LIMOUSIN TODAY | Page 126

Management State University (KSU), outline the specifics in differences among high-, medium- and low-profit cow-calf producers in a recent KSU analysis. “Obviously, if output is not increasing over time, the emphasis needs to shift more toward controlling cost,” Lalman says. Drawing from the KFMA analysis, Lalman cites opportunities to reduce the unit cost of production: • Match cow herd traits and calving season to the grazing system and forage resources. “This should result in lower winter feed costs, higher stocking rate per unit of land, and lower cost per pound of calf weaned,” Lalman says. • Take advantage of established and developing technologies. For instance, use of growth-promoting implants during the suckling phase has declined from about 60% to 30% of larger cow-calf operations. “They still work, providing an additional 15 to 20 pounds of weaning weight for a cost of about $1.25,” Lalman says. “With no market discount for calves implanted prior to weaning, and with no downstream negative impacts related to finishing performance or carcass quality, this trend is puzzling.” 124 | JUNE/JULY 2019 • Develop an intentional plan to improve fertility over time without increasing costs. “Available genetic selection tools are rapidly evolving. Take advantage of them,” Lalman says. “Examples include stayability, sustained cow fertility and heifer pregnancy EPDs. Cull cows that fail to produce a weaned calf. Keep only early-born heifers as