How Much Grain Does Beef Production Need

Grass-fed Beef Markets and Terminology

There has been a growing interest in the product of "grass-fed beef". On January 12, 2016, the USDA actually revoked the "USDA Grass-fed" label or claim (USDA, 2016); although, the USDA left the standards for the claim on their website for producers to follow. Yet, many grass-fed or grass-finished markets persist. This interest in grass-fed beef stems non only from consumers looking for a perceived improvement in animal welfare or quality of the production they purchase; just, it besides stems from producers looking to fill a niche market or maintain cattle in a more pastoral setting. Along with this interest from both consumers and producers comes a lot of terms and ideas that may or may non be fully understood. The objective of this article is to clarify some of the product methods used to raise grass-fed beefiness.

Because of the aforementioned consumer perceptions, demand for the grass-fed beef is greater than the supply in much of the U.S. due to country values, lack of grazing infrastructure, lack of grass-finishing production noesis, and other constraints. Despite the consumer demand, still, approximately 95% of the cattle in the The states proceed to be finished, or fattened, on grain for the terminal 160 to 180 days of life (~25 to thirty% of their life), on average. The logic behind grain finishing dates dorsum to enquiry as early as the 1800's. Cattle become less efficient, less able to convert feed to musculus or meat, as they age. Grain contains more free energy assuasive cattle to maintain greater growth rates afterward in to their lives when compared to feeding only grass or fodder. In addition, feeding grain frees up valuable state resources necessary to produce forages and other grain crops past concentrating the cattle in a smaller area. Because of the challenges with state mass availability in the U.S., some of the beefiness in the U.S. that comes in labeled as grass-fed actually comes from outside the U.S.

Rather than argue advantages and disadvantages of the grain versus grass-fed systems, the take-domicile here is that all beef cattle, whether farmers cull to enhance them every bit grass-fed or grain-fed animals, spend at least two-thirds of their lifetime in a pasture setting. Therefore, all beefiness may be considered "grass-fed" for the majority of its life. Thus, beef production in the United States has been, and continues to be, a fodder-based industry. The differentiation in what makes cattle grass-fed then, generally occurs towards the end of life and will exist discussed in more than item.

One of the primal areas scientists have investigated are the characteristics of the beef from cattle finished on grass, every bit they tin be quite different from characteristics of beef from grain-fed cattle. Inquiry suggests that when finished to the same fat endpoint (0.four in. dorsum fat) at that place is no consumer detectable divergence in tenderness between beef from grass-fed or grain-fed cattle (Faucitano et al., 2008). However, beefiness from grass-fed cattle is generally more lean than beef from cattle fed grain, peculiarly when compared at the same age. Therefore, cattle finished on grass typically have lower USDA quality grades, an indication of fat inside the muscle, than grain fed cattle (Matthews and Johnson, 2013). For some consumers, less fatty may be a desirable trait. The reduction in total fatty plant in grass-fed beef has been lauded as one of the benefits for consumers looking to cut cholesterol, for example. While no difference in cholesterol concentrations have been reported betwixt beef from grass-fed and grain-fed cattle (Matthews and Johnson, 2013), consumers existence brash to lower their total fat consumption may discover grass-finished beef or USDA Select grain-finished beefiness to exist a better fit in their diet.

Regardless of the personal choices consumers may have for purchasing grass-fed beef, producers must first manage the cattle and the grass they are consuming to produce the product. During this production, grazing management and fodder quality are both essential factors to consider.

Grass-Fed Beef Direction

Forage Quality

Provender quality as it relates to grass-fed beef production is really a discussion of the energy supply. If acceptable energy is supplied to the grazing cattle, cattle may be expected to gain 2.0 to 2.v lbs per solar day. The greatest average daily gains in grass-finished cattle can be expected when the forage provided is more than 65% digestible and supplies between 14 to 18% rough protein (CP), more than 20% dry matter (DM), and more than 20% water-soluble carbohydrates (WSC). Forages supplying the aforementioned nutritive values are considered very expert quality. In any grass-fed production system, a minimum of two lbs average daily gain (ADG) should be the goal in order to keep cattle on a trajectory towards advisable finishing. Because of the loftier forage quality necessary to come across or exceed these gains, provender nutritive value should be monitored and managed accordingly.

Forages grown for livestock product tin take a wide range of nutritive values, based on how they are managed and when they are harvested or grazed (Figures 1 and 2). Because of the wide variation in nutritive value that be, quality should e'er exist monitored. As a full general rule-of-thumb, the less mature the forage, the greater the nutritive value. Therefore, if grazing, or feeding, growing cattle – either stockers or feeders – forages should be maintained at a vegetative phase and should not be allowed to set seed. When plants go into a reproductive stage, afterward seed head emergence, forage quality declines speedily.

In add-on to quality of provender, the grass-finished beef producer needs to exist concerned with quantity of forage consumed by the cattle. Cattle need to be given the opportunity to maximize their consumption of forages throughout the whole product process. At no time should cattle exist restricted in their intake of forage. For instance, overgrazed pastures volition not only result in poor long term pasture productivity, but will also cause the cattle to have restricted forage intake and result in poor average daily gains.

Figure ane

Ranges in percent digestibility of common forages found in the northeastern The states. Bodily digestibility largely depends on maturity of the forage at the fourth dimension of feeding as well as grazing and harvest management. The blood-red bar indicates range that forages should fall inside for optimal growth in a grass-fed system.

Figure 2

Ranges in per centum rough protein of common forages found in the northeastern U.s.a.. Actual crude protein largely depends on maturity of the fodder at the time of feeding as well as grazing and harvest direction. The red bar indicates range that forages should fall within for optimal growth in a grass-fed arrangement.

Forage Direction

Cool-season perennial forages, which are the most common permanent forages used in the northeastern United States, should not exist grazed or mowed lower than 3 inches during the about rapid growing season (Effigy 3), and no lower than 4 inches during the slower growing time of the year – the hot summer months. Warm-season annuals and perennials typically should be grazed to a higher grazing height than cool-season perennials – usually warm-season annuals and perennials should exist grazed no lower than 8 inches. Leaving acceptable residual peak ensures that there will exist enough leaf mass left for the found to continue photosynthesis, allowing for regrowth to occur every bit quickly as possible.

Figure 3

Growth pattern of cool-season perennial forages. Almost rapid growth occurs during spring "greenish-upwardly", or May through the starting time part of June. After the weather turns warm and dry, fodder growth dramatically slows as plants go into dormancy to survive the summer. As the days absurd and precipitation increases in the early autumn, cool-season perennial growth increases until the first killing frost, in which they get dorsum into dormancy to survive the wintertime.

Figure 4. Common provender species, growing seasons, and life cycles in the northeastern The states.

Species	Growing Flavour	Life Cycle
Orchardgrass	Cool-flavour	Perennial
Timothy	Cool-flavor	Perennial
Polish Brome	Cool-season	Perennial
Alpine Fescue	Cool-season	Perennial
Perennial ryegrass	Cool-flavor	Perennial
Reed canarygrass	Absurd-season	Perennial
White Clover	Cool-flavor	Perennial
Alfalfa	Cool-season	Perennial
Cherry-red Clover	Absurd-flavour	Perennial
Sorghum x sudan	Warm-season	Annual
Sudangrass	Warm-season	Annual
Pearl millet	Warm-season	Almanac
Browntop millet	Warm-season	Annual
Annual ryegrass	Cool-season	Almanac
Cereal rye	Cool-flavour	Annual
Wheat	Absurd-season	Annual
Oats	Cool-season	Almanac
Barley	Cool-flavor	Annual
Indiangrass	Warm-season	Perennial
Big Bluestem	Warm-season	Perennial
Gamagrass	Warm-season	Perennial
Switchgrass	Warm-flavor	Perennial

Rotational grazing – rotating animals from ane paddock after they have grazed the forage down to the desired top and then moving them into another ungrazed paddock – has been shown to increase stocking rate and carrying capacity, equally well as reduce the incidence of selective grazing (Williamson et al., 2016). Selective grazing over time will reduce the pasture productivity and cause the selected-against fodder to become over-mature with a severe decline in forage quality and a proliferation of the undesirable species.

In the northeast, it is rare to be able to extend the grazing flavor across the entire calendar year, regardless of management practices. Therefore, feeding harvested forages is necessary to provide nutrition to cattle during the time of yr when grazed forages are not available. In a grass-fed operation, loftier quality provender is a necessity for obtaining targeted gains of at to the lowest degree 2 lbs/day. Just as with grazing, forages should exist harvested earlier seedhead emergence while still in the vegetative stage, regardless of whether it is being harvested as dry hay, haylage, or baleage. Generally, the more than mature a provender is, the lower the feeding value, resulting in poorer animate being functioning.

Other management considerations

Every scenario is a little bit dissimilar. In some grass-fed situations, intensively managed perennial pasture may exist the best pick. The land may be too steep, likewise rocky, or have soil that is likewise shallow to support profitable production of annual crops. However, in other situations, annual grazing crops may be a better option. In the United States, there has been gradual adoption of no-till crop production practices for the past 50 years. In more contempo times there has been an explosion of interest in the use of cover crops equally no-till ingather growers have realized that an effective encompass crop arrangement can brand no-till ingather product work even better. Following the interest in cover crops has been an uptick of interest in using the embrace crops for grazing livestock. Farmers who take integrated cattle into cropping systems are seeing positive results from an agronomic standpoint. This blazon of production would exist ideal for finishing cattle on annual forages integrated into a crop rotation. In addition to agronomic benefits, this scenario direct adds acquirement to the cropping budget via livestock, and when combined with the crop revenue would make more efficient utilise of expensive cropland.

Producing grass-fed beef may non be for everyone. Cattle managers interested in grass-finishing demand to appraise the resources available to them to decide how to all-time finish cattle on that particular farm. 1 resources that should not exist forgotten is the cattle themselves. In almost grass-fed situations, small-scale to medium-framed British-based breeds are most ideal. These cattle tend to mature faster (at an earlier age) and take a lighter finishing weight than large-framed Continental types of cattle. Big-framed Continental cattle tend to be more suited to grain-fed, feedlot scenarios.

Conclusions

Need for grass-fed beef is greater than the supply in the U.S. due to land values and other constraints. Even though all beef may be considered "grass-fed" for the majority of its life, finishing cattle on grass takes a bully bargain of management and requires expert quality forages to attain gains of at least two lbs per day. Cool-flavour perennial forages are the most mutual permanent forages used in the northeastern United States, and will likely supply the most do good in terms of digestible energy and protein to cattle finishing on forages. Finishing cattle on grass can be a way for producers to maintain a pastoral setting on their farms and fill the niche marketplace for grass-fed beef that consumers are demanding.

References

Capper, J.L. 2012. Is the Grass Always Greener? Comparing the Environmental Affect of Conventional, Natural and Grass-Fed Beef Product Systems. Animals. two:127-143. doi:x.3390/ani2020127

Faucitano, L., P.Y. Chouinard, J. Fortin, I.B. Mandell, C. Lafrenière, C.50. Girard, and R. Berthiaume. 2008. Comparison of culling beef product systems based on forage finishing or grain-forage diets with or without growth promotants: 2. Meat quality, fat acrid composition, and overall palatability. J Anim Sci. 86:1678-89. doi: 10.2527/jas.2007-0756.

Matthews, K.H., and R.J. Johnonson. 2013. Culling beef production systems: issues and implications. United Land Department of Agriculture: Economic Enquiry Service. LDPM-218-01. Available online Jan 22, 2017.

NAMI. 2015. Corn-fed versus Grass-fed Beef. Northward American Meat Institute: Fact Canvass. Washington, D.C. Available online January 22, 2017.

USDA. 2016. Grass fed marketing claim standard. United Country Department of Agronomics: Agricultural Marketing Service. Washington, D.C. Available online Jan 22, 2017.

Williamson, J.A., Thousand.E. Aiken, E.S Flynn, and M. Barrett. 2016. Beast and Pasture Responses to Grazing Management of Chemically Suppressed Tall Fescue in Mixed Pastures. Crop Sci. 56:2861-2869. doi: x.2135/cropsci2016.04.0206

hoffmangreped.blogspot.com

Source: https://extension.psu.edu/grass-fed-beef-production

Share this post