a new chain carries “Angus beef” it comes up again.

When a retail giant like Wal-Mart announces it’s selling Angus beef, and then some news outlets report somebody’s definition of what that means—Angus confusion is back in full force.

Just to clarify, Certified Angus Beef ^® is not available at Wal-Mart.

Angus is Everywhere — Angus is everywhere.

For a couple years, I did a weekly “Mythbuster Monday” segment on this blog. Then it seemed I’d taken on every high-quality beef misconception I could think of, but sometimes it just feels like the right time to dust off one of those posts.

So here it is:

Myth: “Certified Angus Beef? Ya, I’ve seen that at McDonald’s… [or Wal-Mart].”

Fact: You have not seen Certified, Angus and Beef—those three words, together with this logo at McDonald’s or Wal-Mart or Sonic or the local farmer’s market. (And if you did, let us know and we’ll have a talk with them.) That’s the only way you know it’s Certified Angus Beef ^® and not just Angus beef.

Don’t know the difference? Don’t worry, it happens all the time. Here’s the crash course:

To earn the brand, cattle must pass a total of 10 carcass specifications designed to provide predictably delicious beef.

So, if that beef at Wal-Mart isn’t Certified Angus Beef ^® that begs the question: What is it?

There are 146 programs certified by the USDA. Of those only 97 are Angus programs and only 39 are Premium Choice. Packers want to do something with all the cattle USDA has already identified as Angus-type, so when they don’t make the brand there is a wide variety of programs they might fall into.

Only about three in 10 of these A-stamped carcasses end up as Certified Angus Beef ^®, so the other 70% or so will fulfill the needs of companies like Hardees, Arby’s, Burger King and Mickey D’s.

That’s why we’ve coined the tagline, “Not all Angus is equal.”

Are you ready to bring this good news story to the world? Check out our consumer website to load up on more facts. I could use a little help here.

May your bottom line be filled with Black Ink,

Miranda

Intern shares her CAB mythbusting experience

Terssa Lawrence — Tressa Lawrence, our fall Industry Information intern

Count this as your formal introduction.

Folks– this is former beef ambassador and Wyoming Livestock Roundup reporter and current Red Raider and Certified Angus Beef intern Tressa Lawrence.

Tressa—Here’s your chance to chat with some pretty cool folks from ranchers to beef industry professionals.

Enjoy! –Miranda

As I sat in my ad campaigns class at Texas Tech University, the topic of branding came up. John Deere vs. Case, Coke vs. Shasta, Certified Angus Beef vs. off-brand “100% Angus beef”. Comments were thrown around such as “CAB is just a marketing scheme,” and “There isn’t anything different about CAB burger than any other Angus burger.” And the comment that finally jabbed me into action, “Any cow with a black hide is CAB.”

Wrong. I raised my hand and explained that I was actually very familiar with the Certified Angus Beef brand, and that no, not all black-hided bovine could become Certified Angus Beef.

Yes, one of the standards is that cattle must be 51% black hided in order to be evaluated for CAB, but there are also ten other qualifying factors.

Once my classmates had me on my soapbox there was no stopping me. I explained how those 10 carcass specifications ensure consistent quality. We discussed modest to higher marbling and medium to fine marbling texture; how only “A” maturity is acceptable; consistent sizing and the specifics of quality appearance and tenderness.

One guy in the back of the class said he raised another breed and was sure a steak from his cattle would taste just as good as any CAB steak I put in front of him. (It took a lot not to roll my eyes at this statement, but I am pretty sure my eyebrows shot up in disbelief. Had this guy ever eaten a CAB Prime steak? I’d bet not.)

I explained that it’s not just about the breed, but the specs and especially the consistency. That’s what is unique about CAB. You know that you are going to get consistently high quality meat every time, whether it’s a burger or one of their prepared briskets. Always consistent. Always high quality. They track every pound.

My explanation of Certified Angus Beef with Q&A follow-up managed to consume the rest of the class period, which I don’t think any of the students were complaining about. We may not have learned much about campaigns that day, but by golly I bet no one in that class ever says anything like ‘all black-hided cattle are Certified Angus Beef’ again.

~Tressa

Angus to Limousin=Apples to oranges

Every ranch I’ve been to this summer has been pretty much focused on straightbred Angus cattle. (Remember my visits to Zutavern Ranch Co. and Guggenmos River Ranch?)

2012_07_07_mr_Guggenmos River Ranch Ranch-245 — Angus works at Guggenmos River Ranch, so they see no reason to add any variation or complicate matters.

They know Angus EPDs (expected progeny differences) like nobody’s business. Er, nobody else’s business. They can recall what were good numbers in say a milk EPD from two decades ago and how that compares to today. I’m not sure how much they could tell you these measures in other breeds, because frankly it doesn’t matter a whole lot to them.

So today’s myth hasn’t come up lately, but we do hear it out in the country so I’m bringing it to light here, too:

Myth: You can compare EPDs from one breed to the next straight up. No conversion needed.

Fact: The Angus.org EPD page describes an EPD as “the prediction of how future progeny of each animal are expected to perform relative to the progeny of other animals listed in the database.” If you’re reading carefully it’s that very last part that carries so much importance.

“Relative to the progeny of other animals listed in the database.”

Each breed compares all its sires to other sires in the same breed registry. As a hypothetical example, if you lined up all the Charolais bulls and found one that would be considered fairly low birthweight compared to that whole population and then you took that same bull and put it in a lineup of all the Angus bulls it probably wouldn’t register as a “low birthweight bull” by Angus standards. You’re comparing against different measures.

So the U.S. Meat Animal Research Center (MARC) in Clay Center, Neb., has calculated across-breed EPDs for years. They use Angus as the base.

Rather than go through and list all the traits and the adjustments, I’ll point to this article that appeared in BEEF Magazine, written by MARC scientists: MARC Releases 2012 Across-Breed EPD Table

“Bulls of different breeds can be compared on the same EPD scale by adding the appropriate adjustment factor to the EPDs produced in the most recent genetic evaluations for each of the 18 breeds. The AB-EPDs [across-breed EPDs] are most useful to commercial producers purchasing bulls of more than one breed to use in crossbreeding programs. For example, in terminal crossbreeding systems, AB-EPDs can be used to identify bulls in different breeds with high growth potential or favorable carcass characteristics.

As an example, suppose a Simmental bull has a yearling weight EPD of + 52.1 lbs., and a Gelbvieh bull has a yearling weight EPD of + 84.0 lbs. The AB adjustment factors for yearling weight (Table 1) are 22.4 lbs. for Simmental and -13.5 lb for Gelbvieh. The AB-EPD is 52.1 lbs. + 22.4 lbs. = 74.5 lbs. for the Simmmental bull, and 84.0 – 13.5 = 70.5 lbs. for the Gelbvieh bull. The expected yearling weight difference when both are mated to cows of another breed (e.g., Angus) would be 74.5 lbs. – 70.5 lbs. = 4.0 lbs.”

Of course if you want to avoid all that math, you could just go with straightbred Angus.

Only kidding.

Well, kind of.

May your bottom line be filled with black ink,

Miranda

Yield grade 4 and CAB?

Producers often turn to the guys in our office to help them make heads or tails of carcass data. It is our kind of thing…

A call came in last week that sounded an awful lot like one our team has heard before:

“There must be some mistake…I got a yield grade 4 discount and a CAB premium.”

This myth is completely understandable, especially once you learn its history:

Myth: Certified Angus Beef LLC (CAB) doesn’t accept yield grade 4s (YG4) into its program.

Fact: If you’d asked us that question in early 2006, we’d have said, “You’re right. There must be some mistake!”

But then this happened:

“Responding to beef industry changes and consumer demand, the Certified Angus Beef LLC (CAB) Board of Directors on Sept 7 <2006> voted to adjust Certified Angus Beef ® (CAB®) brand specifications. In place of a long-standing Yield Grade (YG) 3.9 limit, the brand will use a more specific consistency requirement in the future. Finished cattle weights have increased steadily and beef fabrication styles have evolved in the 28 years since CAB was founded. The changes will address uniformity issues that technology has been unable to control.”

Essentially that took the YG spec and broke it into its three separate parts—ribeye size, backfat and carcass weight:

10-16 square inch ribeye
Carcass weight less than 1,000 lb
Less than 1 inch external backfat

This has helped us deliver more consistency to our customers. If you want to get into all the details behind the move, check out: “CAB to enhance uniformity.”

But in short, you can get a YG 4 discount (because packers like to discourage waste fat) and a CAB premium (because they like to reward quality).

May your bottom line be filled with black ink,

Miranda

Here in the real world

Sometimes I hear commercial cattlemen discussing seedstock producers like they’re some elite class of uber-rich that don’t have to adhere to the same fiscally conservative practices most of the rest of the folks in production ag do.

I’ve also heard talk of how they baby their cattle and that they just “don’t get” what it’s like to be a commercial rancher.

I’ve spent time on registered ranches. Sometimes they have nicer fences or cleaner machine sheds, their places a little showier, but quite often I don’t think you’d be able to tell by looking if they were raising bulls or feeder steers. I’ve also heard many of them talk about their share of tough times and scraping by.

I draw from my boots-on-the-ground experience with today’s falsehood:

Myth: There aren’t any seedstock producers who know what it’s really like raising cattle in the real world.

Fact: Sure some producers are tunnel focused on the bull market, but a great many take great interest in all other segments of the beef business.

The Klausmeyers: a few of the consigners (the winners, in fact) in this year’s Kansas Carcass Data Project.

Take the Kansas Angus Association members. They recently wrapped up their Carcass Data Project where nine breeders co-mingled 79 calves to feed at McPherson Co. Feeders.

“This was kind of a learning experience,” said one consigner of his first shot at some firsthand feeding knowledge. “A good chance to compare with other good cattle,” said another.

Earlier this summer I was at Schiefelbein Farms in Minnesota, where they not only raise bulls, but also feed out calves.

“It also elevates your knowledge base,” says Don.

Between balancing rations and grid marketing they’re deeply entrenched in the same issues that a feedlot is. They know real-world and that helps direct their breeding program.

2007_6_mr_Downey Ranch-2 — Downey Ranch Inc. knows about commercial cattle: it was their first source of income and continues to be a large part of their operation.

Still, a big handful of breeders are also in the commercial business. When I visited with Barb Downey at the Downey Ranch in Kansas a few years back, we mainly talked about her commercial herd.

“We started this commercial cow herd with the emphasis from the start on trying to produce higher-quality beef. We were already keeping the kind of records that you’d need, and we had established a real firm idea of what we wanted in our seedstock. We have a very grounded idea as to what’s important to a commercial man in our area, because that’s what we are.”

So many places I’ve been to, they talked about treating their cows just like any commercial cattle. They followed the same breeding season, no second chances for under-performers. Some might run a few more cows through a calving barn, but they’re still tied to making a profit. That’s a universal motivator. It’s good for their bottom line to see what makes yours.

As Danny Schiefelbein said, “Our whole goal is for them to be in the business a long time and the only way they can do that is to do it a profitable way.”

May your bottom line be filled with black ink,

Miranda

Not forced to love it

Perhaps you’ll notice a new level of excellence in my writing or be able to sense that I’m less stressed thanks to my recent professional training at the Agriculture Media Summit in Albuquerque, New Mexico last week.

But when more than 500 professional in the ag communications business get together, you can bet there’s a whole other round of learning going on in the hallways, during breaks and social hours. Everyone shared drought stories, from their own experience or places they’d been. We talked crop conditions, markets, cow numbers and politics—not unlike a bunch of producers meeting for their morning cup of coffee down the road, except the hotel coffee was more expensive. And we were wearing slacks and skirts. But otherwise, pretty much the same.

p145763698-3 — Everything I write about comes back to the end product, but I don’t complain about that!

During one of those chats a friend and I were talking about writing for ag papers (which we both have done at one point in our lives) and writing for companies and breed associations.

I commented that I love the writing at CAB, because of the combination of Steve’s background (former editor of Beef Today and Grass & Grain) and our leadership team’s philosophy that make it feel like I’m just a regular ag journalist. I don’t have to write about things I don’t believe in. I’m not instructed to “push” things. Sure, my work always has to have a connection to high-quality beef, but c’mon, who wouldn’t believe in that?

I’m not sure if he bought that or not, so I thought I’d pull this one out of the archives:

Myth—The CAB supply development team just spews Angus propaganda, regardless of the facts.

Fact—We do want you to use more Angus in your herd, but only because we truly believe it will lead you down the trail of profitability.

And it takes a lot to make us “believe” because our team is made up of scientific minds who take a hunch and then find the hard-core data to back it up. We’re not easily swayed by popular opinion. We want to know the numbers, the supporting facts and then firsthand accounts from ranchers and feeders.

Almost all of us come from a production background and most of us continued that early education with advanced study in the agriculture field, some holding masters and doctorates. Heck, our president isn’t just a marketing whiz. Dr. John Stika is a Kansas farm boy, still firmly grounded by his advanced study of meat science.

We have looked at the numbers on everything from how having more Angus-influence in your herd affects quality grade to how the breed has improved its growth traits. When somebody asks us about implant recommendations, we crunch the numbers and then ask for outside opinions.

We lean on a wide and varied network of university and private researchers to provide us with information that we can share with you.

Of course it’s always going to include talk about quality. We are paid to increase the long-term supply of Certified Angus Beef^® but I certainly didn’t take this job to spew propaganda. I’m sure my teammates would agree: We all want you to succeed. If you want to do that by producing a darn tasty product, we’re here to share with you all that we know (and all that the true-blue experts know) about getting that done.

I get to look at things from all angles. I get to wear a critical thinking hat and talk with experts with diverse opinions. And then I get to share that with you.

Sounds kind of like my first paid writing gig freelancing for The Land. Except now I get some fringe benefits (read: CAB for breakfast, lunch and dinner).

That said, if there’s anything you’d like us to dig into….let me know. I’d love to hear your questions.

May your bottom line be filled with black ink,

~Miranda

Be specific

Is it really breed specific?

Sometimes I answer a CAB question with, “Let me ask the scientists.” That’s what happened last week when some Twitter followers asked questions about using our DNA test on other breeds.

I knew that it is specifically for high-percentage Angus cattle, but I couldn’t exactly say why. I promised those followers that I’d get a more in-depth answer.

Myth: GeneMax would work on any breed, they just say “high-percentage Angus” since they’re a breed organization.

Fact: All DNA tests on the market today work better on the type of cattle they were trained on. I interviewed Larry Kuehn, a geneticist at the USDA Meat Animal Research Center (MARC), for a story on the future of DNA earlier this year.

When I asked why the tests don’t work as well across-breeds he said, “We’re working on it.”

Right now the “high-density” tests measure 50,000 markers, but they’re working on “ultimate high density” tests.

“Basically we’re trying to get down more to the meat of what’s causing animals to be different from one another. When you’ve got 50,0000 markers spread across the genome, you’ve got a certain probability that you have markers in that same region as causal mutations that will be in phase with the casual mutations. The hypothesis is with the higher density panel, you’ve got a higher probability that you’ve markers in phase with casual mutations.”

Simply put, the more pieces of the puzzle you have, the easier it is to compare across breeds. Also, as with most things we pay for….more work=higher cost.

That’s why “reduced panel” tests, like GeneMax, have popped up.

The GeneMax (GMX) markers are a subset of the 50,000 markers that are used on the Pfizerr HD 50K test.

“HD50K is very much a breed-specific test – a Simmental breeder would not get useful or informative results from using the Black Angus calibration of HD50K. It follows then, that since GeneMax was derived from the Black Angus 50K, that only high percentage Angus animals will receive informative results from GeneMax,” says Tonya Amen, with Angus Genetics Inc.

So there you go. The American Angus Association and CAB developed GeneMax to help identify cattle with the potential to gain and grade. So, yeah, we wanted to make sure it’d work on high-percentage Angus, but really it’s also a factor of what today’s technology is capable of doing. We’re not just saying that because our paychecks say Angus at the top.

May your bottom line be filled with black ink,

Miranda

Hidden sickness, hidden cost

The droopy ears, the hanging head, the cough. Yeah, you know what a sick calf looks like.

IDFY (36) — They look healthy, but they may be hiding something!

They’re easy to spot….except the ones that aren’t. There are times you wonder, “Is he moving a little slow today? Nah, I guess not.” Think about that runny nose when you debated if you should treat the calf.

But unless they’re really sick, it’s probably no big deal, right?

Wrong.

Myth: Cattle have to show dramatic outward signs of sickness for it to impact performance and quality later on.

Fact: Many cattle go untreated at the home ranch or in the feedyard, and that matters to everything from daily gain and carcass weight to marbling scores.

Harvest records on more than 62,000 records from Iowa’s Tri-County Steer Carcass Futurity show that about 5% had lung adhesions. That indicates some type of respiratory challenge at some point during their life.

Of that subset only one-third of the cattle (1,042) were treated in the feedyard.

What about the other two-thirds? They were sick but apparently not sick enough. They didn’t get caught and treated, but they still suffered with reduced performance and carcass quality.

Here are all the numbers:

Cattle that were never visibly sick and had no adhesions were heavier at harvest (1,185 lb. compared to 1,167 those with lung adhesions but never treated) and took fewer days to get there (165 days on feed vs. 170).
The non-treated, healthy cattle had the lowest cost of gain and the highest carcass weights.
The non-treated, no adhesion cattle reached 68.4% USDA Choice and above, compared to just under 63% for those non-treated cattle with adhesions. That dropped to 53.8% for the cattle that had adhesions and received treatment. Even more dramatic was the drop in Certified Angus Beef^®(CAB^®) brand acceptance from 17.8% to 7.6%.

The stats (weight, average daily gain, dressing percent, etc.) are all stacked against those sick calves, regardless of treatment.

TCSCF manger Darrell Busby sums it up: “That all adds up. Lung adhesions are pretty costly to the industry.”

May your bottom line be filled with black ink,

Miranda

Beef prices & my paycheck

Easy ways to make conversation with anybody in agriculture: 1-Talk weather. 2-Talk prices.

It seems everybody knows those rules, so when I’m traveling and visit with fellow ag business folks the conversation usually starts out on one of those two notes. Recently upon learning I worked for Certified Angus Beef, a guy said, “Huh, so are these cattle prices cutting into your margins? Or do you just hike up the price of your beef and pass it along to the consumers?” (*Note this was before those prices were flirting with limit down levels today…)

From what ad features retailers will commit to running to the number of cattle going to harvest in a given a week, cattle prices do have a big effect on our business. But it’s not quite as direct as that guy was thinking.

After all, in essence we are a non-profit, marketing company.

I thought I’d dust off this Mythbuster post that addresses how we’re funded and should indirectly address this one:

Myth: CAB sets beef prices, depending on the cattle market.

Fact: https://cabcattle.com/2011/03/28/show-me-the-money/

I’m not an accounting whiz or a market forecaster, but if you’ve got any other questions along these lines, let me know. I know people who are!

May your bottom line be filled with black ink,

~Miranda

Beefed up findings: Cattle solve global warming

About the author: Maeley Herring

Angus, Angus everywhere

You may also like

Intern shares her CAB mythbusting experience

You may also like

Angus to Limousin=Apples to oranges

You may also like

Yield grade 4 and CAB?

You may also like

Here in the real world

You may also like

Not forced to love it

You may also like

Be specific

You may also like

Hidden sickness, hidden cost

You may also like

Beef prices & my paycheck

You may also like