Implanting nursing beef calves mid-summer returns over $435/hour

 Resize text        

Implant technology has been used in beef production since the 1950s and includes natural and artificial compounds with anabolic properties; both of which are considered safe and effective for beef production according to the FDA.

Ralgro and Synovex C are the two options for nursing beef calves. Ralgro contains zeranol, an estrogenc compound. It is approved for use in calves greater than 30 days of age. Ralgro is not to be used in bull calves and post-weaning heifers. Synovex C contains progesterone and estradiol benzoate. Similarly, Synovex C should not be used in bull calves and the manufacturer recommends calves be at least 45 days of age. As with any product, be sure to read the label before administration.

The effect of implants is variable and highly dependent on environmental factors and nutrition. Implants are designed to increase average daily weight gain. Research data suggest you can expect a 10-30 pound increase in weaning weight in both steers and heifers when properly implanted. Implants also increase the animal’s nutritional demands to support the added growth, so adequate pasture nutrition is required. In steer calves, research shows implanting provided comparable weaning weight to bull calves left in-tact until weaning. Implanted steer experience significantly less weaning stress and improved post weaning gains compared to castration at weaning.

Replacement heifers can be implanted prior to weaning but research suggest added weight gain is not generally advantageous and slight reduction in fertility can be observed. The general recommendation is to not implant replacement heifers.

Lets’ assume two people can gather and implant 30 calves/hour. Using and average 20 percent weaning advantage and a conservative calf value of $1.50/lb, nets an additional $30/calf (assuming no price slide). In this case, implanting nets $870 in added gain value from 30 calves after the $1.00/head implant cost. Divide that by two workers and you just made $435 each for your hour of working calves. That’s one job on the farm you should have on the top of your “to do” list!


Sponsored Links


Comments (2) Leave a comment 

Name
e-Mail (required)
Location

Comment:

characters left

Kevin    
Utah  |  May, 17, 2012 at 09:58 AM

Why is "midsummer" in the title? This implies that there may be some advantage over implanting in the spring, but the author never addresses that point. Is he suggesting reimplanting midsummer?

Bobbi Lorenz    
Ne  |  May, 17, 2012 at 12:27 PM

Not real sure why we would break it down to $/hour return. Especially for something that on most ranches even the big ones doesn't account for very much of the total time used to produce calves. If I went to my banker and told them I was going to make $435/hr pretty sure my banker would look at me as though I had 2 heads. By using that type of a number it makes the act of implant look overly inflated. I don't dis-agree implanting is a great tool to increase final body weights and dosn't cost a lot of time or money to do, but I think the return as a $/head is a much better way of looking at the number


Feedback Form
Leads to Insight