• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Title Page
 About the beef operations
 Findings about reproduction
 production
 Parasite control
 Beef producers' nutrition...
 Forage production
 Method for obtaining informati...






Group Title: Bench marking beef : forage practices, Tampa Bay Area, 1982.
Title: Bench marking beef
CITATION PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE PAGE TEXT
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00066199/00001
 Material Information
Title: Bench marking beef forage practices, Tampa Bay Area, 1982
Physical Description: 12 p. : ill. ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Florida Cooperative Extension Service
Publisher: Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida
Place of Publication: Gainesville Fla
Publication Date: 1983
 Subjects
Subject: Forage plants -- Florida -- Tampa Bay Region   ( lcsh )
Beef cattle -- Standards -- Statistics -- Florida -- Tampa Bay Region   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
General Note: Cover title.
General Note: Handwritten: "December 1983."
Funding: Florida Historical Agriculture and Rural Life
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00066199
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: Marston Science Library, George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida
Holding Location: Florida Agricultural Experiment Station, Florida Cooperative Extension Service, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, and the Engineering and Industrial Experiment Station; Institute for Food and Agricultural Services (IFAS), University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved, Board of Trustees of the University of Florida
Resource Identifier: oclc - 70859125

Table of Contents
    Title Page
        Title Page
    About the beef operations
        Page 1
    Findings about reproduction
        Page 2
        Page 3
        Page 4
    production
        Page 5
        Page 6
    Parasite control
        Page 7
    Beef producers' nutrition program
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
    Forage production
        Page 10
        Page 11
    Method for obtaining information
        Page 12
Full Text

IC r-3 'I


BENCH MARKING BEEF -

FORAGE PRACTICES

TAMPA BAY AREA

S1982

S- SUMMARY

















Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences,
Cooperative Extension Service,
University of Florida, Gainesville, FLorida


4 4


j.4AAP ii


(cc~c~~ccr,







In 1982 information was gathered from beef producers in Polk, Hillsborough,
Pasco, Manatee and Sarasota Counties. The main purpose of the survey was to
determine the present production practices for beef and forage, so Extension agents
can direct their efforts to where the most improvement can be made in beef cattle
production.



ABOUT THE BEEF OPERATIONS

Kind of Beef Operations

Most of the beef operations in the five counties (88%) are commercial. They
own 90 percent of the cattle.

88% Commercial

4% Purebred

4% Purebred and Commercial

Plans for the next five years

Sixty-three percent of the producers plan to maintain the same size of operation,
they own 57 percent of the cattle.


Only four percent of the cattle are owned by those who plan to reduce the size
of their herds. Only 4/10 of one percent of the cattle are owned by those who
plan to get out of the beef business.


o






Importance of Profit


Slightly over half, 52 percent of the producers feel its very important for their
beef operation to make a profit and they own 85 percent of the cattle.


Nine percent of the producers in the five county area feel its not important for
their beef operation to make a profit. However, they own only 2 percent of the
cattle.


FINDINGS ABOUT REPRODUCTION

Percent Calf Crop

The average percent calf crop across all brood cows is 72.

Number of Bulls

Producers indicate they have one bull for every 20 cows.




Breeding Season

Sixty-six percent of the producers indicated they do not practice a controlled
breeding season. That is, they let the bulls run with the cow herd throughout the
year. These producers own only 24 percent of the cattle.


* *J






Breeding Soundness Evaluation a
Fifty percent of the producers indicated they never ew the bulls
used for breeding. However, these same producers owrt-y^6 percent of the
cattle.



Other 2%
Each Year 6%
Every Two or Three Years 11%
STest at Purchase 31%

: :: :: .. .. Never Test 50%
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Percent Testin_.s V re. b *44


Practice Of Palpating Cows

20% of producers palpate all cows

16% of producers palpate dry cows only

Producers who palpate all cows own 41 percent of the cattle. Producers who
palpate only dry cows own 37 percent of the cattle.
Age Heifers Calve

Forty-nine percent of the producers indicate their heifers calve at the age of
three years. However, this includes 66 percent of the heifers.





Percent Culled


Most of the producers, 84 percent, indicate they cull 10 percent or less of their
cow herd each year. These same producers own 62 percent of the cattle.

84% Cull 10 percent or less each year

7% Cull from 11-15 percent each year

5% Cull from 16-20 percent each year

4% Cull 21 percent or more each year

Reason for culling

Age is the main reason for culling as indicated by 73 percent of the producers
who own 79 percent of the cattle.



other 4%-
3Economics (low prices) 9%
Diseases 11i
Poor Producers 40%
SFailur to R 43% -
$For Age 7%r
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percent Who Cull


Relatively few producers (9 percent) cull based on .ni-esen. They own
only 4 percent of the cattle.

Leading Diseases

Producers indicated brucellosis is the leading disease Fourteen percent
indicated they have experienced problems with brucellosis, these same producers
own 15 percent of the cattle.

14% Problems with brucellosis

No more than two percent of the producers had problems with the following
diseases.
Problems with leptospirosis
Problems with vibriosis
Problems with red water
Problems with IBR and BVD



yr }. !-w i ;""' "




More producers (38%) indicated they had vaccinated for brucellosis, than any
other disease. These same producers own 70 percent of the cattle.


Other 7%
IBR, and BVD 8%
J Vibriosis 14%
LePtosDirosis 15%
Blackleg 31%


0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Percent Who Vaccinate

Nutrition is big problem with reproduction
Forty-four percent of the producers who responded to the question indicated
nutrition is their single largest problem. These same producers own 60 percent
of the cattle.
Largest problems by percent of producers:


PRODUCTION


Weights at weaning and selling
.-!--- The -awla weaning weight f producers is 375 pounds. The aa eanin
rL *weightacross all calves is 41 The a~ e selling weightW- producers is 394 "'
pounds. The av.ege selling eight across all calves is 431 pounds. Some of the
producers are weaning calves and to heavier weights.
a- '_Or


a" ql,










Age at weaning and selling

The average weaning age by producers is 6.86 months. The average selling
age by producers is 6.9 months. Some of the producers are selling calves
several months after weaning.

Uses of the calf crop

The calves that were born between October, 1980 and September, 1981 were:


Implanting with growth stimulants

Fifteen percent of the producers who responded to the question said they implant
calves with growth stimulants. These same producers own 52 percent of the
cattle.

Identification of cows and calves

Slightly over half (53 percent) of the producers who responded to the question
said they used a system to individually identify each cow. These same producers
own 60 percent of the cattle. Thirty-five percent of the producers indicated
they identify the calf. These same producers own 31 percent of the cattle.

Production Testing Records

Twenty-two percent of the producers indicate they keep production testing
records such as birth date and weight at selling. These same producers own 13
percent of the cattle. Eighty-seven percent of those who keep records use them
for culling purposes.


.








PARASITE CONTROL


External Parasites

Most of the producers (94 percent) indicate they practice external parasite
control. This represents 99 percent of the cattle.


Method to Control External Parasites by Percent of Beef Producers
Ticks &

Method Flies Lice Grubs

Spray 69% 56% 28%
Dust Bag 38% 17% 9%
Pour-on 10% 11% 11%
Ear Tag 17% 5% 4%
Back Rubber 8% 5% 2%


Spray is the most widely used method to control external parasites. Sixty-nine
percent of the producers indicate they use this method to control flies. These
producers own 73 percent of the cattle. Seventeen percent of the producers use
ear tags to control flies which represents 42 percent of the cattle.

Deworming

Most producers practice worming at least one time each year.

76% Worm cows

67% Worm calves

80% Worm bulls

Liver Fluke Treatment

Only 21 percent of the producers indicate they treat for liver flukes, which
represents 34 percent of the cattle.

BEEF PRODUCERS' NUTRITION PROGRAM


Forages


The following reveals the percent of producers who use various forages for cows
and heifers during the winter months. Sixty-three percent of the producers
indicate they use native range for the cow herd, 44 percent for heifers.








PARASITE CONTROL


External Parasites

Most of the producers (94 percent) indicate they practice external parasite
control. This represents 99 percent of the cattle.


Method to Control External Parasites by Percent of Beef Producers
Ticks &

Method Flies Lice Grubs

Spray 69% 56% 28%
Dust Bag 38% 17% 9%
Pour-on 10% 11% 11%
Ear Tag 17% 5% 4%
Back Rubber 8% 5% 2%


Spray is the most widely used method to control external parasites. Sixty-nine
percent of the producers indicate they use this method to control flies. These
producers own 73 percent of the cattle. Seventeen percent of the producers use
ear tags to control flies which represents 42 percent of the cattle.

Deworming

Most producers practice worming at least one time each year.

76% Worm cows

67% Worm calves

80% Worm bulls

Liver Fluke Treatment

Only 21 percent of the producers indicate they treat for liver flukes, which
represents 34 percent of the cattle.

BEEF PRODUCERS' NUTRITION PROGRAM


Forages


The following reveals the percent of producers who use various forages for cows
and heifers during the winter months. Sixty-three percent of the producers
indicate they use native range for the cow herd, 44 percent for heifers.








Winter Feed Used For Cows and Heifers by Percent of Beef Producers


For
Cows


For
Heifers


Hay 83% 64%
Native Range 63% 44%
Winter Pasture 31% 22%
Deferred Grazing 22% 21%
Other 20% 20%
Silage 3% 3%




Protein Supplement

Thirty-seven percent of the producers use molasses supplement during the
WINTER months. These same producers own 67 percent of the cattle.



Protein Supplements Used During Winter Months by Percent of Producers

For For
Cows Heifers

Mineral Containing Protein 43% 35%
Molasses Supplement 37% 31%
Protein Blocks 35% 29%
Range Cubes 24% 23%
Other 6% 8%
None 4% 3%


Even though 35 percent of the producers feed protein blocks to the cow herd, this
represents only 14 percent of the cattle.


.








Feed during winter months

Only forty-six percent of the producers feel their winter feeding program is
adequate for greatest net returns, these producers own 58 percent of the cattle.




Adequate



Uncertain
29% No
25%





Analyzing Hay and Silage

Only thirteen percent of the producers who feed hay or silageindicate they have
it analyzed. These same producers own 26 percent of the cattle.

The Practice of Feeding Salt and Minerals -
Almost all producers feed salt and minerals.
Feed Salt
93% Yes
8% Winter Only
92% Year 'Round

Even though 93 percent of those who responded indicated they feed salt, this
.,represents ~ 3 percent of the cattle. .'
Feed Minerals
98% Yes
10% Winter Only
90% Year 'Round t 0

The findings indicate that 96 percent of the cattle receive mineral year 'round
^<^<^4^.








FORAGE PRODUCTION


Acres Used For Pasture


On the average, producers indicate they have 1244 acres of pasture. However,
this ranges from two acres up to 59,300.

The following gives some insight into the kinds of pasture used by beef
producers.


Tons of Hay Produced -

In 1981 beef producers harvested an average of 132 tons hay. *.i.

The Practice of Soil Testing--

Sixty-three percent of the producers indicate they generally use soi~ tot6
guide their fertilizing and liming decisions. These same producer own 88
percent of the cattle.

The Practice of Liming

Fifty-two percent of the producers indicate they have limed pastures within the
past three years. These same producers own 71 percent of the cattle.
Fifty-seven percent of the producers who responded to the question indicated
they have limed HAY land in the past three years. This represents about 55
percent of the cattle.


The Practice of Fertilizing

Seventy-five percent of the producers indicated they fertilized pastures within
the past year. These same producers own 92 percent of the cattle.

Eighty-five percent of the producers who responded to the survey indicated they
fertilized hay.






The following shows the average amount of the most commonly applied nutrients
to pasture and hay
Nitrogen Phosphorus Potassium
(P205) (K20)

Pasture 52 25 33
Hay 68 28 40


Types of Pasture Grasses Used

I


Other 5%


Bermuda 27%
Re rass 29%
Pangola
OMiMONOM


0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Percent Wse -Usy- ss


80 90
na qt-'
G ^^


Bahia 97%
100


Even though only 42 percent indicate they use native pasture, these producers
own 68 percent of the cattle.

Rotationally Graze Pastures

Sixty-one percent of the producers indicated they practice rotational grazing and
they own 67 percent of the cattle.

The Use of Legumes


Clover 0%
White Clover 2%
Alfalfa 3%
Other 9%
Aeschynomene


10 15


Clover 10%
Hairy Indigo 15%
20 25 30


(GfV l


Percent -ie'Si


Although hairy indigo is grown by 15 percent of the producers, 4pschynomene is
fed to more cattle (39 percent) than any other legume.




r I


METHOD FOR OBTAINING INFORMATION


Livestock agents obtained this information from beef producers using mail
questionnaires. Agents identified 1899 beef and/or livestock owners. A sample
size of 319 is needed to provide a degree of accuracy of + 5 percent. However,
agents in two counties had difficulty in distinguishing beef producers from other
livestock owners. Thus, the sample size was increased percent for one county
and 10 percent for the other to compensate for n6nbeef1 stock owners. The
sample size was also increased 20 percent t conpens r producers who had
gone out of business within the last year and or expected incorrect addresses.
Therefore, the final sample size was 417. Seventy-eight percent of the
questionnaires were returned by only 51 percent (214) were usable. The expected
error rate for a sample of this size is + 6.4 percent with 95 percent confi-
dence.1 For more detailed information refer to Bench Marking Beef-Forage
Practices, Tampa Bay Area, 1982. Florida Cooperative Extension Service,
Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida.


Survey Coordinator


Consultants and Support


Cliff Taylor
311 Rolfs Hall
University of Florida
Gainesville, FL 32611

Agents Conducting Survey

Jo Durrance Sarasota
Travis Seawright Manatee
Mark Spelbring Pasco
Sid Sumner Polk
Wayne Wade Hillsborough

Advisory Groups


Bill Kunkle Beef Specialist
Carrol Chambliss Forage Specialist
Walter Prevatt Economist
Gene Cope Veterinarian
Dick Cromwell Engineer
Gerald Kidder Soils Specialist
Kenneth Portier Statistician
Bill Summerhill Design
Jim Stricker Liaison
Maurice Cole Administration
Rita Slaughter Word Processor
Patsy Lawrence Data Entry
John Dixon Computing


Extension Beef Advisory Committees
in each of the five counties.














1Yamane, T. 1967. Statistics, An Introductory Analysis, 2nd ED. New-York:
Harper and Row.




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs