The Rural Voice, 1987-04, Page 25Packers are paying a premium for
steer carcasses between 550 and 750
pounds and heifer carcasses between
475 and 750 pounds, Wideman finds.
"We have to breed cattle that will at
least become an Al or A2 by the time
they reach 1,250 pounds. That would
be the upper range of live steers that
would dress out with a 750 -pound car-
cass. We certainly don't want to be
breeding animals that will require you
to take them up to 1,400 pounds be-
fore they reach an Al grade. If you
do, you are going to produce a carcass
that is too heavy. The feedlot oper-
ator takes a discount then and nobody
makes money."
Producers must also quit breed-
ing animals that will finish off at Al
before they reach 900 pounds live
weight, Wideman says. "We can't be
producing Hereford heifers that catch
an Al grade by the time they're 800
pounds because they will simply be
too light."
There is room for a few light hei-
fers on the market, Wideman concedes,
but "we simply daren't have many, so
our objective should be to eliminate
them because there's always going to
be some of them around. But the
minute you have an excess of them,
the price drops substantially and the
discounts are simply too large. No-
body can make money at that-"
Discounts for A3, A4, or Bl cattle
may look harsh — and they are, says
Wideman. They're harsh simply
because the packer doesn't want the
cattle. The consumer dictates what
is to be produced, he adds, and the
packer is acting on those requirements.
Wideman would like to see all farmers
producing 1,000 to 1,200 -pound cattle
with good daily gain and feed conver-
sion. "Sometimes a bull has a high
daily gain but terrible feed conversion,
and feed conversion is a highly herit-
able trait. If a bull is converting at
five to one, he will pass it on to his
offspring."
Wideman is often asked which
breed he thinks will give the highest -
yielding offspring. "I don't care which
breed does it," is his answer. "The
important thing is that we produce
offspring that will give superior yield
and superior cutability."
Yields at packing houses vary from
53 to 67 per cent. Producers may
blame a low yield on excessive trim-
ming by the meat plant, but Wideman
believes that genetics play a far greater
role than many producers realize. To
prove his point, his company slaugh-
tered two very similar Hereford steers
which had been raised together in the
same feedlot.
All variables were eliminated and
each steer was weighed before and after
slaughter. "Popular theory should tell
us that their yields should be within
one half of a per cent of each other,
but they varied by four per cent. That
indicates to me that there is an awful
lot to do with yield in the genetics of
the animal because they didn't come
from the same herd, despite being
raised together."
Despite a sometimes
negative consumer
attitude toward beef,
Wideman is convinced
that there is a
phenomenal market
for beef still left
untapped.
In a similar experiment to deter-
mine the variations in the percentage
of cutability (the percentage of meat
that can be cut from a carcass and
placed in the consumer's freezer), 57
steers were slaughtered. Cutability
ranged from 63 to 73 per cent despite
a strong degree of similarity in the
live animals. Farmers should be
breeding beef cattle to produce at least
70 per cent cutability, Wideman says.
It is difficult for a cow -calf opera-
tor to know what his calves will yield
or their cutability, Wideman notes.
"Unless a farmer can actually fatten
those calves and hang them on the rail,
he cannot get that information."
Wideman says feedlot operators would
be more than willing to supply market
results if calves were ear -tagged by the
cow -calf operator.
Selling beef cattle on a rail -grade
basis also gives the farmer a better
indication of the quality of his live-
stock. "It is the only way that a
producer can really know what it is
that he is producing," Wideman says,
adding that as far as he's concerned all
cattle are already sold this way.
"All cattle are sold on a rail -grade
basis, whether they're bought live or
by the dollar or on a rail -grade basis.
The end point is the carcass and that is
the ultimate purpose for which every
buyer is buying a slaughtered animal.
Even if he is buying him live, he's
looking at that animal and saying 'It
will produce me a carcass of such and
such, and that carcass is worth so
much, and on the basis of converting
it, I can pay so much for it live.' That
is the exercise everyone goes through."
Despite a sometimes negative con-
sumer attitude toward beef, Wideman
is convinced that there is a phenome-
nal market for beef still left untapped.
It's a matter of promoting an appeal-
ing, convenient product to the consu-
mer, he says. Given the desire for
lean, easily prepared meat, Wideman
believes that more emphasis should
be placed on beef as a wholesome and
totally nutritious protein source. Re-
cently published nutrition tables indi-
cate that beef is even leaner than many
people in the beef industry think.
Wideman, 46, married with three
children, compares his family's present
eating habits to what they were 15
years ago. "We don't have the tradi-
tional pot roast as much anymore. I
look at the steak I eat now compared
to 15 years ago. I don't want a big
T-bone steak anymore."
The beef industry also hasn't
taken advantage of the fact that beef
is a very pure product, Wideman says.
With the exception of penicillin and
a possible growth hormone, beef is a
natural, clean product in comparison
to chicken, which is given medicated
feed throughout the growth period.
Wideman is skeptical about the promo-
tion of meat products as "drug free,"
however. "I'm concerned about people
who promote a drug-free product. By
saying their product is drug free, they
are implying that other products are
full of drugs, and that's not so."
The beef industry in Canada lost
22 pounds worth of consumption per
capita between 1977 and 1985, mostly
to chicken and pork, Wideman adds.
But beef consumption is on the up-
swing again, he says. "The chicken
industry has done major work in
product development and advertising
to promote their product, but despite
all that, beef has still stayed number
one, and that's where there's cause for
optimism."
APRIL 1987 23