In the current economic situation — when saving money is a must — it is tempting for cattle producers to forgo providing supplements to help boost their bottom line. But before producers pull the plug on supplements, they should take a look at their current procedures to make sure they are getting the best bang for their buck.
Because protein and energy supplements can be costly, Eldon Cole, a livestock specialist with the University of Missouri Extension, said producers should first consider their current feed supply to determine if a supplement is even necessary.
“A forage analysis might reveal that their hay or winter pasture is better than they thought, and there is no need for a supplement,” Cole said. “Raising quality forage and turning cattle out on a pasture with a good mix of grass and legumes are the best ways to expose cattle to adequate amounts of energy and protein.”
Producers should also have a working knowledge of their cattle’s needs. For example, fresh cows that are just starting to milk have a greater energy need than cows that gave birth in August or September. Also, some cows have more fat stores to mobilize as a short term energy source, reducing the amount of supplementation needed.
“After producers identify the different type of cattle they have in their herd, some sorting is important to really get the best usage of feed supplements,” Cole said. “Penning cattle with the same energy and protein needs is a cost-effective way to provide supplements. Sorting cattle into separate pens or pastures may also reduce the risk of overstocking, which can be a major factor in the need to provide supplements.”
If quality forage or pasture is not available, producers must begin thinking about providing a supplement. When it comes to choosing the best supplemental sources of energy and protein, Cole said producers usually have to decide between cost and convenience. Factors such as time, distance between pastures and number of pastures can actually make buying a more expensive supplement more cost-effective.
“It is pretty easy to go to the store and see how much it will cost a producer to supplement one cow for an entire year. What most producers choose to consider is how easy it is to provide the supplement,” Cole said. “A few of the more expensive self-fed supplement options include lick tubs, lick tanks and dry supplements with limiters that prevent cattle from eating too much of the supplement, and while they may require more time and effort in distributing, supplements such as corn, soybean meal, alfalfa hay and dried distillers’ grains are still very viable options for producers.”
Cole said if producers are trying to decide whether or not to provide supplements, it may be time to look at the overall operation and instead decide whether or not culling a few cattle might be better for business.
“This is a hard time, and producers have to decide if holding on to an entire cow herd is good for their operation,” Cole said. “If producers have invested time and effort into improving herd genetics, they should evaluate their cattle and cull those animals that are not meeting the same standard of quality as the others.”
Cole said the University of Missouri Extension’s Commercial Agriculture Program is currently conducting a statewide survey of Missouri cattle producers to identify popular supplement forms and how producers determine their cattle’s needs. The results should be available this fall and will help extension personnel provide more information to their clients.
If producers have questions about whether or not their cattle need supplements, Cole suggests they contact their local extension agent or veterinarian.
