Canadian cattlemen

BRANDING IS BACK 路 COMMITTED TO STEWARDSHIP 路 BeefWatch

THE BEEF MAGAZINE

MAY 2016 $3.00 WWW.CANADIANCATTLEMEN.CA

RUSTLERS TAKE MORE THAN YOUR CATTLE Publications Mail Agreement Number 40069240

Glenn and Christine Strube

Shellbrook, Sask.

Turn out with LONGRANGE ® for season-long

PEACE OF MIND. 1 INJECTION • 2 PHASES • EXTENDED RELEASE COVERING UP TO 150 DAYS 1

LONGRANGE vs. Conventional Dewormers2 0.28 lbs./day more

Average Daily Gain (ADG) in lbs.

2.5

Difference ADG 0.24*

Difference ADG 0.40

1.93

2.33 1.93

Injectable

Pour-on

2 1.5

Difference ADG 0.30*

Difference ADG 0.28*

2.14

2.07 1.79

1.84

1.69

1 .5 0

Conventional Dewormers

Combinations

LONGRANGE

Entire Study

*Statistically significant (P<0.01)

Conventional Dewormers Injectable • formulations of doramectin or ivermectin Pour-on • formulations of ivermectin

1 2 †

Treatment in the spring with LONGRANGE for parasite control leads to better average daily gain (ADG).

How much better? In a stocker trial with 15,000+ enrolled head, cattle treated with LONGRANGE gained an average 0.28 lbs./day more than those treated with conventional dewormers.2 That equals 28 lbs. over 100 days.†

Treat your cattle this spring. Talk to your veterinarian about LONGRANGE.

Combinations • moxidectin + fenbendazole • ivermectin + fenbendazole • doramectin + fenbendazole • doramectin + fenbendazole + ivermectin • albendazole + ivermectin

Based on the Canadian LONGRANGE label.

Data on file at Merial.

28 lbs. = 12.72 Kg.

®LONGRANGE is a registered trademark of Merial. ©2016 Merial. All rights reserved. LAGE-16-5561-LONGRG-CTLMN-AD

Available in 500 mL and 250 mL bottles Administer subcutaneously at 1 mL/50 kg.

Established 1938 1938 ISSN ISSN 1196-8923 1196-8923 Established Cattlemen Editorial Editorial Cattlemen Editor: Gren Winslow Winslow Editor: Gren 1666 Dublin Dublin Avenue, Avenue, Winnipeg, Winnipeg, MB MB R3H R3H 0H1 0H1 1666 (204) 944-5753 944-5753 Fax Fax (204) (204) 944-5416 944-5416 (204) Email: gren@fbcpublishing.com gren@fbcpublishing.com Email: Field Editor: Editor: Debbie Debbie Furber Furber Field Box 1168, 1168, Tisdale, Tisdale, SK SK S0E S0E 1T0 1T0 Box (306) 873-4360 Fax (306) 873-4360 Fax (306) (306) 873-4360 873-4360 Email: debbie.furber@fbcpublishing.com debbie.furber@fbcpublishing.com Email:

Contents canadian cattlemen · may 2016 · Volume 79, No. 5

 I D E N T I F I CAT I O N

Sales Advertising Sales Advertising Sales Sales Director: Director: Cory Cory Bourdeaud’hui Bourdeaud’hui (204) 954-1414 954-1414 (204) Email: cory@fbcpublishing.com cory@fbcpublishing.com Email: National National Sales: Sales: Mike Mike Millar Millar (306) 251-0011 251-0011 (306) Email: mike.millar@fbcpublishing.com mike.millar@fbcpublishing.com Email: Tiffiny Taylor Taylor Tiffiny (204) 228-0842 228-0842 (204) Email: tiffiny.taylor@fbcpublishing.com tiffiny.taylor@fbcpublishing.com Email: Head Office Office Head 1666 Dublin Dublin Avenue, Avenue, Winnipeg, Winnipeg, MB MB R3H R3H 0H1 0H1 1666 (204) 944-5765 944-5765 Fax Fax (204) (204) 944-5562 944-5562 (204) Services Co-ordinator: Co-ordinator: Advertising Services Advertising Arlene Bomback Bomback Arlene (204) 944-5765 944-5765 Fax Fax (204) (204) 944-5562 944-5562 (204) Email: Email: ads@fbcpublishing.com ads@fbcpublishing.com Publisher: Lynda Lynda Tityk Tityk Publisher: Email: Email: lynda.tityk@fbcpublishing.com lynda.tityk@fbcpublishing.com Publisher: John John Morriss Morriss Associate Publisher: Associate Email: john.morriss@fbcpublishing.com john.morriss@fbcpublishing.com Email: Director: Laura Laura Rance Rance Editorial Director: Editorial Email: laura@fbcpublishing.com laura@fbcpublishing.com Email: Production Director: Director: Shawna Shawna Gibson Gibson Production Email: shawna@fbcpublishing.com shawna@fbcpublishing.com Email: Circulation Manager: Manager: Heather Heather Anderson Anderson Circulation Email: heather@fbcpublishing.com heather@fbcpublishing.com Email: President: President: Bob Bob Willcox Willcox Glacier FarmMedia FarmMedia Glacier Email: bwillcox@farmmedia.com bwillcox@farmmedia.com Email:

Glenn and Christine Strube

rustlers take more than your cattle  I D E N T I F I CAT I O N

FEATURES Canada sets the bar for feedlot animal care. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Contents of Cattlemen are copyrighted and may be reproduced only when written permission is obtained from the editor and proper credit is given to Cattlemen.

We harvest weeds!. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 A full-time commitment to stewardship. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Cattlemen and Canadian Cattlemen are Trade Marks of Farm Business Communications.

Cattlemen is is published published monthly monthly by

by Farm Farm Business Business Communications.

Communications.

Cattlemen Head Head office: office: Winnipeg, Winnipeg, Manitoba.

Manitoba. Printed Printed by

by Transcontinental Transcontinental LGMC. Cattlemen Cattlemen is is printed printed with with linseed linseed oil-based oil-based inks. inks.

LGMC.

Rustlers take more than your cattle . . . . . 18

Subscription rates rates in in Canada Canada — — $43 $43 for for one one year, year, $64 $64 for for 22 years, years, Subscription $91 $91 for for 33 years years (prices (prices include include GST).

GST). Manitoba Manitoba residents residents add add 8% PST. PST. U.S. U.S. subscription subscription rate rate — — $35 $35 (U.S. (U.S. funds). funds). Subscription Subscription 8% rate outside outside Canada Canada and and U.S. U.S. — — $55 $55 per per year. year. Single Single copies copies $3. $3. rate We acknowledge the financial support of the Govern­m m ent of ent of We acknowledge the financial support of the Govern­ Canada Canada through through the Canada the Canada Periodical Periodical Fund Fund of the the Department Department of of Canadian Canadian Heritage.

Heritage. of Publications Mail Mail Agreement Agreement Number Number 40069240.

40069240.

Publications Canadian Postmaster: Return undeliverable Canadian Canadian Postmaster: Return undeliverable Canadian addresses addresses (covers (covers only) only) to: to: Circulation Circulation Dept., Dept., PO PO Box Box 9800, 9800, Winnipeg, Winnipeg, MB MB R3C R3C 3K7.

3K7.

U.S. Postmaster: Send address changes and undeliverable U.S. Postmaster: Send address changes and undeliverable addresses (covers only) to: Circulation Dept., PO Box 9800, addresses (covers only) to: Circulation Dept., PO Box 9800, Winnipeg, MB R3C 3K7.

Winnipeg, MB R3C 3K7.

PRINTED IN CANADA PRINTED IN CANADA

Branding is back. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Branding is back

22

 g ra zing

Member Member LIVESTOCK PUBLICATIONS LIVESTOCK COUNCIL PUBLICATIONS COUNCIL

Our commitment to your privacy: At Farm Business Communications we have a firm commitment to protecting your privacy and security as our customer. Farm Business Communications will only collect personal information if it is required for the proper functioning of our business. As part of our commitment to enhance customer service, we may share this personal information with other strategic business partners. For more information regarding our Customer Information Privacy Policy, write to: Information Protection Officer, Farm Business Communications, 1666 Dublin Avenue, Winnipeg, MB R3H 0H1. Occasionally wewe make ourour listlist of subscribers available to other reputable Occasionally make of subscribers available to other firms whose products services be ofmight interest you. If to reputable firms whoseand products andmight services be oftointerest you would prefer not to receive such offers, pleaseplease contactcontact us at the you.

If you would prefer not to receive such offers, us address in the preceding paragraph, or call or 1-800-665-1362. at the address in the preceding paragraph, call 1-800-665-1362.

The pros and cons of grazing cover crops. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 BeefWatch. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Verified Beef Production . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

DEPARTMENTS

Circulation inquiries: inquiries: Circulation Call toll-free toll-free 1-800-665-1362 1-800-665-1362 Call or email: email: subscription@fbcpublishing.com subscription@fbcpublishing.com or U.S. subscribers subscribers call call 1-204-944-5766 1-204-944-5766 U.S.

The editors and journalists who write, contribute and provide opinions to Canadian Cattlemen and Farm Business Communications attempt to provide accurate and useful opinions, information and analysis.

However, the editors, journalists, Canadian Cattlemen and Farm Business Communications, cannot and do not guarantee the accuracy of the information contained in this publication and the editors as well as Canadian Cattlemen and Farm Business Communications assume no responsibility for any actions or decisions taken by any reader for this publication based on any and all information provided.

18

The pros and cons 24 of grazing cover crops

Congratulations!

To our May survey winner, Walter Clark, Indian Head, Sask.

This month’s survey is on page 46.

Cover Photo: Debbie Furber

Comment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Newsmakers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Letters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Our History. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Nutrition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Research on the Record. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Straight from the Hip. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Holistic Ranching. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Free Market Reflections. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Vet Advice. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Prime Cuts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 CCA Reports. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 News Roundup. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Purely Purebred. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 The Markets. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 Market Talk. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 Sales and Events. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 C a t t l e m e n · m ay 2 0 1 6

3

 COMMENT

By Gren Winslow

Traceability, again

I

n his column this month Dan Darling of the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association raises a red flag over the traceability regulation Ottawa plans to Gazette by the end of this year.

Well, maybe not, according to Darling. His basic message is that the cattle industry can’t implement what Ottawa wants and remain competitively viable. In short, something needs to change.

It’s hard to believe we are still talking about this issue.

Way back in 2011 the whole industry sat down with government staffers and worked out a Cattle Implementation Plan (CIP). That was supposed to be the road map to putting this new-age system into operation.

Unfortunately the message that went back to Ottawa from that meeting lost something in the translation, because here we are in 2016 and, as Darling puts it, there are still gaps between the CIP and the government’s proposed regulation.

It’s been a moving target ever since. In 2014 the CIP was reworked, then last year the Canadian Food Inspection Agency held a series of consultations with each livestock sector. But in the case of cattle, the messages keep getting mixed up, or ignored.

Early this month another meeting was scheduled in Calgary to once again try to fill in this gap between what the industry says it agreed to and what the bureaucrats say is needed to track an animal from birth to death and everyplace in between.

The industry’s position on traceability really hasn’t changed much over the years. The technology must accommodate the pace of normal business, the changes should be phased in, and costs shared according to the benefit derived by having an animal identified. Traceability will expand as the appropriate technology becomes available. It must be market neutral. And there needs to be a reasonable tolerance for missing tags on delivered cattle.

Rick Wright says the proposed regulation misses the mark on quite a few of these points. As the livestock markets’ association rep on the Canadian Cattle Identification Agency board Wright has been at the table on this issue almost from the beginning.

One of the big issues, he says, is the requirement to scan cattle as they pass through auction markets or buying stations. The current technology won’t support individual scanning of cattle but Wright says the government is now willing to accept the resulting variable read rate when cattle are herded past passive scanners at the market.

That may sound like a compromise to a bureaucrat but Wright says the markets are still expected to buy these

4

C a t t l e m e n · M ay 2 0 1 6

scanners and pay people to maintain them. Also the markets are expected to scan the cattle and report the results to the Canadian Livestock Tracking System within 48 hours. That translates into extra handling, added stress, and shrink, and more costs to the market and its clients.

Ironically most of these cattle go right from the market to a feedlot where they will be scanned again within seven days as they are processed.

A valid alternative, Wright says, is to track cattle movement in auction markets by manifests. The information for each load could easily be passed on to the Canadian Livestock Tracking System as the cattle are being sold.

And manifests are already inspected in B.C., Alberta, Sask­ atchewan, and are available in Manitoba and Ontario.

Another concern is the technology itself. Tests have shown that a 100 per cent read rate is far from a certainty.

Then there’s the issue of lost tags. The industry is asking for a tolerance level of 10 per cent on shipped cattle.

Then, of course, there’s the even bigger issue of who is going to pay for it all.

Ottawa has already put up money for auction market studies and to offset some of the cost of readers for producers. But it could be argued that improving the control of devastating livestock diseases is a national responsibility. So Ottawa has received some benefit for its investment.

To date Canadian beef producers have purchased 96 million national ear tags at $3 a pop or $288 million. And that total is growing by about $15 million per year. So you’d have to say producers are doing their part.

But you don’t get the impression that they are willing to spend much more on this national system to protect the national herd, and possibly gain access to new markets around the world.

To date, the payback has been minimal but I suppose national ID was always viewed as an insurance scheme, rather than a marketing add-on.

There’s still hope. In a recent article Mike McMorris, the general manager of BIO in Ontario, wrote about discussions to create a Canadian Beef Improvement Network. It would gather genetic data on animals and then generate genetic evaluations that could be shared, based on their national ID number. If widely used, he says, it could be a first step to providing “supply chain genetics.”

For now, Ottawa should be careful about pushing too hard on its dream of a national traceability system for beef cattle. We already have one of the best national ID programs in the world.

We can afford to wait on traceability until we get it right. c

www.canadiancattlemen.ca

YOUR CATTLE BRING IN THE PROFITS. BUT FOR ALL THE OTHER JOBS, YOU’LL WANT ONE OF THESE. Whether mowing, baling, loading or pulling, Case IH has the equipment you need to keep your operation running. You’ll find everything from do-it-all Puma,® reliably flexible Farmall® and simply productive Maxxum® series tractors to balers, windrowers, mower conditioners and more. If there’s a job to be done on your operation, there’s only one equipment brand you need to turn to.

Learn more at your local Case IH dealer or online at caseih.com/livestock.

©2016 CNH Industrial America LLC. All rights reserved. Case IH is a trademark registered in the United States and many other countries, owned by or licensed to CNH Industrial N.V., its subsidiaries or affiliates. www.caseih.com

 THE INDUST RY

NewsMakers Brian Lemon is the new general manager of the Manitoba Beef Producers, replacing Melinda Ger­ man who was appointed as the first general manager of the National Checkoff Brian Lemon Agency in March. Lemon comes to the MBP after a long career with the federal government, serving in senior positions based in Winnipeg with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency and the Canadian Grain Commission over the past decade.

Dr. Roger Davis of DavisRairdan Embryo Transplants was named the 2016 winner of the Don Matthews Memorial Award by the Canadian Beef Breeds Council (CBBC) in late Dr. Roger Davis March. Davis is a veterinarian and former purebred and commercial cattle rancher. He and his partner Dr. Scott Rairdan co-founded Davis-Rairdan Veterinary Services in 1979 and later specialized in embryo transplants in 1990. He is a past president of the Alberta Hereford Association and past director of the CBBC. The award honours Don Matthews, a past president of the CBBC and member of the Canadian Agricultural Hall of Fame by recognizing individuals who exhibit the same passion for the purebred industry as Matthews.

Saskatchewan Stock Grow­ ers Association represen­ tative Mark Elford was elected chair of the Canadian Cattle Identification Association board of directors last month. He replaces Mark Elford veterinarian Pat Burrage who stepped down from the board. Pat Hays, representing the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association is vice-chair and Tim Fugard of Beef Farmers of Ontario is finance and audit committee chair. Livestock Markets Association of Canada representative Rick Wright was re-elected as executive director and Canadian Cattlemen Association representative Doug Sawyer was named second executive director.

New to the board are Maritime Beef Council representative Ivan Johnson and Manitoba Beef Producers representative Larry Gerelus.

6

C a t t l e m e n · M ay 2 0 1 6

Garner Deobald of Hawkeye Land and Livestock Ltd. at Hodgeville, Sask., was elected president of the Canadian Beef Breeds Council at the purebred lobby group’s annual meeting. Roger Peters is vice-president. The remaining directors are past president David Bolduc, Bruce Holm­ quist, Mel Reekie, Rod Remin, Stephen Scott, Rob Smith and Byron Templeton.

Dr. Paul Jefferson will be retiring from PAMI as vicepresident operations for the Western Beef Development Centre on September 9. Jefferson joined the WBDC in 2007 after a Dr. Paul Jefferson 26-year research career with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada at the Swift Current station. In his current position he collaborates on plant breeding, grazing and plant ecology research with AAFC colleagues at Swift Current, Saskatoon, and Lethbridge Research Centres and with University of Saskatchewan plant and animal researchers. He has published 77 scientific research papers and given many presentations at scientific conferences.

Marty Seymour resigned last month as the CEO of Canadian Western Agribition after five years in the top job at the Regina show to accept the position of director of indusMarty Seymour try and stakeholder relations for Farm Credit Canada.

Stewart Stone, the COO of Heartland Livestock, was re-elected presi­ dent of the Canadian Western Agribition board of directors last month.

Rejoining him on the Stewart Stone executive are vice-president Bruce Holmquist of Saskatoon and executive members Chris Lees, Arcola; Blake MacMillan, Nokomis and Bryce Thompson of Regina. Both Lees and Thompson were re-elected to the board for two-year terms along with Doug Fee, De Winton, Alta.; Kim Hextall, Grenfell; Levi Jackson, Sedley; Marty Kratochvil, Milden; Ross MacDonald, Lake Alma and Carla Schmitt, Saskatoon.

Letters Faux stewards

I would like to say good for Steve Kenyon for his article on page 24 of the February issue, Stewards of the Land. How often have I used that title with a sneer. It seems the more land owned, the more the owner drains every slough and cuts down every tree. There are so many “stewards” who will let Big Oil drill on their last prairie chicken dancing site.

Christine Pike, Waseca, Sask.

Alberta Farm Animal Care presented several Awards of Distinction to champions of farm animal care in Alberta at the group’s annual conference. Rick Hen­ derson, the director of community and protective services with Red Deer County received the award for communication.

Dylan and Colleen Biggs of TK Ranch received the award for industry leadership.

Jenna Griffin, industry development officer for Egg Farmers of Alberta received the award for innovation.

Barry Boghean has joined the Western Canada sales team of Bio Agri Mix LP. He spent much of his marketing career in Alberta until he returned to Saskatchewan in 2003 to manage the Red Coat Cattle Feeders feedlot. He is perhaps more widely known for his other career as a rodeo announcer at major events, including the National Finals Rodeo.

Compared to all the anguish and fury that accompanied its birth, the death of the Alberta Livestock and Meat Agency (ALMA) was quietly slipped into a costcutting section of the Alberta budget last month. Delivery of the programs, services and research grants handled by ALMA will be moved back under the mandate of the provincial Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. Also put on the shelf were the Alberta Farm Safety Advisory Council, the Alberta Grains Council and the policy advisory group of the Agricultural Operations Practices Act. c

www.canadiancattlemen.ca

T S E T A L THE ND

YA E R O T IRA UCTIV P S E R ROD

E S A N E O I S I T N D E V E PR O

REP FROM

C N ELA

®

ion t c m e ia, t r u o i e r t p c n Titlivaers proveirnuses anda,bma ost de he v ultocid tory t t s again ing P. m respira es in h d inclu iated wit ve diseas fe i a c asso product e that’s s . re and le vaccin ur cattle g o a s i n a sy o n y e and

The label contains complete use information, including cautions and warnings. Always read, understand and follow the label and use directions.

Elanco®, Titanium® and the diagonal bar are trademarks owned or licensed

by Eli Lilly and Company, its subsidiaries or affiliates. ©2016 Eli Lilly and Company, or its affiliates.

CAN35164 CACTLTIT00017

NEW

DISEASE PREVENTION FROM ELANCO

Titanium 5+PH-M • Titanium 5 L5 HB Titanium 5 • Titanium 3 • Titanium IBR

 our histo ry

The Menace of the Antelope Hunter

By T. L. Shepherd, West Plains, Sask.

Reprinted from the January 1950 issue of Canadian Cattlemen

A

s stockmen, can’t we do something to protect ourselves about this very real “Menace of the Antelope Hunter?” Or, are we supposed to just sit and twiddle our thumbs, while the visiting so-called Sportsmen in high-powered cars with higher-powered rifles leave our gates open, even cut our fences and shoot the odd range cow for us? I think that this is a very serious matter that should be given very careful consideration before another hunting season rolls around.

Now let’s be fair about this thing. I’m quite willing to admit that perhaps 90 per cent of the antelope hunters are very reasonable men. Some of them come back and board with the same farmers year after year, having a nice little vacation, get their fresh meat and pay their way as they go along. I don’t think that too much difficulty should be put in their way. They have certain rights, and I feel sure that most stockmen are willing to respect them.

What I want to see is some check on this other 10 per cent who do a lot of damage, cause extra work in the busy fall season, and a whole lot of hard feelings besides. I think that if each of us would write either Canadian Cattlemen or the provincial came commissioner, and list out the damage we know of personally, we could get some action in this matter.

We live 18 miles northeast of Govenlock, in the extreme southwest corner of Saskatchewan. And although we don’t get many hunters through our own place here is what one party did. They left just one gate open between us and a good neighbour, and within two hours three of his horses were down at our place and 35 head of our cattle were visiting him. In this case not a great deal of damage was done, as this gate separated two small pastures. But many gates separate much larger fields with more stock in them. Many fences are built to keep stock out of hay flats and grain fields. Even in this case our neighbour had to walk four miles after his horses, and it took two riders several hours to get our cattle back from the field. We both saw the car, but

8

C a t t l e m e n · MAY 2 0 1 6

were not close enough to get the licence number. They had to stop to open the gate, and it would only have taken them about a minute extra to stop to close it, but NO, they had a hunting licence, and I suppose they figured that that allowed them the right to drive when, where and how they pleased.

One of the ranchers a few miles west of us had a range cow shot this fall. As it happened, it was a large ranch with a fair number of cattle, so the loss was not felt too keenly. But instead of a range cow it might have been a special milk cow supplying milk to a family of young children.

In fact, a white Holstein cow takes her “life in her hands” every time she strays more than a few rods from the buildings during the hunting season, especially in the earlymorning dusk. For many antelope hunters get out early in the morning, some before their eyes are too well open.

We always have to ride more in the hunting season in an effort to find the gates left open or the cut fences before the cattle get out. For once a bunch of cattle get really well mixed with a neighbouring herd, it takes a good long time and a lot of hard riding to sort them out again.

Here is the way I see it. Most of us own or lease land at what a good many of us feel is quite an expense. The only reason that we put up a fence with considerable labour and expense is that we want to keep cattle or horses either in or out of said land. Now if this fence is cut, or a gate left open, that reduces the value of that fence to almost zero. It also reduces the value of the land. On the other hand, we have hunters who are out to kill animals that, although they don’t carry our brand, they have lived off our grass and alfalfa most of the summer. Now I’m willing to admit that the antelope belong to all of us, including the hunter. And I’m further willing to admit that when we give them grass and sufficient protection throughout the breeding season, that the hunters should have the chance, after paying for a hunting licence, to shoot one of them.

But I’m not willing to admit that a $5 hunting licence grants any man permis-

sion to tear over our land at 50 miles an hour, throw our gates down or cut our fences. And further, I think that said hunter should exercise considerable care to see that range cattle are not within his sights at the time he pulls the trigger on that high-powered rifle of his.

Here is my suggestion. That every hunt­ ing licence should carry the following in large black-faced type: Fences are built to hold cattle and horses, so don’t cut them or leave gates open. Failure to follow these instructions causes much extra work for the landowner and creates a great deal of hard feelings toward all hunters. This may lead to a closed season. I think that anyone caught in the above acts should have his licence withdrawn and further a licence should be refused to him for the following three years.

I would like to add from personal experience, that it is of little or no value to put up “No Hunting” signs. Although the considerate hunters might abide by them, the thoughtless and “smart-alec” type ignore them completely. In some cases they’ll even tear them down or shoot holes in them.

Again, I would like to say when the Games Branch sells a man a hunting licence, that man should be granted the right to hunt. But it should also be made very plain that a hunting licence doesn’t give any man the right to hunt on privately owned or leased land, cut fences or leave gates open. I think that it is up to every stockman to give this matter very careful consideration, and each one of us to put forward any suggestion that might be of some value. Now I don’t make any claim to have the solution, but maybe someone else has. If so, let’s hear from you, either through Canadian Cattlemen or at some Stock Growers meeting. We hear and read a lot about the coyote menace, and they may be troublesome in some areas, but for us, the “Menace of the Antelope Hunter” is far more important. c For more of the past from pages of our magazine see the History section at www.canadiancattlemen.ca.

www.canadiancattlemen.ca

TM

INNOVATION FILE:

What if you could give your calves long lasting, effective pain reliefâ&#x20AC;Ś that was also affordable?

Veterinarians and producers asked for a pain medication that was both affordable* and long lasting. Solvet went a step further. New Meloxicam Oral Suspension delivers a minimum of 56 hours relief from pain and inflammation when castrating. Its oral suspension formulation also makes it easy to administer. Itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s just one example of Innovation By Request.

Talk to your Veterinarian about Meloxicam Oral Suspension for pain prevention.

Solvet researches, develops and manufactures products to meet the needs of veterinarians and producers from their headquarters in Calgary, Alberta. * Calculated as days of therapy per label claim at product list price.

Solvet is a trademark of Alberta Veterinary Laboratories Ltd.

5370-Meloxicam-Prod-Ad-CM-FINAL.indd 1

2016-03-15 12:08 PM

 feedlot ass ess m e n t

By Debbie Furber

Canada sets the bar for feedlot animal care

B

uttons were bursting with pride at the National Cattle Feeders’ Association (NCFA) with the recent release of the first national certified program in North America for assessing the care of beef animals in backgrounding and finishing operations.

Officially known as the Canadian Feedlot Animal Care Assessment Program, it is an auditable seal of approval for the care given to feedlot cattle that can stand up in corporate boardrooms and the court of public opinion.

While virtually every link of the beef chain has been involved in its creation, the NCFA has been driving this project from the beginning.

The program received the official nod of approval from the NCFA board in February hard on the heels of being certified by the U.S.-based Professional Animal Auditor Certification Organization (PAACO) in December. The final approval came through in late March with formal recognition by Canada’s National Farm Animal Care Council (NFACC) that it meets all the requirements of the national Animal Care Assessment Framework for developing assessments based on codes of practice.

Picture Butte, Alta., feedlot veterinarian Dr. Joyce Van Donkersgoed, the NCFA’s manager for this project, says the program was intended to fill a gap in the beef chain. In recent years, packing plants have come under increasing pressure from retailers for proof of diligent animal care, not only at the plants, but also at the feedlots that supply their cattle.

For some time now large packers in

10

C a t t l e m e n · M ay 2 0 1 6

Canada and the U.S. have followed the PAACO-accredited North American Meat Institute’s (NAMI) animal-handling and audit guidelines. Eventually, some started asking feeders to sign affidavits confirming animal-care practices on their operations. Members of the Alberta Cattle Feeders Association (ACFA) were confident the animal-care guidelines in the beef code of practice were being met but worried that they had no way of proving their claim.

“Chaos all around,” would have been the result, says Van Donkersgoed, if packers had started asking feeders for multiple audits to suit each retail customer’s requests.

To get in front of this situation, the NCFA set up an advisory group in 2014 to develop a common assessment program that could be used by feedlots and processors. It had to be voluntary, affordable, credible and workable for all.

With funding from the Alberta Livestock and Meat Agency and Growing Forward 2, Van Donkersgoed and Dr. Karen Schwartzkopf-Genswein, an animal behaviourist with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada at Lethbridge, developed a draft under the direction of the advisory committee members representing Canadian and U.S. cattle buyers, retailers, restaurants, the Society for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, feedlot veterinarians, PAACO, the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association, dairy producers and feedlot members of the NCFA and ACFA. In 2015 Van Donkersgoed and Schwartzkopf-Genswein with veterinarians from Feedlot Health Management Services, Vet-

erinary Agri-Health Services, and Coaldale Veterinary Clinic in Alberta, Dr. Kelly Lightfoot in Saskatchewan, and staff from Beef Producers of Quebec tested the assessment and audit forms at 22 outdoor and indoor feedlots ranging in size from 1,500 to 30,000 head across Western Canada and Quebec to be sure it was adaptable to all scenarios.

Jim Clark, head of Ontario Cattle Feeders’ Association and the Ontario Corn Fed Beef Program also reviewed it.

What’s in it?

The assessment criteria are based on animal health and welfare principles set out in the beef code of practice plus basic management practices identified by the Canadian beef industry. They also had to fit in with indicators devised by the Canadian Roundtable for Sustainable Beef, the NAMI animal-handling and audit guidelines, and the Canadian Certified Livestock Transporters. A feedlot assessment includes everything that influences an animal from the time it arrives at the yard to when it is loaded to head to the plant.

The committee also reviewed the PAACO-certified Common Swine Industry Audit developed by U.S. pork industry and guidelines in the U.S. National Cattlemen’s Beef Association’s Beef Quality Assurance Program. The NCBA has a copy of the Canadian program and is working toward developing a similar feedlot animal-care assessment program for the U.S. The hope is packers, retailers and producers will eventually have one common standard for feedlots on both sides of the border.

www.canadiancattlemen.ca

feedlot assessment

The assessment covers the feedlot’s commitment to animal care in 10 sections dealing with transportation practices, feedlot facilities, cattle handling, nutrition and feeding, environment, animal health management, euthanasia and salvage, care of other working feedlot animals, egregious acts of neglect and wilful acts of abuse.

There are three reasons for automatic failure of an audit: failure to participate in an audit, egregious acts of neglect and wilful abuse, and lack of efficient euthanasia.

Acceptable minimum scores for each section and minimum overall scores will be determined by continuous benchmarking through the coming year.

“We found out from the pilots that most feedlots are already meeting most of the requirements,” says Van Donkersgoed. “The weakest area is probably that they could use a bit more documentation.”

To help with that the advisory committee put together generic templates for various written procedures. Also in the works is an online training course for feedlot personnel to work through as time allows.

This rollout year will involve more fine tuning based on feedback of producers and processors, testing of the target levels set by the committee, benchmarking to determine minimum scores, preparing additional program materials and reaching out to producers, veterinarians and nutritionists to make sure they are aware of this new program.

In time all the documents and supporting material will be available in both English

and French at no cost from the membersonly area on provincial feeder association websites where there will be a link to the specific section on the NCFA website. Feedlot producers without Internet access should contact their provincial feeder association.

Feedlot producers, veterinarians and nutritionists who aren’t members of a provincial feeder association are encouraged to call the NCFA office (403-769-1519) to find out how to access the documents. c

What’s next?

“Our job now is making sure producers are aware of the program and have the tools they need to implement it so that they are ready for second- or third-party audits from packers down the road,” says Van Donkergoed.

Just because a feedlot voluntarily participates in the program doesn’t mean an auditor will come knocking overnight. If and when one does it won’t be a surprise visit.

Proper arrangements will be made with the feedlot, as outlined in the program.

“Remember, processors are part of the team. Everyone is on side because they see the benefits and want the program to be successful,” Van Donkersgoed adds.

The benefits, she notes, may go beyond the inherent economic gains related to improved animal health and performance.

From her own experience counselling feedlot clients on animal care over the years, she has noted a big difference in staff morale when cattle are healthy and content because nobody likes dealing with chronic conditions and euthanasia. The broader benefit comes from securing the social licence to operate by building and maintaining the trust of customers and the public in feedlot production practices.

PAACO is currently developing a program to train and certify auditors for the program, to ensure they have the necessary cattle-related background to produce a credible audit.

What’s your Next Move?

Chances are, you have something exciting on the drawing board right now. Maybe it’s more land, a bigger herd, better genetics, new equipment or other ways to grow.

Our agriculture banking specialists have expertise and financial products to help you carry out your plans today and build the farm business you want tomorrow.

Go on, make your move.

At RBC we’re ready to help.

Talk to an agriculture banking specialist today at rbc.com/farmhelp ™

® /™

Trademark(s) of Royal Bank of Canada. RBC and Royal Bank are registered trademarks of Royal Bank of Canada.

www.canadiancattlemen.ca

C a t t l e m e n · M ay 2 0 1 6

RBCA-001-16N01E

11

RBC-4699_4.58x7.5_RancherAd_Jan7.indd 1 2016-01-07 1:49 PM HEADING/VERSION RBC 2016 Campaign - Jan Insertions/Canadian Cattlemen (Rancher) SIZE 4.58”x7.5” BLEED n/a PUB Canadian Cattlemen COLOR

 grazing

We harvest weeds!

I

say it all the time. There is no such thing as a weed.

All plants have a purpose. But what happens quite often is that particular type of plant will take over an area. This is because the conditions are favouring it. The “weeds” or undesirable plants are a symptom of an underlying problem. Address the symptom and you will have to keep addressing the symptom every year. Solve the problem and the symptom goes away.

For example, the symptom is that you have “weeds” taking over a pasture, to address the symptom most producers are encouraged to spray or cultivate to control weeds. But the problem is overgrazing.

To address the problem, you would need to set up a rotational grazing system to manage the grazing concepts and stop the overgrazing.

We need to favour the conditions to allow the desirable species to outcompete the weeds. It’s pretty simple actually.

That being said there are plants that have been considered weeds for many years that are actually quite beneficial.

Urtica Dioica (a.k.a. — stinging nettle) is a good example. It’s been considered an undesirable species for many years in agriculture.

Yet stinging nettle is a large, rhizomatous perennial that is edible. It originally came from Europe and Asia and has sharp hairs that break easily and can irritate or sting when the plant is touched. It’s one of the reasons you definitely don’t go fencing in short pants in my part of the world. Only the top side of the leaf causes the skin irritation, and it grows well in rich peat soils and can take over an area.

Is it really a weed? Not at Greener Pastures Ranching! We harvest it and bag it. We are now registered with the Government of Canada to sell stinging nettle tea. By drying the leaves, we are able to store the stinging nettle, which when steeped, makes a very flavourful green tea. Add a little bit of honey and you have a really great tea with loads of health benefits. You can also let it cool in the refrigerator to make a healthy sweet ice tea. We call it “a multivitamin in a cup.” The kids don’t even know they are getting their multivitamin. Have you ever looked at the ingredients of a kid’s multivitamin?

12

C a t t l e m e n · M ay 2 0 1 6

By Steve Keynon

We also use stinging nettle as a spice. The dried leaves break up into small pieces and can be sprinkled into almost any meal. Add some to your mashed potatoes, eggs, sauces, or just about any other meals you can think of. An extra vegetable loaded with minerals and vitamins added to almost any meal.

Here is a list of some of the benefits that stinging nettle can provide: • Relieves arthritis symptoms.

• Helps to support the adrenals.

• Helps with diabetes mellitus.

• Destroys intestinal worms or parasites.

• Strengthens the fetus in pregnant women.

• Promotes milk production in lactating women.

• Relieves menopausal symptoms.

• Helps with menstrual cramps and bloating.

• Helps asthma sufferers.

• Stops bleeding.

• Reduces acne.

• Reduces inflammation.

• Stimulates the lymph system to boost immunity.

• Promotes a release from uric acid from joints.

• Reduces incident of prostate cancer.

• Helps reduce skin problems.

• Eliminates allergic rhinitis.

• Lessens nausea.

• Helps with the common cold.

• Helps with osteoarthritis.

• Helps break down kidney stones.

• Reduces hypertension.

• Helps with respiratory tract disease.

• Supports the kidneys.

• Helps with diarrhea.

• Helps with gastrointestinal disease, IBS, and constipation.

• Reduces gingivitis and prevents plaque (when used as a mouthwash).

• Treatment of Alzheimer’s disease.

• Helps with neurological disorders like MS, ALS and sciatica.

• Supports the endocrine health by helping the thyroid, spleen and pancreas.

It has so many minerals and vitamins that the benefits are almost endless. There is a bit of a warning to check with your doctor as occasionally stinging nettle can interfere with certain pharmaceuticals.

Stinging nettle is very easy to harvest and dry, as long as you wear long sleeves and gloves. Once the plant is dry, it no longer stings as the itch is caused by the liquid in the leaves. The dry product is quite safe to handle. It is easy to store and light to transport. Maybe this could be a solution to some nutritional problems in Third World countries?

There are many other “weeds” out there that can be quite beneficial and nutritious for livestock or humans. Maybe it’s a soil amendment; a pioneer species that shows up when conditions are harsh to heal the land.

The first question you ask when a so-called weed appears is, why is it there? Then ask yourself, how do we solve the problem, not just the symptoms? Always look for the good in every plant. Maybe the cure to an ailment is right in front of you. Urtica Dioica — for Medicinal Purposes. c Steve Kenyon runs Greener Pastures Ranching Ltd. in Busby, Alta., www.greenerpasturesranching.com, 780-307-6500, email skenyon@ greenerpasturesranching.com or find them on Facebook.

www.canadiancattlemen.ca

 Nutritio n

By John McKinnon

Chasing Carcass quality — Not as Easy, as it Looks!

T

his is an interesting time of year when one looks at feedlot placements. Most of last year’s yearlings are gone, with fall-placed calves well into their feeding program. As well, many lots have tried to keep pens full by bringing in short yearlings that were backgrounded over the winter or in some cases by feeding lightweight calves that will go to grass by the end of May or early June. There may even be the odd pen of cull cows on feed. This mix illustrates the classic challenge feedlots face in taking a wide variety of cattle that vary in weight, age, sex and genetic makeup and feeding them to narrow carcass quality and weight end-points demanded by the market.

In order to fully understand this challenge, let’s look at the definition of carcass quality which in today’s marketplace with natural, organic and numerous branded programs is getting more difficult to define. If we restrict ourselves to the vast majority of conventionally fed cattle, the quality and yield grades of the Canadian or in the case of our southern neighbour, the USDA beef-grading regulations are the gold standard. Canadian quality grades are only applied to youthful cattle and are based on marbling. They range from Canada Prime (slightly abundant or better marbling) to AAA (small or better marbling) to AA (slight or better marbling) to A (trace marbling). Respective USDA quality grades are Prime, Choice, Select and Standard. Canadian yield grades (YG) reflect the per cent lean meat in the carcass and attempt to classify carcasses based on fat content with overfat carcasses often discounted by the market. There are three Canadian YG that are based on measurements of the subcutaneous fat thickness and muscle area of the rib-eye. These include Canada 1 (59 per cent or greater lean), Canada 2 (54 per cent to 58 per cent lean) and Canada 3 (less than 54 per cent lean).

USDA yield grades range from 1 to 5 and while assessed somewhat differently than Canada’s, they effectively classify carcasses from leanest (USDA YG 1) to fattest (USDA YG 5).

The challenge is to target the right combination of quality and yield grade that the market wants. Of course, this is a moving target depending on packer, local market or in some cases branded programs.

Although not always the case, carcasses with higher marbling (i.e. Canada AAA or USDA Choice or better) and with high lean yield (i.e. Canada 1 or USDA 1 or 2) are desired while those with minimal marbling (Canada A or USDA select) or that carry excessive fin-

www.canadiancattlemen.ca

ish (Canada YG 3 or USDA YG 4 or 5) are not. Again depending on the packer, premiums can be paid for desired carcasses (such is the case if one markets under a grid or branded beef program) and discounts applied to off-grade carcasses.

A further confounding factor is the requirement to achieve desirable carcass weights. Most packers require carcasses to fall within specified limits, which in turn dictate the live weight of the cattle at slaughter. For example, when selling on the rail, it is not uncommon to see a specified carcass weight range of 700 to 900 pounds. At 59 per cent dressing percentage, this translates to a live weight range at slaughter of 1,185 to 1,525 pounds. Most feedlots today are marketing cattle at the upper end of this range and in some cases well exceeding 1,500 pounds. In terms of carcass grading, this practice has positive and negative attributes. Quality grades (i.e. marbling) are improved with time on feed, however, yield grades suffer as overall carcass fat content increases with increasing weight, particularly during the latter phases of finishing. Another concern is what is happening to feed efficiency as you hold cattle for an extra 30 to 60 days to get that extra 100 to 200 pounds. Cattle that had been converting at 6.5 or seven to one (i.e. pounds feed to pounds of gain) may now be converting at 7.5 to 8.5 to one or greater, a cost which may or may not be offset by the increased value of the weight gain.

If achieving desired carcass grades while maintaining efficient gains seems like a difficult task, then I have been successful in getting my point across. It is indeed a challenge! To understand how they achieve this task, one needs to look at how feedlots use a combination of backgrounding, grass and finishing programs to manipulate frame, muscle and fat development in the cattle they feed. For example, depending on the weight and genetics of the calf at weaning, it could go right onto a finishing program (as in the case of a largeframe calf weighing 600 pounds or more at weaning), be backgrounded over the winter and go into the feedlot as a short yearling (i.e. at a year of age) or in the case of lightweight calves, spend a second summer on grass and go on feed as a long yearling (i.e. 18 months of age or so). These management programs along with appropriate technologies such as implants to enhance growth and ionophores for feed efficiency allow feedlot operators to feed just about any class of cattle to the appropriate weight and carcass grades demanded by the packer.

Indeed — no small feat! c

John McKinnon is a beef cattle nutritionist at the University of Saskatchewan

C a t t l e m e n · M ay 2 0 1 6

13

 forage

By Debbie Furber

A full-time commitment to stewardship

T

he transition from a tobacco farm to Texas Longhorn ranch in southern Ontario’s foremost tobacco-growing region wasn’t without turmoil for Cathy and Bryan Gilvesy, but the rewards far outweighed regrets as they reinvented the farm to better reflect their philosophies on agriculture and life.

The latest material reward came in the form of Ontario’s environmental stewardship award (TESA) presented by the Beef Farmers of Ontario in February. It is unique among others they’ve received in this category, including the Tillsonburg Chamber of Commerce Environmental Award in 2014, a Minister’s Award for Environmental Excellence in 2012, and the Canadian Agri-Food Award of Excellence for Stewardship in 2008, in that TESA represents recognition of the good work they do from peers in the beef industry.

“Why we have a focus on doing environmental projects is because of the influence of the ALUS (alternative land use services) program and the technical support available. In 2008, we were the third ALUS demonstration farm in Ontario,” Gilvesy explains. Being a tireless advocate for the program and sustainable farming led him to accept the position of executive director for ALUS Canada in 2015.

14

C a t t l e m e n · M ay 2 0 1 6

ALUS is about farmers and ranchers voluntarily using their land in alternative ways to put it into environmental service and providing technical and financial support for their role in conserving and restoring nature’s benefits, he explains.

Although Manitoba was the birthplace of ALUS in Canada, arising from the initial 2006-08 pilot project in the Rural Municipality of Blanshard, Ont.’s Norfolk County, where the Gilvesys’ YU Ranch is located near Tillsonburg, became the epicentre of early activity. ALUS Norfolk is the longest-running ALUS program in Canada having grown from a pilot program in 2007 to a county-wide program involving more than 175 farm families.

The program expanded into Grey and Bruce counties, the municipality of Bayham, and eastern Ontario in 2012.

The Gilvesys have 150 acres of their total 350 acres enrolled in the ALUS program.

One project established buffer zones to exclude cattle from the Little Otter Creek tributary that runs through their property upstream from Lake Erie and maintaining shade trees along its course to support habitat for brook trout.

Another manages woodlots to eliminate non-native species, protect old trees, and provide habitat for wildlife.

Their hedgerow of flowering shrubs was established to support pollinators, as do flowering species, such as echinacea, showy tick trefoil and brown-eyed Susan, in the diverse tall grass prairie mix they restored on 45 acres. Early accounts indicate at least 250,000 acres of tall grass prairie existed in a parkland-like setting around Norfolk County.

The tall grass prairie field, initially planted for conservation purposes, has become integral to the ranch’s grazing program. It is a blend of locally sourced big bluestem, indian grass, switchgrass, showy tick trefoil and round-headed bush clover. These are heat-loving, droughttolerant warm-season forages that aren’t ready to graze or hay until late July into August. The timing turned out to perfectly complement the early-season growth habit of the cool-season mixes, typically orchardgrass, tall fescue, ryegrass and white clover. Those paddocks are rotationally grazed to keep fresh forage in front of the cattle and recycle nutrients across the land.

“With temperatures frequently over 30 C here in summer, the cool-season grasses Continued on page 16

www.canadiancattlemen.ca

18 f t

PHIL JOHNSON SWITCHED TO THE VERMEER TM1400 TRAILED MOWER TO CUT AT WIDTHS UP TO

AND GET THROUGH...

FIELD GATES AS NARROW AS 8.5 ft

Phil Johnson has tried all sorts of mowers. Like a disc mower with a single 13-ft cutter bar that offered little flexibility or ground contouring. And a sickle-bar mower that was slow and required tons of maintenance. Then Phil switched to a Vermeer TM1400 trailed mower. With increased productivity (18-ft cutting width), narrow transport (8.5 ft) and improved flexibility and ground contouring (split cutter bar), Phil says he won’t be trying any other mowers any time soon. See Phil’s full story and more at: makinhay.com/stories

8.5-ft transport width 18-ft cutting width

MAKE THE SWITCH LIKE PHIL BY REQUESTING A DEMO: VERMEERDEMO.COM Information noted above was gathered from a third party who was advised his/her experience might be featured in marketing materials.

Individual results may vary based on care and operation of machine and crop and field conditions, which may adversely affect performance.

Vermeer, the Vermeer logo and Equipped to Do More are trademarks of Vermeer Manufacturing Company in the U.S. and/or other countries. © 2016 Vermeer Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

Vermeer_National_PhilTM1400_CanadianCattleman_May2016_8.125x10.75_Fullpg.indd 1

4/4/16 4:07 PM

fo r ag e

Continued from page 14

go dormant, so we open the native pastures, which have served nature in the meantime.

By then the natives are shoulder height so we can pretty much park the herd there until the rains and cooler weather come back and the cool-season pastures start to produce again,” Gilvesy explains.

“ALUS is a simple notion really. We do these projects that are a benefit to Canadians and to us,” he adds.

Texas Longhorn cattle fit into the farm’s makeover from the tobacco farm the Gilvesys purchased in 1979 to a ranch in 1993 because they are hardy, low-maintenance cattle that do well outdoors year round. Although that’s a common scenario out west, he says it’s not the general practice in Ontario.

“We needed to keep costs low and, because our market is 100 per cent grass-fed beef, we needed a breed that could efficiently convert grass to beef,” Gilvesy explains. True to their expectations, Longhorns harvested around 24 months of age yield lean, tasty beef. The natural tenderness is enhanced by the wetaging process.

Ontario's TESA winners Joe, Bryan, Cathy and Paula Gilvesy raise grass-fed Longhorn beef.

YU Ranch’s annual carrying capacity is about 200 head. This includes the breeding herd and calves at various stages in the finishing program so that they are able to send animals for harvest every second week throughout the year.

The Gilvesys count themselves fortunate

to be able to work with two excellent family butcher shops in nearby Simcoe, the Van Groningens of VG Meats and the Mediemas of Townsend Butchers. The beef is vacuum packaged and frozen as steaks, roasts, stew beef, ground beef and patties for pickup by the Gilvesys. It is sold from the ranch

Watch AgCanada TV and be inspired AgCanada TV web series informs and motivates farmers Gain a new perspective on your farm, your family and your future with this informative video series from Farm Credit Canada.



INFORMATIVE:

INSPIRATIONAL:

FCC Chief Agricultural Economist, J.P. Gervais, explains the predicted ups and downs of the 2016 Canadian economy and their effect on the agriculture industry.

Sylvain Guimond, best-selling author and sports psychologist, shares 6 strategies for leading a successful life.

Current AGCanadaTV topics include: 

Exchange Rates and Their Effect on Canadian Exports

J.P. Gervais, explains the relationship between exchange rates and Canadian exports and why Canada remains competitive despite the declining dollar. 

Ag Industry Scores Viral Victory Greg Peterson, from Peterson Farm Brothers, discusses his success using various forms of social media to promote agriculture.



5 Keys to a Successful Agribusiness Kevin Stewart helps you focus on your farm’s future with these five tips for successful agribusiness.

Start watching: www.agcanada.com/video

16

C a t t l e m e n · M ay 2 0 1 6

Watch all the episodes Now!

AGCanadaTV is sponsored by

www.canadiancattlemen.ca

forage

store and delivered to customers, including restaurants in Tillsonburg, Simcoe,Toronto, Guelph and Kitchener. The longest standing of their restaurant customers have been with them for nine years.

Ontario’s burgeoning local food movement has also helped draw attention to the YU Ranch brand. The ranch is a farmermember of Sustain Ontario, an alliance of public organizations, food and farm businesses, and individuals that support healthy food and farming. It also became a certified Local Food Plus producer while the project ran under the auspices of the Land Food People Foundation for 10 years ending in 2014.

“Grass-fed beef is a small niche market, but it allows us to develop our brand and bring retail dollars back to the ranch, but you have to be able to talk about this and other things you do on the ranch. Consumers like to hear your stories,” Gilvesy says.

Storytelling is another skill he has perfected. He regularly hosts tours of the ranch, speaks at meetings and events, and makes himself available to mainstream media for interviews to help consumers understand why and how the ranch does what it does.

The ranch’s website is geared toward consumers with enough detail to explain the production basics, but not so much as to boggle the mind.

The concept of sustainability they adopted for their ranch includes economic viability, enhancing environmental quality and the natural resource base, while integrating natural biological cycles, and enhancing the quality of life for farmers and society as a whole.

They aim to capture free energy from the sun as much as possible in their everyday management. Solar panels capture energy for pumping water from a pond into troughs to water cattle on pasture and charging the battery packs for electricity to run the freezer section of their delivery van.

Excess electrical energy generated by the vehicle’s alternator also charges the battery packs. Next on the renewable-energy drawing board could be capturing stream flow to generate hydro power.

Rotational grazing of cool- and warmseason mixtures ensures actively growing plants continuously soak up energy from the sun throughout the growing season.

The forages and trees in the woodlot transform carbon dioxide from the air into plant material that stores carbon and releases it into the soil to build soil organic matter. Soil organic matter filters water and improves www.canadiancattlemen.ca

water infiltration for plant growth to fuel the cattle.

The ranch produces enough forage to graze the herd in summer and provide hay for the winter although the winter feeding period has become difficult to define because of erratic weather in recent years.

Hay is rotationally fed as whole bales on pasture to carry on the nutrient recycling regime year round.

Grassland Meats is a new snacks division

of YU Ranch launched early this year by their children. Joe, a high school student, and Paula, now at university, have been testing recipes for beef jerky in their home kitchen for the past four years. Encouraged by friends and family, they entrusted their recipes to VG Meats and Townsend Butchers to take their hobby to the next level and now offer sweet and spicy beef jerky, spicy beef pepperettes and classic all-beef frankfurters made from YU Ranch beef. c

“When I ride out to treat calves on pasture, I need a product that works fast and I know will last...because I’m only doing this once.”

Summer pneumonia is a challenge anytime you have calves on grass.

Treat them with a product that gets to work right away1 and gives long lasting2 action in a single dose. Treat them with the product that is safe3 to handle, and comes in a plastic bottle that you can toss in your saddlebag.

Treat them with ZACTRAN ®.

Ask your veterinarian why ZACTRAN is ideal for cattle on your ranch.

1. Giguère S, Huang R, Malinski TJ, Dorr PM, Tessman RK & Somerville BA. Disposition of gamithromycin in plasma, pulmonary epithelial lining fluid, bronchoalveolar cells, and lung tissue in cattle. Am. J. Vet. Res. 72(3): 326-330 (2011).

2. Based on label claims.

3. See ZACTRAN MSDS. ZACTRAN® is a registered trademark of Merial Limited. © 2013 Merial Canada Inc. All rights reserved. ZACT-13-7557-JAD-E

C a t t l e m e n · M ay 2 0 1 6

17

 cover sto ry • i d e n t i f i cat i o n

By Debbie Furber

Rustlers take more than your cattle Be sure you can identify your animals

N

early six years after 10 bred heifers were stolen from them, Glenn and Christine Strube still feel the lingering stress of the long, drawn-out court process that ended with a guilty verdict. Most disturbing is knowing that the crime wasn’t committed by a fly-by-night thief, but by a neighbour who blatantly lied about it.

Little could Glenn have known what the years ahead would bring when he set out down the road to check the bred-heifer pasture that late-fall day of 2009. It wasn’t odd that he didn’t see all of the cattle. Pastures are big with lots of bush in this area bordering the boreal forest north of Shellbrook, Sask. When the same 10 heifers failed to show up the next day, his first thought was that he had a fence to fix somewhere, not theft.

What was unusual was that after a couple of days looking and asking around, not one of their neighbours had seen the missing heifers.

Families in this neck of the woods are tight with bonds that go back to the first generation on the land, he says. Someone would have called had they noticed cattle wandering at large.

Strube had notified the local RCMP detachment but couldn’t give them much to go on at the time except the description of the cattle and

18

C a t t l e m e n · M ay 2 0 1 6

www.canadiancattlemen.ca

identification

that they had yellow dangle management tags in their left ears and the required Canadian Cattle Identification Agency (CCIA) radio frequency identification buttons in their right ears. The Strubes normally brand their cattle, but the timing didn’t work out for branding the 2008-born heifer group.

Sure enough, a neighbour, Sigurd Skarsgard, contacted them a few days later with pertinent information.

Calling around to auction markets to find out whether any farmers from the area had delivered cattle, Strube learned that the farmer with pasture across the road from their heifer pasture had sold cattle at Sask­ atoon Livestock Sales on October 13, 2009.

“If it hadn’t been for Les Tipton, the brand inspector (now retired) at Saskatoon, stepping up, nothing more would have happened,” Strube says. He described the cattle to Tipton, but Tipton didn’t let on at the time that the neighbour had indeed sold an unusual group of cattle with 10 animals that matched Strube’s description more than they matched the other cattle in the group.

Following through the sales and manifest records, Tipton traced nine of the bred heifers to a feedlot in Saskatchewan and the other to an Alberta feedlot.

The Strubes suggested DNA testing to prove their rightful ownership. The couple runs a purebred Simmental operation and has up-to-date parentage records for every animal. Six of the bred heifers were purebred and the others were commercial Simmental-crosses.

As far as the Strubes were told, DNA testing had never before been used to crack a cattle theft case, but on the afternoon of December 31, 2009, a cavalcade of RCMP members made the trip to the farm to take hair samples from the dams and remaining sires of the stolen heifers. The Strubes’ bill came to a little over $1,000 for the on-farm tests and the RCMP paid for DNA testing the nine heifers found at the Saskatchewan feedlot.

The testing paid off because the stolen heifers proved to be from the Strube herd.

The suspect was subsequently charged with three Criminal Code offences: theft of the cattle, fraudulently keeping them in his possession, and making a false or counterfeit mark on them (removing Strube’s RFID tags and replacing them with his own).

Glenn underwent questioning on the stand for 2-1/2 hours during the preliminary hearing in October 2010, and another four hours of interrogation during the fourday court case in December 2012.

At the end of it all, Kelly Robin Deck was www.canadiancattlemen.ca

found guilty on the counts of stealing the heifers and making the counterfeit mark on them. He was ordered to pay restitution to the Strubes of $800 for each of the nine DNA-tested heifers and given a six-month conditional sentence with a curfew from 11 p.m. to 6 a.m.

Needless to say, the Strubes were pleased with the verdict, but couldn’t hide their deep disappointment with the sentence.

What it boiled down to was that the thief had to pay back the money he had made from selling the cattle!

That could hardly be considered a monetary penalty and certainly didn’t compensate the Strubes for the value of the heifers as productive females in the herd over their lifetimes.

They are extremely discouraged that the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) failed to follow up on the conviction for switching out the CCIA tags. Two CFIA officials who had visited the farm early on had told them there would be big trouble to pay if the accused was found guilty of tampering with tags.

The CFIA is responsible for administering and enforcing the Health of Animals Act, which requires animals have unique identification tags. The animal identification regulations under Part XV of the act explain that, except upon death or slaughter of an animal, no person shall remove, or cause the removal of, an approved tag from an animal or carcass.

“Farmers have to go to all the trouble and expense with these tags and even in a case like this, someone who removes them and steals the animals gets nothing,” Glenn says.

The CFIA declined to comment on our questions related to the maximum penalty for tampering with tags and following through on enforcement on the grounds that the case was a Criminal Code investigation led by the RCMP and Saskatchewan Livestock Inspection Service.

The Criminal Code on the Government of Canada’s justice laws website covers the penalties for the crimes cited in the case.

According to Section 338 (1) (b) (ii), everyone who without consent of the owner fraudulently, in whole or part, makes a false or counterfeit brand or mark on cattle is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years. Part 2 of the same section states that the maximum sentence for theft of cattle is a term not exceeding 10 years.

Christine says she gets it that no jail time was ordered because the system is filled Continued on page 20

C a t t l e m e n · M ay 2 0 1 6

19

i d e n t i f i cat i o n

Continued from page 19

with the most dangerous criminals, but the couple feels that the six-month conditional sentence was little more than a slap on the wrist for theft and tampering with the tags, let alone a deterrent to cattle rustlers.

The judge told them the reason for not handing down a stiffer penalty on either count was because Deck suffered an additional punishment of having to live in his community with this conviction hanging over his head, and recommended that the Strubes follow up with a civil suit to claim the full value of the breeding heifers.

They didn’t see why after going through two court cases, the thief being proven guilty, expertise available to help the court determine the real cost of losing 10 animals from the breeding herd and, when all was said and done, they still had to go through civil court to get the rest of the money.

It turned out that they had lots of time to consider whether filing a civil suit would be worth the cost and stress because Deck launched an appeal. It was heard in the Sask­atch­ewan Court of Appeal on April

20

C a t t l e m e n · M ay 2 0 1 6

15, 2014. The judgment handed down nine days later upheld the trial judge’s verdicts and the appeal was dismissed.

Court decisions are public documents housed on the Canadian Legal Information Institute’s website (www.canlii.org).

According to the court document (R. v.

Deck, [2014] SKCA 44), the Appeal Court is required to show great deference to a trial judge’s findings of credibility and the trial judge had made adverse findings in relation to Deck’s credibility.

Deck never denied to the court that the Strube heifers had been in his yard and acknowledged that he had sold them, but claimed that he thought the heifers were his even though he knew the Strubes were looking for cattle at the time he sold the animals. The trial judge didn’t accept Deck’s evidence that he was so unfamiliar with his cattle operation that he didn’t notice Strube’s yearlings among his own animals.

The appeal judge found that Deck was able to give quite detailed evidence about the composition of his herd at the time.

Deck’s initial statement that he had no idea how to remove tags didn’t hold water

either. The appeal judge agreed with the trial judge’s conclusion that, while some of the Strube tags “could have fallen out by the fall of 2009, it was not ‘within the realm of possibility’ that all of those tags could have fallen out or been lost by that time” and that Deck had removed the tags and replaced them with his own before selling the animals.

The Strubes did follow through with a civil suit, which was settled out of court in May of last year.

The couple came forward with their story in the hope that it will help create awareness among ranchers across Canada that cattle rustling can happen anywhere, any time.

“This happens more often than we hear about to ranchers, but they don’t have a lead on who did it or can’t prove it. We were lucky to have the evidence and felt we were willing to go through this to represent other ranchers in sending a message to cattle rustlers that they cannot keep getting away with this,” Christine says.

They for one will make sure their brand is on each and every animal from now on and will continue to diligently check their cattle and keep good herd records. c

www.canadiancattlemen.ca

If you’re buying a utility tractor, have you thought through the true costs of ownership?

Choosing what kind of tractor to buy can be confusing and stressful. Lots of brands offer claims of greater productivity, higher effciency, and so on. And it’s all too easy to get caught up in the hype — and then be lured by low-ball pricing and huge discounts. But the true purchase cost of any tractor is often buried deep within the operator’s manual. And this surprise may end up costing you thousands.

What’s hiding in the fne print One brand of utility tractor in the 75 to 125 hp class has routine maintenance requirements that would have you replacing up to 27 parts every two years.

This includes oil, air, and fuel flters plus all sorts of hoses, cables, and lines.

The costs really add up.

Now, compare the John Deere 5M Series. A simple oil change is the only routine maintenance you’ll need to perform during the frst two years of ownership.

We design our tractors with built-in durability – with components and parts designed to last and last. Need a little proof?

Our 5Ms feature durable steel brake lines — unlike the less-costly and fatigue-prone rubber hoses found on other tractor makes.

Then consider our abrasion resistant braided wire hoses used in our steering system and rear hitch – they are simply stronger, and longer lasting than the conventional hoses used by some other manufacturers.

So when you’re ready to buy your next tractor, be sure to ask one vital question: “What will it cost to maintain – yearafter-year?” The answer might surprise you.

Then, talk to your John Deere dealer. See how a new 5M delivers one of the lowest costs of ownership of any utility tractor in its class. It’s a question you won’t regret asking.

JohnDeere.ca/5Family

 identifi cat i o n

Branding is Back S

askatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia are the only provinces in Canada with cattle brand registries and associated brand inspection services, all of which have reported a surge in new brand registrations with the rising prices for cattle last year.

Last spring, Bob Miller, general manager of Ownership Identification Inc. (OII) in British Columbia, noted a “considerable” increase in new beef ranch brand registrations. This spring, he calls it “huge.”

“The increase shows that producers do accept and see branding as a way to have permanent identification on their cattle,” Miller says.

OII’s current missing livestock report includes 21 active reports for cattle, totalling 85 missing head since May 2015.

Approximately 50 per cent of Alberta producers brand their cattle and that number along with the number of cattle branded is on the rise. Livestock Identification Services (LIS) general manager Shawn McLean reports 90 new brands registered this January alone, 70 of those for cattle and 20 for horses. In February, 59 of the 65 new brands registered were for cattle.

“It’s probably because of the increase in the value of cattle, but people are also becoming more aware of what can happen because of media reports and they are keeping watch on their cattle because they are hearing more about thefts,” McLean says.

In 2015 in Alberta, 229 cattle were reported missing, another 265 were reported as suspected stolen, and another 120 were reported as thefts.

Overall, that’s about five per cent higher

22

C a t t l e m e n · M ay 2 0 1 6

than 2014, but it’s hard to say whether it represents an actual increase in missing cattle or better reporting by producers, says Corporal Christian Reister, RCMP livestock investigator for southern Alberta. The significant increase has been in the value of the loss because it follows along with the value of cattle.

Cameron Wilk, CEO, of Livestock Services of Saskatchewan (LSS) says cattle go missing for many reasons other than theft, including straying out of pastures and predation by wildlife.

Already in 2016 up to April 1, 180 cattle had been reported missing in the province.

The tally for the northwest, which historically has been the hot spot for missing cattle, shows a jump since 2013 when 13 producers reported 60 head missing with two reports being alleged thefts. In 2014, 31 producers in the northwest reported 533 head missing with 11 reports alleged to be thefts. In 2015, 29 producers reported 141 head missing with six reports alleged to be thefts.

Counting the ways

LSS has dealt with cases of cattle shot and butchered on the spot, with only the best parts taken for meat and the remainder left behind. Crimes of this nature in British Columbia are more frequent in areas with strong urban-to-rural migration.

Credit fraud is on the rise, too. People finance animals and don’t report the security interest at the time of sale so that the proceeds are paid out directly to the consignor rather than to the lender.

As McLean puts it, the modern-day cow thief is more likely to find financial ways to

photo: thinkstock

By Debbie Furber

steal cattle than doing it the old-time way, by rustling.

Corporal Reister says this is a worrisome trend because the industry needs lenders to continue to have confidence in the industry.

White-collar fraud, which Miller describes as people using internal auditing to make cattle disappear and then making an insurance claim for the loss, is becoming more prevalent in British Columbia.

A common scenario is when a business or family relationship breaks down and one party feels gypped and takes cattle for what he or she thinks is deserved.

In each of the three provinces, all cattle in loads arriving and leaving auction markets are inspected by livestock inspectors, Reister says. If you bring in cattle with another person’s brand on them, you have to have a proper receipt from the owner of the brand showing that you are the rightful owner.

If you don’t have the legitimate proof of purchase in hand, the brand inspector has the authority to hold the cattle and payment until rightful ownership is determined.

“We catch thousands of thefts this way and redirect the proceeds to the rightful owner. Whether it’s a relationship situation, or cattle have been stolen or strayed, there’s a lot of value in your brand,” Reister says.

Wilk reports that in Saskatchewan alone, the proceeds on 5,600 head of cattle were redirected to the rightful owners in 2015.

Brand inspection

Miller stresses that a brand is evidence that the owner of the brand is the owner of the livestock. If there are multiple owners of the livestock, then all of their names must

www.canadiancattlemen.ca

identification

www.canadiancattlemen.ca

 t h i ngs to d o

Protect your cattle

photo: thinkstock

be on the brand registration and on the shipping manifest.

If cattle aren’t branded, all an inspector has to go by are the shipping manifests. Branded or not, fill the manifests out completely, and clearly, including numbers and descriptions of the cattle on the load.

Don’t assume that the brand inspector, transporter or market staff will do this for you, he adds.

Regulations in all three provinces require brand inspections on all cattle offered for public sale, including auction markets, electronic sales and farm-direct sales handled through dealers, cattle entering feedlots, packing plants and abattoirs, and leaving the province via any border for sale, pasture or shows. LSS maintains a district office at Winnipeg for overseeing inspection of cattle from Saskatchewan entering auction markets in Manitoba and, at the request of dealers, cattle leaving Manitoba going west.

The brand inspection programs in the west are in themselves a strong deterrent to cattle thefts. They co-operate with one another on circulating missing animal reports, flagging missing animals in the system and work closely with the 22 states that have similar programs.

The brand inspectors are the programs’ strength. They live in communities where they work, so they know the people and the cattle, McLean says, adding that all of Alberta’s brand inspectors are also beef producers, so they know what it means to lose cattle.

Properly branding your cattle is the undisputed top answer from all provinces on the question of how to protect cattle from theft. Any cattle thief who knows the business — and virtually all of them do have some level of understanding of the trade and cattle handling — knows that branded cattle are easier for authorities to track down. That makes them more apt to drive on by your pasture to find a herd that’s not branded.

Timely reporting of missing cattle ranked right up there, too. In fact, Wilk identified this as the No. 1 problem for brand inspectors and the RCMP when investigating missing cattle reports.

Whether your first call to report missing animals or strays that show up in your pasture should be to the RCMP or to the brand inspector depends on the province because municipal governments are involved with stray animals in some provinces. c

Corporal Christian Reister, one of Alberta’s two RCMP officers dedicated to livestock files, offers some tips on how to protect your herd on pasture: 1. Branding is the single biggest deterrent and the greatest single piece of evidence the RCMP can use in court because a brand can’t be altered or removed.

2. Watch out for one another. Be aware of unfamiliar vehicles or ATVs in your neighbours’ yards or pastures as you go about your daily work and don’t hesitate to give the neighbour a call if you do see something suspicious. If you can’t get hold of the neighbour, call the police. Contrary to images of rustlers loading up a trailer and sneaking off into the night, most cattle thefts happen in broad daylight and most often the thief is a person known to the owner of the cattle, including hired hands and neighbours.

3. Check your cattle regularly, but not routinely. If someone is planning a heist, whether it’s cattle, tools, or equipment, chances are they will be watching the goings on around your farm to decide when to make the move.

4. If you think you are missing cattle or see unusual activity or vehicle tracks, go out and get a good head count right away. If the number is down, that’s the time to call the police so they can collect tire impressions and other evidence and canvass the

neighbours for information. Don’t wait until fall roundup to do a head count because it will be almost impossible for the RCMP to collect evidence and chances are that the missing cattle will be long gone.

5. Be aware of who you are giving permission to be on your pastures. If it’s hunters or recreational users you don’t know, get some identification and a vehicle number to hold them accountable because there is always a possibility that they could be there to case out your operation for a theft in the planning.

6. Ask all unaccompanied visitors whether there for pleasure or business to use the gates (not cut the fences) and to close gates behind themselves, but always go out afterward to double-check that the gates are closed and the fences are up.

7. Put padlocks on gates into pastures. Yes, they can be easily cut off, but the presence of locks will be a deterrent.

8. Consider setting up some trail cameras if you or others in your area have been victims of theft.

9. Apply radio-frequency identification tags and, if at all possible, associate the official tag number with the individual animal in your records. At the very least, keep a record of the tag series numbers on each package of tags you purchase.

10. Follow up on references and do background checks when hiring new employees.

C a t t l e m e n · M ay 2 0 1 6

23

 grazing

By Heather Smith Thomas

The pros and cons of grazing cover crops

C

over crops have traditionally been used to help hold the soil when transitioning between different types of cash crops, and are often plowed under before planting the next crop — to add organic material and fertility to the soil. Farmers with livestock often select cover crops that can be grazed, adding an additional benefit as feed and the advantage of animal manure.

Grant Lastiwka, livestock and forage business specialist with Alberta Agriculture and Forestry, says some of the alternative cover crops can be very beneficial for producers, to provide forage. “In conventional grazing systems, we either have an annual that starts growing later in the spring and finishes growing sooner than perennial forages, or we use a perennial pasture that lacks productivity. Many of our pastures in Alberta fall into that category and their ability to capture carbon is limited,” he says.

“Also much of our land has gone out of crops that use a lot of water and are green for a longer period of time. More of our grain farms now manage water to get it off the land, and there is a lot of large equipment used. Weight per square inch has increased, as has our ability (via GPS) to travel on the same tracks. We are running into issues with our soils; they are being adversely impacted.

The ability for these stands to take in water, hold it, release it, etc. has decreased. Using cover crops can help remedy this situation.”

“Also, if you add nitrogen to a system it improves water use efficiency. The cover crops mixes that some people are now using include a legume. This contributes nitrogen that is beneficial to the soil and also to the quality of feed,” he says.

Barry Yaremcio, an Alberta beef and forage specialist says some producers add different varieties of seed to establish an extra crop when planting a traditional crop, to provide more forage. “For instance, they might be planning to seed an oat crop or barley for silage, but also plant clover, winter wheat or another crop that will grow and be available for grazing after the silage is harvested,” he says. A person can plant their main crop and take it off for silage, but broadcast grazing turnips, kale or forage rape between the rows to provide a lot of biomass for grazing later.

24

C a t t l e m e n · M ay 2 0 1 6

You need to test the feed, says Barry Yaremcio, an Alberta beef and forage specialist.

“Grazing brassicas (turnips, kale, forage rape, forage radish), sorghum sudangrass hybrids, winter wheat or fall rye, winter triticale, etc. can provide high-quality forage for cattle or sheep late in the growing season. These species grow faster once the silage or greenfeed crop has been taken off,” says Yaremcio. This type of crop can provide a lot of fall/winter grazing for cattle.

Sometimes regrowth from a traditional crop can be used as fall grazing. “Last year, for instance, producers who harvested their silage earlier than usual because of the dry conditions saw significant regrowth when rains came in late July and early August.

Some regions of the province were fortunate to have 12 to 16 inches of oat, barley and canola regrowth for fall grazing. Rain brought on second growth, reaching the heading stage when it froze. The quality of that regrowth material was as high as a good alfalfa-grass mixed hay, at 15 to 16 per cent protein, and very digestible (63 per cent TDN or higher), with low fibre content,” he says.

Winter wheat, fall rye or winter triticale can work nicely for grazing late in the year.

“Even if you seed them in May or June (when their spring counterparts are seeded for a grain crop), they won’t grow much during early summer, but by August/September there will be a lot of leaf and bottom

growth. The majority of the winter crop tillers won’t put up a head and seed until the next year. All those leaves at the bottom of the plant are very high quality and when they have a chance to grow they can supply a lot of feed for cattle,” says Yaremcio.

Nora Paulovich at the North Peace Applied Research Association has done a lot of work experimenting with various crop blends at the research farm near Manning, Alta. to determine what works and what doesn’t work in that area. The farmer-run executive board has made it a priority to increase total yields by adding cover crops. The group has been using various cocktail mixes of different types of species. A mix of plants can often be a good diet for cattle, including a legume such as clover to increase the protein and calcium content in the forage. Providing different species can help balance the ration, reduce supplement costs, and take advantage of moisture and growing conditions at different times of year. This can produce a better yield as well as a betterquality product that will be available through the entire summer. If one type of plant doesn’t do as well, some of the others might.

This is the advantage of some of the cocktail mixes because you can include a species that can take the heat and withstand a Continued on page 26

www.canadiancattlemen.ca

www.myfarmshow.com @canadafarmshow

the only

place

to see it all Canadaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s largest tradeshow with the most complete selection of cutting-edge agricultural products, innovations, equipment and services available in the farming industry Over 700 exhibitors Nearly every major line of farming equipment will be on display, allowing attendees to compare products side by side

Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada

JUNE

15 - 172016 Preview Day:

VISIT THE LIVESTOCK CENTRE

Located in Hall #9A An area devoted to livestock production, and to the people, organizations and equipment manufacturers who keep this industry vibrant.

June 14, 2016 Evraz Place

Proud Member of the Farm Show Council

g r a z i ng

Nitrogen content was quite high in some fields where forage brassicas were grown as an alternative crop.

Continued from page 24

THINGS TO BE AWARE OF WHEN GRAZING ALTERNATIVE CROPS

drought, so if it’s a dry year you’ve got that covered. There are other plants that have the ability to grow when it’s cooler, with more moisture. A good mix can cut down the amount of risk and help assure good feed for the cattle, whatever the year might bring.

“Our work with cover crops is still in its infancy,” says Paulovich. “We are still trying various things, and a dozen producers in our area are trying different combinations and species as well. We are still experimenting with seeding rates, also. We know that we need to include species from warm- and cool-season grasses, as well as legumes,” she says.

“We try to have species from each of these categories and hope to find the optimum seeding rate for all them. We like to have a spring cereal included, and oats or triticale are the cool-seeding grasses we are seeding. This (past) year in our cocktail cover crop mixes at the research farm we found that our seeding rate for the oats was a little bit high. So we are going to experiment with that,” says Paulovich.

“We’re also going to try different seeding dates — seeding every two weeks. It was so dry these past several years, that the more often you put seed in the ground, the greater the chance of success for one of those to catch some rain at the right time,” she explains.

Maintaining a balanced diet and avoiding health problems can be tricky sometimes, when utilizing alternative crops. “You need to test the feed and know if there are health risks, or to figure out what type of mineral or combination of products to add to the diet to make them work,” Yaremcio says.

“Some of the problems we’ve seen this past year are related to soil fertility/nutrient uptake.

Producers who put in forage brassicas like turnips, kale (or used late-germinating canola crops for grazing, silage or greenfeed) found that nitrogen content of the soils was quite high. The nitrogen may have come from commercial fertilizer or significant amounts of manure applied to the field. Nitrogen accumulation in some of these crops was sufficiently high that intake had to be restricted to prevent poisoning,” he says.

If a crop is grown in fields with high sulphur fertility, the plants will take it up with the soil moisture. “Brassicas species are known to accumulate sulphur. We’ve received feed test results with sulphur levels in the 0.6 to 0.8 per cent range. Sulphur content in a ration (including that which is obtained from water) should not exceed 0.4 per cent in the entire ration or it will reduce rumen pH. The bacteria responsible for pro-

26

C a t t l e m e n · M ay 2 0 1 6

ducing thiamine are very sensitive to low pH and die off. A shortage of thiamine can cause polio. There have been some cows die this year because of this situation,” he says.

“In many parts of Alberta and Saskatchewan many canola crops did not germinate until the rains came in July and early August. It was in full bloom/early pod stage when they cut it for silage and greenfeed.

It was excellent feed, at 16 to 17 per cent protein, with great energy and good levels of calcium, phosphorus and magnesium, but the sulphur and nitrate levels were high. The forage had to be blended down with other material to make it safe to feed. Control measures, such as electric wire, were needed to limit the amount of canola consumed daily. Alternative crops require awareness, and at times a bit more management compared to grazing conventional forages,” he explains.

“If you are putting some of these crops in to provide late-season grazing, feed testing is very important. With nitrates there may be no warning; you just suddenly find a dead animal. Polio takes a bit longer, but the outcome can also be dead animals.”

Another thing to be aware of is that immature crops or crop regrowth have low fibre levels, and a lot of the brassicas and other companion crops have very low fibre levels.

www.canadiancattlemen.ca

grazing

“Without sufficient fibre the manure will become very loose, due to high water content and rapid movement through the digestive tract. It is beneficial to feed cattle some highfibre roughage such as slough hay or straw to increase dry matter content and reduce feed passage rate. Animals that consume one or two pounds a day of the high-fibre material have improved digestive efficiency of the high-quality feeds, and greater opportunity to extract the nutrients before they go out the back end,” says Yaremcio.

“In some of these crops the magnesium levels can be fairly low, such as 0.12 or 0.13 per cent whereas you need about 0.2 per cent magnesium in the ration to have proper balance. A lack of magnesium,

especially if potassium levels are high, could lead to tetany situations and downer cows,” he explains.

Most of the time, these alternate crops are grown on certain fields between other major crops. There’s usually no problem with intake; cattle really like them, even though it may take them a few days to adjust to the different taste or texture. Various crops may have differences from year to year in palatability and length of time it takes the cows to adjust to the new feed.

For instance, he says some people were saying their cows didn’t want to eat their pea straw last year, and usually there was no problem. It may have grown a bit differently last year, or the leaves were a bit waxier.

“Sometimes cows that are accustomed to a really good pasture are fussy in what they want to eat. If you suddenly switch them to a cover crop it may take them a few days to get them to eat an alternate crop.

If you don’t see them really going after it by the second or third day, you need to re-evaluate whether they are actually going to eat it or not. Usually by then the cows are hungry, they get used to the taste and texture of the feed and start eating it more readily,” says Yaremcio.

If a producer is trying an alternate crop for the first time, it helps to talk to someone else who has done this or knows about various forages, to glean some suggestions and guidelines. c

Quiet industry Leader

SaleS & Product SuPPort ProfeSSionalS Nester Livestock equipmeNt LtD 1-888-684-3691

•

VuLcan, ab

www.NesterLivestockequipmeNt.com www.canadiancattlemen.ca

C a t t l e m e n · M ay 2 0 1 6

27

 researc h o n t h e r eco r d

By Reynold Bergen

Winter Cow Transport Assessed

A

2007 transportation benchmarking study led by Dr. Karen Schwartzkopf-Genswein of Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada’s Lethbridge Research Station surveyed over 9,000 loads and close to half a million cattle trucked to, from and within Alberta over an 18-month period. That study reported that over 99.9 per cent of the cattle arrived at their destination with no serious problems.

But transport was more risky for some cattle than for others. Cull cows were 3.5 times more likely to have trouble during transport than weaned calves, 5.5 times more likely than fat cattle, and 8.5 times more likely than yearlings. The risk of death also increased greatly in cattle transported at temperatures below -15 C. Finding ways to improve winter transport outcomes is important for the cows as well as industry reputation.

Dr. Schwartzkopf-Genswein and co-workers did a followup project evaluating how winter transportation affects the welfare and carcass quality of cull cows (“Trailer temperature and humidity during winter transport of cattle in Canada and evaluation of indicators used to assess the welfare of cull beef cows before and after transport”; J. Anim. Sci. 93:3639).

What they did: Between January 4 and April 30, 2013, commercial truckers hauled 673 cull beef cows weighing 1,517 lbs. in 17 tri- and quad-axle trailer loads from southwestern Manitoba to a packing plant in central Alberta. At the driver’s discretion, side boards were used to protect animals from the weather.

Data loggers on the ceiling of each compartment (except the nose) and outside the trailer were used to record temperature and humidity. In some trailers, accelerometers attached below the nose, belly and back and on the ceiling of the belly and back compartments recorded vertical (up-and-down), lateral (side-to-side) and horizontal (forward-and-backward) jolts (e.g. braking, cornering) and vibrations 200 times per second.

Based on the Recommended Animal Handling Guidelines and Audit Guide developed by the American Meat Institute, cows were assessed for temperament (calm, restless, nervous, flighty, or aggressive), body condition score, lameness, injuries and other health conditions.

Handler (e.g. shouting, prod use) and animal behaviour (e.g. slips, falls, walking, running) were also recorded.

RFID tags were scanned to track which cows were in each compartment. Bruise size and location (rib, back, loin, round, tailhead) were recorded after slaughter.

What they learned: Most trips lasted nearly 14 hours, ranging from 12 to 18 hours. Temperature averaged 4 C and ranged from -33 to 20 C. Side boards were used on 88 per cent of the loads. More boards were used at colder temperatures. On average, fewer than 25 per cent of punch holes were covered when temperatures averaged

28

C a t t l e m e n · M ay 2 0 1 6

2 C; half to two-thirds were covered when temperatures averaged -5 C, and 80 per cent or more were covered when temperatures averaged -11 C. Boarding is intended to protect animals from wind chill and increase temperatures inside the trailer. This did happen when the trucks were waiting to unload; when more boards were used, air temperatures and humidity were higher inside the trailer compared to outside air conditions. This suggests that animal body heat and moisture from exhaled breath, sweat and manure built up inside parked trailers when more boards were used. But at highway speeds, more heavily boarded trailers were actually less humid than the outside air. This suggests that boarding might increase (not reduce) airflow through the moving trailer. More research is necessary to know whether boarding benefits animal comfort during transport.

Accelerometers indicated that vertical motion was similar in all compartments, lateral motion was greatest in the back, and horizontal motion was greatest in the nose, back and doghouse. The most severely bruised carcasses came from cows travelling in the doghouse, but this may be because of the compartment’s dimensions rather than motion alone.

The risk of bruising increased the longer cows waited before unloading. Overall, 80 per cent of carcasses were bruised, with 18 per cent showing severe bruising and 14 per cent showing bruising in more than one area of the carcass.

Fifty per cent of loads carried at least one cow that was compromised at loading. Sixty per cent of loads carried one or more compromised cows at unloading. Three cows (0.4 per cent) went down and were euthanized on the trailer.

What it means: Knowing what and where our problems occur is the first step to fixing them. A cow’s condition at loading heavily influences whether she will reach her destination safely. Cows that are in tough shape on the farm will not get better on the road.

Canada’s Code of Practice for the Care and Handling of Beef Cattle requires that compromised cattle (e.g. cancer eye, lame, open wound, lumpjaw, etc.) only be transported for treatment or directly to local slaughter. They must be segregated from unfamiliar animals, in a rear compartment, with extra bedding. Make culling decisions sooner than later, evaluate cow condition carefully, and only load cows that are fit for the trip. Ask your vet if you’re unsure.

The Beef Research Cluster is funded by the National Checkoff and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada with additional contributions from provincial beef industry groups and governments to advance research and technology transfer supporting the Canadian beef industry’s vision to be recognized as a preferred supplier of healthy, high-quality beef, cattle and genetics. c Dr. Reynold Bergen is the science director of the Beef Cattle Research Council.

www.canadiancattlemen.ca

FIND YOUR PRODUCTIVITY Find and purchase premium used equipment at discount prices. Browse for your next machine.

Set up an equipment alert. Find what you’re looking for.

Get in the zone now at RMEdealzone.ca

2013 CASEIH 600Q | 4WDQ 36” Armourlug, Twin Pmps, Pro 700, Pwr Bynd, Pwr Shft, Nav II & 372 Rcvr, Elec Mirrors, Dff Lck

2013 CASEIH 8230 | COMBINE New Cab, Sngles, Magnacut Fine, HD Lat. Tilt, FS 800/70x38 Fronts, FS 750/65R26 Rears, 3016 YCS026263

2008 CASEIH 4420 | SPRAYER 134’ Pommr Boom, 290HP, 6 Cyl, 8.3 L, Topcon Mntr, 1200SS, Act Susp, A/Cmmnd, C/Divdrs, 620R38 Fltrs, 380R46

2010 APACHE 1010-100 | SPRAYER 100’, 1100 Gal, Auto Steer, Raven Smartrax, 380/80R46, Powerglide Plus Boom, 42” Clearance

2013 MACDON M205 | WINDROWER 16’ MA R85, Forming Shield, Pres Snsor Kit, Hyd Couplers, Booster Spring Ext, 600-65R28, 16.5L-16.1

2013 CASEIH MAX125 | 100-139 PTO HP 20.8R38 Rear, 16.9R28 Front, Continental, Suspended Deluxe Cab, 3 Hyd Outlets, 98” Bar Axle, 540/1000 PTO

$389,000

$135,000

$275,000

$109,000

deal zone PREMIER PICKS AT DEEP DISCOUNTS

$195,000

$89,000

2012 BOURGAULT 3320-76 | SEEDING 76’ QDA/ 6700 Tank, 4.5” V Packers, Dbl Shoot, 30.5x32 DU, x20 Top Con, Sd Bag Lift, Edge on Knife Holder $380,000

2007 CASEIH 3320 | SPRAYER 100’, A/Cmmnd, Act/Susp, Combo Body/5Way Nzzl, SCS4600 rate, 4Sens Boom Hght Cntr, C/Divdrs on Front $149,000

RMEdealzone.ca 1-844-527-3154 OR 1-844-435-3866

 straigh t f ro m t h e h i p

By Brenda Schoepp

The Consequence of a Society of Privilege is Choice

D

o you like burgers? I do and am at a loss at the rage of farmers regarding the burger world and some of their advertising campaigns. I was asked about this recently and in response I advised that a consequence of a society of privilege is choice. I believe choice is a measurement of economic vitality, particularly in the middle class.

When folks make decisions at the fast-food counter it is not going to be driven by a farmer’s emotional response to an ad, incentive or program. Regardless of the personal feelings of the men and women who own cows — consumers will buy largely on convenience, cost and most certainly on taste. The recent research shows that taste is still king in the quest for a great eating experience.

Part of that taste experience is fresh product and the commitment to fresh Canadian veggies, potatoes, bread, eggs and most things in between makes decision-making easier for the person ordering on the other side of the counter. It is an amazing journey to go through both websites and note the Canadian food used by the two burger chains. There is a lot of commitment in buying Canadian because the volume of use is staggering and a constant supply is so critical to customer satisfaction.

People will choose to buy from a place of core values and beliefs and yet sometimes they are just hungry and tired and want to know they can eat a burger and be safe in that choice. The beef producers have to give them a little more credit and not drive them away with negative comments. Talking publicly about one personal beef over another may result in an alternate response — ordering a chicken burger. The reality is that there is a ton of work behind the scenes to secure consumer loyalty and as both companies are pushing beef — the beef industry should not be pushing back.

Beef producers have a choice to provide beef for either burger company. Farms and ranches also have a choice to be organic or natural or sell to a domestic butcher or grocery. They have a choice to work with others to create marketing strategies and new markets or to sell directly to an export market based on the commitment to production protocols. Farmers have a choice to leave land for future generations or to sell it. This is Canada and these choices are for everyone.

There is no right or wrong decisions and personal values are reflected in actions.

My concern is that the industry is pushing towards conformity — a sameness that poisons the tall poppy or the entrepreneur. This is the beginning of the end to creative thinking and unique deliverables. And there is a world of difference between the outcomes of a monoculture of conformity and the expression

30

C a t t l e m e n · M ay 2 0 1 6

of free enterprise, a principle that the Canadian beef industry was built on.

I think of those I have met and shared a meal with who do not have our range of choice. After nearly 80 meals of rice and beans — I recall not really caring where the meat offered came from just as long as it was cooked! It is often overwhelming to come home from travel to the obscene amount of abundance that Canadians take for granted.

There are many folks in the world who have choice too — blue shirt or blue shirt — walk five miles for water or walk five miles for water — eat cassava boiled or eat cassava boiled — stand in line for bread or stand in line for bread. Simple choices. Their problems are few, and greater in the context of their lives.

If they could see those in the Canadian beef industry fighting it out on the streets over an ad campaign or from the other side, the fear of regulation by a food company, what do you think their impression might be? I am certain they would be happy with either burger, grateful in fact.

Just to be clear, the Canadian beef industry is just part of the Canadian food scene. Canada is the world leader in food waste at 40 per cent and we pay the least for food.

Canadians eat $6.8 billion more of imported processed or value-added food than we export and we continue to ship 60 per cent of all our food out of country for further processing before bringing it back again. Food processing in Canada is a greater contributor to GDP than oil and gas, employs more people than manufacturing and beef remains the weakest point in all processing. Like wheat that goes to Italy, Canadian cattlemen still ship live cattle, not beef, to the U.S. When it comes to offering a menu, it is up to food companies to respond to the expressed desires and needs of their clientele. It may offend a producer, but there are more customers than there are cattlemen and the idea is to keep customers coming through the door. As an industry, Canadian beef leaders and producers need to move beyond the stale argument to create opportunities for further value adding within the country and promote the continuous support of unique opportunities to our youth throughout the beef industry. There are good farmers and good companies both doing great things for agriculture.

To live in Canada is to live in a society of privilege.

Agriculture contributes and keeps our rural communities alive and sets the stage for our future generations. At the end of the day the beef industry prospers and these long-standing farms and communities give our children something very special, it gives them choice. c Contact Brenda through her website: www.brendaschoepp.com.

All rights reserved. Brenda Schoepp

www.canadiancattlemen.ca

and Canfax Research Services, divisions of the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association

BeefWatch

 The U.S. herd is expanding, while the Canadian beef cattle herd has stabilized. Cattle prices have peaked and producers are now watching to see how far and how fast prices will drop with more pounds of protein available in North America. This will be largely determined by domestic and international demand, which were very strong in 2015, but could soften in 2016. It will be necessary to watch margins carefully and control costs as expansion occurs.

CATTLE INVENTORIES Canadian beef cow inventories stable Canadian cattle inventories on January 1, 2016 were up 0.3 per cent at 12.0 million head, the first increase since January 2013. The slight increase is driven by higher heifer retention and calf numbers, while beef cow inventories remained steady, and steer and feeder heifers for slaughter were down.

Beef cow inventories were steady, with last year at 3.83 million head. This is the first year without a decline in beef cow herd since 2006. Alberta (+0.8 per cent) and British Columbia (+1.8 per cent) saw larger beef cow numbers while other provinces were down 0.4-2.5 per cent. With cow marketings down 19 per cent in 2015, it was anticipated that beef cow numbers would be up 1.0 to 2.0 per cent. While the increase did not show up in this January report, the steady numbers at least indicate a stable beef cow herd for the first time in 10 years.

Stronger evidence of expansion is shown in heifer retention. Beef heifers held for breeding were up 4.0 per cent at 547,300 head, the highest number since 2008. Interest in expansion was shown in most provinces, with Alberta up 5.2 per cent, Saskatchewan 4.6 per cent, Manitoba 3.4 per cent, Quebec 1.4 per cent, British Columbia 1.2 per cent and Ontario 0.2 per cent. The only exception was the Atlantic provinces, which were down 4.5 per cent.

Canadian Cattle Inventories January 1 (1,000 head) 2015

2016

16 vs. 15

221.8

213.3

0.2%

3,831.2

3,829.6

0.0%

Bulls Beef cows Dairy cows

954.2

959.6

0.6%

Dairy heifers

444.6

444.8

0.0%

Beef heifers (brdng)

526.5

547.3

4.0%

Beef heifers (sltr)

920.9

910.1

-1.2%

Steers

1,179.8

1,171.7

-0.7%

Calves

3,850.0

3,883.6

0.9%

Total

11,920.0

11,960.0

0.3%

Source: Statistics Canada

www.canadiancattlemen.ca

Combining the beef cows and breeding heifer inventories, total breeding female numbers are up 0.4 per cent or 19,200 head. Heifers represent 14.3 per cent of the breeding herd, up slightly from 13.7 per cent last year. A larger breeding herd is expected to result in a larger calf crop this spring and support production moving forward. Profits in the cow-calf sector in 2015 should support more robust heifer retention in 2016, if weather co-operates. However, this is expected to be tempered by lower fed cattle prices and market volatility.

Feeder and calf supplies outside of feedlots were up slightly by 0.2 per cent or 10,000 head at 4.05 million head, but remain 3.0 per cent or 144,000 head lower than 2014. These are the second-lowest numbers since 2011, meaning feeder supplies remain tight. The 2015 calf crop is up 0.9 per cent head at 3.88 million head. A slightly larger calf crop coupled with the sharp decline in feeder exports since September 2015 should support fed cattle marketings in 2016. However, after seeing an extremely strong feeder basis from September 2015 through February 2016 discouraging feeder exports, a move back to the fiveyear average has seen more feeders going south in March.

U.S. herd expansion increasing production U.S. cattle inventories on January 1 were up for the second year to 92 million head, up 3.2 per cent or 2.8 million head from 2015. This is the largest year-over-year increase since 1981, as producers quickly restock following liquidation during the drought years. However, total inventories remain one per cent smaller than 2011 and are anticipated to see further growth in 2016, though at a slower pace as prices experienced a sharp correction this winter.

Beef cow numbers increased 3.5 per cent or one million head to 30.3 million head, the highest level since 2011.

Beef replacement heifers were up 3.3 per cent or 198,800 head to 6.3 million head, the highest since 1995. Although the increase in breeding female numbers has been sharp, Continued on page 32

 Canadian beef heifers (breeding) January 1 900 800 Million head

Beef Watch is prepared by the staff of Canfax

700 600 500 400

76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 98 00 02 04 06 08 10

12

14 16

Source: Statistics Canada

C a t t l e m e n · may 2 0 1 6

31

BeefWatch Continued from page 31

lower cattle prices and margins at the end of 2015 will likely slow expansion. U.S. beef cow slaughter is up 1.4 per cent in the first quarter of 2016. There are already weather concerns in some regions, which may slow growth further.

The 2015 calf crop was up 2.3 per cent at 34.3 million head, and feeders outside of feedlots were up 5.3 per cent at 25.9 million head. U.S. cattle on feed March 1 were up a modest 0.8 per cent from 2015 and 0.5 per cent from 2014. However, the number of cattle on feed for four months or longer was up 3.4 per cent from 2015 and up 17.4 per cent from 2014. In addition, carcass weights continue to be large. Steer carcass weights this spring have averaged 15 lbs. larger than last year, but jumped from 12 lbs. to 25 lbs. heavier in March. Overall, we are looking at larger U.S. beef production in 2016.

As production starts to increase in the U.S., prices will be pressured down. How quickly prices drop will depend not only on how fast supplies increase, but on how consumer demand holds up domestically and internationally.

Canadian beef production steady to higher in 2016 Total beef production (domestic slaughter and live slaughter exports) dropped nine per cent in 2015 to 2.7 million pounds (1.24 thousand tonnes) to be the lowest since 1994. Packers were successful in keeping cattle in Canada last year, with domestic production down only 3.3 per cent, while live slaughter exports were down 32 per cent. This larger proportion of cattle being processed in Canada, along with a lower dollar, supported beef exports. This was in stark contrast to the U.S., where beef exports fell 12 per cent in 2015.

Domestic beef production in the first quarter of 2016 is up 2.0 per cent and is anticipated to be steady to slightly higher for the year, despite fed cattle marketings being down 7.0 per cent in the first quarter. Fed beef production U.S. Cattle Inventories January 1 (1,000 head) 2016 Total cattle All cows

2015

% of Yr. ago

91,988

89,143

103%

39,646.2

38,609.0

103%

is only down 0.7 per cent with record-large carcass weights. Steer carcass weights have averaged 939 lbs. this spring, up a staggering 60 lbs. from last year. A mild winter and strong animal performance has contributed to the larger weights that are adding to production.

Cow marketings steady in Q1 2016 In 2015, record-high cattle prices were sending signals for herd expansion, as many producers have rebuilt equity and invested in infrastructure over the last couple of years.

Canadian cow marketings in 2015 were down 19 per cent overall, with domestic slaughter down 15 per cent and exports down 26 per cent. The Canadian beef cow culling rate dropped in 2015 to 10.6 per cent; while this is below the longterm average of 11 per cent, the chart indicates this is fairly modest in terms of expansion. In 1994 the rate was at 9.0 per cent, while in 1999 and 2000 it was 8.4-9.5 per cent. In fact, the rate was around 10 per cent as recently as 2012 when the herd was stabilizing. A further drop in cow marketings combined with larger heifer retention is needed to move expansion into high gear. However, that does not appear to be happening in 2016. Cow marketings show no sign of slowing down with cow slaughter up 6.0 per cent (6,500 head) and exports down 10 per cent (or 5,300 head) year to date.

Alberta D1,2 cow prices so far in 2016 have traded narrowly between $103-$110/cwt, 16-29 per cent below last year. Large supplies of imported lean manufacturing beef into North America last year are weighing on the cow market. In addition, it appears cows were fed over the winter supporting current slaughter numbers.

Minimal snow cover in Western Canada has producers watching for timely rains this spring, not only for crop germination, but also pasture conditions. This will be particularly noticeable in those areas that were dry last summer.

PRICES AND Profitability While the U.S. market peaked in November 2014, the Canadian market was supported by a lower exchange rate throughout last year. In 2015, Alberta fed steer prices were up 19 per cent at $183/cwt, 850-lb. steers were up 22 per

Beef cows

30,330.8

29,302.1

104%

Dairy cows

9,315.4.0

9,306.9

100%

Heifers >500 lbs.

19,822.3

19,261.2

103%

975

Beef rep. heifers

6,285.2

6,086.4

103%

950

Dairy rep. heifers

4,824.0

4,710.4

102%

925

8,713.1

8,464.4

103%

16,320.4

15,629.5

104%

Bulls >500 lbs.

2,142.4

2,109.4

102%

Pounds

Other heifers Steers >500 lbs.

ď ľ canadian weekly steer carcass weights

850

14,056.7

13,533.9

104%

825

34,301.7

33,522.0

102%

800

Cattle on feed (all sizes)

13,177.0

13,100.0

101%

C a t t l e m e n ¡ m ay 2 0 1 6

2016

875

Calves <500 lbs.

32

2015

900

Calf crop

Source: USDA

2014

1

7

13

19

25

31

37

43

49

Source: CBGA

www.canadiancattlemen.ca

BeefWatch cent at $243/cwt, 550-lb. steers were up 25 per cent at $305/cwt and D1,2 cows were up 19 per cent at $132/cwt.

Cash margins for feedlots turned negative in September 2015, pressuring calf prices throughout the fall run. Alberta 550-lb. steer calves made a low of $252/cwt in December, before rebounding in the new year, but have fallen again in March to average $252/cwt. As the shine came off prices in the fourth quarter of 2015, many producers felt the impact.

It is easy to get used to those record-high prices. Cowcalf producers continue to enjoy record-high profitability, but producers should be watching margins and controlling costs moving forward. Investments in expensive breeding stock can impact cost of production for years to come.

Cattle prices have moved lower this spring, when we typically see a spring rally, as the dollar has moved from 69 cents in early January to 77 cents in March. This is concerning but does not yet call for a counter-seasonal market. The U.S. fed cattle market has ranged between US$132-$139/cwt, with the exchange rate being the major driver for the Canadian market so far in 2016. Despite cut-out values averaging only 3.0 per cent below last year, Alberta fed cattle prices have averaged 10 per cent below 2015 as packers have regained some leverage and margin. A loss of leverage in the cow-calf and feedlot sectors is one of the first things that occurs when the market turns. This contributed to the large price drops in the fourth quarter, but may mean that the largest declines are behind us.

Fifty per cent trim has been a roller-coaster this spring, adding to the volatility in the fed cattle market. Recordlarge carcass weights contributed to excessive volumes all winter, keeping pressure on prices, which dropped to $53/ cwt in December the lowest prices since March 2008.

However, a significant adjustment occurred in March with prices rebounding to $110/cwt to be steady with last year. Continued large carcass weights will see continued uncertainty in the 50 per cent trim and fed cattle market.

Replacement Ratios Replacement ratios show how much higher feeder cattle prices are per pound of fed cattle. The lower the ratio, the fewer dollars a feedlot needs to replace an animal. Conversely, a high ratio implies the feedlot  canadian beef cow culling rate

must pay more per pound to replace an animal.

Consequently, a higher ratio has negative implications on feedlot profitability, if feed costs are constant.

Replacement ratios peaked in the third quarter of 2015 and have since dropped back to levels similar to lower than last year in the first quarter of 2016.

In addition to lower cattle costs, feed prices have softened with the U.S. corn-planting intentions surprisingly large at 93.6 million acres compared to pre-report estimates of 89-91 million acres. Now, a lot can and will happen with acres planted as farmers adjust plans, but at this point it appears there will be ample feed in 2016, pressuring prices lower. However, all of that pressure is coming from the U.S. as Canadian barley production is projected to increase a modest 2.0 per cent to 8.4 million tonnes.

In March, Lethbridge barley prices were up 3.0 per cent from last year at C$213/tonne and Ontario corn was down 4.0 per cent at C$187/tonne, while Omaha corn prices were down 9.0 per cent at C$191/tonne (in barley equivalents or US$3.45/bu.). This widened Canada’s feeding disadvantage.

Demand remains strong Retail beef prices stabilized in the second half of 2015 and have been steady since. Per capita consumption is projected to be down 4.5 per cent. The Retail Beef Demand Index is an indicator of consumer willingness to pay by evaluating per capita consumption and deflated retail prices. Since 2011, the index has rebounded from the low made following the global financial crisis, and is projected to be up 7.0 per cent in 2015 to 124 (Index 2000=100). This is the strongest demand in 25 years, since 1989. The uptrend of the demand index in the past five years shows that beef demand has been resilient to high prices, but it remains uncertain how demand will hold up in 2016 with larger pork and poultry supplies.

Nominal retail beef prices in 2015 averaged $19.67/ kg, up 15 per cent from 2014, while pork was up 12 per cent at $13.50/kg and chicken up 5.0 per cent at Continued on page 34

 projected break-even vs. market price $220

18%

20-yr. average = 11%

16% 14%

Break-even

Cash

Hedgeable

$190 Cnd $ per cwt

12% 10% 8% 6%

$180 $170 $160 $150 $140 $130 $120

4% 2%

www.canadiancattlemen.ca

Jul-16

Apr-16

Jan-16

Oct-15

Jul-15

Apr-15

Jan-15

Oct-14

Jul-14

Apr-14

13

10

07

04

01

98

95

92

89

86

83

Source: Canfax Research

Jan-14

$110 $100 80

0%

YEARLING STEER

$210 $200

Source: Canfax, Trends West

C a t t l e m e n · may 2 0 1 6

33

BeefWatch Continued from page 33

Replacement Price Ratio

(Replacement cattle price divided by slaughter price)

$7.61/kg. Beef has increased from being two times the price of poultry (historic average), to being 2.75 times the price of poultry in February 2016. But consumers are not turning to poultry. Per capita poultry consumption has been stable since 2001 around 37 kgs/person. Given the saturated poultry market, consumers are looking at alternative protein options like Greek yogurt and hummus. Another option is pork. Throughout 2015, beef remained at the historic average of 1.4 times the price of pork, but as pork prices came down in 2016, this has increased to 1.6 times the prices of pork in February 2016.

The International Demand Index for Canadian beef has been supported by a lower exchange rate, as well as the economic recovery in the U.S. and strong demand from China, which supported exports last year. International demand was up 13 per cent in 2015. Beef exports in 2015 were up 1.0 per cent in volume at 322,000 tonnes and 15 per cent in value at $2.2 billion. In contrast to the U.S., where a strong dollar and disruptions at West Coast ports reduced exports in 2015, a weaker Canadian dollar and direct access to mainland China supported Canadian beef exports. In the first half of 2015, Chinese official’s anti-smuggling campaign to reduce grey channel pork imports also reduced volumes of beef through the grey channel. Canada was able to quickly redirect trade through official channels directly to mainland China. Consequently, China became the second-largest market for Canadian beef in 2015. However, total exports to the Asian region were steady as China pulled product previously going to other countries. The U.S. remains Canada’s top market, accounting for 71.4 per cent of total beef exports, followed by mainland China (10 per cent), Mexico (6.0 per cent), Japan (4.5 per cent), and Hong Kong (3.3 per cent).

From January to February 2016 beef exports were up 6.0 per cent in volume but down 3.0 per cent in value as the higher Canadian dollar impacted values.

Volumes were up to the United States (9.7 per cent), Hong Kong (32 per cent), China (36 per cent), Japan (7.7 per cent) and South Korea (25 per cent).  Alberta Fed Steer price vs. AAA cut-out value 2014

$210

2015

YEAR

Steer calves (5-6)

Yearling heifer (6-7)

Yearling steers (7-8)

Shortkeep steers (8-9)

Q1 EAST

1.14

1.29

1.09

1.16

1.1 3

WEST

1.32

1.45

1.20

1.26

1.18

Q2 EAST

1.35

1.43

1.27

1.28

1.20

WEST

1.42

1.53

1.32

1.34

1.23

Q3 EAST

1.52

1.61

1.35

1.37

1.33

WEST

1.58

1.58

1.37

1.39

1.32

Q4 EAST

1.58

1.62

1.37

1.40

1.35

WEST

1.67

1.64

1.41

1.42

1.35

Q1 EAST

1.39

1.5 1

1.32

1.24

1.24

WEST

1.59

1.61

1.35

1.34

1.25

Q2 EAST

1.53

1.5 9

1.40

1.38

1.27

WEST

1.60

1.62

1.37

1.37

1.25

Q3 EAST

1.61

1.65

1.44*

1.42

1.35

WEST

1.72*

1.75*

1.52*

1.52*

1.43*

Q4 EAST

1.64*

1.67*

1.39

1.43*

1.37*

WEST

1.65

1.64

1.40

1.43

1.37

Q1 EAST

1.39

1.48

1.25

1.30

1.23

WEST

1.45

1.53

1.25

1.27

1.19

2015

2016

* Record highs, east and west

 retail beef prices

2016

2014

$21

2015

2016

$20

$190 $180

$19

$170

$18

$/kg

Cdn $/cwt

Heifer calves (4-5)

2014

$200

$160 $150

$17 $16

$140 $130

$15

$120 1

6

11

16

21

26

Source: Canfax

34

QUARTER

C a t t l e m e n · may 2 0 1 6

31

36

41

46

51

$14

J

F

M

A

M

J

J

A

S

O

N

D

Source: Statistics Canada

www.canadiancattlemen.ca

 Holistic R a nc hi ng

By Don Campbell

happy trails

M

y first article in Cattlemen appeared 13 years ago in March 2003 under the title Holis­tic Ranching. I was eager to write but I was also pretty nervous and green at that time. I will be 72 in May and have decided that now is an appropriate time to stop writing. This decision is largely due to the influence of my father (whom I greatly admire). His advice and example was simple. Be involved in things you feel are important. Quit when you are still capable and doing a good job.

I remember the circumstances that led to my opportunity to write. I was giving a presentation at the Manitoba Grazing School.

Gren Winslow the editor of Cattlemen happened to sit in on my talk. After I was done Gren approached me and asked if I would be interested in writing for Cattlemen. I was honoured and agreed immediately.

I want to publicly thank Gren for the opportunity he gave me. He asked me to focus on grazing management but in reality he gave me free rein to write about any topic. Thank you Gren.

I want to offer a sincere thank you to everyone who has taken the time to read my articles. Without your support my writing career would have been short lived. I enjoyed writing for you. If you enjoyed reading the articles we have had a win/win relationship. I am thankful for that. I want to offer a special thank you to those of you who took the time to contact me. I always enjoyed interacting with you. Thank you. One of the rewards of

writing has been the number of fine people I have met who say, “Oh I know you. I read your articles in Cattlemen.” To these people I say thank you for reading, and thank you for introducing yourself. I enjoyed meeting and visiting with you.

Since this is my last article I will summarize what H M has helped me accomplish. I firmly believe H M can help you do similar things.

Personal Benefits

H M has helped me become a better person. I am better than I used to be but not as good as I am going to be. H M encouraged me to embark on a journey of lifelong learning. The good books I have read and the good people I have met have helped me grow. As I have become a better person I have become more successful in all areas of my life. Please note I am not talking about how good I am, only that I am better than I used to be.

H M has helped us improve our land and grass management practices. Our management has been focused on improving the ecosystem building blocks (energy flow, water cycle, mineral cycle and succession) for 25 years now. The results have been outstanding. We have more than doubled our capability to grow grass on a set land base and we have become more resistant to both droughts and floods.

Holistic financial planning has helped us build a strong, stable and profitable business. We spend our money more wisely. We are always working in the future. We project

our financial plan out for a full year or more.

We plan for the profit we desire before the year begins. If things go off track as they sometimes do, we are able to replan which allows us to achieve our planned profit. All of these steps have led to increased confidence and less stress. We are in charge. We make it happen.

H M has given Bev and I the wonderful opportunity to ranch with our two sons and their families. Without H M we might have had one son at home, there is no way we would have had both. The goal setting, the communication, the grazing and the financial planning have led to this opportunity. Ranching with your children is one of the highlights of life.

H M has helped us have a better quality of life. The goal setting has helped us identify our deepest desires. We are constantly making decisions towards our goal. The result has been contentment, more peace and happiness. Life is good. We are living our dream.

We are creating the future we desire.

I realize that my desires and dreams are different from yours. H M has helped us identify and live our dreams. H M can help you identify and live yours. I invite you to investigate H M. I believe you will be pleased with the results.

Happy trails. c Don Campbell ranches with his family at Meadow Lake, Sask., and teaches Holistic Management courses. He can be reached at 306-236-6088 or doncampbell@sasktel.net.

BKT Tires (CANADA) Inc.

Tel: AG/IND 905-641-5636 AG/IND 604-701-9098

www.canadiancattlemen.ca

C a t t l e m e n · m ay 2 0 1 6 35

 Free Mar k et R e flect i o n s

By Steve Dittmer

Health battles heating up

I

n 2014, I was fortunate to speak to Canadian cattle people at the International Livestock Congress in Calgary. I held up a new book, and suggested reading and digesting it, as it held the keys to rescuing our industry from the clutches of 50 years of erroneous dietary-health theory.

The book, The Big Fat Surprise: Why Butter, Meat and Cheese Belong in a Healthy Diet, explained how the low-fat, high-carbohydrate, fewer animal products theory came to be, based on faulty science and big political influence. It is a scathing indictment of the nutrition and medical community, as well as the U.S. government’s role in propagating these dietary theories.

Nina Teicholz spent nine years researching the book. Once it was circulating, she began warning animal agriculture about the next set of Dietary Guidelines being finalized (2015). Her information was that this Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (DGAC) was very radical and was actually considering more restrictions or even eliminating red meat in the Guidelines.

The U.S. Dietary Guidelines are a collaboration every five years between the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Health and Human Services department. A new DGAC is appointed for every set, and are supposedly health and nutrition experts.

In reality, many are, but some are activists and radicals more interested in advancing pet health theories, masters at ignoring some science while touting other science.

This DGAC, a nutrition and health panel, actually made recommendations against animal agriculture products based on supposed environmental impact, something the secretaries of the two departments agreed to quash.

The elephant in the room is that since the Guidelines have been adopted, the American population has trended to obesity and diabetes, with nearly half the adult population suffering from one or both.

The high-carb, low-fat, fewer animal products establishment in the nutrition and health community and government

36

C a t t l e m e n · M ay 2 0 1 6

responded with high indignation to Nina’s book. But they figured after selling some books and stirring us cowboys up — Nina typically gets standing ovations at cattle conventions — she would go away.

Not so Nina.

Last fall she wrote a well-researched, peer-reviewed article for TheBMJ, formerly the British Medical Journal. The article examined the shaky and/or nonexistent scientific underpinnings of current and past Dietary Guidelines. She exposed how the 2015 DGAC manipulated the studies on which their report would be based, including certain studies and excluding extensive studies investigating the inefficacies of high-carb, low-fat diets or the lack of correlation between higher-fat, especially saturated fat diets and obesity, heart disease and cancer.

Stunned at their exposure, the 2015 committee and defenders of the highcarb, low-fat establishment went ballistic, 180 of them signing a letter requesting TheBMJ retract the article, objecting to alleged inaccuracies.

Teicholz responded with a peer reviewed rebuttal that mainly served to further expose the hypocrisy of the Guidelines process and its perpetrators. TheBMJ published only one correction, which turned out to be more about semantics and risk interpretation than fact. All of the rest of the article, over 700 points of fact according to Teicholz, has stood.

Another criticism of the article dealt with whether the DGAC should directly review some of the largest government studies on saturated fats involving thousands of people for up to 12 years or rely on someone else’s analysis. No DGAC has examined them directly. Other studies examined in 2010 were small studies meeting substandard, weak inclusion data.

In fact, most of the furor really involves whether certain studies should “count,” how they were conducted, why other studies should be ignored and what was being measured or counted.

When the annual Nutrition Policy Conference announced its convention program, with a nutrition policy panel

discussion including Nina Teicholz, the establishment reacted. Other panel members, Barbara Millen, chairman of the 2015 DGAC; Margo Wooten, of the Center for Science in the Public Interest — a food activist group that organized TheBMJ retraction letter — and Angie Tagtow, executive director, USDA Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion, according to the conference organizer, refused to participate if Teicholz did. So Teicholz was removed.

When word got out, the nutrition and health professionals aware of the “other” studies and tired of policy based on only some of the science leavened with political correctness, responded. Within days, some 4,000 people signed an online petition to reinstate Teicholz on the panel.

The conference organizer demurred.

But Nina’s no wallflower. She’s part of a new Nutrition Coalition, nutrition and health professionals dedicated to seeing policy based on all the solid science, not just some science and poor science.

The day before the Nutrition Policy conference, Teicholz and several nutrition researchers and clinical practitioners held their own news conference and webinar regarding the “other” science.

Perhaps most striking, was the explanation of the clinical diet and health practitioners that the Guidelines would literally make their obese, pre-diabetic and diabetic patients sicker.

The bottom line: we, the red meat industry, have a fight on our hands. This war will take time and effort. But that’s so much better than being assumed through conventional “wisdom” that we are a nutrition and health liability. We have leadership like Teicholz and a growing list of professionals tired of poor advice and cognizant of a growing body of evidence showing we are part of the solution, not the problem. c Steve Dittmer is the CEO of Agribusiness Freedom Foundation, a non-profit group promoting free market principles throughout the food chain. He can be reached at steve@agfreedom.ag.

www.canadiancattlemen.ca

BUILDING TRUST IN CANADIAN BEEF

Insider tips for loading cattle effectively Advice and a wake-up call for all cattle handlers

There aren’t many things in cattle transportation that Rick Sincennes hasn’t seen in his more than 30 years as a trucker. As a cattlehandling trainer he teaches proper loading techniques. As an industry advocate he has helped develop today’s industry standards.

With transportation so prominent these days, here’s his take on the key things needed to load and transport cattle properly.

Know cattle behaviour. It’s probably the most important step in loading a trailer.

“Know the animal flight zones,” says Sincennes. “If you stand at the edge of the chute and lean over, you push cattle back. If you follow cattle up the chute and walk alongside, you may think you’re chasing them but you’re actually holding everything behind you back.”

Also, cattle will not enter a trailer easily if there is a layer of liquid on the floor. They don’t know how deep it is.

Know the type of cattle. The type of cattle — beef, dairy, cull animals — and the weight of the animals are the first steps to ease of loading. A good knowledge of the size and height of compartments in a trailer is critical. Animals should be able to stand in a natural position without making contact with the roof.

Cull cows will not be as strong and will need room and proper bedding to lie down. “If you have loaded at too high a density and animals go down it is very difficult to manage.”

Density matters. Loading dairy and cull cattle at the same density as stronger cattle is a mistake. Dairy cattle are usually taller than beef cattle and need special consideration for where they go in a trailer. Sometimes a different trailer is needed.

Drivers have to know compartment sizes and heights to load at proper density, says Rick Sincennes of Picture Butte, Alta.

“There’s a huge difference between a 25-foot compartment and one that is two feet shorter,” says Sincennes.

Shippers need to step up. Truckers load in many different situations where they are not able to get a good read on the cattle being loaded. “In those cases we are completely at the mercy of the shipper,” says Sincennes. “We need to be able to trust that the shipper has a good knowledge of what we and cattle face.”

Push for industry improvements.

The cattle industry has made significant improvements over the past 20 years, but continual improvements are needed. One is more cleanouts. Another is easier-to-read density charts for quick reference by truck-

ers in real-world situations, especially for newer drivers.

You can be charged

While there is much to be celebrated in terms of transportation industry improvements, there are still those who shirk responsibility. There are some who feel when an animal moves on to the next stage of transport that the potential problems move with it, but anyone involved with the load can be held responsible.

“The reality is that people involved in transporting cattle need to understand they can be charged for poor handling of animals,” says Sincennes. “The world is watching how we do things.”

DEVELOPED BY PRODUCERS. DEVELOPED FOR CONSUMERS

THE TOP BRAND IN PAIN RELIEF.

When your cattle are in pain, there’s only one brand you can trust.

Metacam® is Canada’s #1* long-lasting pain reliever for cattle for a reason. It controls pain and reduces inflammation.

Choose the pain relief that’s good for your cattle and good for your operation. Choose Metacam. *ImpactVet 2015 Metacam is a registered trademark of Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH. ©2015 Boehringer Ingelheim (Canada) Ltd. For more information, visit MetacamCattle.ca.

 vet aDvi c e

exploring the theory that not all pathogens are bad

A

s a veterinarian, I wondered for many years if animals and humans could function normally in an environment free of pathogens, free of stress and devoid of all things considered harmful. What might the balance be between not enough and too much? Are city kids raised in a semi-sterile milieu advantaged or disadvantaged compared to those of us raised around animals in contact with cow chips and guano every day?

What evolutionary role does hygiene play in kids who frolic in farmyard dirt versus those attending unsoiled daycares?

According to the hygiene hypothesis, the decreasing incidence of infections in western society and, more recently, in developing countries may be the source of increasing levels of autoimmune and allergic diseases. Lifestyle changes in industrialized countries led to a decrease in infectious burden, and resulted in the inadvertent escalation of allergic and autoimmune diseases, including Type 1 diabetes (T1D), multiple sclerosis (MS), atopic dermatitis, and Crohn’s disease.

Data demonstrates that people migrating from countries with a low-incidence of immune-based diseases to countries with a high incidence of immune disorders acquire new immune-based illnesses within the first generation following relocation.

D.P. Strachan, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine proposed the “hygiene hypothesis” in 1989. He observed an inverse correlation between hay fever in older siblings from British families reporting respiratory infections when young. The leading idea at the time: some infectious agents are able to protect against a large spectrum of immune-related disorders. Although the causal link between acquired immune disorders and the decline of infectious diseases remains in question, animal studies demonstrate quite clearly that the hygiene hypothesis does exist in nature.

Underlying mechanisms attributable to the hygiene hypothesis are multiple and very complex. They arise from changes in populations of microbes and parasites in both animals and humans — some concurrently; changes in lifestyle; and the constant, intricate regulation of the human immune system. Taken together, the bits and pieces we begin to understand about the hygiene hypothesis opens new therapeutic perspectives in preventing and treating autoimmune and allergic diseases.

Five decades ago, researchers first began to find evidence of an upside to parasitism. People in Nigeria had lower levels of arthritis and other immune-related diseases than people in Britain. Researchers suggested that chronic infection with intestinal worms and other parasites moderated the immune system in Nigerians, reducing the risk that the body’s own tissues would be attacked.

The prevalence of atopic dermatitis has doubled or tripled in industrialized countries during the past three decades, affecting 15 to 30 per cent of children and two to10 per cent of adults. In parallel, there is an increase in the prevalence of autoimmune diseases like T1D, which now occurs earlier in life than in the past, and is becoming a serious public health problem in some European countries. The incidence of inflammatory bowel diseases like Crohn’s disease is also rising.

A number of experiments indicate that infectious agents can promote protection from allergic diseases. This has been demonstrated in experimental models of genetically modified mice highly susceptible to T1D. Treatment of mice with specific immune agonists

38

C a t t l e m e n · M ay 2 0 1 6

completely prevented the progression of diabetes. Similar data has been observed in asthma models. The prevalence of atopic diseases in childhood (asthma, allergic rhinitis, and atopic dermatitis) is reduced in families exposed to Hepatitis A virus.

Public health measures introduced to limit the spread of infectious disease after the industrial revolution in western countries predestined the rise of immune-based illnesses.

Proponents of the hygiene hypothesis contend measures like decontamination of the water supply, pasteurization and sterilization of milk and other food products, respect for cold chain procedures, vaccination against common childhood infections and the wide use of antibiotics had a role to play. It’s paradoxical that important public health initiatives that save millions from the ravages of serious disease every year opened the door for a plague of allergies and autoimmune issues.

In countries where good health standards do not exist, there is an inverse relationship between the prevalence of soil-transmitted helminthes and the prevalence of allergic diseases.

Conservation biologists contend that parasites of endangered hosts should be conserved as part of their host’s natural environment. Parasitic exposure might be crucial to the host’s development of a fully functional immune system and its survival.

“We’re trying to find elegant ways to spread the message that parasites are very important parts of ecosystems,” said Andres Gomez, an ecologist and veterinarian at Columbia University and the American Museum of Natural History.

Not surprisingly, many people fail to share his view. According to Gomez, parasite conservation presents a critical conundrum: to conserve bloodsuckers and disease spreaders is to explicitly conserve death and sickness. In nature, this is a normal part of a functioning ecosystem, but for human society and health, the trade-offs don’t work.

The notion of a hygiene hypothesis opens new, interesting, therapeutic perspectives for the prevention of allergic and autoimmune diseases. Introducing infectious agents into children or adults at high risk of developing autoimmune diseases cannot be envisioned.

However, some groups are using live swine parasites (T. suis) in the prevention of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), or living probiotic (Lactobacilli) in prevention of atopic dermatitis. The use of bacterial extracts has already shown to be efficacious in a number of experimental models for Type 1 diabetes.

Through millions of years of evolution our bodies maintained a tricky balance. We depended on a powerful immune system to fight deadly infections, yet selective enough to prevent the indiscriminate attack on beneficial bacteria, or tissue through relentless inflammation.

The hygiene hypothesis, maintains our ancestors tolerated low levels of infection and depended on parasites to support development of the immune system. According to Gomez, “Our relationship with parasites is a complicated trade-off. If all parasites disappeared tomorrow, we’d have a teetering ecological house of cards ready to crumble.” c Dr. Ron Clarke prepares this column on behalf of the Western Canadian Association of Bovine Practitioners. Suggestions for future articles can be sent to Canadian Cattlemen (gren@fbcpublishing.com) or WCABP (info@wcabp.com).

www.canadiancattlemen.ca

 prime cuts

By Steve Kay

Weak exports are a concern

M

exico and Canada in 2015 were, respectively, the No. 1 and No. 4 volume destinations for U.S. beef exports. So it’s no understatement to say that the integrated North American market is vital for the health of the U.S. cattle/beef industry. It thus came as something of a shock that exports the first two months of the year were so weak.

Exports to Mexico in January and February fell 18 per cent in volume (31,850 metric tons) and fell 28 per cent in value (US$143.4 million). Exports to Canada were down 11 per cent in volume (17,532 mt) and down 25 per cent in value (US$104.7 million). The U.S. Meat Export Federation, which compiles the data, gave no reason for the weakness in exports to Canada. But it made it clear that the weak Mexican peso offset any decline in U.S. prices.

Fortunately, export volumes were higher to most Asian markets and steady elsewhere. But they were not enough to offset the volume declines in North America.

Total February beef exports were 83,203 mt, up slightly from last year but their value dropped 18 per cent to US$437 million. January-February exports were up two per cent in volume (165,504 mt) from a year ago but fell 16 per cent in value to $$875.1 million. Indications were that volumes improved somewhat in March and April but that values remained depressed.

The meagre year-on-year growth in volume is probably more troubling that the value decline. The U.S. is producing more beef than last year so there’s more to sell on the domestic market than a year ago. That’s one reason why the weekly comprehensive beef cut-out (comprised of cuts and grinds) was running 13 per cent below last year in mid-April. But these lower prices did not stimulate the kind of increase in export volumes that packers had expected.

The lower export values in part reflect the lower prices. They might also reflect the product mix of exports, which can vary considerably from month to month. For example, a month of big sales of short ribs would bring a higher value for the month than if the big seller was short plates. Even the price of short ribs has declined from 2014, a reflection of how international trading conditions can affect wholesale beef prices.

USDA Choice short ribs averaged around US$5 per pound in 2014, going as high as US$5.50. But the price fell back to US$3.50 after Australia received a reduction in its export tariff in Japan. The price then recovered to US$4.25 to US$4.50 after Australian production declined sharply at the start of this year.

Meanwhile, the U.S. industry’s current preoccupation is over the grilling season, when Americans fire up their barbecues and buy their favourite steaks. Some market bulls had hoped the early Easter this year would mean grilling would start earlier and give a boost to retail beef demand. But April began as it always does, with only modest retail feature activity. It didn’t help that sizable parts of the country were still experiencing snow and blizzards.

As in past years, more aggressive retail featuring was likely only begun in the last week of the month.

One reason for the modest features in April was that boxed beef prices (cuts and grinds) ran up unexpectedly from mid-February until late March. This made it difficult for retailers to set aggressive features for April. Boxed beef prices by early April had declined sharply, which will allow retailers to feature beef more aggressively from the start of May into June. Cattle feeders hope this will mean an uptick in fed cattle prices, as they had fallen for two weeks in a row as April began. c

A North American view of the meat industry. Steve Kay is publisher and editor of Cattle Buyers Weekly.

 CCA repo rts

By Dan Darling

pressing issues

R

esearch plays an integral role in achieving a competitive Canadian beef sector. In addition to investment in research and research infrastructure, other key factors include fully funding programs that help producers manage risk, investing in infrastructure, securing access to high value and growing markets, Canada’s regulatory operating environment, and ensuring access to sufficient labour. The Canadian Cattlemen’s Association (CCA) has been continuously working in all of these areas to ensure the importance of having a competitive Canadian beef sector is well understood by the federal government.

As I write this column in early April, two of the most pressing issues on my mind are the need to replace critical beef and forage research infrastructure at the universities of Guelph and Saskatchewan, and the federal government’s approach to moving forward on traceability.

The CCA views the reinvigoration of both universities’ research facilities to be of the utmost importance to the long-term strength and success of Canada’s agriculture industry, the economy, and food security and to support the government’s objectives on combating climate change.

Over the past months, there has been much discussion with government and elected officials, including ministers, to follow up on industry funding submissions for these projects. More news on the future of these requests will hopefully be available by the time this column is published.

As many producers know, the Universities of Guelph and Saskatchewan are home to vitally important beef research institutions. These once flagship research facilities are in need of significant upgrading to remain compliant with today’s operating standards and to maintain critical research capacity going forward.

The Elora Beef Research Centre at the university of Guelph — considered by the Beef Cattle Research Council (BCRC) to be one of Canada’s best — is the only remaining facility in Central and Eastern Canada that has the capacity to do beef production research on a meaningful and integrated scale; encompassing everything from forage production, animal genetics, cattle production and feeding, to food safety and beef quality.

The University of Saskatchewan has the most comprehensive applied beef and forage research program in Canada. It encompasses forage and feed breeding and production, cattle genetics, cow-calf and feedlot production, veterinary medicine, and meat science.

A major commitment of producers’ checkoff dollars has been made as part of our industry application through provincial cattle associations to seek government funding for these projects. This is money well invested as research and teaching facilities like these will lead to significant benefits for the Canadian beef industry and the Canadian economy as a whole. Canada’s beef industry

40

C a t t l e m e n · M ay 2 0 1 6

is a key driver of the economy, contributing over $18.7 billion to Canada’s GDP and representing the secondlargest source of farm cash receipts in Canada in 2014.

The beef sector generates an estimated 228,000 jobs in Canada with every job within the sector yielding another 3.56 jobs elsewhere in the economy.

Also in April, I attended the Canadian Cattle Identification Agency annual general meeting and board meeting.

The proposed Traceability Regulation that the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) is developing is a serious concern, as the federal government’s current program concept varies greatly from the previously agreed-upon Cattle Implementation Plan (CIP). I expect there will be further meetings to discuss and hopefully resolve the gap between the CIP and CFIA’s current regulatory concept. In the meantime, CCA will be explaining that CFIA is planning to build a regulation that the industry cannot implement and remain competitively viable, as part of ongoing outreach activities in Ottawa with members of Parliament.

The CCA continues to focus on implementing the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and ensuring that technical conditions in Europe enable the Canada-EU Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) to live up to its potential for Canadian beef exports. As I write this, CCA vice-president David Haywood-Farmer and executive vice-president Dennis Laycraft were planning to accompany Agriculture and Agri-Food Minister Lawrence MacAulay on a mission to Japan and Korea in late April, and I was planning to participate in meetings in Brussels with International Trade Minister Chrystia Freeland. These missions are valuable to ensure industry issues are top of mind for the ministers.

Finally, I would like to encourage beef producers to complete the 2016 Census of Agriculture. The information captured by the census helps to inform much of the work the CCA does on behalf of industry. The census data is the anchor for cattle inventories, which are the base for production projections and monitoring the cattle cycle. This information in turn helps to inform business decisions to invest in the beef industry.

We know we are obligated by law to complete the census, but we should want to do it because ultimately, better data helps achieve better policies. The online survey has fewer questions and the process ensures it takes less time.

Producers will be asked about the adoption of technologies, direct marketing, succession planning and renewable energy production, but are no longer required to provide detailed farm expenses and other information such as place of residence, details on irrigated land, or the source and use of manure. The collection of this information has been tailored to our needs as an industry and keeping it up to date will benefit us all.

Until next time. c

Dan Darling is president of the Canadian Cattlemen’s Association

www.canadiancattlemen.ca

This Growing Season: Graze Grass Up As many graziers will attest, healthy forage makes for healthy pocketbooks.

As we head into the start of spring, it’s important to consider this year’s forage and pasture management strategy. For producers hoping to sow new fields, sourcing feed may be a hurdle this year, as some experts are forecasting rising prices in much of Canada. For those with well-established crops, this year might be the time to start thinking about increasing paddock numbers to promote healthy grasslands.

To start the spring off right, it’s important to have patience. There’s an old adage that for each day of grazing before pasture is ready, managers sacrifice three days of grazing in the fall. Ideally, livestock will be given pasture stockpiled specifically for spring use. The first grazing of other pastures should begin when there is at least six inches of growth.

CANADIAN FORAGE & GRASSLAND ASSOCIATION

www.canadianfga.ca

The Canadian Forage and Grasslands Association is online with a newly refreshed website and online resource.

Connect with CFGA on Twitter @CFGA_ACPF and on Facebook!

Using carrying capacity assessments of paddocks as a guide, producers can begin to hash out the season’s grazing plans, making sure to allow for sufficient rest periods. Rest periods allow plants to recover from the loss

of their shoots as well as their roots.

When plants are stressed by overgrazing or drought, rest periods will need to be lengthened, and, in severe cases, producers might need to consider destocking or finding other forage sources.

A well-managed pasture is an asset to any forage producer, providing an environment suitable to a diverse range of microorganisms, whose primary role is to break down fibre and other organic matter, and eventually create humus.

Healthy forage and pasture stands have a lower risk of erosion and compaction, increased nutrient storage, and better water infiltration and soil moisture capacity. In addition, healthy humus levels increase nutrient availability, lower leaching potential, absorb water and increase the oxygen in the soil.

If you decide this year you’re going to focus on soil improvement through grazing or harvesting strategies, make sure you evaluate the progress. Take soil tests. Document changes through repeat photos of the same area. The transition might just surprise you.

 TH E IN DUSTRY

NewsRoundup  PROJECTION DISTRIBUTION CANADIAN BEEF 2016

Beef to U.S. 25% Live exported feeder cattle 7% Live exported slaughter cows and bulls 8% Live exported slaughter cattle 10% Non-fed beef consumed in Canada 12% Fed beef consumed in Canada 31% Beef to rest of world 6% Beef to Mexico 1%

marketing

Assessing the first quarter — Inventories disappointing By Charlie Gracey

At the end of the first quarter the domestic steer slaughter was down 2.3 per cent while the domestic heifer slaughter was down 9.1 per cent. That doesn’t tell us much until we factor in live slaughter steer and heifer exports. The sex of fed cattle slaughter exports is not known until closer to yearend, so I apply the same percentage as was experienced in 2015. On that basis the total fed steer slaughter was up nearly 2.0 per cent while the fed heifer slaughter was down 4.4 per cent. Combined the total fed beef slaughter was down 0.5 per cent.

This, however, takes no account of carcass weights, which are up nearly 9.0 per cent on steers and 8.0 per cent on heifers. At the end of the first quarter domestic tonnage of fed beef was up 3.1 per cent, despite the decline in slaughter numbers and, when fed cattle exports are included total fed tonnage was up 9.2 per cent. Virtually all of this is due to increased carcass weights.

Because the ratio of cow to bull slaughter is rarely far from 11:1 one can estimate quite accurately that domestic and export cow, and bull slaughter was up 1.6 per cent to date. But due to a remarkable 15 per cent increase in carcass weights total non-fed tonnage was up 16 per cent.

The most remarkable trend to date is the sharp increase in carcass weights, an issue that should be of concern. If one checks the

beef carcass grading data to date one will note that the percentage of Y-1 carcasses has continued its long-term decline from 41.3 per cent to 35.4 per cent while the percentage of AAA and Prime carcasses has risen from 64.2 per cent to 69.2 per cent. Given the major influence that fat thickness has on yield there can be no doubt that most of the increase in carcass weight is fat. Increasing tonnage by increasing fat in carcasses may be a short-term answer to current tight supplies but it is not the right direction for an industry that should strive to produce high-quality and high-lean meat yield in the same carcass. So the decline in the supply of beef is masked by an increase in the tonnage of fat.

This increase in carcass weight means that commentary about future supply must carefully distinguish between “numbers” and “tonnage.” From the standpoint of longerterm productivity numbers is the more important consideration and it is now difficult to foresee any significant increase in numbers before 2018.

While it is now quite clear that the bottom of the cattle cycle has been reached the marketing numbers do not offer persuasive evidence of significant growth in the breeding herd. A 4.4 per cent decline in heifer marketings doesn’t do anything to offset a 1.6 per cent increase in cow culling.

So the inescapable conclusion is that herd growth is slower than I had previously expected (see The First Sign of Expansion, pg. 36, February 2016 Canadian Cattlemen).

One of the reasons for this is that feeder cattle

Bio Agri Mix LP (BAM) is pleased to announce that Barry Boghean has joined our Western sales team.

Barry was born and raised on a mixed farming operation in Southern Saskatchewan and started his career in the Alberta beef industry in 1984 before returning to Saskatchewan to manage a large feedlot in 2003. Barry will be well known to many in the Western livestock industry for his passion as a rodeo announcer. More recently, Barry was selling livestock feed products in Western Canada prior to joining BAM as of March 1, 2016.

Barry joins Lara Forchuk, Mike Paterson, Nick Korver, and Ron Henderson on BAM’s Western team and will primarily be responsible for supporting the Saskatchewan beef industry with products such as Monensin, Tylosin and Ractopamine. Barry can be contacted at (306) 625-7355 or boghean@bioagrimix.com.

BAM is Canada’s largest manufacturer and distributor of medicated feed additives and water soluble medications and is proudly Canadian.

bioagrimix.com

NEWS ROUNDUP

exports to the U.S. have, in recent years, been heavily tilted to heifers. In 2014 and 2015 heifers made up 71 per cent and 57 per cent, respectively, of total feeder cattle exports.

The slow projected growth in the national herd is a strong indication that beef output in 2017 will not be significantly larger than it has been in 2015, or is now projected for 2016. As stated above significant increases in supply, at least in numbers, cannot now be expected before 2018.

Disposition

The projected productive capacity of the industry in 2016 is 981,000 MT expressed on a retail weight basis. Productive capacity means the ultimate market weight of all the cattle marketed in the year. That includes the final market weight of exported feeder cattle because we are interested here in the productive capacity of the national herd and it matters not where the feeder cattle were finished.

The pattern of beef disposition is little changed. Approximately 43 per cent of that productive capacity will be consumed in Canada. A larger portion, almost exactly 50 per cent will be exported to the U.S., 18 per cent as live slaughter cattle, 7.0 per cent as feeder cattle and 25 per cent as beef. The remaining approximate 7.0 per cent will be exported to international markets.

A note of explanation about retail weight basis: most beef is now fabricated down as boxed beef or “retail ready.” International trade also occurs mainly on a fabricated basis. The average retail yield of a carcass is 73 per cent. This is the ratio now used to express per capita disappearance or consumption. Thus a 750-pound carcass fabricated to a retail basis becomes 547.5 pounds and/or 248.3 kilograms.

Charlie Gracey is an independent beef industry consultant living in Ontario.

Sustainability

Canadian Centre for Food Integrity kicks off

Farm & Food Care Canada (F&FC Canada) is on target with its year-one game plan culminating with the official kickoff of the Canadian Centre for Food Integrity (CFI) and a rundown on insights from Canada’s first public-trust research on farming and food during the Public Trust Summit at the end of this month in Ottawa.

The Canadian CFI is a division of F&FC Canada, which is a rebranding of the Farm & Food Care Foundation, a charitable organization formed five years ago. As an affiliate of the U.S. CFI, the Canadian CFI’s focus is on pubwww.canadiancattlemen.ca

lic-trust research, gathering intelligence and developing strategy, while F&FC Canada is the public face to put it all into action, explains F&FC Canada CEO Crystal Mackay. She took on the national job full time in January after looking after it part time along with her work for the Ontario F&FC. Public-trust research dives deeper than just monitoring trends by exploring the underlying beliefs and values that drive consumer behaviour and then wrap those insights into meaningful messages to build consumer con-

fidence in today’s farming practices and by extension the entire food chain.

That’s a big responsibility that needs a bigger voice so F&FC Canada, working with the Canadian CFI, intends to turn up the volume in a big way by involving farmers in all sectors and their associations, plus the companies that supply their agricultural inputs and services, as well as educators, processors, retailers and food-service companies.

Continued on page 44

Grow informed.

With the new web series: AGGronomyTV

AgCanada.com is proud to present this new informative web video series.

AGGronomyTV is a series of videos that covers today’s top issues related to soil management and crop production. Video topics include:  New Seeding Technology  Tire Performance

 Crop Suitability for

NW Saskatchewan  Plus more…

 4R Stewardship  Growing Soybeans

Scan the code or visit the website for more information

www.agcanada.com/aggronomytv Sponsored by

C a t t l e m e n · M ay 2 0 1 6

43

News Roundup STAMPEDE

By Jerry Palen

“Don’t you just love holidays like Mother’s Day, Flo?”

Continued from page 43

“It’s a new frontier — a whole-sector proactive approach with shared vision and investment in building public trust in food and farming,” says Mackay. “The more voices, physically and financially, the stronger and more credible we will be.”

Eight years in, the U.S. CFI, with its 150 members and research partners drawn from right across the food chain, is having an impact on the U.S. conversation about food and farming by targeting believable messages to people who genuinely want to learn more.

The U.S. CFI’s research says public confidence is the No. 1 driver of trust. It’s three to five times more important than competency because people are more likely to act on their feelings and beliefs than on what they know.

And the best way to instil confidence is by demonstrating values that align with consumers’ values.

It starts by listening to concerns and engaging with consumers online in places where farming and food conversations are happening. The key is to stay engaged once you get the conversation rolling because research shows that one negative message

that takes hold in the public’s mind neutralizes five positive ones. The goal isn’t to win an argument, but to win a friend, explained U.S. CFI’s CEO, Charlie Arnot, in a webinar hosted by F&FC Canada.

F&FC Canada is testing the public-trust model that’s been developed to be sure it’s the right formula for Canada. Public-trust research will be conducted annually and include the Canadian consumer tracking survey carried out by F&F Care Ontario every fourth year.

“We want to start with the end in mind by asking the public first before we decide where to spend our time and money,” Mackay explains.

The U.S. CFI’s 2014 research was focused on moms, millennials and foodies. Of the 17 societal concerns listed, rising food costs and having affordable and healthful food were among the top three check-box concerns for all groups.

Forty-two per cent said the food system is on the right track, while 30 per cent said it’s on the wrong track and 27 per cent were unsure. It’s significant that the percentage saying it’s on the right track was up eight per cent over the previous year.

Can you afford NOT to weigh your cattle?

You can’t manage what you can’t measure.

How does weighing your herd increase profit?

It replaces guess-work with facts, which means you can be precise when making key decisions. And, by making the right decisions on things like feed and health treatments, you maximize the return on your investment in each animal.

Hard work Made easy.

Let’s talk. www.tru-test.com Other Great Products from

44

C a t t l e m e n · M ay 2 0 1 6

800-874-8494

2571TTSM01 CAT NEWS

www.canadiancattlemen.ca

N EWS ROUNDUP

For the first time, websites, rather than local television, were the primary go-to source of information for food system issues.

Are Canadian moms, millennials and foodies thinking the same?

Are they looking for information in the same places?

It will be interesting to find out, says Mackay. This first 400-page report will be a lot to absorb.

Once it is presented at the summit, MacKay say the plan is to distribute the content in a series of webinars.

The group continues to circulate its flagship publication, The Real Dirt on Farming, and will be training messengers and seeking Canadian experts to join the 180 from the U.S. who answer consumer and media questions as a public service on www.bestfoodfacts.org.

It’s all part of F&FC Canada’s 25-year vision because, as MacKay puts it, you can’t advertise your way to trust.

REsearch

Intranasal vaccination could protect young calves from BRD

Bovine respiratory disease (BRD) is a major animal health problem in feedlot cattle. Presently, BRD makes up about 65 to 80 per cent of feedlot diseases and 45 to 75 per cent of deaths in many lots. The financial toll of BRD on North America’s cattle industry is more than $1 billion per year.

Previously, the most common vaccines used to control the occurrence of BRD were administered either subcutaneously or intramuscularly. In a recent study, Dr. Philip Griebel, from the University of

Join us...

Charting the Course SSGA

AGM & CONVENTION June 13 & 14, 2016

Conexus Arts Centre, Regina, SK

www.skstockgrowers.com

For details visit: www.skstockgrowers.com

Continued on page 47

Genex Is All In To Serve You PEOPLE:

s The Genex Team

LOGISTICS:

s Facility Design s Stockmanship s Cattle Handling

CHUTE-SIDE SERVICE:

s Full Service Breeding Project s Turn-key Synchronization and Arm Service s Well-trained Technicians

s Team of People

BENEFITS

TO YOU

THE MEMBER s Profitable Genetics s Logistics and Chute-side Service s Creating Pregnancies

For more information contact your local representative.

SYNCHRONIZATION & PRODUCTS:

s Consulting s Scheduling s A.I. Supplies & Equipment

GENETICS:

s Cow Sense & Science s Proven Genetics s GenChoice™

291 Woodlawn Road West, Guelph, ON N1H 7L6 (CAN) 888.354.4622 www.crinet.com genexcanada@crinet.com

©2016 CRI A-11349-16

CANADIAN HEREFORD ASSOCIATION

Make Your Decisions Profitable

Limousin Bank on the Carcass Breed

Canadian Limousin assoCiation

#13, 4101 – 19th Street N.E., Calgary, AB T2E 7C4 Phone: (403) 253-7309 Web site: www.limousin.com

5160 Skyline Way NE Calgary, Alberta T2E 6V1 Phone: (403) 275-2662 Toll Free (888) 836-7242 Fax: 295-1333 Toll Free:12/9/03 (888) 824-2329 CSA(403) Bus. Card Jan04 www.hereford.ca

More Efficient Means More Hereford

Unbeatable Maternal Performance

SHORTHOR NS

News Roundup

11:21 AM

to improve marbling, feed conversion and add docility.

Page 1

STAMPEDE

Canadian Shorthorn Association Box 3771 306-757-2212 Regina, SK S4P 3N8 Fax 306-525-5852 Email: office@canadianshorthorn.com www.canadianshorthorn.com

By Jerry Palen

Canadian Simmental Association

403-250-7979

13 - 4101 19 Street, N.E. Calgary, AB www.simmental.com

Titanium Oilfield Manufacturing Quality fabrication at competitive prices

Introducing THE RANCH HAND Fully Portable corral built and sold in Alberta • Set up or taken down in 15 minutes or less without a loader tractor and by 1 person and hold over 100 head of cattle.

• Has a head gate built on.

• Raises and lowers with built in hydraulic pack.

• Numerous options available please call us for information!

www.titaniumoilfieldmfg.ca

“I’ll call my husband.

Hello Turkey Hot-Line?”

Cam 780-512-7332 • Andrew (Sales) 780-231-8962 • Lloyd (Sales) 780-228-5772

Answer our survey — and have a go at winning one of our caps

We have a goal to be the best beef cattle magazine in the business. But we need your help. If you could just fill in this survey and return it to me, you would be helping us set the future editorial direction for Canadian Cattlemen. All you have to do is tell me what you like about the magazine, and what you

MARKETPLACE

We’d appreciate it if you could tell us a little about yourself. It makes it easier for us to keep your main interests in focus  I’m ranching or farming Enterprise Total beef cattle Yearlings on feed/pasture Registered cows Fed cattle (sold yearly) Commercial cows Horses Calves on feed/pasture Other livestock

# of head

 I no longer take an active part in farming If not an owner/operator of a farm, are you:

 In agribusiness (bank, elevator, ag supplies, etc.)  Other (please specify) ____________________ My approximate age is:  a) Under 35  b) 36 to 44  d) 55 to 64  e) 65 or over

46

 c) 45 to 54

C a t t l e m e n · M ay 2 0 1 6

don’t like. There’s also some space for you to tell us what you would like to see in future issues.

ClIp And enClose your mAIlIng lABel. each month, we will draw one name from all the surveys sent in and send that person a Cattlemen cap. It could be you!

What do you think of: On a scale of 1 to 5, how do you and your family like these features?

5 – I always watch for it; let’s see more of it 4 – I regularly read it and like it 3 – I usually read it 2 – There are things I’d rather read 1 – I don’t want it; get rid of it Regular Columns 5 4 3

Regular Columns News Roundup Purely Purebred The Markets

5

4

3

2

1

Market Talk Sales and Events

2 1 Nutrition Comment Research Special features 5 4 3 2 1 Newsmakers Letters Calving Issue (Jan.) CCA Reports Custom Feedlot Guide (Sep.) Prime Cuts Stock Buyers’ Guide (Aug.) Straight From The Hip Animal Health Special (Sep.) Holistic Ranching Beef Watch (May & Nov.) What would you like to see? __________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________ How much time do you and your family spend reading 1666 Dublin Avenue Canadian Cattlemen?  Under 2 hours  Over 2 hours Winnipeg, Man. R3H 0H1

www.canadiancattlemen.ca

NEWS ROUNDUP Continued from page 45

Saskatchewan, developed an effective vaccination strategy that begins early in the life of a calf and provides effective immunity against BRD before the cattle enter the feedlot.

During his research, he assessed the efficacy of both intranasal (nasal spray) and intramuscular (injected) routes using several commonly used commercial vaccines administered at branding and at weaning. The results showed that an intranasal vaccination at branding and weaning resulted in better protection from BRD compared to the same vaccine administered intramuscularly.

“The project data clearly shows that the intranasal vaccination at branding led to persisting immunity until calves were six to seven months old,” said Griebel in a release from the Alberta Livestock and Meat Agency that supported this research. A second intra-

nasal vaccination at weaning resulted in complete protection against BRD. Meanwhile, the intramuscular vaccination at weaning did not prevent the disease.

The key is in circumventing the maternal antibodies present in calves. These antibodies, present in the animal’s blood, neutralize the intramuscular vaccines and reduce the animal’s immunity during booster followups. However, the antibodies in the nasal cavity are cleared from calves within three to five days after birth, allowing the intranasal route to work more effectively.

Dr. Susan Novak, ALMA’s executive director, strategic initiatives says the use of intranasal route to administer vaccines at branding and weaning could reduce antibiotic usage at the feedlot and potentially reduce the cost of antibiotics to the cattle industry.

For more details contact Dr. Griebel at philip.griebel@usask.ca. c

5160 Skyline Way NE, CALGARY, ALBERTA, T2E 6V1 PH: (403) 250-8640 • FAX: (403) 291-5624

FARM & RANCH EQUIPMENT Ltd

1974

RA ANDING B

♦

ND

2016

• Apply for the loan amount your operation requires • Feed Advances (equity draws) • Cattle can be tracked on a pen by pen basis, allowing for proceeds to be returned sooner upon the sale of livestock

“Our staff works hard to offer and maintain a cattle financing service that is flexible and competitive.”

Phone: 780-448-0033 Suite 306, 13220 St. Albert Trail Edmonton, AB T5L 4W1

WWW.GELBVIEH.CA

E OU TST

• Non-Pooled Security Deposit

www.cattlefinance.com

CANADIAN GELBVIEH ASSOCIATION

HOG HI-

• Affordable financing

Call us to discuss details, or visit our website:

“A GOOD BOTTOM LINE STARTS WITH A GREAT COW HERD!”

TH

FARM CREDIT CANADA ALLIANCE PARTNER

Hi-Hog Farm & Ranch Equipment Ltd.

The Outstanding Brand

Adjustable Loading Chute Stationary Chute № 76 Portable Chute № 75

Chute comes with adjustable stabilizers to ensure your chute is secure and lined up squarely with the truck.

Ramp height adjusts from 12” to 51”

MARKETPLACE

The portable chute comes with a removable transport kit for convenient use at multiple locations.

Optional panel hangers allow you to load your corral panels and take them with you. (max. axle capacity of 3,196 lbs)

U-Frames with Gates Maximize headroom and don’t pay for the addition of an overhead frame.

U-frames widths from 8’ up to 18’.

A 10’ wide U-frame will carry a 8’ wide gate.

www.hi-hog.com www.canadiancattlemen.ca

1-800-661-7002 C a t t l e m e n · M ay 2 0 1 6

47

 NEWS ABOUT YOU

By Mike Millar

PurelyPurebred

Canadian Beef Breeds Council board. Back row (l to r): David Bolduc, Stephen Scott, Bruce Holmquist, Rod Remin, Rob Smith. Front row (l to r): Michael Latimer, Garner Deobald, Mel Reekie. Missing: Roger Peters, Byron Templeton.

 Garner Deobald of Hodgeville, Sask., was elected president of the Canadian Beef Breeds Council at the group’s recent annual meeting in Calgary. Roger Peters of Red Deer is vice-president. They are joined on the board by new director Mel Reekie and returning directors David Bolduc, Bruce Holmquist, Rod Remin, Stephen Scott, Rob Smith and Byron Templeton. The CBBC is the umbrella group representing the interests of Canada’s 16 beef breed organizations.  Kelsey Dust is the new YCSA co-ordinator with the Canadian Simmental Association (CSA). She grew up on a livestock farm near Humboldt, Sask., and later obtained a bachelor Kelsey Dust of science in agribusiness from the University of Saskatchewan. Dust and her fiancé run a Simmental herd near Coronach, Sask. Ryan Cook has also joined the staff as a sales representative for Simmental Country. He and his family run a Simmental operation near Big Valley, Alta.  The staff and executive of the Canadian Charolais Association are busy preparing for the breed’s annual general meeting and banquet June 18 at Hilton Garden Inn West Edmonton in Edmonton. Breeder tours of three operations around the Edmonton area are planned for Friday, June 17.  Bob Hahn of HR Hahn Cattle Co. in Sherwood Park has been re-elected to a second term as an Alberta director of the

48

C a t t l e m e n · M ay 2 0 1 6

Canadian Angus Association while Dale Easton of Eastondale Angus was elected as a director for Saskatchewan prior to the Canadian Angus Association annual meeting June 11 in Quebec City.

Easton will replace retiring Saskatchewan director and past president Corinne Gibson of Six Mile Ranch Ltd. He is a past president of the Saskatchewan Angus Association and just recently retired from the provincial board. Dale and his wife Shelly and daughter Erika run a purebred herd calving about 180 females a year near Wawota, Sask.

Hahn served on the Alberta Angus Association board until 2012 before being elected to the CAA board. He is a chartered accountant and operates his own practice in addition to his cattle operation.

For more on the CAA annual meeting visit http://cdnangus.ca/activities-andservices/national-convention.  After five years Marty Seymour, stepped down as CEO of Canadian Western Agribition to take a position at Farm Credit Canada on May 1. Seymour has overseen many changes at AgriMarty Seymour bition and can be proud of his accomplishments. He was instrumental in taking the commercial cattle program to the next level by opening The Yards, a concept based on the hugely popular event at the National Western Stock Show in Denver.

This is a showcase for purebred breeders to highlight and market their breeding programs in a relaxed and casual manner without having to exhibit cattle in the show ring.

The Yards grows more popular every year with a waiting list to get in. As well, on Seymour’s watch, the $37-million International Trade Centre has gone from a dream to a plan to construction underway. The centre is expected to be completed in time for Agribition in 2017 and will give a new look and feel to the show. As Seymour moves into his new role as director of industry and stakeholder relations with FCC, we wish him all the best and say thank you for a job well done!  At the same meeting that Marty Seymour announced his resignation from the Canadian Western Agribition (CWA) he gave the board the good news about an $844,606 profit

Suggestions are always welcome. My phone number is 306-251-0011 Email: mike.millar@ fbcpublishing.com

on operations for last year’s show. Attendance was also up, the highest in six years with 130,200 visitors over the six days. For the first time since 1975, overall livestock sales reached $3.4 million and purebred beef sales exceeded $2 million. The show attracted over 800 international guests from 70 different countries, with a 25 per cent increase in active international buyers. 2016 Canadian Western Agribition is set for November 21-26.  Donations to the Angus Building the Legacy fundraising auction just keep piling up. The sale takes place during the June annual Canadian Angus Association conference in Quebec City.

Ferme Gagnon at Chénéville, Que., has donated the pick of their 2016-born heifer calves.

Roger and Jo Hillestad of Ebon Hill Angus have donated five straws of the elite sire Leachman Right Time 779510.

Once again Doug and Kate Reid of Reid Angus in Alberta and Trevor Welch and family of Garvie Mountain Angus in New Brunswick are offering an East Meets West seafood and steak dinner for four at the Reids’ place in Alberta.  We are a little late in offering our congratulations to the 51 Angus youth who braved the cold in Ottawa during the 11th annual Guiding Outstanding Angus Leaders (GOAL) Conference in February.

Highlights included a tour of the Parliament Buildings, presentations by agriculture advocate J. Scott Vernon, PhD and about the McDonald’s Verified Sustainable Beef Project. Along with the conference, $14,000 was awarded to deserving scholars and attendees courtesy of the Canadian Angus Foundation. I had the names of the scholarship winners in this space last issue.

Sales results Wheatland Cattle Co. Annual Bull Sale

March 24, 2016, Bienfait, Sask.

29 Yearling Simmental bulls, av. $19,034 1 Yearling Angus bull, av. $43,000 30 Total, av. $19,833

www.canadiancattlemen.ca

PURELY PUREBRED

 The Government of Canada through Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada’s Canadian Agricultural Adaptation Program (CAAP) has invested $1 million to increase adoption of genomic technologies in Canada’s cattle sector and Canada’s Angus breeders will benefit. The financial investment will enable the Canadian Beef Breeds Council to demonstrate to producers the use and value of improving beef herds through genotyping. The project will make genomic testing available for the various Canadian beef breeds at a reduced cost, increasing adoption by producers. Determining the right genetic mix in their herds will allow Canadian Angus producers to increase their return on investment, while accurately predicting traits that benefit consumers and the environment.

Starting April 1, the Canadian Angus Association has been offering its members the Zoetis i50K genomic test which includes SNP parentage verification and a prediction of genetic merit for numerous traits at a reduced rate of $40 per test.

Genomic information from the Zoetis i50K test is incorporated into animals’

Expected Progeny Differences (EPDs) to calculate more accurate EPDs for them.

This is typically valuable on younger animals that have low accuracy EPDs. EPDs are expressions of the relative genetic merit of beef cattle for various traits. EPDs are used to compare the predicted progeny performance between two bulls (or females) within a breed, regardless of age or herd location.  Cattlemen’s Young Leaders: Robert Dixon, Vermilion, Alta.

Mentor: Trish Jordan Robert lives in Vermilion, Alta., near his family’s farming operation. Growing up in a mixed operaRobert Dixon tion, Robert spearheaded the farm’s diversification into purebred cattle. Over the past 15 years Dixon Farms has shown and sold cattle across the globe.

Through this time Robert served as the chair, and president, for numerous committees and non-profits. After a post-secondary education in agricultural business, Robert worked on purebred and commercial

operations across Canada before pursuing a career in public relations. After working alongside producers and industry, a shift was made to join the faculty at Lakeland College. Currently he serves as program head for the agricultural business program.

Shane Klepak, Melfort, Sask.

Mentor: Martin Unrau Shane was raised on a mixed commercial cowcalf operation in central Saskatchewan, where his Shane Klepak grandparents currently run 500 Black Angus cross pairs as well as a backgrounding feedlot during the winter. Shane studied livestock production at Lakeland College in Vermilion and agbusiness at the University of Saskatchewan in Saskatoon. After graduating he went to work at the University of Saskatchewan’s Beef Research and Teaching Unit as an animal technician. In December 2014 he was selected to serve a two-year term as a member at large on the Young Cattlemen’s Council (YCC).

Continued on page 50

PUTTING IT TOGETHER...

August 9 – 11, 2016 Grey Eagle Resort & Casino in Calgary, AB W W W.CANADIAN BEEF INDUSTRY CONFERENCE.COM Register by June 15 for early bird pricing.

Follow us on social media for updates! facebook.com/canadianbeefindustryconference

@CDNBeefConf

KEYNOTE ADDRESS BY ARLENE DICKINSON LIVE MUSIC BY AIN’T NO RODEO

PRODUCER FOCUSED WORKSHOPS & SESSIONS | INPUT & DECISION MAKING | ENTERTAINMENT | INDUSTRY MEETINGS www.canadiancattlemen.ca

C a t t l e m e n · M ay 2 0 1 6

49

PU R E LY PU R E B R E D

Continued from page 49

 Simmental bulls, already a hot ticket item this year, got a little hotter with the sale of Wheatland Kill Switch 598C at Wheatland’s Cattle Co.’s annual production sale. This red bull caught the interest of many ranchers and purebred breeders alike selling for $210,000 to Curtis Simmentals of Bethune, Sask. Kill Switch is sired by Circuit Breaker owned by Brad Dundas at Outlaw Cattle Co. and a Remington Red Label cow on the dam side from the Hale Ranch program in Texas. Interest has been strong worldwide with semen packages into U.S. and Australia.

With a power-packed pedigree, the first calves next year will be worth watching for. c

Wheatland Kill Switch 598C.

bull Sale results douglas bull test station sale — april 2

maritime beef testing society bull sale — april 2

Carberry, man.

Number of lots sold

2015

Average price

Breed

2016

nappan, n.s.

Number of lots sold

2015

2016

2015

2016

Breed

Average price

2015

2016

50

43

Angus

$3,922

$3,985

9

11

Black Angus

$4,738

$4,522

3

3

Blond d’Aquitaine

3,916

2,600

9

16

Charolais

5,627

4,734

1

—

Charolais

2,500

—

—

1

Gelbvieh

—

5,500

6

11

Limousin

4,341

4,636

1

4

Hereford

3,800

2,537

1

1

Maine-Anjou

3,000

3,000

3

—

Hybrid Cross

4,466

—

1

3

Salers

5,200

3,500

8

6

Limousin

4,750

3,791

11

8

Shorthorn

3,713

3,400

11

12

Simmental

3,890

3,458

2

1

Red Angus

3,300

5,700

84

81

TOTAL

3,908

3,856

2

2

Salers

3,950

2,600

17

17

Simmental

4,735

5,308

51

58

TOTAL

4,774

4,569

get THE CANADIAN CATTLEMEN APP today… for free!

More great agricultural apps available!

Keep up to date on all the latest livestock news with the new Canadian Cattlemen mobile app!

INSTANT ACCESS TO: • • • • • • • •

Livestock news Daily regional ag news Daily market news Commodity futures Crops news WeatherFarm data Machinery tips & reviews Plus much more!

It’s free!

Scan the code to get the app – or visit agreader.ca Available for Android devices, iPhones and iPad. Part of the

50

C a t t l e m e n · M ay 2 0 1 6

Sponsored by

network

www.canadiancattlemen.ca

 Market Su mma ry

By Debbie McMillin

TheMarkets Fed Cattle Fed cattle prices in 2016 have followed a disappointing contra-seasonal trend, with the average fed steer price dropping seven per cent from the high of $179.11/cwt the second week of the year to a low in early April of $165.85/cwt. Typically we expect prices to increase through the first quarter of the year as orders for spring grilling season pick up. The past few weeks however, have been steady to firmer with the mid-month fed steer price at $167.38/cwt and some expected strength ahead in cut-out pricing.

Carcass weights remain large as sellers held in hopes of a spring rally while packers shorten their kill and push back lift times for some cash and contract cattle. Steers in mid-April average 942 lbs., 61 more than last year.

Alberta and Saskatchewan April 1 cattle-on-feed report is up by seven per cent over a year ago at 941,140 head. Placements were up four per cent at 161,504 head through March, with a surprising 60 per cent jump in heifer placements over last year. Dry conditions across much of the Prairies may have resulted in some additional feeders going to lots as a hedge against slow pasture growth.

Slaughter numbers remain small, but some pounds are being recovered by the increase in carcass weights. Domestic steer slaughter is down two per cent year to year at 330,859 head and heifers are off by 11 per cent at 230,015 head. Fed cattle exports to date are 26 per cent higher than a year ago at 84,432 head.

Feeder Cattle Feeder cattle prices are disappointing as well due to poor profitability in the feedlot sector, uncertain spring moisture conditions, a weakening basis and a surging Canadian dollar. Lighter-weight feeders generally rally in the spring as grass cattle buyers look to fill pastures. However, the current 550-lb.

www.canadiancattlemen.ca

feeder steer average of $234.10/cwt is down from $329.68/cwt just one year ago.

While the U.S. price traded mostly within a $10 range Alberta 850-lb. steers have lost over $43/cwt since the start of the year to settle at $183.03 at this writing, 27 per cent under a year ago. The Canadian basis widened from a positive $1.76/cwt the first week of February to a -$16/cwt in midApril. While this is more historically normal for this time of year it makes it difficult to see a price rally ahead. At the same time the Canadian dollar gained seven cents, but is still below a year ago. Even with this historically lower dollar and wider than year-ago basis, feeder cattle exports to the U.S. were down 61 per cent from last year to the second of April at 61,532 head.

Non-Fed Cattle D1,2 cows continue to trade in a relatively narrow trading range from 101 to 110/ cwt with the bulk of the trade from 103108. The very strong seasonal pattern in which cow prices climb throughout the first quarter was not seen this year and in fact the first-quarter high was made in the third week of the year, quite a rare event.

The D1,2 mid-April average of $102/cwt is nearly $50 under the same week last year.

Cow slaughter was down through January but picked up through the first quarter and is now six per cent ahead of last year at 119,001 head. Exports are down seven per cent at 55,435 head.

Slaughter bull prices picked up slightly over the past week to $129.92/cwt, which is still more than $40/cwt under last year.

Domestic bull slaughter has reached 3,292 head, well ahead of the 859 slaughtered in the same period last year. Exports are currently down 26 per cent at 13,386 head. c Debbie McMillin is a market analyst who ranches at Hanna, Alta.

 DEB ’S OUTLOOK Fed Cattle In the near term firmer cut-out values are expected which should boost cash sales. Tightening supplies and lighter carcasses in the U.S. due to improving weather trends earlier in the year should support this market.

Further out, summer prices are expected to seasonally decline as higher volumes come to market and consumer demand for the higher-priced cuts slows in the summer heat.

Feeder Cattle Demand for bunk replacements will likely meet resistance from buyers until better profit margins are seen at the feedlot. The feeder basis has widened over the past month and coupled with the weaker than year-ago Canadian dollar it may encourage more U.S. buyer interest. Lighter calves, particularly good-quality grassers should capture premiums moving forward as buyers look to fill pastures. This will vary some by region and spring moisture conditions.

One positive — numbers will tighten at auction sales ahead of summer.

Non-Fed Cattle Cows fed on hopes of a higher market in the new year are likely gone now which should tighten up local supplies. Many commercial producers are in the midst of calving and will not be selling culls, with the exception of some that lost calves. Tighter supplies and the anticipation of some summer demand for lean trim should lend support to the non-fed market.

More markets 

C a t t l e m e n · m ay 2 0 1 6 51

M A R K ETS

Break-even Prices on A-Grade Steers

Market Prices

210

340

190

310 280

170

250

150

220

130 110

ALBERTA Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

160

210

160

190

140

170

120

150

100

130 110

ONTARIO Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Canfax weighted average price on A-Grade steers

Break-even price for steers on date sold

2016 2015

2016 2015

April 2016 prices* Alberta Yearling steers (850 lb.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $187.59/cwt Barley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.66/bu.

Barley silage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58.25/ton Cost of gain (feed) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71.70/cwt Cost of gain (all costs) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103.01/cwt Fed steers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167.31/cwt Break-even (September 2016) . . . . . . . . . . . . 154.36/cwt Ontario Yearling steers (850 lb.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $187.00/cwt Corn silage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39.44/ton Grain corn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.68/bu.

Cost of gain (feed) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74.25/cwt Cost of gain (all costs) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108.39/cwt Fed steers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162.46/cwt Break-even (October 2016) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155.56/cwt *Mid-month to mid-month prices Breakevens East: end wt 1,450, 183 days West end wt 1,325 lb., 125 days

Steer Calves

190

(500-600 lb.)

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

80 60

D1,2 Cows Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Ontario

Alberta

2016 2015

2016 2015

Ontario prices based on a 50/50 east/west mix

Market Summary (to April 9, 2016) 2016

2015

Total Canadian federally inspected slaughter. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 650,554. . . . . . . . . . . . 673,777 Average steer carcass weight . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 939 lb.. . . . . . . . . . . . 879 lb.

Total U.S. slaughter. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,257,000. . . . . . . . 8,200,000

Trade Summary Exports 2016 2015 Fed cattle to U.S. (to April 2). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83,452.. . . . . . . . . . . . 66,321 Feeder cattle and calves to U.S. (to April 2). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61,532.. . . . . . . . . . . 157,449 Dressed beef to U.S. (to February) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87.30 mil.lbs.. . . . . . 79.59 mil.lbs Total dressed beef (to February). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114.82 mil.lbs.. . . . . 108.10 mil.lbs IMPORTS 2016 2015 Slaughter cattle from U.S. (to February) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 *Dressed beef from U.S. (to February) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37.77 mil.lbs. . . . . . . .41.72 mil.lbs *Dressed beef from Australia (to February) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19.74 mil.lbs. . . . . . . . 8.25 mil.lbs *Dressed beef from New Zealand (to February) . . . . . . . . . 8.86 mil.lbs. . . . . . . .4.30 mil.lbs *Dressed beef from Uruguay (to February) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.04 mil.lbs. . . . . . . .17.85 mil.lbs Canadian Grades (to April 9, 2016) % of A grades +59% 54-58% AAA 18.6 24.8 AA 15.5 8.2 A 0.2 1.1 Prime 0.3 0.8 Total 34.0 35.5

EAST WEST

Total graded 150,858 490,181

Yield – 53% Total 23.4 66.8 3.9 27.6 0.1 1.4 2.1 3.2 29.5 Total A grade 99.0%

Total ungraded 7,706 1,809

% carcass basis 83.1% 89.2% Only federally inspected plants

52

C a t t l e m e n · m ay 2 0 1 6

www.canadiancattlemen.ca

 market ta l k

By Jerry Klassen

Fed Cattle Market Outlook

Quarter

2013

2014

2015

Estimated 2016

1

6,172

5,868

5,664

5,845

2

6,517

6,183

5,855

6,115

3

6,608

6,179

6,066

6,365

4

6,420

6,021

6,105

6,215

TOTAL

25,717

24,251

23,690

24,540

Source: USDA

 alberta fed cattle price projection for 2016 175 170 165 160 155 150 Dec

Nov

Oct

Sep

Aug

Jul

Jun

May

Apr

Mar

Feb

Jan

www.canadiancattlemen.ca

u.s. quarterly beef production (million pounds)

$$/CWT

F

eedlot margins have been struggling in red ink over the winter and spring period; therefore, I thought this would be a good time to discuss the market outlook so that producers can have a better idea of the risks moving forward.

Alberta fed cattle prices have been hovering in the range of $168 to $170 during the early-spring period and break-even prices are closer to $190. Given the slow decline in feeder cattle prices, it will be closer to June and July before break-evens are closer to $170.

At the time of writing this article, the April live cattle futures were near $134 while the June contract was closer to $123 and the August contract was even lower at $119. It is important that producers realize the supply-and-demand projections moving forward so that they can have a better idea of market expectations in the deferred positions.

U.S. cattle-on-feed inventories have been running slightly above year-ago levels during the spring time frame and this will likely continue for the remainder of the year. The 2015 U.S. calf crop was 800,000 head above 2014 and we will likely see a similar year-overyear increase in 2016. We are now seeing feeder cattle move off small grain pasture into feedlots and this will result in larger on-feed numbers during the summer.

Weaker corn prices have also resulted in cattle being fed to heavier weights. During the second and third quarters of 2016, the USDA is projecting a sharp year-overyear increase in quarterly beef production. The October live cattle futures is factoring in this surge in production which would be the highest since 2013.

In Canada, year-to-date beef production for the week ending April 2 was 242,486 mt which was up 4.0 per cent from last year. Beef production will likely be similar to year-ago levels for 2016. The only difference is that more cattle are being fed domestically. Canadian feeder cattle exports to the U.S. from January 1 through March 26 were 54,000 head, down 57 per cent in comparison to 2014. This has resulted in a surge of fed cattle exports to the U.S. which were up by 41 per cent for the same time frame. The domestic fed cattle market will be more heavily influenced by U.S. prices as the exportable surplus needs to move south, which could result in a weaker basis during the summer months. Exports of fresh and chilled beef cuts to the U.S. are running almost 10 per cent above 2014 as well.

Beef demand is exceeding earlier expectations. Earlier in winter, Canada was expected to experience a recession for the first half of 2016; however, exports have increased in the manufacturing hub of Eastern Canada and we’ve also seen a minor recovery in crude oil prices. Contraction in spending is not as sharp as earlier anticipated. U.S. consumers have actually increased food spending. After a slow

Source: Gerald Klassen

start in January, at home food spending during February surged 6.5 per cent above February of 2015 and away from home food spending jumped 7.0 per cent. We’ve seen a minor decrease in retail beef prices but with the jump in food spending, retail demand and restaurant traffic has held up fairly well absorbing the larger beef supplies. I want to remind producers that August and September are periods of seasonal low demand coming at times when beef production surges. The third quarter will be the lowest prices of the year.

The Canadian dollar has also bounced back much quicker than I anticipated back in the fall. Enhanced exports from Eastern Canada have offset the effect of lower oil prices. It is important to realize the U.S. crude oil stocks tend to decline in the summer months so we could see a further recovery in the oil sector; thereby driving the Canadian dollar higher closer to US$0.80/Cdn, maybe even up to US$0.82/Cdn. Above is a projection for average monthly Alberta fed cattle prices. c Jerry Klassen manages the Canadian office of Swiss-based grain trader GAP SA Grains and Produits Ltd., and is president and founder of Resilient Capital specializing in proprietary commodity futures trading and market analysis. He owns farmland in Manitoba and Saskatchewan but grew up on a mixed farm feedlot operation in southern Alberta. He can be reached at 204-504-8339.

C a t t l e m e n · M ay 2 0 1 6

53

 GOINGS ON

Sales&Events Events

27-30 Medicine Hat Exhibition and Stampede, Medicine Hat, Alta.

29-31 Canadian Junior Limousin Association annual impact show, Lloydminster, Alta.

May

12-15 Livestock Markets Association of Canada Convention, Brussells, Ont. 26-28 B.C. Cattlemen’s Association annual meeting, Penticton Trade & Convention Centre, Penticton, B.C.

June 1

cDonald’s Verified Sustainable Beef M Pilot wrap-up meeting, Calgary, Alta.

6-8 Canadian Animal Health Institute annual meeting, Mono, Ont. 9-11 Canadian Angus Association annual meeting, Hotel Le Concorde, Quebec City, Que. 12 An evening with Dr. Temple Grandin, Conexus Arts Centre, Regina, Sask.

13-14 Saskatchewan Stock Growers Association annual convention, Conexus Arts Centre, Regina, Sask.

14 2016 FutureFare, Edmonton Marriott at River Cree Resort, Edmonton, Alta.

14-16 Beef Improvement Federation Conference, Manhattan, Kansas 17-18 Canadian Charolais Association annual meeting, Edmonton, Alta.

July

8-17 Calgary Stampede 11-15 Summer Synergy, Olds Alta.

17-22 International Rangeland Congress, Saskatoon, Sask.

19-21 Ag in Motion — Western Canada’s Outdoor Farm Expo, Langham, Sask.

21-24 Canadian Simmental Association annual meeting and YCSA National Classic, Lloydminster, Alta.

SEE Technology TOUCH Innovation BE Empowered

August

4 Saskatchewan Pasture Tour, Harris, Sask.

9-11 Canadian Beef Industry Conference, Grey Eagle Resort, Calgary, Alta.

9-13 Bonanza 2016, Burning the Hereford Brand, Olds, Alta.

21-28 International Limousin Congress, Ireland 22-27 World Simmental-Fleckvieh Congress, Poland

SEPTEMBER

13-15 Canada’s Outdoor Farm Show, Canada’s Outdoor Park, Woodstock, Ont.

October 3-4

dvancing Women Conference, A Fairmont Royal York Hotel, Toronto, Ont.

November

4-13 R oyal Agricultural Winter Fair, Toronto, Ont. 9-13 Farmfair International, Edmonton, Alta.

15-17 Canadian Forage & Grassland Conference, Winnipeg, Man. 21-26 Canadian Western Agribition, Regina, Sask.  Event listings are a free service to industry.  Sale listings are for our advertisers.

Your contact is Mike Millar at 306-251-0011 or mike.millar@fbcpublishing.com

 A DV ERT IS ER I NDEX Page Airdrie Trailer Sales 47 Alberta Veterinary Laboratories Ltd. 9 Balkrishna Industries Ltd. 35 Beef Cattle Research Council 49 Bio Agri Mix 42 Boehringer Ingelheim 37 Canada’s Farm Progess Show 25 Canadian Angus Assoc.

39 Canadian Charolais Assoc.

OBC Canadian Forage & Grassland Assoc.

41 47 Canadian Gelbvieh Assoc.

46 Canadian Hereford Assoc.

46 Canadian Limousin Assoc.

46 Canadian Shorthorn Assoc.

46 Canadian Simmental Assoc.

5 Case-IH Cattlemen’s Financial Corp.

47 7 Elanco Animal Health Genex Cooperative, Inc. 45 47 Gilbrea Consulting Ltd. 47 Hi-Hog Farm & Ranch Equipment 21 John Deere 13 a-p Lakeland Group/Northstar IFC, 17 Merial 27 Nester Livestock 29 Rocky Mountain Dealerships Inc. 11 Royal Bank of Canada — RBC 45 Saskatchewan Stock Growers 46 Titanium Manufacturing Tru-Test 44 University of Calgary 20 Vermeer Corporation 15 Zoetis Animal Health 55

Decisions are made in the field at Western Canada’s only outdoor farm expo!

16

LANGHAM

SASKATOON

Join us at the second annual Ag in Motion on July 19 - 21, 2016.

It’s a unique opportunity to get up close and personal with today’s agricultural technology. Experience live demonstrations of field equipment, crops, livestock and services all together on 320 acres near Saskatoon. ™

™ Denotes a trade-mark of Canada’s Outdoor Shows Limited Partnership.

SEE Technology

54

TOUCH Innovation

C a t t l e m e n · M ay 2 0 1 6

BE Empowered

Don’t miss it! July 19 - 21, 2016 www.aginmotion.ca www.canadiancattlemen.ca

SVG_017_SelectVac_2016_JA_E_Cattlemen Magazine.qxp_Layout 1 2016-03-11 2:06 PM Page 1

CANADA’S PREMIER HERD HEALTH VACCINATION PROGRAM JUST GOT BETTER. The recent addition of Bovi-Shield GOLD One Shot™ to the SelectVac Gold Plus (formerly Pfizer Gold Plus) herd health vaccination protocols allows you to vaccinate with one less needle for superior results and protection.

Market your calves this fall as SelectVac Gold Plus which qualifies them for Canada’s only 0% BRD GUARANTEE.* Bovi-Shield GOLD One Shot is a significant advancement in combination vaccine technology — that’s why it’s now included as the #1 option in the SelectVac Gold program.

Go to www.selectvacgold.ca today to register your herd online.

Print your certificate right away, and you’ll receive a pdf in your email for your records.

INTRODUCING

CANADA’S FIRST 0% BRD GUARANTEE*

SelectVac Gold has provided peace of mind for professional cattlemen and cattlewomen, and protection for millions of calves for over a decade. * To qualify for the 0% BRD Pull Rate Guarantee your calves must be registered online as SelectVac Gold Plus calves at selectvacgold.ca Zoetis is a registered trademark and SelectVac Gold and Bovi-Shield GOLD One Shot are trademarks of Zoetis Inc. or its subsidiary and used under licence by Zoetis Canada Inc. ©2016 Zoetis Inc. All rights reserved. SVG JAD01 1601 E SVG-017

register at www.selectvacgold.ca