Advancements in the Live Animal,
Carcass and End Point

Preharvest Production Systems for Beef

by Troy Smith for Angus Productions Inc.

 

HOUSTON, Texas (April 20, 2012) — Largely due to consumer perceptions of healthfulness, there has been growth in demand for beef derived from preharvest production systems categorized as natural, grass-fed and organic. They aren’t all the same, but Texas A&M University’s Rich Machen suspects the average consumer really doesn’t realize or appreciate the differences. During the 2012 Beef Improvement Federation (BIF) Research Symposium and Annual Meeting in Houston, Machen talked about those differences.

 

Calling “natural” a term that is broadly used by an amazing number of marketing programs, Machen said the term generally applies to preharvest production systems that utilize antibiotics on a limited basis or not at all. He said oversight of production and processing of products bearing a “natural” label is largely the responsibility of independent production or marketing entities.

 

“Grass-fed” conjures considerable confusion, said Machen, because there are at least three different definitions for this production system. One defines grass-fed beef as any coming from animals that have grazed pasture for their entire lives. The definition favored by USDA states the animals must have received a diet solely derived from forage, with no grain or grain products. The only supplements allowed are vitamins and minerals.

 

Machen called the third definition, that of the American Grassfed Association (AGA), more stringent. AGA has rules regarding when and what feed supplements may be used. No cereal grains may be fed and no implants or other growth promotants are allowed. If a sick animal must be treated with antibiotics, it is no longer eligible. Each animal’s progression through the production system must be tracked through individual identification and careful records. Participants in AGA’s program are subject to on-farm, third-party audits.

 

According to Machen, “organic” beef production has, by far, the most detailed requirements. Animals may be fed more types of feedstuffs, including grain, but the diet must be 100% organic, in accordance with USDA certification standards. While organic and natural production systems have their respective followings, Machen said grassfed systems have attracted considerable attention recently, from consumers and producers.

 

“I would submit, however, that the single biggest limitation to grass-fed beef production is sustaining both quantity and quality of forage,” stated Machen. “It’s a real challenge.”

 

To illustrate the point, Machen said taking a typical 500-pound (lb.) British-type steer to 900 lb., gaining 1 lb. per day in the very best forage environment, would require up to 400 days and more than 6,500 lb. of forage. Gaining at a rate of 2 lb. per day, nearly 3,400 lb. of forage would be required during a period of 200 days. If he could gain 3 lb. per day, the steer would consume 2,200 lb. during the course of 134 days.

 

“In a less-productive environment, such as native range, multiply all the numbers by four,” said Machen.

 

Discussing the biological type of cattle most suited to grassfed beef production, Machen said cattle of small to moderate mature size, with a steep growth curve would be preferred. Heifers of this type might have the advantage.

 

“To finish on forage, cattle need to be early-maturing and genetically predisposed to fatten faster,” he explained. “Other selection criteria for forage-based beef production may have to include adaptability to different environments because more than one production environment may be required. It might be necessary to move cattle where the most desirable finishing forage is available.”

 

Return to the Newsroom for links to the PowerPoint presentation that accompanied this presentation.

Editor’s Note: This summary was written under contract or by staff of Angus Productions Inc. (API). Through an agreement with the Beef Improvement Federation, we are encouraging reprinting of the articles to those who will adhere to the reprint guidelines available on this site. Please review those guidelines or contact Shauna Rose Hermel, editor, at 816-383-5270. PowerPoints are posted with permission of the presenter and may not be reproduced in whole or in part without the express permission of the presenter.

API's coverage of the event is made possible through collaboration with BIF and sponsorship of LiveAuctions.tv. For questions about this site, or to notify us of broken links, click here.

Headquartered in Saint Joseph, Mo., API publishes the Angus Journal, the Angus Beef Bulletin, the Angus Beef Bulletin EXTRA, and the Angus e-List, as well as providing online coverage of events and topics pertinent to cattlemen through the API Virtual Library.