HAS selection for growth and excessive muscle done irreparable damage to the UK beef herd?

As we see an industry that is struggling to be financially viable without subsidy, it certainly seems that way.

A beef farmer has many types of dam and sire available to produce in-demand beef progeny, either for finishing or for slaughter, in what should be a simple process, but have we over complicated farming?

The simple process of getting kgs of beef off the farm begins with live calves. We need moderate sized calves born (unassisted), full of the will to live – up on their feet, suckling colostrum within the critical first six hours.

Sounds simple enough doesn’t it? Yet we look at industry figures stating that 5-10% of calves do not leave the farm as beef, we see calf birth weights ranging from 25-60kgs and we hear of calves being born between 60-80kgs.

We must ask why. Is it dietary? Have the breeding females been allowed to get excessively fat or overly lean? Or is it because the bull breeders have not castrated calves born over 45kgs? Perhaps this sounds like a drastic measure, but I would say that if you want live calves, easier births and females capable of re-breeding (therefore reducing the costs of replacements), it’s crucial that we as breeders take the responsibility.

As part of my Nuffield Farming Scholarship looking at Efficiency Gains Through Improved Beef Genetics, I had the opportunity to meet with bull breeders in the USA, Canada, Brazil and Paraguay.

While in the USA, I visited Tim Ohlde of The Ohlde Cattle Company, Kansas, who strongly believes in simplifying cattle breeding.

The Ohlde Cattle Company produce breeding bulls, with 500 sold in 2015, as well as replacement females.

During my time with Tim, I was shown a herd of moderate framed, deep bodied cows carrying lots of natural flesh.

Tim’s philosophy is simple: "Don't breed for maximums, aim for optimums". The must-have traits within their herd are calving ease, easy fleshing and fertility – the foundations of beef production anywhere in the world.

Another visit which highlighted the benefits brought if simplifying our beef production here in the UK was a visit to Beefbooster Cattle, Alberta, Canada.

The Beefbooster program is simple, using five specific strains, bred for roles in beef production. They have developed three maternal strains for crossbreeding programs based on Angus and Hereford genetics, rigorously selected for fertility, udder quality and mothering ability as well as using weaning weight as part of the primary selection criteria.

These maternal genetics are used to produce replacement females and breeding bulls from mature cows.

The fourth strain has been developed for extreme calving ease, for use on first calving heifers and the fifth strain, known as the TX Terminal strain, has been developed from a Charolais base and is aimed at mature cows (eg fourth calvers and older) who’s progeny are all destined for finishing.

This fifth strain is a solely terminal type, bred to maximise growth potential post weaning through to the feedlot.

This insight in to the Beefbooster program reinforced the idea that instead of focusing solely on current breeds, we must focus on strains for specific breeding goals within beef production.

For the UK going forward, the breeding female needs to be calving at two years old, moderate framed, capable of rearing a good quality, easy fleshed calf and, in the case of a spring calving herd, this must be done solely from grass.

Calving at two years old instead of the industry norm of three years, slows the progress of breeding females reaching their potential mature weight. A more moderate framed animal will be lighter on the ground, require less feed for maintenance purposes but still carry the genetics for growth to pass on to her progeny.

It became clear whilst I was on my Nuffield Scholarship that cows within the UK and European beef industries vary too much in size.

When we consider that 70% of the feed consumed by an animal is solely for maintenance, we should be getting rid of larger framed cows and focusing on moderate frames in order to make our businesses more profitable.

We need terminal genetics within beef production, as the market does not reward nor demand an increase in replacement females or an expansion in the national breeding herd.

It is always a challenge to maximise growth potential, whilst being mindful of the calving phase of production. We must strike a balance between calving ease/growth potential and target this type of bull to proven mature cows.

The final stage of production is one that needs to be short. Although the ability of an animal to grow to a target weight and then lay down an adequate level of fat cover is linked to genetics, we can manipulate the growth curve with diet and management. However we must remember that an animal’s genetics are it’s blueprint.

If the industry intends to continue using the EUROP carcase classification grid as the method of assessing beef carcases, we should follow Tim Ohlde’s advice of aiming for the optimum, not the maximum.

We, as primary producers, are not compensated for the losses associated with producing any carcase graded above R grade.

If the market really demands such extremes in carcase, then the financial bonus must off-set the losses on farm at calving and subsequent re-breeding.

Or is it time for a new approach to beef production, where farmers are paid for the eating quality of the beef they produce?

If we wish to protect the iconic Scotch Beef brand and demand further market share then perhaps it’s time to look at the final product as it meets the consumer on their table.

We are often told that repeat custom reduces the cost of advertising. One or two bad experiences of the eating quality of beef can be forgotten, more than that and we open ourselves to competition.

If our goal is to reduce costs and maximise our potential to sell kilograms of beef in whatever form off the farm, we must simplify the job.