• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Main
 Historic note














Group Title: Mimeo series - University of Florida Range Cattle Station ; 66-4
Title: Fattening cattle for slaughter on pasture
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00074330/00001
 Material Information
Title: Fattening cattle for slaughter on pasture
Series Title: Mimeo series
Physical Description: 4 p. : ; 28 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Chapman, H. L ( Herbert L. ), 1923-
Range Cattle Station, Ona
Publisher: Range Cattle Station
Place of Publication: Ona FL
Publication Date: 1966
 Subjects
Subject: Beef cattle -- Feeding and feeds -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Pastures -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Statement of Responsibility: H.L. Chapman, Jr.
General Note: Caption title.
General Note: "May, 1966."
Funding: Mimeo report (Range Cattle Station, Ona) ;
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00074330
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 86118717

Table of Contents
    Main
        Page 1
        Page 2
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
    Historic note
        Page 6
Full Text

Range Cattle Station
Mvimeo Series PCS 66-4


May, 1966
May, 1966


FATTENING CATTLE FOR SLAUGHTER ON PA3TLRE1/

H. L. Chapman, Jr.2/


There are a number of factors that will affect the degree of
success experienced from fattening steers on pasture. Some of
these are presented below. It is extremely important to define the


*' N-


A-- /


kind of pasture being used the kind of forage, its nutritional value,
tonnage per acre, stage of growth, etc. Good quality pasture is an
essential ingredient for a successful steer-fattening program on
pasture. The supplemental feed should be used for increase in gain
and carcass grade and not for maintenance of the animal.




1/ Presented at 1966 Beef Cattle Shortcourse, University of
Florida.
2/ Animal Nutritionist and Head, Range Cattle Experiment
Station, Ona, Florida









Most permanent grasses in tropical and sub-tropical areas
are deficient in energy and supplemental feeds used for fattening steers
on pasture should be high in energy content. The crude protein
level in the diet of fattening cattle should not be below 10 percent.
If the forage protein level is below 10 percent it is important to
increase the protein content of supplemental feed. It should also
be remembered that the carrying capacity of the permanent grasses
of south and central Florida are reduced about two-thirds during the
winter months. Pasture forage should have a large amount of leaf to
stem, have at-least 20 to 25 percent of dry matter, contain a
minimum of 0.20 and preferably 0.25 to 0.30 percent of phosphorus
and should have a minimum of 7 ppm of copper. Examples of
supplemental feeds that have been successfully used for fattening
steers on pasture are presented in Table 1. In addition to the
ingredients presented in Table 1 it is recommended that the
concentrate ration contain 2,500 I.U. of vitamin A per pound and
also that diethylstilbestrol be used. The stilbestrol may be implanted
or mixed in the feed.

The quality of cattle will affect the amount of gain obtained on
pasture, just as well as in the feedlot. An example of this is
presented in Table 2. When properly managed poor and fair
quality steers can be used profitably on pasture-fattening programs,
but generally there is more profit to be made from a good quality
steer if it is favorably purchased.

Most of the time the use of a limited amount of concentrate
on good pasture will result in more return than on pasture alone.
The use of a limited amount of concentrate will increase rate of
gain, dressing percent, carcass grade, inventory output and buyer
acceptance (Tables 3 and 4). The use of full-feed on pasture is
not recommended. If it is desired to full feed steers better results
will usually be experienced in drylot than on pasture.








Table 1. Examples of rations-of various protein content that can be


Ingredient


Dried citrus pulp (lb)

Blackstrap molasses (Ib)

Cottonseed meal (Ib)

Urea 262 (Ib)

Hominy feed (Ib)

Dicalcium ps1 ph(ite (Ib)

Cobalt sulfate (gm)


Crude protein (%)
TDN


Crude rotein level
10 12 14


- I -


800

250

50

10

850

40

0.8

2000


*1*


10.4
74.8


L __________ A


800.

250

100

20

790

40

0.8

2000



12.5
73.8


765

250

125

30

790

40

0.8

2000



14.2
73.3


--1 1 .i


16 18 20


705

250

175

40

790

40

0.8

2000



16.3
72.6


625

250

250

45

790

40

0.8

2000


18.3
72.0


565

250

300

45

790

40

0.8

2000


20.4
71.3


and Feeding"
and Feeding",


1/ Crude protein and TDN content calculated from Morrison, F. B.,"Feeds
22nd edition.


_ _


1 i -- ^-


--


I


I


I


satisfactorily used on pasture-/.








Table 2. Relationship of feeder grade.to rate of gain for
steers fattened on pasture.


Feeder
Grade


Medium
Medium +
Good -
Good
Good +


Number
steers


24
72
97
77


Daily
gain (Ib)


1.74
1.75
1.95
2.01
2.06


Table 3. Average weight change and carcass data for steers
receiving different supplemental feeds on Roselawn
St. Augustinegrass.


No
feed


Number of steers
Final weight (lbs)
Initial weight (lbs)
Total gain (lbs)
Daily gain (lbs)'

Intransit shrink (%)
Cooler shrink (%)
Dressing percent (%)

Change in grade (1/3)


8
839
692
147
1.05

3.52
1.20
53.6

1


Citrus
pulp


8
931
692
239
1.71

4.83
0.76
56.4

2


Ground
Cane snapped
molasses corn


8
875
675
200
1.43

5.31
0.71
55.0

2


8
914
691
223
1.59

4.90
0.79
54.8

1


RCS 66-4
900 copies


Mixed
feed


8
923
692
231
1.65

4.54
0.58
54.4

1


- -


@ t


I .






Table 4. Molasses, with and without cornmeal op VegeFat, for fattening cattle on pasture.

No No
molasses, molasses, Molasses
2 steers 3 steers Molasses, Molasses, VegeFat,
per acre per acre Molasses VegeFat cornmeal cornmeal


Number of steers 8 12 12 12 12 12
Final wt. (Ib) 871 845 913 955 928 962
Initial wv. (lb) 677 682 678 682 680 681
Total gain (lb) 194 163 235 273 248 281
Daily gain (lb) 0.94 0.79 1.14 1.33 1.20 1.36

Wt. at packing house 822 797 861 901 876 908
Warm carcass wt, (lb) 464 443 514 548 536 558
Gross dressing % &/ 56.45 55.58 59.70 60.82 61.19 61.45
Net dre:sirg %h/ 53.4.9 52.68 56.55 57.67 58.11 58.31

Carcass grades
Gccd 0 0 1 1 0 2
Standard 6 8 9 11 12 10
Utility 2 4 2 0 0 0

Final carcass value ($)./ 143.97 135.47 163.06 179.50 173.90 183.93
Feed cost ($)d/ _____ 8.24 16.48 20.60 28.84
Return above feed cost ($) 143.97 135.47 154.82 163.02 153.30 155.09

Warm carcass weight
a/ Gross dressing percent = Packers live weight
Warm carcass weight 2 1/2% shrink
b/ Net dressing percent = Final weight 3% shrink
c/ Cattle sold on a net carcass weight and grade basis. U. S. Good, $36.50; U. S.Standard,
$33.25; and U'. S.- Utility, $27.00 cwt. Net carcass weight was warm carcass wt. 2 1/2%.
d/ Costs used in calculating feed costs were cane molasses @ $20.00 per ton; VegeFat @ $160.00
per ton; and cornmeal @ $60.00 per ton.









HISTORIC NOTE


The publications in this collection do
not reflect current scientific knowledge
or recommendations. These texts
represent the historic publishing
record of the Institute for Food and
Agricultural Sciences and should be
used only to trace the historic work of
the Institute and its staff. Current IFAS
research may be found on the
Electronic Data Information Source
(EDIS)

site maintained by the Florida
Cooperative Extension Service.






Copyright 2005, Board of Trustees, University
of Florida




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