Barzona Bulletin Winter 2024

Budgeting for Bulls Continued from page 1

President’s Message

ing long term about the marketability of future calf crops may help producers start determining a price point for a herd sire purchase. A higher priced bull that is backed by data to improve growth and carcass and make more market-acceptable calves is probably worth writing a bigger check for an operation that plans on sending its calves to the feedlot. The bull that’s prov en to be calving ease with ideal milking ability for the intended production environment is probably worth more to a maternal operation. Either way, Spangler says, selection criteria should always start with the bull having passed a breeding soundness exam, being sound enough on his feet and legs to travel to breed cows and having acceptable docility to meet management expectations. “Outside of these physical attributes, all other selection cri teria should be based on expected progeny differences [EPDs] or, preferably, economic selection indexes,” Spangler says. EPDs are the prediction of how each animal’s future progeny is expected to perform relative to the progeny of other ani mals. Selection indexes for beef cattle, according to the North Dakota State University North Central Research Extension Cen ter, provide a composite value for the individual by combining relevant EPDs with assumed economics of production. “Economic selection indexes help producers select for increased net profit, while reducing the complexity of selecting for multiple traits at the same time,” Spangler explains. “Use them.” Spangler also recommends utilizing indexes when compar ing two or more potential herd sires. “If a producer were to use economic selection indexes for bull selection, then the producer could take the difference between the economic index value of two bulls (difference is $/head or $/conception, depending on the index) and then multiply it by the number of cows the bull would be exposed to over his lifetime,” he explains. “This provides the net profit difference between two bulls over their lifetimes, and helps determine how much more you could justify spending for one bull compared to another.” Spangler also notes that if the “better” bull sells for more than he is worth based on this calculation, it might be wise to choose another bull that’s a more economically sound buy. As many producers well know, bulls also come with own ership costs that include things like maintenance, risk of loss and salvage value. Another way to look at a budget for a bull, according to John B. Hall, Ph.D., Extension beef specialist, University of Idaho, is to compute annual bull cost and risk, and cost per natural service pregnancy. This can be accomplished by dividing the number of pregnancies by annual costs plus the original purchase price of the bull. In the end, Spangler is confident producers can find a herd sire they’re excited to turn out with their cows by establishing breeding objectives and selecting bulls based on superior ge netics that are proven can be passed on to offspring by using EPDs and economic index values. “Thinking of bull purchases as investments, with the expec tation of a return, is a good start,” he concludes. For many producers, it’s an investment that makes the pos sibilities exciting. BB $/head x Number of Females Bull A: $30 x 100 = $3,000 Bull B: $23 x 100 = $2,300

By Matthew Heinz, Golden Hz Farms, BBAA President

I t is the dead of winter around here, and having almost 2 feet of snow cover in much of the Midwest along with below-ze ro temperatures has many of us burning through hay faster than we had in December. Our Barzona cattle did a great job through the storms, handling the extreme cold just as well as they handle the heat! Three Barzona breeders currently have steers and breeding heifers in Hereford, Texas, for the feed efficiency test. The test is now in full swing, with the warm-up period followed by the test itself where data collection is critical. We are hopeful that the harvest data from the steers will coincide with what we have from our local packer and our home-fed calves. Our last batch of fats had ribeye areas 4 to 32 percent larger than the expected average (which is 1 inch of ribeye per 100 pounds of live weight). Four of the five were rated with Moderate mar bling; back fat ran about .5 inch; and, thus far, the DNA scores have been comparable at least. I am very excited to see how the feed and harvest results from the test materialize over several breeders using the same feeder – and the more the merrier! The Barzona Breeders Association of America’s goal is to change from using the ratios currently in our registry to modern technology. As you know, the Barzona Breeders Association of America’s (BBAA) goal is to change from using the ratios currently in our registry to modern technology. Being able to accurately use Neogen’s DNA-scoring system will be a big step forward to se lect and promote our breed. This will help us gain ground in the very data-driven industry that the beef market has become. With tighter margins for cattle producers and tighter budges for consumers, anything we can use that proves we are players in this industry will ultimately help our bottom line. The BBAA has paid for a year’s worth of data analysis, and we would encourage any and all breeders to contact us to reserve pen space so we get the most benefit out of those fees. If you have any questions about the feed efficiency test, please contact me. If you are ready to reserve pen space, please look up our rules and contact BBAA Executive Secretary Alecia Heinz so that she can start coordinating the reservations and delivery specs. The larger the variety of bloodlines and backgrounds in these tests, the more accurate the data will be going forward. A large cross-section of calves is our ultimate goal. Stay adaptable, sustainable and profitable my friends! BB

2 | BARZONA BULLETIN