A range of technology is available to cow/calf

producers to aid in reproductive management of

females. Adoption of specific technologies for an

operation depend on many factors including current

level of performance, availability of facilities and

labor, and economic return.

The USDAs National Animal Health Monitoring

System (NAHMS) asked cow/calf producers about

use of many of these options during the Beef

Cow/Calf Health and Productivity Audit (CHAPA).

NAHMS conducted the CHAPA on 799 operations

located in 18 of the top beef states.1 Those 18 states

represented 70 percent of U.S. beef cow/calf

operations.

° Some sources say that using pelvic measurements

to index heifers for selection purposes can help to

minimize dystocia, while other sources question

the procedures value. Three percent of producers report using this technique in their herds

(Figure 1).

° Reproductive tract scoring can be used to select

heifers that are reproductively ready for the breeding season and, thus, minimize carrying costs of

heifers that will very likely fail to cycle and conceive early in the breeding season. Just over 1

percent of producers use this relatively new management tool.

It is encouraging to note that 31.8 percent of

producers feed replacement heifers separately

from the rest of the herd, providing an opportunity

to meet their unique nutritional needs more

effectively.

Sparse Use of Reproductive

Management Technology

for Beef Heifers and Cows

National Animal Health Monitoring System

United States

Department of

Agriculture

Animal and

Plant Health

Inspection

Service

Veterinary

Services

Figure 1

Target population: beef cow/calf producers with 5 or more beef cows and with 50 percent

or more of 1992 calves born from January through June.

1 Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Mexico,

Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and Wyoming.

May 1994
° Rectal palpation of females 45 or more days after

the end of the breeding season can be used to predict the time of calving and eliminate late calvers

and those that are nonpregnant from the herd, reducing feed costs. Nearly 16 percent of

producers pregnancy test any heifers by palpation

(Figure 2). Slightly more (17.7 percent) use the

technique on the cow herd.

° Artificial insemination offers the producer the opportunity to incorporate top quality genetics into

the herd without incurring the purchase and carrying cost for such a quality bull. In this way, large

advances can be made in selected traits in a single

generation rather than over several generations using lower quality bulls. About 3 percent of

producers artificially inseminate any of their heifers, while 5.4 percent do so with some of their

cows.

° Using estrus synchronization can add efficiency to

artificial insemination programs and can be used

to increase the number of calves born early in the

calving season. Producers from 3 percent of all

operations report synchronizing estrus on some of

their heifers. A slightly higher percentage of producers (4.3 percent) report synchronization of

some of their cows.

Also encouraging is that 12.7 percent of

producers breed heifers at least 2 weeks prior to the

rest of the herd. This practice allows heifers the

extra time needed to resume cycling after calving

prior to the onset of the cow herd breeding season.

Body condition scoring is an effective way of

monitoring the gross nutritional status of the herd.

Poor body condition at calving has been associated

with delayed returns to cycling; thus, cows become

pregnant later in the breeding season or not at all.

Nearly 5 percent (4.6 percent) of producers report

doing some body condition scoring of heifers. More

producers (15.5 percent) evaluate body condition of

the herds cows.

Benefits to specific producers may be less than

the cost of employing some of the reproductive

management technologies mentioned here.

However, there are no doubt situations where the

use of one or more of these techniques could pay

large dividends.

NAHMS collaborators included the National

Agricultural Statistics Service (USDA) and State and

Federal Veterinary Medical Officers. For more

information, contact:

Centers for Epidemiology & Animal Health

USDA:APHIS:VS, Attn. NAHMS

2150 Centre Ave., Bldg. B, MS 2E7 

Fort Collins, Colorado 80526-8117

(970) 494-7000

NAHMSweb@aphis.usda.gov

N144.0294

Figure 2