Dairy Cattle

Heavy Steers and Lean Cows: Drivers of the 2026 Ground Beef Market

Tue, 12 May 2026 15:48:30 GMT

In a market defined by record-breaking prices, an unlikely partnership is driving the value of ground beef: 980-lb. carcasses and the lean cull cows needed to balance them out. While fed cattle weights have reached historic highs, they’ve created a massive surplus of fat trim that requires an equally historic amount of lean blending beef to meet consumer demand. This blending math — combined with tight supplies and a shift in culling patterns — is pushing cull cow prices to new heights.

David Anderson, Texas A&M professor and Extension specialist for livestock and food product marketing, in a recent Southern Ag Today article , summarizes that cull cow prices keep climbing.

“While calf and fed cattle prices have continued to set new record highs in the cash and futures market, cull cow prices have continued their slow ascent to new highs as lean beef prices keep pulling cow prices higher,” Anderson explains. “Southern Plains cull cow auction prices increased to almost $180 per cwt in late April, up about $15 per cwt since January. The seasonal price increase has been smaller than normal this year. Cutter-quality cows have increased about $30 per cwt., almost 25%, since the beginning of the year.”

(USDA-AMS, Livestock Marketing Information Center)

The Blending Effect: Why 980-lb. Carcasses Need Lean Cows

Blending math is the process of mixing high-fat trim from fed cattle with 90% lean beef from cull cows to meet consumer demand for specific ground beef ratios. Anderson stresses one overlooked boost to lean beef prices has been record-large fed cattle dressed weights. Average federally inspected fed steer dressed weights have remained more than 980 lb. per carcass since late 2025.

“Larger carcasses produce additional fat that requires more lean beef for blending to boost its value as ground beef rather than just tallow entering the fats and oils market,” he says.

Glynn Tonsor, Kansas State University professor of agricultural economics, says when the beef industry harvests animals bigger than ever, it is also getting more 50% lean and 50% fat trimmings per animal than ever before. He points out most consumers don’t directly consume 50/50, thus it is an input into ground beef production, and it only works if there is more lean to blend with it.

If there is not enough U.S.-produced lean to blend, the next option is to import lean.

Dairy Culling Shifts and the April Pullback

After exceeding slaughter of a year ago through the first 10 weeks of 2026, dairy cow culling pulled back to year-ago levels during April.

“Dairy cow culling typically peaks in January and February each year, then declines into midyear,” Anderson says. “The decline in dairy cow slaughter has pulled down total cow culling as weekly beef cow slaughter has held at steady but low levels. For the year, total dairy cow slaughter is reported up 6% compared to last year while total cow slaughter (beef and dairy) is down 5%.”

(USDA-AMS and USDA-NASS, Livestock Marketing Information Center)

Beef and dairy cow slaughter is reported weekly by region of the U.S. In recent weeks, Anderson says reported regional cow slaughter data has declined due to confidentiality rules that prevent publication if there are too few buyers to prevent revealing any one operation’s actions.

(USDA-AMS and USDA-NASS, Livestock Marketing Information Center)

“The lack of reporting due to confidentiality concerns has been a problem in fed cattle reporting for many years,” Anderson says. “On the positive side, the weekly national cow slaughter data includes all of the regions, including those that could not be reported regionally.”

2026 projected cow culling is based on year-to-date beef cow slaughter.

(Oklahoma State University)

Retention vs. Liquidation: The Impact of Record Calf Values

Anderson says record-high calf prices are likely keeping cows on the ranch or dairy that otherwise would have been culled to get one more calf out of them. As those calves are born and move to weaning, there may be an increase in culling as those cows come to market.

“Cull prices tend to peak midyear, so there is room for cow prices to continue to increase over the next couple of months,” Anderson says. “Beyond just the seasonal pattern arguing for higher prices, cow culling should continue to be lower than last year, further supporting prices. Beef cow slaughter is expected to remain well below a year ago. Better milk prices should restrain dairy cow culling even though the herd remains large.”

Analyst Predicts Cull Cow Prices Will Remain Elevated

Adding to the discussion on cull cow marketing strategies, Don Close, Terrain chief beef analyst, explains, “Growing up in sale barns we always used to say the best day of the year to sell a used cow is the first day of baseball season. There is some grounding in that date. As soon as grass greens, after a producer has kept her and fed hay all winter, he isn’t going to sell her if he has grass, especially if he thinks she is bred. Once she has calved and grass is available, the producer isn’t inclined to do much unless it is a drought or injury issue. At this point they will wait until fall weaning and cow-sorting time.”

He also points out another driving factor for cull cow prices is the strength of ground beef prices supported with the beginning of the grilling season — prepared-meat manufacturers’ demand is at its peak. Hot dog and lunch meat sales go up as children are out of school and with ballpark hot dog consumption.

(USDA-AMS, Livestock Marketing Information Center)

Your Next Reads:

U.S. Bovine Semen Slipped 4% in 2025, Exports Hit Record $327M

Tue, 17 Mar 2026 19:06:22 GMT

Even with a major export market disappearing early in the year, the U.S. bovine genetics industry proved its resilience in 2025.

New data from the National Association of Animal Breeders (NAAB) , which represents roughly 95% of the U.S. artificial insemination industry, shows total semen sales slipped about 4% in 2025 to just under 66 million units - a decline of 2.9 million compared with 2024, effectively giving back last year’s modest gain. However, the industry offset much of that loss through stronger beef demand, expanded export markets and continued shifts in dairy breeding strategies.

China Closes Doors, Global Markets Evolve

In February 2025, U.S. bovine semen exports to China came to an abrupt standstill after Chinese authorities halted the issuance of required veterinary health certificates, cutting off one of the industry’s key export channels. The disruption stemmed from regulatory and trade tensions, not animal health concerns. Without the certificates, U.S. exporters had to redirect product to other markets.

“While dairy unit exports were down due to the closure of the China market, exports to other countries increased, which significantly reduced the impact of the closure,” says Jay Weiker, president of NAAB.

Even with China offline, robust interest from Europe, Brazil, North Africa and South Asia helped steady the export picture.

“The industry not only stabilized but continued to advance by strengthening long-standing markets and opening new ones,” says NAAB international program director Sophie Eaglen.

The closure of China also reshaped the list of top semen buyers by value. In 2025, the United Kingdom led the rankings, followed by Italy and Mexico. Brazil led in total units imported, followed by Mexico and Russia. Overall, 46 markets imported over $1 million in U.S. semen, accounting for 94% of export units and 95% of export value.

A Down Year for Dairy

The U.S. dairy semen market experienced a substantial decline in 2025, reflecting ongoing shifts in breeding strategies and global market pressures. Total dairy unit sales, including domestic, export and custom-collected units, fell 6% compared to 2024, a loss of roughly 3 million units, bringing the total to 45.8 million.

Despite the overall decline, domestic use showed a slight rebound, increasing 2% to 16.5 million units, or nearly 367,000 additional units. Sexed semen continued to dominate U.S. herds, rising 6% to 10.6 million units and now accounting for 64% of all dairy semen used domestically. Conventional dairy semen declined by 280,000 units, highlighting the continued trend toward precision breeding and genomic selection.

Exports for dairy semen totaled 28.3 million units, down about 2.5 million from 2024. The early-year closure of the China market contributed to the drop, but exports to other countries, particularly across Europe, Brazil, North Africa and South Asia, helped offset much of the lost volume. NAAB says strong international demand for replacement heifers continues to create opportunities for U.S. dairy producers.

Beef Semen Sees a Bump

The beef segment saw modest growth in 2025, reversing a multi-year decline. Total beef semen sales increased by 1%, or roughly 122,000 units, to reach 20.2 million units. Domestic use accounted for most of that growth, with beef units sold into beef herds rising 7% for the second consecutive year. In total, 9.8 million beef units were used domestically, with 8.1 million going into dairy herds and 1.7 million used in traditional beef herds.

Heterospermic beef semen, which combines genetics from multiple sires in a single straw, remains a significant portion of the market, though it declined from its 2024 peak of 2.8 million units to just over 2 million in 2025. Domestically, heterospermic units represented 2 million of the total, with 400,000 units exported. Angus remains the dominant beef breed, followed by crossbreeds and heterospermic products.

Export demand for beef genetics also continues to expand. Total beef semen exports grew 13% to 5.5 million units, underscoring the global appetite for U.S. genetics even as total semen unit exports declined overall.

Beef-on-Dairy Genetics Hold Steady

Beef-on-dairy genetics have become an increasingly important strategy for U.S. dairy producers, and 2025 was no exception. Domestic use remained steady at 8.1 million units, while exports of beef-on-dairy semen grew 13%, adding approximately 279,000 units.

This segment is fueled by genomic selection strategies that allow dairy producers to produce replacement heifers from their best animals while using beef sires on the remainder of the herd to create high-value F1 calves for feedlots. Adoption is also growing internationally, with rising demand for F1 calves and crossbred genetics, reinforcing the role of U.S. dairy producers in meeting both domestic and global needs.

Adaptive Trends and Future Opportunities

Despite the year’s unit declines, the industry is adjusting and finding its footing as global demand shifts and new breeding tools and market opportunities come along.

“Trends in semen usage reflect producers’ efforts to improve genetic outcomes and economic returns in an evolving marketplace,” Weiker says. “NAAB members should be complimented for their commitment to developing new markets and increasing market share in strategically important markets. There are many positives that can be gleaned from the 2025 results.”

With export value at record levels and beef-on-dairy strategies growing, the industry appears positioned for continued adaptation and progress in years ahead.

nixiFLOR Injection Approved by the FDA for Bovine Respiratory Disease Treatment

Thu, 22 Jan 2026 19:37:10 GMT

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved nixiFLOR injectable solution by Parnell Technologies, marking the first FDA-approved generic version of Resflor GOLD by Merck Animal Health. This product is indicated for the treatment of bovine respiratory disease (BRD) associated with Mannheimia haemolytica, Pasteurella multocida, Histophilus somni and Mycoplasma bovis, and for control of BRD-associated fever in beef and non-lactating dairy cattle.

nixiFLOR contains the same active ingredients as Resflor GOLD:

Florfenicol, a broad spectrum antibiotic effective against key bacterial pathogens involved in BRD
Flunixin meglumine, a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) that helps reduce fever and inflammation associated with respiratory infection

The FDA determined nixiFLOR is bioequivalent to the brand name product and that, when used according to the label, residues in edible tissues do not pose a public health concern. A withdrawal phase of 38 days must be observed before cattle treated with nixiFLOR enter the food supply.

Administered via subcutaneous injection in the neck, nixiFLOR is prescribed at 40 mg florfenicol/kg body weight and 2.2 mg flunixin/kg body weight (approximately 6 mL per 100lb. of body weight), with no more than 10 mL per injection site. This product is available by prescription only from licensed veterinarians, ensuring accurate diagnosis and responsible use.

5 Tips for Vaccine Handling

Fri, 07 Nov 2025 16:53:41 GMT

Vaccines are one of the most effective and economical tools available to maintain herd health, reduce disease loss and support animal well-being. However, even the best vaccine can fail if it’s not handled correctly. Dr. Jon Townsend, dairy technical services veterinarian with Merck Animal Health, recently touched on the topic during a Dairy Calf and Heifer Association webinar .

“You’ve made the investment in those vaccines. You want to get the best response out of them. You want to get the best cow health possible,” Townsend says.

Whether you’re working with calves, replacement heifers or mature cattle, following consistent vaccine handling practices ensures your investment delivers the intended immunity. Here are five key guidelines to keep in mind.

1. Store Vaccines at the Right Temperature

Vaccines are sensitive, biological products. Many must be kept refrigerated at a specific temperature range to remain effective.

Use a dedicated refrigerator (not the one used for drinks and lunches), as frequent door opening causes temperature swings.
Place a thermometer in the fridge to monitor temperature regularly.
Avoid storing vaccines in the refrigerator door where temperatures fluctuate the most.

2. Don’t Mix all your Vaccine at Once

Many livestock vaccines are sold as two-part products. Once mixed, the live organisms begin to break down.

“Only mix what you’ll use in the next one to two hours if you have to mix up a vaccine,” Townsend advises. “Your modified live vaccines you have to mix. So don’t mix a huge bottle that’s going to take the whole day to use. By the time you get to the last dose that vaccine has potentially degraded, and you won’t get the same response that you would have immediately after reconstitution.”

3. Keep Mixed Vaccines Cool and Out of Sunlight

Heat and sunlight can rapidly damage vaccines, particularly modified-live vaccines.

Keep syringes and mixed bottles in an insulated cooler with cold packs.
Do not place vaccine bottles on the chute, in your shirt pocket, or on a truck dashboard.
Check your cooler throughout the day to ensure cold packs are still cold and not melted.

Unsure about what cooler to use? Consider making it yourself.

“You can either buy a fancy one, or you can make one yourself with an Igloo cooler and drill some holes,” Townsend says. In the end, the goal is the same. “It’s really important to keep that vaccine cool. If you’re using a multi-dose syringe, make sure you’re keeping [it] cool between calves.”

4. Maintain Needle Cleanliness

Contamination can destroy vaccine potency and introduce infection to animals.

Use new clean needles when drawing vaccine from the bottle.
Do not set uncapped syringes or needles down on surfaces like tailgates or barn rails.
If a needle becomes dirty, bent or touches anything questionable, replace it.

“We need to be thinking about changing out needles more frequently than [we] did 30 years ago,” Townsend says. “Then disinfect the needle and syringes after use or dispose of them, and think about disinfecting multi-dose syringes.”

Townsend also highlights the importance of making sure there is no disinfectant residue remaining after cleaning as it has the potential to inactivate your vaccines. Producers and veterinarians should work together to set up protocols for syringe reuse.

5. Use Sharp, Appropriate Needles

A sharp needle ensures a clean injection and reduces animal discomfort.

Replace needles regularly and check for sharpness.
Choose needle size based on animal size, vaccine viscosity and route of administration:
- Subcutaneous: typically 16 to 18 gauge, ½" to ¾"
- Intramuscular: typically 16 to 20 gauge, 1" to 1½"

Townsend specifically warns about the development of burrs, small barbs or defects that can catch on skin, on your needles after too many uses.

“If you wouldn’t want it going into your arm for a vaccine, you shouldn’t be putting it into a cow or calf either,” he says.

Overall, the immunity an animal gains from vaccination is only as good as the care taken in handling the product. Proper storage, careful mixing, maintaining temperature and using clean, sharp needles are straightforward steps that protect your investment and your herd.

Insights into Calf Mortality at Commercial Calf Ranches

Fri, 24 Oct 2025 12:52:21 GMT

As the dairy industry embraces beef-on-dairy crossbreeding, a new type of animal is reshaping the U.S. calf and feedlot landscape. These calves, born on dairies but destined for the beef supply chain, are prized for their hybrid vigor, growth potential and carcass quality. Their journey often includes an early stay at commercial calf ranches, where young calves are reared in large groups under varying environmental and management conditions.

While these specialized facilities play a key role in raising thousands of calves efficiently, they also present unique animal health challenges. Calves arrive from multiple dairies, often within days of birth, and face stresses from transport, commingling and pathogen exposure. The industry has long suspected that respiratory disease dominates mortality at these sites, but until recently, detailed, systematic data to confirm those patterns were limited.

A new study by Rebecca Bigelow and colleagues from Kansas State University set out to change that. The study compiles data from over 240 necropsies performed across four different commercial calf ranches over a 12-month period documenting cause of death, concurrent conditions and whether these patterns shifted by season, sex, breed or location. These necropsies included both beef-dairy cross (152) and dairy calves (91). Their findings confirm respiratory disease is indeed the leading cause of death, but they also shed light on gastrointestinal (GI) disease and septicemia. Their work provides a valuable benchmark for working to improve early-life calf health.

Of the 243 necropsied calves, 67.5% of them had a primary diagnosis of respiratory disease. Gastrointestinal causes accounted for 11.5%, septicemia for 9.5%, and miscellaneous cases (including trauma, umbilical infection and liver abscesses) for the remaining 11.5%.

Most calves had no additional comorbidities recorded, but among those that did, respiratory plus another condition was the most common combination. Within the respiratory category, bronchopneumonia represented nearly 90% of cases, while bronchopneumonia with interstitial pattern was less frequent. Considering GI lesions, 49% of calves had no lesions, while 21% had upper GI lesions (rumen and abomasum), 13% had lower GI lesions (small and large intestine), and 30% had both.

One of the study’s more surprising findings was what didn’t change. Statistical modeling showed no significant associations between the likelihood of respiratory or GI diagnoses and season, sex, breed or ranch. This result suggests the underlying disease pressures in these systems are persistent year-round rather than being driven by environmental conditions or genetic background. Further, beef-dairy cross calves had no improved disease resistance compared to dairy calves under commercial rearing conditions.

These results can be summarized into the following takeaway points for animal caretakers:

Prioritize respiratory prevention.

With two thirds of deaths linked to respiratory causes, calf ranches must focus on preventative strategies: proper ventilation, gradual group transitions and consistent monitoring for early signs of respiratory illness. Review vaccination programs and align them for protection at times of stress and exposure.

Necropsies pay off.

Routine necropsy programs can help producers spot emerging disease trends before they escalate.

Maintain consistent management year-round.

Prevention and monitoring must remain equally rigorous through all seasons, not just in winter or transport peaks.

Collaborate across the production chain.

Calf health outcomes at ranches depend on colostrum management, navel care and nutrition practices at the dairy of origin, as well as transport and receiving protocols. Strong communication between dairies, calf ranches and veterinarians ensures continuity of care.

The Impact of Low Trace Minerals in Cattle May Be Bigger Than You Expect

Wed, 08 Oct 2025 17:12:13 GMT

Trace minerals — including copper, selenium, zinc, manganese and cobalt — are needed in vanishingly small amounts. However, when these nutrients fall even the smallest bit short of a cow’s needs, the consequences can be significant. These results can include slower growth, compromised immunity and poor reproduction.

Although trace minerals make up less than 0.01% of an animal’s body weight, they’re fundamental co-factors in enzymes, antioxidants, metabolic and immune pathways. Subclinical deficiencies may be a more extensive problem as the symptoms are not evident and there is no intervention, leading to economic losses.

David Schaeffer, professor at the University of Illinois, and his colleagues recently published work analyzing trace mineral concentrations from beef and dairy livers submitted to the California Animal Health & Food Safety Lab System laboratory between 2012 and 2021. The aim of this work was to compare any correlation patterns of copper, selenium, and manganese contents, and incidence of disease.

This work included 1,495 liver samples collected from cattle submitted for diagnostic testing. They were categorized as beef (857) or dairy (638), and further grouped by age (neonates, adolescents and adults).

The study revealed significant differences between deficiencies in beef and cattle. Overall, 73% of beef cattle and 45% of dairy cattle were found to be deficient in at least one trace mineral. In beef cattle, 46% of cattle were deficient in selenium, while 39% were deficient in manganese and 33% were deficient in copper. In dairy cattle, 10% of cattle were deficient in selenium, while 37% were deficient in manganese, and only 5% were deficient in copper.

(Adapted from Schaeffer et al., 2025)

The observed increased incidence of deficiency in beef cattle is likely expected as these animals often rely on free choice minerals, while dairy cattle are fed a total mixed ration including a mineral supplement. Interestingly, Schaeffer also reported a large portion of dairy cattle may have been oversupplemented as they observed above normal copper and selenium levels.

Associations between mineral status and disease occurred across both groups, but were most prevalent in beef cattle.

In beef cattle reported to have bovine respiratory disease (BRD), 68% of animals were deficient in copper, selenium or both minerals. The median age of these animals was 8 months, and most of them had been recently transported and co-mingled with other calves.

One thing the authors noticed was some conditions that are usually subclinical in beef cattle, for example parasites, were fatal in animals that were deficient in copper, selenium, or both.

“Now obviously we don’t know the condition score of those animals,” says co-author David Villar on a recent episode of “Have You Herd?”. “I would imagine it was pretty poor to die from internal parasites.”

As stated above, dairy cattle cases had much lower prevalences of trace mineral deficiency. Along with this, they also had lower incidences of correlation between deficiency and disease.

Of the dairy cattle with only one deficiency, the most frequent diagnoses were BRD (23%), Salmonella (14%), scours (16%), and septicemia (6%). Of all dairy cattle, 11% of those with BRD also had a copper or selenium deficiency.

It’s important to remember these are correlations between mineral status and disease, not causation.

Villar highlights what he hopes producers and veterinarians would take away from this work: “The main conclusion I would make is that beef, but not dairy, are still largely deficient in essential microminerals, copper and selenium. We need to check the herd management to see what’s happening.”

These results present an opportunity for producers and veterinarians to build preventative mineral nutrition programs, especially in beef herds where deficiencies are more prevalent. Proactive monitoring and targeted supplementation could reduce disease, mortality and economic loss in cattle herds.

Generic vs. Pioneer Drugs for Cattle: Should You Care?

Wed, 17 Sep 2025 13:58:13 GMT

Medication use is an essential part of maintaining health, productivity and welfare in dairy and beef cattle. From treating mastitis on a dairy to managing respiratory disease in a feedlot, veterinarians and producers rely on a range of pharmaceuticals to keep herds healthy. However, with many drugs available in both pioneer and generic forms, the question arises: Is there a meaningful difference between the two?

For veterinarians and producers, the decision involves more than just the label. Understanding the approval process, economics and practical considerations behind generic and pioneer drugs can help guide responsible choices that support animal health, food safety and economic sustainability.

What are Pioneer and Generic drugs?

Pioneer drugs are the original products developed by a pharmaceutical company that have an approved new animal drug application (NADA). They are protected by patents, which give the company exclusive marketing rights for a period of time. This exclusivity allowed the manufacturer to recoup the significant investment made in research, development and regulatory approval.

Generic drugs enter the market once those patents expire and have an approved abbreviated NADA (ANADA). A generic contains the same active ingredient, in the same dosage form and strength, and is administered through the same route as its brand name counterpart. In other words, a generic drug must deliver the same therapeutic effect as the brand name drug.

The key differences often lie in the inactive ingredients, such as stabilizers, preservatives or carriers, that can vary between products. These differences generally do not affect stability or efficacy, but may influence characteristics such as palatability or ease of administration.

Approval and Regulatory Oversight

Both pioneer and generic veterinary drugs are regulated by the FDA’s Center for Veterinary Medicine. However, the approval pathways differ:

Pioneer drug approval requires a company to submit an NADA. This includes extensive studies to prove the product’s safety for the target species, its effectiveness against the labeled condition, tolerance in the animal, food safety data (residue studies for milk and meat) and environmental impact. These studies often involve large clinical trials and can take years to complete.
Generic approval follows the ANADA process. Instead of repeating all of the brand name drug’s trials, the generic manufacturer must prove bioequivalence — that the drug behaves the same way in the animal’s body as the original product. Generics must also demonstrate consistent manufacturing practices and establish withdrawal times for milk and meat.

The result is that generics are held to rigorous standards of safety and efficacy. They are not weaker or inferior, they simply follow a more streamlined approval process as the groundwork has already been laid by the pioneer product.

Economics

One of the most notable differences between pioneer and generic drugs is cost. For producers, generic options can significantly reduce the cost of herd-level treatment, which is an important factor when treating dozens or hundreds of animals. For veterinarians, cost can influence prescribing practices and client satisfaction. Offering effective but more affordable treatment options might improve compliance and strengthen the veterinarian-producer relationship. In the long term, the availability of generics supports more sustainable herd health programs, particularly for common or recurring conditions.

Clinical and Practical Considerations

Does it work? vs. Did it work here?

When speaking on generic drugs, one of the key distinctions Dr. Nora Schrag, from Kansas State University, pointed out was the difference between whether a drug works and whether a drug worked in a specific production environment.

“‘Does the thing in the bottle work’ is a fundamentally very different question than ‘did it work,’ Schrag says. “‘Did it work’ includes the stuff in the bottle, but it also includes the people that are getting the stuff in the bottle into the critter, it includes the critters, it includes the weather, it includes everything else.”

Outcomes are influenced not just by the drug but also by management. Measuring whether a drug worked in a particular production setting requires keeping good records, monitoring success rates and comparing farm outcomes to peer benchmarks.

While generics and pioneer drugs are equivalent in active ingredient and expected efficacy, a few practical points deserve attention:

Perception: Some producers might be skeptical, perceiving pioneer products as more trustworthy. Veterinarians play a critical role in reassuring clients with evidence-based guidance.
Formulation differences: Rarely, a difference in inactive ingredients might influence animal tolerance or ease of use.
Compliance and stewardship: Regardless of whether pioneer or generic, observing label directions, withdrawal periods and judicious antimicrobial use principles remains essential.

Guidance for Decision-Making

The choice of what drug to use should be a collaborative effort between veterinarians and producers.

Veterinarians should evaluate both clinical needs and economic considerations. Recommending a generic is often appropriate, but being prepared to explain the science behind equivalency helps build producer confidence.
Producers should recognize withdrawal times and responsible use requirements apply equally to both drug types. Partnering with veterinarians ensures choices align with herd health goals and regulatory compliance.
Both parties must consider not only cost, but also judicious antimicrobial use, animal welfare and food safety when selecting products.

Both brand name and pioneer drugs are indispensable tools for managing cattle health. FDA’s rigorous approval process ensures generics are just as safe and effective as their pioneer counterparts. Generics offer producers significant cost savings that support sustainable operations. Working with their clients, veterinarians can help guide drug choices to ensure effective treatment while promoting stewardship and trust.

In the end, the decision is not about brand loyalty but using evidence-based judgment to balance animal health, food safety and economics. Together, these values benefit both the beef and dairy industry.

Taking Stock For Disasters: Developing A Large Animal Preparedness Plan

Mon, 11 Aug 2025 14:27:24 GMT

When a disaster is on the horizon, timely evacuation can become that much more challenging for owners whose horses and livestock can’t simply squeeze into the back seat. These animals often depend entirely on their owners to shield them from the elements within their pasture, so having a proper plan in place is vital for their safety.

Kyle Johnson, a clinical assistant professor at the Texas A&M College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, offers insight into disaster risks and preparedness methods for large animal owners.

The Threat Of Wind, Water And Wildfires

Natural disasters that can impact horses and livestock include seasonal concerns like extreme summer heat and winter ice as well as sudden events like hurricanes, tornadoes, floods and wildfires.

Any storm with strong winds brings the threat of flying debris.

“When airborne, this debris can cause traumatic injuries — such as lacerations and puncture wounds — to horses and livestock,” Johnson says. “These high winds can also cause barns, shelters, and other structures to collapse.”

Flooding brought on by a storm’s heavy rain is another major threat for large animals exposed to the elements.

“If an animal is forced to stand in floodwaters because it is confined to a stall or a flooded pasture, it can suffer from a variety of injuries, including severe dermatitis, pneumonia and gastrointestinal or neurological disease — collectively known as submersion injury,” Johnson says. “Floodwater can also be heavily contaminated with a variety of substances, such as petroleum products, agricultural and industrial chemicals, pesticides and bacterial organisms like E. coli.”

Completing nature’s triple threat against horses and livestock is the potential harm brought by wildfires.

“When these animals inhale the smoke from wildfires, it can cause irritation of their eyes and lungs,” Johnson says. “Animals may cough, have increased respiratory rates and nasal discharge. Fires can also destroy or contaminate any available forage for grazing animals. In these cases, animals will either need to be moved or high-quality forage will need to be delivered to them.

“At times like these, proper animal identification is critical, as it makes returning these animals to their owners and pastures much easier after flood waters have receded and fires have been extinguished.”

Methods of large animal identification include:

Microchipping
Ear tags
Plastic neck bands
Branding
Tattoos

Thinking Ahead

Simply deciding to evacuate your horses or livestock isn’t enough. Having a safe place to go is also a vital part of your plan. Furthermore, knowing how to get there and having alternate routes can also be critical to an effective evacuation.

“A vital first step in any evacuation is the ability to quickly and safely load your horses into a horse trailer,” Johnson says. “Practice makes perfect so practicing loading your horse can be helpful so when you must leave. It’s also important to ensure that the trailer is regularly maintained.”

A plan is merely an idea unless it is written down. Copies should be made and stored both on-farm and in alternate, but known and accessible, locations. It should also be rehearsed, even if only briefly, and everyone should have a thorough understanding of the plan and know their role.

Emergency Kit Preparation

Companion animal owners are encouraged to plan ahead in the event that an evacuation might be needed by creating an emergency “go kit” of necessities for their pets; having the same kind of kit in the event that you need to evacuate large animals will make that process easier as well.

An emergency kit for large animals should contain enough supplies to last at least 72 hours, and possibly up to two weeks.

“Water is arguably the most important part of an emergency kit,” Johnson says. “An adult horse needs roughly six to 10 gallons of fresh water per day. As such, a kit should include at least three days’ worth of water per horse, with enough feed to last one to two weeks.”

Additional emergency kit materials include:

Registry paperwork
Copies of medical records
First-aid supplies
Identifying photographs
Feed and water buckets
Extra halters and lead ropes
Cleaning supplies
Medications

Pre- And Post-Disaster Resources

Before a disaster strikes, an owner’s best preparation resource is their regular veterinarian, who can provide copies of important documents and ensure that horses are properly vaccinated and in good health.

“It is important for horse owners to know their neighbors or, if the horse is kept in a boarding barn, the barn manager and other boarders at the facility,” Johnson says. “These relationships can promote mutual aid when disaster strikes.”

There are also a variety of resources available for members of the public to obtain accurate and up-to-date information about disasters that may impact their area, including automated emergency alert systems in the form of texts, emails or apps.

Knowing how weather may affect your property and having a plan in place are the best ways to protect your horses and your herds and to stay ahead of the chaos.

“As Dr. Deb Zoran, director of the Texas A&M Veterinary Emergency Team, says, ‘hope is not a plan.’ Owners should plan for disaster, discuss their plan with others, prepare their emergency kits, and be ready to act,” Johnson says. “With disasters becoming more frequent and catastrophic, it’s not a matter of if, but when.”

3 Ways To Help Producers Be Ready If ICE Shows Up At The Farm

Tue, 15 Jul 2025 02:22:46 GMT

Many aspects of U.S. food production have the hands of immigrant labor involved in the process today. That fact is a key reason bovine veterinarians can benefit from considering how to help their beef and dairy clients be prepared if Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officials show up at farms and other facilities.

“Many of [the] employees are unfortunately undocumented, and farms have been the subject of ICE raids,” says Fred Gingerich, DVM, American Association of Bovine Practitioners (AABP) executive director.

Gingerich addressed the topic and offered some practical recommendations during a recent AABP Have You Herd podcast with program guest Rick Naerebout, executive director of the Idaho Dairymen’s Association. The association is a producer owned and governed organization in Idaho, representing dairy farm families throughout the state.

Here are three of the key takeaways from their discussion:

1. Encourage beef and dairy producers to proactively put legal counsel in place that is specific to immigration — has that as a specialty in their practice.

Do this first step as soon as possible, Gingerich and Naerebout encourage.

“…Make sure that you have legal counsel lined up and you have that phone number readily available for anybody that you anticipate that might be that first point of contact with ICE if they show up on the facility,” Naerebout says

2. Establish a chain of command (COC) on the farm that all employees are aware of and know how to articulate to ICE officials.

Coach employees on how to implement the COC.

“…Guys, have a strategy worked out in advance, so you’re not trying to make it up on the fly,” Naerebout advises. “Because everything that has been reported to us in terms of what the experiences have been with ICE coming onto facilities these last few months is that those are very intense situations, and you typically don’t have the luxury of time or convenience on your side.”

Within that strategy, Naerebout recommends coaching employees who are not authorized to speak for the facility to be able to tell ICE officials that and how to reach the owner or key manager.

3. Encourage clients to post signage that clearly delineates between private and public places within facilities and/or on the farm.

Naerebout says such signage can help guide where ICE officials can go, depending on the type of warrant they show up with. He explains there are two common warrants ICE officials might have in-hand when they arrive:

One is an administrative warrant. The other is a judicial warrant:

An administrative warrant is going to come from, typically, the Department of Homeland Security and is not signed by a judge.

“With an administrative warrant, they can only go into public places,” Naerebout says.

As a simple rule of thumb, tell producers to consider wherever a UPS or FedEx driver can go to deliver packages on the farm or facility as a public place. Post signage designating those areas, as such.

A judicial warrant is going to be signed by a state or a federal judge, and that will give ICE authorization to go into private places within your client’s farm or facilities.

Naerebout says understanding the difference between those two warrants, and the access they provide, is a key piece that you need to try and make sure your clients and their employees have a clear understanding of at the onset.

“Again, [if ICE shows up] this is going to happen very rapidly, very aggressively, from what we’ve been shared with, so you want to really coach employees and have a strategy in place beforehand, so it’s somewhat second nature if it does happen on one of your facilities,” he says.

Gingerich asked Naerebout about what are an employer’s and an employee’s rights if they’re questioned by an ICE agent.

“Sit down with your legal counsel and really talk through what those rights are for the employees and the employers to understand, what they can and cannot do, and don’t have to answer,” Naerebout emphasized.

“I will say that the different ICE raids that we’ve seen around the country, and what’s been reported back to us, is typically they are coming in and they’ve got arrest warrants for individuals, and they are arresting those individuals,” he adds.

“In those situations, you have all your same Miranda rights that any of us would have. But again, I would strongly encourage this, talk through these situations with your legal counsel and have a good understanding of who’s going to talk to ICE and what they have to say.”

For more insights that you and livestock producers can use to prepare for a visit from ICE, AABP provided links to the following organizations:

National Immigration Law Center
American Immigration Council
American Immigration Lawyers Association

Your next read: Rural America is Facing a Mounting Labor Crisis

Are Beef-on-Dairy Animals Really Worth the High Price Tag?

Fri, 27 Jun 2025 21:25:43 GMT

Beef-on-dairy calves are no longer just a trend; they’re a business strategy for producers aiming to squeeze more value out of every breeding decision. For dairy farmers, they offer a way to turn lower-producing cows into a new revenue stream. For feedlots, they promise improved feed efficiency and more desirable carcasses.

“Dairy producers are breeding lower milk production cows to beef sires to increase calf revenue,” says Melanie Concepcion, a Ph.D. student at Michigan State University, who recently presented on the economics of beef-on-dairy animals. “The idea is to add more value to existing Holstein calves by improving muscling, hide quality and market desirability.”

According to CattleFax, beef-on-dairy crosses started showing up in the fed slaughter mix around 2019. Today, they represent an estimated 2 million to 3 million head annually, contributing roughly 15% to 20% of total U.S. beef production and signaling a major shift in how dairy genetics can serve the beef supply chain.

“They’re here to stay,” Concepcion adds. “And the number of beef-on-dairy cattle is only expected to grow.”

Study 1: Feedlot Gains and Carcass Traits
To measure how these crossbreds stack up, Concepcion launched a study evaluating 75 Holstein and 75 beef-on-Holstein steers from Michigan calf raisers. Raised under identical conditions, the steers transitioned from starter to finishing diets and the performance differences were not surprising.

Beef-on-dairy steers:

Reached market weight 21 days faster
Converted feed more efficiently
Posted a 20% larger ribeye area
Scored lower yield grades, signaling better muscling

“They’re more feed efficient and have a greater ribeye area and fat thickness than the Holsteins,” Concepcion explains. “Their yield grade is also lower, which is a good thing because it means more yield and muscling.”

However, liver health raises red flags. Concepcion finds that 39% of the beef-on-Holstein steers develop liver abscesses, some severe enough to adhere the liver to the carcass.

“In those cases, you see trimming losses,” she says. “And that hurts overall carcass value.”

Premiums and Pitfalls: Are Crossbreds Priced Right?
Economically, the study shows that beef-on-dairy calves bring greater value but also come with a price tag that’s tough to justify.

“We pay $310 more per calf for the beef-on-Holsteins, but our data shows we should have only paid $273 more,” Concepcion says. “Yes, they should be worth more, but not as much as we paid.”

With some day-old beef on dairy crossbreds fetching upward of $1,000, Concepcion says the numbers simply don’t justify the premium in many cases.

“These calves clearly have more value than Holsteins, but not to the degree that some buyers are currently paying,” she says. “We’re still seeing inflated calf prices that don’t reflect actual feedlot performance or carcass returns.”

Study 2: Corn Silage and Liver Health
Looking to address liver concerns, Concepcion led a second study focusing on dietary fiber. The hypothesis: increasing corn silage in the finishing ration could help reduce liver abscess incidence by supporting better rumen health.

The study included 65 Holstein and 65 beef-on-Holstein steers. Each breed was fed a finishing diet with either 20% or 40% corn silage.

“We wanted to see if increasing fiber through higher corn silage inclusion reduces abscess rates,” she says.

The findings were clear:

Steers on the 40% corn silage diet had significantly fewer liver abscesses
The diet change did not affect feed efficiency or cost of gain
Beef-on-dairy steers continued to outperform Holsteins in carcass traits, regardless of diet

“Increasing corn silage inclusion effectively reduces the amount of liver abscesses in cattle, regardless of breed,” Concepcion says.

Carcass Performance Remains Strong
Even with the shift in diet, beef-on-Holstein steers continue to demonstrate a clear advantage in carcass traits and processing yield compared to purebred dairy steers. These crossbreds exhibit:

Higher hot carcass weights
Greater dressing percentages
Larger ribeye areas
Lower kidney, pelvic and heart (KPH) fat

“Adding beef genetics to Holsteins results in more muscling,” Concepcion notes. “And that leads to higher carcass value.”

Interestingly, marbling and quality grade remain similar between breeds and diets. Most cattle grade in the low to mid-choice range, offering acceptable quality without excessive feed costs. Additionally, the lower KPH fat and higher dressing percentages give processors more saleable product, further boosting the overall economic benefit.

“Even with differences in feed and frame size, beef-on-dairy cattle continue to show consistency in carcass composition,” she adds. “This predictability is valuable for both feeders and packers.”

Feedlot Advantages Might Not Justify Current Calf Prices
Despite the performance benefits, the pricing issue resurfaces. In the second trial, beef-on-Holstein calves cost Concepcion $353 more than Holsteins, but break-even data shows they should only cost $281 more.

“We overpaid again, just like last time,” Concepcion says. “These studies show us that beef-on-dairy calves should be priced at a premium, but not as high as the current market suggests.”

Feed costs were actually lower for beef-on-dairy steers, thanks to shorter days on feed. And while the 40% corn silage diet increased feed cost slightly, it didn’t impact the cost of gain, making it a viable strategy for improving liver health without compromising efficiency.

Looking Ahead
While beef-on-dairy calves offer clear advantages in feedlot performance and carcass quality, Concepcion notes the market still needs tools to match pricing with actual value.

She continues to explore what drives health, gain and grading in these crossbreds, and her latest work includes studies on gut and liver health as well as comparisons across breed types like Simmental-Angus, Holstein and beef steers.

“The more we understand how these cattle grow, grade and ultimately eat, the better we can manage and market them,” she adds.

Your Next Read: How to Keep Good Hay From Going Bad: Barn Storage Tips That Protect its Quality and Value

To watch Cocepcion’s full webinar, click here:

Consumer Trust: A Veterinarian’s Role

Thu, 19 Jun 2025 15:27:12 GMT

This article was written by David Friedlander, the Senior Director of Market Research for the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association.

With information so readily available at one’s fingertips, ensuring a trusted source of information from the cattle industry is critical. Animal caretakers may field questions on how animals are raised from many interested groups. Who better to provide unbiased information related to animals than the voice of a veterinarian?

Through the first three months of 2025, fresh meat sales reached an all-time high compared to year ago levels¹. Protein is top of mind as it relates to health and wellness and consumers are looking for help navigating the crowded informational marketplace.

By the end of 2025, over 325 million people are projected to have internet access in the United States² with the majority using a mobile device or smartphone to access it³. News and information are now at the consumers’ fingertips. For a host of reasons, consumer trust among mass media outlets is at an all-time low⁴.

From a veterinarian or farmer/rancher perspective, how does one share information related to production practices? Who is the trusted source of truth among consumers?

Referencing the National Cattlemen’s Beef Associations’ (NCBA) Consumer Beef Tracker, a contractor to the Beef Checkoff, both a veterinarian and farmer/rancher rise to the top, above all other sources⁵. In fact, more than 60% of consumers note both a veterinarian and farmer/rancher as the source of truth followed by more than 50% consumers looking to government agencies, specifically, USDA, FDA and CDC.

(Consumer Beef Tracker, NCBA)

When asking respondents about perceptions specifically related to beef, 90% of respondents had a positive or neutral response. Taking this one step further, when asking respondents about the production perception of beef, 80% had a positive or neutral response⁵.

Although overall perceptions related to beef are positive, when asking respondents about their knowledge specifically related to how cattle are raised and grown for food, data show slightly more than 25% of respondents noted either “knowledgeable’ or “very knowledgeable”⁵about how cattle are raised and grown for food.

However, when consumers make purchases, 70% claim they have some level of consideration of how food was raised and grown for food. When narrowing down to concerns related to how cattle are raised for food, less than 35% of respondents have a specific concern, with animal welfare rising to the top⁵.

Given the challenging media landscape and lack of trust among consumers, NCBA looked to producers and a veterinarian to help raise overall perception related to how cattle are raised for food.

(Consumer Beef Tracker, NCBA)

Given the challenging media landscape and lack of trust among consumers, NCBA looked to producers and a veterinarian to help raise overall perception related to how cattle are raised for food. Capturing a day in the life of local producers and a veterinarian, NCBA shared the level of care, overall well-being and hard work that goes into raising cattle.

When surveying consumers, both before and after seeing the featured video, the positive response grew from just over 30% to nearly 75% among respondents. Perhaps even more encouraging, negative perception decreased from nearly 30% to just 5% after seeing the featured video ⁶.

Integrating industry education resources such as those in the Beef Checkoff-funded Beef Quality Assurance (BQA) and associated programs is one way that veterinarians can continue to be this trusted voice. Elevating cattle care through that partnership with the producer impacts animal health, product quality, and consumer confidence . Considering the consumer aspect of raising cattle is one area where veterinarians may have not previously contributed, though it is apparent that their influence goes beyond animal health.

In a marketplace filled with competing messages and general mistrust among consumers, it is very encouraging to see high levels of trust by consumers, specifically, in those individuals that have one-to-one experience with the animals, namely the veterinarian and the farmer/rancher to help share out the broader message of animal care.

There is still work to be done from a consumer perspective but having a trusted leader to share the message is a great place to start. For more consumer insights and Beef Checkoff-funded research, visit https://www.beefresearch.org/ .

References
¹Circana
² Statista, 2025 projections based on actuals through 2023
³DataReportal: GWI; Meltwater; We Are Social
⁴Gallup 1927 - 2024
⁵NCBA Consumer Beef Tracker, January – December 2024
⁶NCBA: Raised and grown asset testing, October 2023

3 Factors Fueling Americans' Obsession with Protein

Fri, 06 Jun 2025 15:48:09 GMT

Meat is having a moment, and the craze for more protein is benefiting protein across the board. The fact cattle prices continue to crush records is proof of that, as well as the robust demand for pork.

“I am still bullish of dairy. I’m bullish of beef. I’m bullish of pork and poultry,” says Dan Basse, AgResource Company . “I think as you think forward, I see the next two or three years as being the years of protein. It’s that side of the fence in agriculture that’s going to do very well.”

Basse’s optimistic outlook on protein hinges on one major factor: consumers’ ability to pay for it.

“I’m still bullish of protein, until we see the labor force start to shrink in the United States, and I start to see disposable income coming down. Again, there’s not a period looking backward in history that I can find where disposable income on a personal basis has risen this quickly from 2020 to 2025,” he says.

“Meat protein, not just pork or not just beef, but meat is having a moment. I’m an economist, so I have concerns on the macroeconomic front, but it is exciting to be in an era where the public’s desire for meat protein is growing,” says Glynn Tonsor, a professor in the Department of Agricultural Economics at Kansas State University.

People Are Eating More Protein Than Ever Before

Cargill’s 2025 Protein Profile found people are eating more protein than ever before. The report found 61% of consumers report increasing their protein intake in 2024, which is up from 48% from 2019.

According to Cargill, the shift in shoppers’ preferences toward whole, minimally processed foods, is giving protein a chance to shine.

“It’s really important to remember the U.S. public wants meat protein,” Tonsor says. “There are a lot of signs. We are in a pro protein environment. I don’t think there’s issues. I actually think there is a celebration about the taste and the eating experience and so forth for all the major proteins.”

A Slight Shift in May’s Monthly Meat Demand Monitor

Tonsor also authors what’s called the Monthly Meat Demand Monitor (MDM) , which tracks U.S. consumer preferences, views and demand for meat. The first half of the year, the MDM continued to show consumers’ growing demand for protein, but in the report in May, it did show a slight shift.

“The biggest takeaway from the MDM would be we have two conflicting patterns,” says Tonsor. “One is the public really wants meat protein, but the macroeconomic environment is giving us some pause. So, we continue to see strong signals people want protein. Taste is leading that decision, so that’s good and very supportive, but we also see lots of uncertainty on the macro-economic front. So, trade discussions, elevated unemployment, inflation concerns and so forth. Those are not supportive of meat demand, so those are the two trends that are fighting the way out.”

Tonsor points out the May MDM showed a pullback in consumers eating away from home, like in restaurants, but showed a boost in retail demand, which would be grocery stores.

“But part of that is a substitution away from restaurants,” he says. “And that’s across the board. It’s not just pork or beef or chicken. It’s all of them that we track, so I do think it is a headwind that is growing here in 2025.”

Tonsor says if confidence in the economy rebounds, and tariff discussions ease, the restaurant piece of meat demand could quickly recover, especially considering we’re entering the summer months, where meat demand is typically higher.

3 Major Drivers Behind the Protein Craze

And even with the pause in restaurant demand in May, Tonsor says the push for consumers to eat even more protein doesn’t seem to be going away, and it’s being driven by three major factors.

“More people are having meat as an ingredient rather than center of the plate. So, it’s coming across as more convenient. It’s an input,” Tonsor says. “Also younger folks in particular are quite physically active, and their demand for protein and that broader lifestyle is elevated.”

Those two factors are strong drivers of meat demand, especially in the younger crowd. But another supportive piece of the growing demand for protein is related to weight loss drugs.

“We have a GLP-1 effect, so Ozempic, Mounjar and so forth, in the MDM, we put out a report earlier this year, showing maybe 15% of the U.S. public is using the GLP-1,” Tonsor says. “That’s a higher end, but that’s what we estimate. And if you are on those products, you’re actually consuming beef, pork and chicken more frequently.”

He says all of those things add up to support the growth in meat demand.

“It’s the income and the future status of my finances is mainly the only headwind at the moment, and that’s why I keep reiterating that concern,” Tonsor says.

Demand is What’s Pushing Cattle Prices to New Highs

It’s not just the hog industry that’s benefiting from the strong demand, both domestically and with exports

Cattle prices continue to crush records. But according to one veteran cattle analyst, it’s not historically tight cattle numbers pushing prices higher, it’s the strong demand.

“This price increase that we’re experiencing in the industry is demand-driven,” says Randy Blach, CEO of CattleFax. “Our per capita supplies were flat last year. They’re going to be flat again this year. And yet we’ve had a market that’s gone from a $1.75 to $2.25. That’s all been demand driven with what we’ve seen throughout the industry.”

The incredible demand is pushing beef demand to its highest level in nearly 40 years.

“Beef demands that are a 37-year high,” he says. “And I think when people think about demand, obviously quality has been the key to that. We’ve seen the quality of the animals being produced has increased substantially.”

As record-high cattle prices also push the cost of beef higher, that would push consumers to eat more pork and chicken in the past. But it’s a trend Tonsor is not largely seeing this time around.

“We see some of that, but not nearly as much as you might think. So, there’s less of that adjustment than historically we would have seen,” Tonsor says. “This is 100% Glynn’s opinion, but I think habits are a little stickier. Persistence of an item in your meal is a little sticker than in the past. Meat is an ingredient, not just the center of the plate. Higher beef prices have not elevated chicken demand as people have expected, and I think it’s because the consumer substitution effects, they exist, but they’re not as strong as they were 20 years ago.”

As consumers crave more protein, it’s a bright spot for all of livestock with many hopeful this isn’t just a trend but a permanent fixture on consumers’ plates.

Urgency in Action: We Must Eradicate New World Screwworm

Tue, 03 Jun 2025 13:00:12 GMT

New World screwworm (NWS) continues to threaten the U.S. cattle industry. The potential impact is devastating — the larvae can kill an animal in just four to seven days if not quickly detected and treated.

Colin Woodall, National Cattlemen’s Beef Association CEO, discussed the hurdles of controlling the spread of NSW on the latest episode of the “Unscripted” podcast .

“We have to eradicate it from here,” Woodall stresses. “We need to eradicate it from Mexico. We need to eradicate it from Central America. We need to push this thing all the way back down to South America.”

The NSW fly and its larvae are flesh-eating parasites that pose a significant threat to warm-blooded animals.

“This is not just a cattle issue,” Woodall says. “This could be dogs. This can be cats. It can get into people. So, anything that is warm blooded could be a host for this flesh-eating parasite.”

Woodall says NSW is approximately 700 miles from the U.S. border, having breached the isthmus of Mexico in the states of Oaxaca and Veracruz, adding that Texas is expected to be the first point of entry if the fly continues to move north.

“We’re going to look at every eradication option possible, because we have to get rid of this thing,” he says. “This is not something that can become endemic to United States. We have to eradicate it from here.”

Woodall says the situation has been complicated by cooperation challenges with Mexico. Earlier attempts to transport sterile flies were hindered by bureaucratic obstacles, with planes unable to land and flies dying before deployment. This led Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins to close the border, sending a clear signal to the Mexican government about the need for more serious action.

He explains cooperation has reportedly improved, with USDA teams planning to visit Mexico to assess the current situation. The primary strategy for control involves releasing sterile flies into the wild to disrupt breeding and push the population back southward.

Woodall says NCBA is actively working on several fronts to address the threat:

Pushing for the establishment of a domestic sterile fly production facility.
Exploring genetic engineering technologies for fly control.
Investigating treatment options (such as ivermectin) and helping producers understand how to detect and treat potential infections quickly. Woodall says treatment is possible, explaining ivermectin has proven effective in killing larvae and treating wounds. However, early detection is crucial due to the rapid progression of infection.
Conducting education and awareness campaigns to explain the threat without causing panic. He says misinformation has been a significant challenge. A recent false report about NSW in Missouri caused panic and temporarily impacted cattle prices. He adds that while the threat is serious, it’s not a cause for panic.

“While everybody needs to be aware, they don’t need to panic, and that’s the thing we want everybody to understand,” Woodall summarizes.

NCBA is taking an active role in addressing the threat of NSW through education, technological exploration, government collaboration and a clear commitment to preventing its spread.

Your Next Read: Secretary Rollins Announces $21 Million Investment to Renovate Fruit Fly Production Facility

BVDV: A Threat The Beef Industry Can’t Afford to Ignore

Tue, 06 May 2025 19:43:33 GMT

Some veterinarians and producers think of bovine viral diarrhea virus (BVDV) in narrow terms – as the virus that causes persistently infected (PI) cattle. And while that perspective is correct, Dr. Thomas Passler, DVM, PhD, says there are broader implications for BVDV and its impact on cattle and some other animal species worldwide.

“(BVDV) has evolved over the years and is not a single virus or just a diarrhea-causing problem. Today it’s made up of three related viruses and 19 subtypes that cause similar diseases,” explains Passler, the Jack Rash professor of internal medicine for food animal medicine at the Auburn University College of Veterinary Medicine.

“It’s a sneaky, insidious disease,” he adds.

Passler estimates 0.5% of U.S. cattle are persistently infected by BVDV. Of that percentage, only a small number of those animals become PI cattle – a result of infection caused during fetal development between 40 and 125 days of gestation and which persists during the animal’s entire life.

The PI problem differs from transient infection (TI), which occurs when an animal becomes infected after birth. A TI animal is infected temporarily, but during that time is capable of shedding the virus and transmitting it to other herd members or pen mates.

Multiple Health Issues And Losses Across Species
BVDV-positive animals, especially PI cattle, significantly impact U.S. herds by causing immunosuppression, weakening immune systems and making herd mates more susceptible to other infections. Passler says that immunosuppression often manifests as increased calf death losses from diseases such as scours and pneumonia, as well as poor weaning weights.

Passler adds that he has seen similar problems from BVDV in other animal species, including hogs, white-tailed deer, alpacas and goats.

BVDV is one of the costliest bovine diseases for beef producers and dairy producers, as well. Losses average between $15 to $88 per head, conservatively, according to Indexx Laboratories , citing older data from 2002 and 2008.^1-3

Despite the associated costs, a 2017 National Animal Health Monitoring System (NAHMS) study of 75 U.S. cow-calf producers (the summary was released in 2023) reported only 57.5% of participating producers said they knew some basics or were fairly knowledgeable about BVDV. In addition, 26.9% of producers said they “recognized the name but not much else,” and 15.3% of respondents said they had never heard of it (see Figures 1 and 2).

Furthermore, most BVDV infection problems in cattle herds go unnoticed since 70% to 90% of BVD infections are subclinical (do not result in observable disease), according to the Washington Animal Disease Diagnostic Laboratory .

The Beef 2017 study was conducted in 24 of the nation’s major cow-calf States. In 2017, operations in these states accounted for 86.6 percent of the U.S. beef cow inventory and 78.9 percent of all U.S. operations with beef cows.

(NAHMS)

Only 24.4% of the cattlemen surveyed said they are “fairly knowledgeable” about BVDV.

(NAHMS)

Contributing Factors To PI Cattle
Direct contact with infected animals and with contaminated fomites (water buckets, calf feeders, feed bunks, IV equipment, etc.) are common ways BVDV gains a foothold in a herd.

One risk factor that often flies under the radar is the use of intranasal vaccines that do not address BVD viruses, reports Dr. Dan Thomson, PAC veterinarian and Iowa State University professor emeritus.

“We’re using a lot more intranasal vaccinations, thinking that we’re covering for BVDV when we’re actually not,” says Thomson, who spoke with Passler recently on an episode of DocTalk.

It’s a perspective Passler says he agrees with. “We see mucosal disease in the clinic – something we shouldn’t be seeing at all – and often from herds that vaccinate,” he adds.

Intranasal vaccines for respiratory disease do not currently contain BVDV Type 1 & 2, so a separate injectable BVDV vaccine is required, according to Craig A. Payne, DVM, and Celeste Morris, DVM, respectively, at the University of Missouri. Payne and Morris discuss this contributing factor further in their online article, Vaccination Program for a Cow-Calf Operation .

Key Into The Correct Timing To Test Calves
Payne and Morris recommend that “because PI animals are so detrimental, the standard recommendation in herds where BVDV is suspected is to implement a testing strategy and remove any PI animals detected. Vaccination alone cannot counter the effects PI animals can have.”

Specific to calves, Passler says it’s important for veterinarians to let producers know the timing of the testing can impact results – maternal antibodies can skew the results.

“Either test the calf as soon as it hits the ground, before it can nurse, or wait at least a week or [even up to] a month later,” he advises.

He encourages practitioners to talk with cow-calf producers about testing calves to identify BVDV.

“A lot of people don’t test until those animals are stockers or going to the feedlot, and that’s too late,” Passler says. “We want producers to test earlier so they can remove PI cattle sooner.”

Evaluate Vaccines And Protocols
There are two main types of vaccines for BVDV: modified-live (attenuated) and killed (inactivated).

The most significant value for beef producers in using a vaccine that addresses BVDV is being able to protect a dam’s fetus, Passler says. But no vaccine is perfect, he adds, noting producers must also be diligent with their management practices.

“What we have seen here in the clinic is that even in well-vaccinated herds – those we know use killed vaccines religiously – they still get PI cattle if they’re not careful about biosecurity,” he says. “These might be herds that religiously vaccinate, but they still go to the stockyards and buy replacements or take some other sort of risk.”

As for vaccine use protocols, Passler says his review of other researchers’ work indicates it’s best if producers use at least one modified live vaccine and then an inactive (killed) vaccine to vaccinate cows and heifers.

“I’d probably [vaccinate] two cycles and well before gestation, because vaccine seems to reduce fertility a little bit,” he says. “Some researchers say 42 days in advance [of gestation] is a good number to use”

Another practice Passler advises is using products from more than one manufacturer. “Different manufacturers use different vaccine strain viruses, so you might increase endogenic exposure,” he explains.

Thomson supports that recommendation. “We do that when we deworm, we do it with how we treat bacteria, so why wouldn’t we do that to prevent BVDV? That’s great advice,” he says.

Your next read: Can Oxytocin Boost Colostrum?

References

1. Bartlett B, Grooms D. BVD-PI eradication: unintended consequences. Michigan Dairy Review. 2008;13(3).

2. Chi J, VanLeeuwen JA, Weersink A, Keefe GP. Direct production losses and treatment costs from bovine viral diarrhoea virus, bovine leukosis virus, Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis, and Neospora caninum. Prev Vet Med. 2002;55(2):137–153. doi:10.1016/s0167-5877(02)00094-6

3. Ridpath J. Why BVD is a tough problem. Hoard’s Dairyman. 2002;147:697.

Economists Fear the U.S. Will See a Recession in 2025, And That Could Eat Into Consumers' Demand for Meat

Fri, 28 Mar 2025 17:56:24 GMT

Consumer meat sales hit record-breaking levels last year. The craze for protein-filled diets has been a storyline that’s helped drive meat demand, which is good news for meat producers. Ag economists warn, however, the major limiting factor for meat demand, and meat prices, in 2025 just may be what happens in the overall economy.

The March Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor asked economists if they think the U.S. general economy will see a recession in 2025, and 62% said yes.

Recent reports agree with that sentiment, as the Federal Reserve’s key inflation index rose more than expected in February and consumer spending posted a smaller-than-projected increase, according to the Commerce Department. Both could be warning signs of what’s ahead.

As a follow up question, The Ag Economists’ Monthly Monitor survey asked, “In what ways does the U.S. economy impact meat demand in 2025?” Respondents had no shortage of opinions on that.

Here’s a rundown of some of their reactions:

“If real wages fall, there will be a substitution toward other protein/cheaper meat cuts.”
“Slower growth (even if the U.S. does not endure a recession) will reduce consumer willingness to spend, especially at a time when beef prices, in particular, are high.”
“A downturn in economic growth impacts disposable income and should slow animal protein demand.”
“There is a positive correlation between GDP and meat demand, particularly between GDP and higher end cuts.”
“When the U.S. economy is strong and incomes increase, consumers have more disposable income to spend on meat and higher quality cuts of meat. When the U.S. economy is weak and disposable income tightens, consumers may reduce meat in their diet or turn to less expensive meat options.”

Not all economists expect U.S. consumer demand to fall off though, even if the U.S. officially enters into a recession.

“Labor income is growing faster than inflation. Most U.S. firms are profitable - at least as of current earnings reports,” said one economist.

Another shared, “I do think consumer demand will be lower in 2025 than it was in 2024. That being said - 2024 consumer expenditures and demand were a lot higher than I anticipated at the beginning of the year. Two indicators that are showing up, and are unsustainable right now, are reducing savings accounts and increasing credit card debt. I think it leads to slower meat demand in 2025, partially due to lower meat availability and partially due to slowing consumer demand. Notice I said ‘slowing’ consumer demand and not ‘declining/negative’. Demand does not have to decline year-over-year to impact meat prices. Slowing can do the same thing.”

The GLP-1 Effect
What could have an even bigger impact on meat demand, and even more so than inflation and a recession, is the use of GLP-1 drugs for weight loss. GLP-1 drugs not only moderate users’ blood sugar levels, but also affect their appetites by suppressing hunger cravings.

“U.S. consumer preference for meat demand is strong, though I would be paying attention to the growing use of GLP-1s as it relates to all agricultural product demand,” one economist responded.

The good news is studies have shown those who use GLP-1 drugs often crave healthier items and often consume more protein versus unhealthy foods.

Starting From a Place of Strength
Forecasting meat demand in 2025 relies on a number of factors. But a positive trend is how consumers, especially the millennial generation, are buying more meat. As PorkBusiness.com reported this week, consumers are buying more meat than ever. In 2024, meat sales hit a record high of $104.6 billion and total pounds sold increased by 2.3%, which was cited in the latest Power of Meat.

More people want meat today, but economists are concerned any economic pain could eat into overall meat demand.

What Do Foot-and-Mouth Disease Outbreaks in Europe Mean for the U.S.?

Fri, 28 Mar 2025 22:18:14 GMT

Foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) is rearing its ugly head in Europe. After an outbreak in water buffalo in Germany in January, an outbreak in cattle in Hungary in early March and an outbreak in cattle in Slovakia last week, why now? What is the U.S. doing to keep this foreign animal disease out and protect the country’s livestock industry?

“FMD is caused by a virus that affects cloven-hoofed animals so that can include cattle, pigs, sheep and goats,” explains Megan Niederwerder, DVM, who serves as the executive director of the Swine Health Information Center (SHIC). “It does not affect humans and is not a threat to food safety, but it has significant trade implications once it is introduced into a country.”

FMD has been fairly quiet in these European countries – with no cases reported for decades. Other parts of Europe have seen outbreaks more recently like the 2001 outbreak in the United Kingdom that caused a crisis in British agriculture and tourism and resulted in the cancellation of the World Pork Expo held in Des Moines, Iowa.

“FMD really decimated the United Kingdom,” says Barb Determan who was serving as president of the National Pork Producers Council (NPPC) at the time. “It became very apparent that we couldn’t guarantee the safety for our U.S. pig herd because of the high numbers of international travelers that would be at the show. We had to cancel World Pork Expo out of an abundance of precaution.”

Although there is still a lot to be discovered about how FMD was introduced into these populations, it’s a significant warning to the U.S. to be on alert.

(Lori Hays)

That was the first time, but not the only time World Pork Expo was canceled. The event was also canceled in 2019 because of the African swine fever outbreak in China and again in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

“That was a hard financial decision,” Determan says. “We had just completed the separation agreement between NPPC and the National Pork Board. NPPC was very tightly budgeted at that time, so it was a huge hit.”

However, keeping the U.S. pig herd safe was the most important thing on everyone’s mind. She says they made their decision after hearing reports from veterinarians who had been to England to better understand the extensiveness as well as from the USDA that had sent veterinarians over to help.

“At that time, we didn’t have near the biosecurity practices and things that we do now with the disinfectant foot mats,” Determan says. “We also don’t have live pigs on the on the grounds now compared to how we did things many years ago. We used to have live pigs everywhere on the fairgrounds in the early 2000s from genetics companies with pigs in their displays to the pigs in the live shows.”

The Truth About FMD
The clinical signs of FMD are similar to what the name implies. It can cause vesicles or blisters on the feet, mouth and tongue of animals that are infected. The U.S. has not had a case of FMD since 1929.

“We certainly want to keep it that way, as the economic implications for producers are significant if the virus is introduced,” Niederwerder says.

Compared to many viruses, FMD is a highly stable, non-enveloped virus that allows it to be infectious for longer periods. It’s very contagious and highly transmissible. Not only are there risks with transmission of the virus through infected meat products that may come in through illegal trade, but it can also be carried on contaminated clothes or equipment or supplies of humans.

“The human would not be infected, but certainly people can carry the virus on contaminated clothing,” Niederwerder says. “That’s why it’s really important as we think about prevention of entry into the U.S.”

FMD causes fever and pain. It results in excessive salivation and causes reduced milk production in dairy cattle.

“When you think about the impact, certainly there’s an impact on animal health with regards to the clinical signs, but even further is this impact on trade restrictions and the economic losses for producers,” Niederwerder says. “When you try and contain the virus, that oftentimes results in those infected animals being culled or euthanized so the disease no longer has the chance to spread.”

Why Should the U.S. Pay Attention?
When a virus moves into a new geographical range or is reintroduced into a country that has maintained a negative status for a long period, Niederwerder says it’s critical to reassess the risk to the U.S.

“In January, Germany reported their first case in over 30 years in water buffalo near Berlin,” she explains. “It was 14 animals, and those animals were all culled after the infection was confirmed but certainly trade restrictions and implications on surrounding areas of that Berlin farm were significant.”

Fast forward to March when two additional countries have reported cases. Hungary reported FMD in a single farm of cattle in the north part of the country for the first time in over 50 years. Shortly thereafter, the virus appeared in Slovakia (who also hadn’t seen a case in over 50 years) in multiple herds of cattle.

“Just recently, another herd was a suspect herd in Slovakia, near the southern border near Hungary,” Niederwerder says. “This is certainly concerning about how this virus is being reintroduced. Is it associated with contaminated fomites that may be in the country or traveling to new locations? Is it associated with wild boar? Could it be associated with infected hay?”

Although there is still a lot to be discovered about how FMD was introduced into these populations, it’s a significant warning to the U.S. to be on alert .

“We need to do everything we can to make sure it doesn’t get reintroduced into the U.S.,” Niederwerder says. “How can we amp up any biosecurity measures that are necessary to reduce our risk? We also need to think about reducing the risk of introduction into our country through travel and illegal trade.”

Be on Alert
Livestock operations should reevaluate biosecurity protocols. If any of your farm’s employees travel to areas where there are infected animals, implement a quarantine period for entry back into your U.S. farm, she advises.

“Be vigilant,” Niederwerder urges. “One of the challenges of FMD is that it does cause these characteristic lesions of vesicles or blisters on the mouth, nose or the hoof. What becomes very tricky is that those clinical signs are indistinguishable from other vesicular diseases such as Senecavirus A. If producers and veterinarians see these lesions, they must report it immediately so it can be investigated and confirmed that it is not FMD virus.”

FMD is not just a disease of pigs and cattle, she points out. Sheep, goats and cloven-hoofed zoo animals may also be impacted by FMD. This increases the breadth of what the industry needs to monitor.

“The world is very small now,” Niederwerder says. “Not only do people travel more internationally, but animals move around more than ever, too. It’s extremely important for those of us that are producers to keep our eyes open and pay attention to what’s going on worldwide so we can be as prepared as possible for any change in disease risk.”

That’s one of the ways that SHIC is trying to help producers. SHIC provides timely domestic and global disease updates to producers.

“Watching the SHIC global disease report is really important for producers,” Determan says. “It comes out every month and really gives you a feel for what’s happening in the entire world from a swine health standpoint. The biggest lesson we learned from the 2001 FMD outbreak is that looking farther out than just our own farm gate is so important.”

Keep Reading:
An Update on Foot-and-Mouth Disease Virus Serotype O in Germany

Hungary Confirms Foot-and-Mouth Disease Outbreak in Cattle

Slovakia Records First Foot-and-Mouth Cases, Minister Says

A Resilient Comeback: U.S. Bovine Semen Industry Sees Growth in 2024

Tue, 18 Mar 2025 13:57:20 GMT

After two years of declining sales, the bovine semen industry is experiencing a remarkable resurgence. Reports from both the dairy and beef semen sectors indicate increased sales in 2024, showing a promising trend that might not only match but potentially surpass the record levels seen in 2021. Jay Weiker, President of the National Association of Animal Breeders (NAAB), emphasizes the optimistic outlook for the industry, suggesting that if the current growth trajectory persists, new record sales could be on the horizon.

“Unit sales have not yet returned to the record levels of 2021. However, if the current trajectory continues, new records can be expected in the near future,” Weiker says.

In 2024, total unit sales increased by 4%, culminating in nearly 69 million units. This 2.7 million unit increase nearly compensates for the previous year’s decline. Moreover, the value of exported semen rose by over 6%, or roughly $20 million, establishing a new record of $326 million.

Dairy and Beef Segment Breakdown
The dairy sector, both in domestic sales and exports, saw a significant 4% growth compared to 2023. This equates to an additional 1.9 million units, summing up to 48.8 million units. Meanwhile, beef unit sales also increased by 4%, with over 850,000 additional units sold, reaching a total of 20 million units. Delving deeper, beef-on-dairy semen sales grew by about 317,000 units both in the U.S. and internationally, while beef-on-beef sales saw an increase of 408,000 units, reversing the decreasing trend of the past two years.

Global Adjustments and Shifts
Globally, dairy producers are recalibrating their reproductive strategies to maximize economic returns. They are now employing a mix of conventional, gender-selected dairy and beef semen to enhance their financial performance. In the U.S., this trend is visible in the shifting preferences for semen types. In 2024, gender-selected dairy semen led the pack with 9.9 million units, marking a 1.5 million unit increase.

The Rise of Heterospermic Semen
An intriguing development in 2024 is the surge in heterospermic beef product sales. Over 2.8 million units were sold, more than twice the numbers from 2023. Domestic sales dominated with 2.4 million units, making heterospermic beef the second largest beef semen category after Angus.

Domestic Market Dynamics
In the domestic market, dairy units increased by 5%, adding nearly 705,000 units, with the total market size reaching 16.2 million dairy units. The domestic beef units saw an overall increase of 304,000 units. The most notable domestic shift was towards gender-selected semen, rising by 1.5 million units or 18% and now comprising 61% of the dairy units used in the U.S.

Robust Global Demand
On the international front, U.S. bovine semen exports continue their upward trajectory despite economic and geopolitical challenges in major markets like China and Russia. Encouraging signs of recovery in Brazil, growth in Western Europe and Central Asia, and expanding opportunities in the Middle East and Africa reflect the global strength of the industry. Beef semen exports rose significantly and according to Dr. Sophie Eaglen, NAAB’s International Program Director, this stems from the increased demand from Brazil and China, alongside a growing number of smaller markets.

“This trend may be attributed to the global adoption of the beef-on-dairy strategy, which is gaining traction across diverse regions” Eaglen says.

The U.S. bovine semen industry has made a strong comeback in 2024. With positive trends in both domestic and international sales and the growing acceptance of innovative breeding strategies, the foundation is laid for future growth and advancements in livestock reproduction. As these trends continue, the industry stands on the verge of a promising era characterized by growth, innovation, and global expansion.

Your Next Read:
From Traditional to Technological: The Evolution of Rolinda Acres

Build A Biosecurity Plan Like You Would Eat An Elephant – One Bite At A Time

Thu, 13 Mar 2025 16:31:30 GMT

If biosecurity plans were easy to develop, perhaps most U.S. beef producers would have done one long before now, but there is no easy button for such a plan, and the task can be daunting.

The best strategy to get started is to tackle the challenge like you would eat an elephant, says Lisa Pederson, Extension beef quality specialist with North Dakota State University (NDSU) and North Dakota beef quality assurance (BQA) coordinator. How do you do that?

“One bite at a time,” she says.

Pederson addressed how to develop a practical biosecurity plan in a recent webinar, “Building A Resilient Cowherd,” which was sponsored by the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA). The webinar also featured Dr. Julia Herman, NCBA beef cattle specialist veterinarian, and Casey Fanta, seedstock manager for Wulf Cattle, based in Morris, Minn.

Prevention Beats A Cure
Biosecurity is the cheapest and most effective means of disease prevention, according to Pederson. She points out that trichomoniasis is a good example of a disease where biosecurity is the most important preventive measure.

(Lindsey Pound)

Herman shares three benefits of biosecurity: 1. Fewer disease challenges mean better animal health. 2. A decreased germ load also results in better animal health. 3. Better animal health means improved potential for economic gains.

Financial implications
Pederson says producers who might have balked in the past about developing a biosecurity plan are more interested today, because of the economic value of cattle.

“Bred cows, four to five years of age, are selling for $2,500 to $3,000 each and maybe more,” Pederson notes. “Bred heifers have pretty easily been selling here in the North for $3,000 to $3,500. All weights of feeder cattle have been selling for $2,000 to $3,000 each. Finished cattle are selling for well over $3,000 a head.”

Fanta says good vaccination and nutritional programs have been foundational to the enduring success Wulf Cattle has experienced in the beef industry.

“Whatever your program is, I feel it’s very important to have protocols in place, a system for the health and well-being of those cattle from the time that they’re born,” Fanta explains. “It all equates to the long-term health and success of your operation.”

Increased risk potential from foreign disease entering the U.S. is another reason veterinarians and beef producers can benefit from developing biosecurity plans.

“The majority of producers have not dealt with a new, highly contagious disease,” Herman says.

The health risks to the beef industry, and the U.S. livestock industry overall, are real and concerning. One is the new world screwworm, which is currently advancing through Central America and into southern Mexico. NCBA has undertaken extensive education efforts with producers in recent months regarding this threat

Another concern, Herman references, is the potential for foot-and-mouth (FMD) disease to enter the U.S. FMD was first discovered in the U.S. in 1870 and eradicated in 1929. Herman says while FMD is not a human health or food safety threat, it would have a significant economic impact on the country’s livestock industry.

This map shows the location of FMD as well as disease-free countries. The disease was found in a water buffalo in Germany in January. More recently, FMD has been found in Hungary.

(WOAH)

NCBA has worked with industry stakeholders on the Secure Beef Supply (SBS) Plan to help producers voluntarily prepare for FMD. If an outbreak does occur, Herman says having an enhanced biosecurity plan in place will help prevent exposing “naïve” cattle to the disease during an outbreak. More information from NCBA is available at Biosecurity Resources

More information specific for veterinarians is available from the American Association of Bovine Practitioners at aabp.org

Producers Need Help
Bovine veterinarians are in a position of trust and leadership to help beef producers understand the importance of a having biosecurity plan and how to create one. Pederson encourages producers routinely to work closely with their veterinary practitioner.

“A strong relationship means more than preg testing and Bangs vaccinating, and calling with calving problems,” Pederson says. “Strong relationship means you use veterinarians for their brains and disease knowledge. Engage them to help you identify biosecurity strengths and weaknesses of your operations.”

For producers who have not started developing a biosecurity plan, it’s a case of veterinarians helping them walk before they can run. Pederson references an elephant cartoon she once found online.

“I like to think about where you can take easy bites of the elephant to eat first,” she says. “Pretty soon, with one bite at a time, you can have that elephant eaten.”

With a biosecurity plan, the point is it can’t be developed all at once, but it can be accomplished one small step at a time when producers, especially with their veterinarian’s help, stick with it until it’s completed.

Five Easy Bites
Here are five factors that are important to consider in a basic biosecurity plan.

1. Help producers identify and develop their team of partners and advisers.
Sit down with producers and talk about the benefits of a biosecurity plan, advises Pederson. Discuss who would be good to include on their team, which might include veterinarians, key employees, nutritionists, Extension specialists, BQA state coordinators, state veterinarian and others.

Build a team that can help you identify risks and how to address them.

(Lisa Pederson)

2. Create a basic communications plan, one that will be straightforward to implement when a crisis does occur.
Help producers create the plan in advance of any crisis, emphasizes Herman.

“We really need to be prepared ahead of time,” she says.

Some of the topics to include in the plan and questions to answer are: Why is there a need to communicate? Who needs to be reached? How will the producer communicate and who with internally and externally? Who needs to know about the plan?

Make sure the plan is written down, so everyone is working off the same document. Also, help the producer decide if the plan needs to be posted in a break room, barn or other facility on the property for quick reference.

3. Address low-hanging fruit. Consider the biosecurity practices that can be adopted with some careful thought but little or limited expense.

The single most important one, Pederson says, is to have separate footwear and clothing for wearing on and off the farm/ranch.

Diseases and pests hitch rides on dirt, dust, manure, critters, shoes, clothes, vehicles and so much more. Remove manure, mud and other organic matter regularly and disinfect as well. As Pederson says: “You can’t disinfect a turd.”

First things to consider implementing are those practices that are of little cost but offer a high reward.

(Lisa Pederson)

4. Have a quarantine/isolation plan for new animals coming on the farm or ranch, whether purchased or acquired.
Isolate new cattle and other livestock for at least 21 days, ideally without the option for nose-to-nose contact. Do not allow for shared feed or water. The isolation can allow you and producers time for observation, testing, vaccination and revaccination, Pederson says.

There are many ways a disease can enter a farm, Herman adds. “Wildlife, rodents and birds are just a few examples,” she says. “That’s why an integrated pest management plan is important.”

5. Help producers adopt good record-keeping practices, if they haven’t done so already.
Pederson says items to keep track of include livestock purchases and sales, as well as livestock movements to exhibitions, rodeos and shows. Good records will be imperative to have should a novel disease outbreak occur, she adds.

Your next read: Hungary Confirms Foot-and-Mouth Disease Outbreak in Cattle

Take the Stress Out of Social Media: Navigate Detractors

Thu, 20 Feb 2025 14:56:23 GMT

Have you ever wanted to post on social media but were worried about potential backlash? You want to share your farm, but are worried about receiving potentially negative comments about sow housing? Maybe you are worried about getting tough questions about the use of hormones or antibiotics when it comes to feeding your animals or treating them for illnesses?

Unfortunately, this scenario is all too common for farmers, veterinarians and others in the ag community advocating for animal agriculture on social media. Negative comments have the potential to steer the conversation down an unproductive path. However, if you know how to handle contentious issues online then you can help people understand the animal agriculture community’s commitment to animal care, responsible antibiotic use, sustainability and other core values.

Before deciding how (and if) to respond to comments, take a deep breath and ask yourself a few key questions:

1. Is the comment relevant or is it completely off-topic?

2. Who has made the comments? Are they genuinely curious or are they a known extreme animal rights activist?

3. Consider, “Is it possible they have a different perspective?” or “Is there something that could have shaped this person’s opinion?”

4. Will responding to the comment help other people who will read your response?

If the person has left a completely irrelevant comment, don’t feel obligated to respond. If the comment included offensive remarks, feel confident in hiding the comment or blocking the person from commenting again. Remember, your social media page is your space, and you can set community guidelines.

Depending on who has left the comment can determine how you respond. By clicking on the commentor’s profile you can quickly learn if their comments come from a place of true concern and interest, like a parent concerned about feeding his or her children safe, nutrient-dense foods, or potentially an animal rights extremist with no intention of having a productive conversation about animal agriculture.

If you have concluded that the commenter is likely not open to having a dialogue, still ask yourself if responding to the comment will help others understand your perspective. Social media is a very public space and there are many more people reading your posts and comment sections than actually engaging.

Once you have asked yourself these questions and have decided that responding is your next step, look for common ground on a related topic – such as food safety and family values. Before jumping into the safety and animal welfare benefits of using antibiotics, validate their concerns and offer empathy. Then, ask permission to share your personal experience with using antibiotics on the farm. If the conversation is going well, follow up with the science and offer resources or other people to follow on social media if they are interested in learning more.

Most importantly, know that you can always ask for help. Bring in your friends who also have experience responding to contentious issues, reach out to your local partners, or the Animal Agriculture Alliance to help you moderate difficult conversations.

This is just a preview of the content and training available in the Animal Agriculture Alliance’s Animal Ag Allies program. To sign up to become an Animal Ag Ally, go to and fill out the interest form to join our next class!

Your Next Read: Build Your Team Across the Entire Supply Chain

New Study Says Domestic Cats Need To Be Evaluated More For HPAI H5N1 Implications

Tue, 14 Jan 2025 16:34:44 GMT

Dairy cattle have garnered most of the agriculture industry’s attention in the past year, with regard to outbreaks of the highly pathogenic avian influenza A (HPAI) H5N1.

Now, some researchers are turning their attention to other animals on the farm impacted by the virus: cats.

A new study published Monday in the journal Emerging Microbes & Infection addresses how domestic cats are affected by the virus and notes concerns such felines could offer the potential for HPAI H5N1 to evolve into a more dangerous version of the virus.

The study – which addresses the deaths of 10 cats in rural South Dakota last April – is not the first time researchers have raised concerns about the virus in cats and the potential for transmission to other mammals.

‘Urgent Need For Surveillance’
Researchers at the University of Maryland School of Public Health said in June 2024 that a “20-year review of bird flu in felines suggests urgent need for domestic cat surveillance.”

Kristen Coleman, an assistant professor in the UMD School of Public Health, and an affiliate professor in the University of Maryland Department of Veterinary Medicine, said, “As companion animals, domestic cats provide a potential pathway for avian influenza viruses to spillover into humans.” (Researcher Warns Pet Cats Risk Getting Bird Flu)

“We looked at the global distribution and spread of bird flu infections in feline species between 2004 and 2024 and found a drastic rise in reports of feline infections starting in 2023, with a spike in infections reported among domestic cats, as opposed to wild or zoo-kept animals,” added Coleman, who was not involved in the South Dakota study.

There is no study that shows transmission occurs from HPAI H5N1-infected cats to humans. Furthermore, current research shows HPAI H5N1 does not readily spread among humans, though studies have noted one or two key mutations could change that fact.

The virus often does take a deadly toll on felines. According to the University of Maryland’s School of Public Health , infected domestic cats have a mortality rate of up to 67%.

Last week, the Cornell University College of Veterinary Medicine Animal Health Diagnostic Center published directions online for veterinarians testing cats for highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) .

AVMA Weighs In
“Dozens of cats are known to have contracted the virus, including barn and feral cats, indoor cats, and big cats in zoos and in the wild (e.g., mountain lions, tigers, leopards, and bobcats),” according to the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA). “Cats were already known to be susceptible to the H5N1 virus, with several feline cases linked to poultry or wild bird exposure before the cattle outbreak began,” AVMA said.

See Avian influenza A (H5N1) in cats for the Association’s recommended practices for dealing with any suspected of being infected by the virus.

‘A Possible Link’ To Local Cattle
The study published on Monday said virus-infected birds could have played a role in the South Dakota felines’ demise.

In addition, the report said: “The exact source of infection remains unclear; however, phylogenetic analysis of H5N1 sequences from two of the cats reveals a close genetic relationship to clade 2.3.4.4b strains previously detected in local cattle, suggesting a possible link.

“Additionally, the presence of bird feathers near the deceased cats indicates the likelihood that infection may have occurred through the consumption of virus-infected birds. However, because the disease typically requires several days to manifest post-ingestion, the exact timing of exposure is unclear. This evidence points toward a plausible cattle-to-bird-to-cat transmission pathway, supported by recent studies that identified H5N1 sequences across multiple species on affected farms, including dairy cows, wild birds, domestic cats, and raccoons.”

Many Mammal Species Impacted
According to USDA-APHIS, more than 200 mammal species in the U.S. have been infected by the virus since 2022.

Along with cows and cats, other U.S. mammals infected with the virus include a bottlenose dolphin, foxes, bobcats, mountain lions, coyotes, skunks, harbor and grey seals, opossums, squirrels, minks, otters, black bears, brown bears, polar bears, and a single pig on a backyard farm in Oregon, confirmed in late October.

The CDC encourages veterinarians and other individuals working with cats or other mammals that are suspected or confirmed positive for HPAI H5N1 to take precautions to prevent potential unprotected exposures.

The agency offers additional direction here: Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza A(H5N1) Virus in Animals: Interim Recommendations for Prevention, Monitoring, and Public Health Investigations .

Your next read: California Issues New Ban on Dairy Cattle and Poultry Shows in Response to H5N1 Bird Flu

I'm Going Into 2025 With Increased Concerns About HPAI H5N1

Thu, 02 Jan 2025 20:41:31 GMT

As we leave 2024 behind and start the New Year, the U.S. needs to step up its efforts to stop the spread of HPAI H5N1 — for all our sakes.

Based on the official numbers of virus cases reported in the dairy industry and beyond, in poultry and wildlife, it doesn’t appear we are moving fast enough individually or collectively to rein in this virus.

I’m trying to tread lightly on this topic, but candidly, I’m afraid.

The Impact On People

I’m very concerned about what this virus has the potential to do to human beings — our dairy farmers, farm workers, veterinarians — and, yes, the rest of us.

While the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) says the “current risk to individual and population health remains low in the U.S.,” that statement is less reassuring to me as time marches on and the virus spreads.

As of Dec. 30, 2024, the CDC has confirmed “only” 66 cases of the virus in people. See H5 Bird Flu: Current Situation.

That number is likely very low, based on what veterinarians have told me since March 25, 2024, when the virus was first confirmed in dairy cattle.

More importantly, consider what scientists are saying.

The American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) reported on Dec. 30 that “the virus strain found in dairy cows in the U.S. may only need one mutation for it to be able to spread among humans, according to a study published in the journal Science in early December.”

Dr. Les Sims, a veterinary consultant who has worked internationally for over 30 years on the prevention and control of major infectious diseases of food-producing animals, warns in the article: “The longer this virus circulates unchecked, the higher the likelihood it will acquire the mutations needed to cause a pandemic. We need to act urgently to prevent this scenario.”

The AVMA’s complete article is available here:
Novel bird flu strain continues to threaten animal, public health

Virologists Share Their Perspectives
Another insightful article is The state of H5N1 infections and research as 2025 approaches, posted on Dec. 24 by Chemical & Engineering News. It notes:

“As more cows get infected with H5N1 bird flu, and more people get exposed to infected animals, there’s increased opportunity for the virus to evolve into a version that’s more capable of spreading between people,” says Ed Hutchinson, a virologist at the University of Glasgow. “The process could result in the virus accumulating mutations that allow for better replication and transmission, including between people.”

“Virologists are also concerned about a situation where a person simultaneously gets infected with H5N1 and human influenza virus H3N2 or H1N1, each of which is currently circulating as flu activity gains pace . But it’s hard to predict whether genetic reassortment between those viruses would create a version of H5N1 that’s more adept at spreading in humans,” says Richard Webby, an influenza virologist at St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, in the Chemical & Engineering News article.

Consider what one physician told NBC News Science Reporter Evan Bush on Dec. 23:

“The traffic light is changing from green to amber,” said Dr. Peter Chin-Hong, a professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco, who studies infectious diseases. “So many signs are going in the wrong direction.”

See Bird flu warning signs are going in the wrong direction

Impacts In Dairy, Poultry, Wildlife
The virus continues to spread in the dairy industry, and it’s alarming the toll it’s already taken in domestic poultry and wildlife. In summary:

In Dairy: On March 25, 2024, the USDA, CDC and FDA made their official confirmation of the virus in dairy herds in two states, Texas and Kansas. A short nine months later, on Dec. 30, 2024, we officially had 913 herds affected in 16 states, according to the CDC. See Domestic Summary.

In Poultry: the USDA says HPAI H5N1 outbreaks in poultry have been detected in all 50 states —1,324 commercial flocks and 729 backyard flocks—resulting in the depopulation of more than 125 million turkeys and chickens. See the Full Report .

In Wildlife: The virus has affected more than 200 wildlife species across the U.S. See Detections of Highly Pathogenic Avian Influenza in Mammals.

Do What You Can
I don’t want to experience “another Covid” or a virus that could be even worse. I’m sure no one else does, either.

We must act individually and collectively to stem the spread of HPAI H5N1.

Please don’t “kick the can” on down the road and expect someone else to do your part. Take the steps you can to help, however small they might be.
That’s what I’m trying to do, too.

HPAI H5N1 is Content Focus of Special Issue

A Message to the Ag Industry about H5N1

California Issues State of Emergency Warning in Response to More Bird Flu Found on Dairies

New Zealand Reports First Case of HPAI

USDA Reports First H5N1 Detection in Swine

Navigating HPAI: Supporting Producers and Safeguarding Cows

2025 Weather: Drought and Root Zone Maps Signal Dryness Ahead

Mon, 30 Dec 2024 19:25:58 GMT

As 2024 comes to an end, roughly 70% of the nation is experiencing some level of drought and dryness.

Recent precipitation led to small improvements in parts of Oklahoma and Arkansas northeast to the Central Appalachians. Since its peak in September, the drought affecting the Central Appalachians and Upper Ohio Valley has steadily improved.

In the northeast, near to above-normal precipitation in the past 30 days means drought conditions have improved.

Across the Southeast, Lower Mississippi Valley and Texas, precipitation deficits continue to increase.

December is typically a drier time of year for the Upper Midwest and Northern to Central Great Plains.

Since the beginning of October, precipitation has generally averaged below normal across the Central Rockies, Great Basin, Southwest and southern California.

Northwest California and much of the Pacific Northwest have experienced wetter-than-normal conditions.

When it comes to severe or extreme drought, parts of the Northern Plains, the Southwest and the Tennessee Valley fall in those categories. Portions of the Midwest are now considered D1/moderate drought, and one-fifth of Indiana is in D2/severe drought.

Looking at various crop production areas, the following are currently affected by drought:

Barley, 35%
Corn, 54%
Cotton, 18%
Durum wheat, 70%
Peanut, 29%
Rice, 15%
Sorghum, 31%
Soybean, 47%
Spring wheat, 33%
Sugarbeet, 48%
Sunflower, 78%
Winter wheat, 27%

While the drought monitor looks longer term, NASA’s root zone soil moisture map shows just how dry it is in the top 3’ of soil across the Corn Belt and Southwest.

The Dec. 23, 2024, root zone soil moisture map shows just how dry it is in the top 3’ of soil across parts of the Corn Belt and Southwest.

(NASA)

Eric Snodgrass, principal atmospheric scientist at Conduit Ag, says the current La Nina is weak and fading, but it continues to influence weather patterns, which is sending warning signs for spring.

Snodgrass says we’re missing one important component in the atmosphere — the subtropical jet stream, which comes from Hawaii.

“We have the polar jet in place that will drive really cold air into the New Year, especially into the eastern two-thirds of the country, really cold air for probably a while,” Snodgrass says. “Until we crank the jet stream out of the Southwest, it’s hard to return a lot of moisture and break the fear of drought spreading from Mexico or from the western High Plains, which I think is where it’s going to come from next year.”

Snodgrass is worried about drought for two reasons:

Drought conditions are developing in Mexico, the western Plains, the High Plains and all the way up to Canada.
In six of the past 10 years with a really dry fall, the spring to follow was also dry. That causes concern for a big chunk of the Plains and into the Midwest.

Snodgrass says the best opportunity for a pattern shift would be if La Nina breaks down in the next few weeks and transitions to a more neutral pattern heading into spring.

Eric Snodgrass is on the agenda for Top Producer Summit in February. Register today!

Your Next Read: Ag Tech and Machinery Trends to Track for 2025

What The Trump Administration's Mass Deportation Plans Could Mean for Agriculture

Mon, 23 Dec 2024 17:39:38 GMT

Farmers and food industry leaders are warning that President-elect Donad Trump’s plans to deport millions of immigrants could devastate agriculture — an industry in which immigrants make up a good chunk of the workforce.

Nearly half of all farmworkers are undocumented, and industries such as dairy and meatpacking plants are especially vulnerable to labor shortages.

“Admittedly, there are some people who slip through,” says Scott VanderWal, vice president of the American Farm Bureau Federation. “Perspective employers are required to take documentation that appears to be legal and valid. There are times when that’s not the case and then ICE [U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement] comes in and cleans house, the workers disappear and go wherever they take them and the employers are left without help.”

While the H-2A visa program has grown, it only covers seasonal work and cannot replace year-round jobs at meat processing plants and on dairy and pork farms.

“Our packing plants need labor. Many of our farms use temporary visa labor — educated, skilled individuals work on our sow farms,” says Lori Stevemer, president of the National Pork Producers Council. “We have been experiencing an increased number of denials over the past year, which really makes it a challenge to find workers. The H-2A visa doesn’t work well when we have animals that need care 24/7, year-round.”

Experts say mass deportations would disrupt food production, raise prices and jeopardize the stability of U.S. agriculture.

Deportation falls under the Department of Homeland Security. President-elect Trump has selected South Dakota Republican Gov. Kristi Noem to lead that agency.

“With Governor Noem at the helm, she’s going to bring common sense to that discussion and make sure we don’t close businesses, make sure we get everyone in line, get the workforce in line and then make sure we’re following our country’s rules,” says Hunter Roberts, secretary of South Dakota’s Department of Agriculture and Natural Resources.

Meanwhile, farm groups continue to urge for reforms to immigration policies or a guest worker program to secure a stable workforce.

“At the same time as controlling the border, we need to overhaul our labor system,” VanderWal says. “We need to make H-2A apply to your own workers or come up with a decent program that will help.”

We need some type of H-2A visa reform to allow those workers to stay year-round, Stevemer adds.

Even then immigration is likely to continue to be a political hot potato in 2025, and labor shortages will continue to top the list of challenges for agriculture.

Washington Grower Shares How To Scale Regenerative Farming

Wed, 04 Dec 2024 13:30:00 GMT

By Deborah Huso

Austin Allred’s family has been farming the Royal Slope region of Washington state between Seattle and Spokane for three generations. He and his two brothers, Derek and Tyson, farm a combined 6,000 acres. They grow potatoes, cherry and apple trees and produce honey, while also running 10,000 beef cattle and milking about 6,000 dairy cows. The family also recently added a worm farm and a beef processing facility.

Like many producers with combined operations, Royal Family Farms focuses on finding a purpose for every acre and every byproduct. In fact, the Allreds have been practicing regenerative farming before it really had its own term.

“My dad was no-tilling before it was billed as regenerative,” Allred explains. “He was doing it to reduce diesel usage. He was also very conscientious about planting woodstock in corners of fields.”

Allred and his siblings took the same approach as they expanded the farm operations.

“I accelerated and defined [what Dad was doing] and put some strategy to it,” Allred says, with the goals of building organic matter in the soil, sequestering carbon and cleaning wastewater.

Royal Family Farms

(Royal Family Farms)

Extended Crop Rotations and Grazing
Allred recognizes the kind of stress agricultural production can put on the land, hence the many inputs required in traditional farming. But Royal Family Farms has demonstrated that not only do regenerative practices work, but one can accomplish them at scale.

“Anytime you’re growing a crop that a human can digest, you’re going to put a lot of pressure on soil,” Allred says. “It’s really hard to do a total no-till strategy. You can’t plant weeds with your wheat.”

Allred says potatoes are the least regenerative crop the farm grows, but says they counteract it by working cattle into a long crop rotation for added soil fertilization.

“If 20% of the ground is in potatoes, that land doesn’t come back online for another six to seven years. And during those years, we do a lot of composting,” he says. “Other years we do cover cropping and planting multispecies crops to grow microbial activity.”

Allred grazes his beef cattle on the cover crops, which provides feed while simultaneously adding more soil amendments, such as nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P).

Upcycling Everything
Nothing goes to waste at Royal Family Farms. The Allreds work with all the processors who clean and box their apples and turn their potatoes into French fries to retrieve all of the products that don’t qualify for human consumption to be upcycled into protein, as Allred explains it, providing food for their cattle in the form of potato culls or damaged fruit or nutrient-rich compost for their fields. Meanwhile any wood chips produced when the Allreds retire a cherry or apple orchard is either turned into cattle bedding, used for the worm farm or processed into biochar, a carbon-rich byproduct.

The Allreds’ interest in biochar, a charcoal-like substance derived from organic waste, developed out of a desire to bring more carbon into agricultural systems. And for the past few months, Royal Family Farms has used four machines to burn wood chips into charcoal that, when mixed with compost, recharges carbon in the soil.

“As farmers, we are selling off carbon, whether it’s beef, milk or cherries,” Allred says. “Seventy to 80% of retired apple, cherry and pear trees in Washington were getting burned at the end of their effective life. Biochar was a way to bring in more carbon and upcycle and compost it.”

“We try to upcycle every byproduct into something of value,” Allred says. “Eventually it all becomes a soil amendment. It’s only a loss if we let that carbon into the air.”

Reusing Wastewater With Worms
Water is a critical part of any farming operation, and Royal Family Farms sought out a better way to
filter wastewater from their dairy operations and reuse it. What was their regenerative solution? Worms.

“We started investing in what is now the biggest worm farm in the world about eight years ago,” Allred says.

Working with a company called BioFiltro headquartered in Santiago, Chile, the Allreds’ worm farm includes eight acres of what looks like 5'-deep swimming pools. These pools are able to serve as the home for about 50 million worms at any one time.

“Wood chips make up the medium they live in, and that’s also the filter for the dirty water,” Allred explains. “The dairy is designed to flow to a low spot, where we have two 5,000-gallon vacuums that bring the wastewater to the worms.”

The worms digest the wastewater, removing heavy metals and other contaminants. The waste matter the worms produce is rich in microbials, and the Allreds take the worm castings and mix them with compost to produce nutrient-dense soil.

Royal Family Farms

(Royal Family Farms)

Eliminating Waste and Need for Inputs
Allred says engaging in regenerative practices large-scale required careful consideration of how everything could work together.

“We started integrating vegetable, fruit, protein and bees to get to the next generation of regeneration,” he explains. Allred points out that the digestive systems of cattle along with biochar create compost. “It’s all about upcycling ‘waste’ products.”

The result of instituting these practices is dramatically reduced reliance on inputs.

“This year we used no phosphorus and potassium and had equal to or greater yields without it,” Allred remarks. “And across the board, we have better quality.”

He adds the farm’s greatest payout is not having to input synthetics.

“The more natural systems we have in play, the more nutrients we keep in the loop, the less we have to go get inputs,” he says.

Allred acknowledges farmers can filter water through mechanical or chemical systems, but says natural systems are typically cheaper to implement.

“Natural investments are always going to have a long-term return on investment,” Allred says. “The problem is producers often don’t have the margin to always be investing in long-term ROI.”

Royal Family Farms’ regenerative farming practices offer payoffs 10 to 15 years out, Allred estimates.

“We’ve bridged that gap with carbon credits and vertically integrating to pick up those margins,” he says.

This year Royal Family Farms is starting to see its regenerative operations pay off in a big way.

“We purchased 90% less phosphorus and potassium [K] than we have in the past and significantly less nitrogen,” Allred says. “We’re working on nitrogen for the next five years because ruminants make P and K.”

“Regenerative farming starts to gobble up the biggest expenses any farm is going to pay — your fertilizer bill and your chemical bill,” he says. “On the cattle side, your feed bill is your biggest expense. Regenerative farming gives you higher-quality, local food.”

No one knows better than you that the future of your farm depends on balancing practices and profits that sustain your land, resources and family . The stakes are evolving based on weather patterns, technology, market demand and more. What actions are you taking to remain resilient?

Johne’s Disease: No Longer Just a Dairy Disease!

Tue, 26 Nov 2024 03:54:00 GMT

This article was written by Dr. Gregg Hanzlicek, Kansas State Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory Associate Director.

In a 2017 USDA NAHMS survey, cow-calf producers were asked about their knowledge of Johne’s disease. Over 70% reported “never hearing of it” or “recognized the name, but not much else”. Veterinarians have been discussing Johne’s disease with dairy producers for many years. This is not true concerning cow-calf producers.

Johne’s disease (pronounced Yo-knees) was first discovered in the U.S. in 1908. It is caused by a bacterium Mycobacterium avium subspecies paratuberculosis, known as MAP. In cattle and small ruminants, this organism causes chronic, non-treatable bowel disease.

Infection typically occurs in calves during the first six months of life. Infection occurs when the calf consumes feces, colostrum, or milk from cows that are shedding this organism. In some cases, a calf can become infected before birth. Older animals can become infected, but this rare and only occurs in situations when extreme levels of MAP are present in the environment. Although infection occurs at a young age, the median age when clinical signs occur is 5 years. We have diagnosed clinical Johne’s in animals as young as 1.5 years.

There are clinical signs you can look for.
Clinical signs include chronic diarrhea and sudden weight loss. Diarrhea and weight loss occur because the MAP organism produces a chronic inflammatory response that thickens the small intestinal wall. The thickening eventually prevents the animal from absorbing dietary nutrients (specifically protein) into the blood stream.

The presence of high levels of dietary protein in the intestine “pulls” water from the circulation into the bowel—hence diarrhea. Weight loss occurs because the nutrients contained in the diet cannot be absorbed into the animal’s system through the intestinal wall. Infected animals may eventually die of starvation, even when provided with an appropriate diet.

In the USDA study mentioned earlier, 7.9% of U. S. cow-calf operations were found to contain one or more Johne’s positive cows. In a 2005 Texas study of 115 purebred beef herds, 43.8% of the herds were MAP positive. The prevalence of this disease in Kansas is unknown, but more than 60 counties have at least one positive sample identified by the Kansas State Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory. It is possible that every Kansas county contains at least one positive herd.

Why should cow/calf producers be concerned about Johne’s? Very little research has investigated the economic impact of Johne’s disease on cow-calf production. Several dairy studies have shown that MAP infected cows (non-clinical, test-positive cows) produce significantly less milk and leave the herd at a much earlier age compared to test-negative cows. There is little reason to believe this organism would not have a similar effect on beef cows.

Another area of concern includes MAP’s zoonotic potential.
A growing number of human medical researchers have published data to support the concept that MAP causes human Crohn’s disease. According to the CDC, over 3 million Americans suffer from this disease. Like bovine Johne’s disease, human Crohn’s is a chronic bowel disease, and in some cases, MAP has been found in human small intestines. Human exposure to MAP is believed to occur through the consumption of contaminated water, dairy products or red meat. This organism has been found in milk, red meat, and drinking water in Europe, and in drinking water in the U.S.

Johne’s disease is a purchased disease.
Keys for a herd remaining non-infected include not purchasing infected replacement heifers, cows or bulls. Purchased replacement heifers and bulls present a particular problem because our current diagnostic tests are not accurate in animals under 2-3 years of age. This means testing younger animals before purchase is not appropriate.

The best means of prevention includes purchasing animals from herds that have tested all, or an appropriate number of adult animals and all tests were negative. A realistic strategy is to ask the source herd’s owners if they have observed Johne’s disease in their herd. If their answer is no, then testing each purchased animal beginning at two years of age and continuing yearly for the next 3 years will help identify infected animals. Testing should always be completed as close to calving as possible because the key is to prevent exposure of the MAP organism to very young calves.

Do an annual risk assessment
Preventing the spread of MAP in a herd includes identifying, through either blood or fecal tests, all shedders before calving and either isolating them from the rest of the calving herd or immediately sending them to slaughter. A key to control is to have a yearly Johne’s Risk Assessment completed by a veterinarian. The risk assessment will help identify those areas of management that provide the greatest risk for young calf infection.

Another key control measure is to minimize the amount of adult manure young calves are exposed to. This can be accomplished by calving in large calving pastures (exactly like neonatal diarrhea prevention), moving each bale ring to a clean area when reloading, frequently moving bunks to clean areas , and if feeding on the ground, feeding in a clean area each day. These activities will minimize the accumulation of adult manure and help minimize calf exposure.

Johne’s is a disease that veterinarians, animal scientists, and cow-calf producers might want to start discussing before consumer confidence in the food we produce decreases and the pressure from outside sources to instill more regulations on the beef industry intensifies.

Lidocaine Infused Bands Minimize Castration Discomfort for Young Calves

Mon, 25 Nov 2024 23:40:04 GMT

As consumer concern for animal rearing practices rises, and industry awareness of animal welfare increases at the same time, food animal rearing practices are changing in step.

One of those practices: castration, a necessary yet painful rite of passage for every male animal destined for the beef market. A recent study at Kansas State University – presented at the American Association of Bovine Practitioners Conference in Columbus, Ohio -- demonstrated how lidocaine-infused castration bands can help calves transition through the castration phase more smoothly and comfortably.

In the study, 26 beef-cross calves under two weeks of age were banded with either the lidocaine-infused band, or a conventional castration band. Calves were individually housed for close observation, and followed via 24/7 video surveillance for 42 days.

Among the results, researchers found:

· The calves treated with the lidocaine-infused bands had significantly more bouts of lying, and more total lying time, than those treated with conventional bands.

· The greatest disparity in lying time occurred between days 21 and 35, which is significant because that is the typical time when bands start cutting through the tissue. “It is great to see the lidocaine-banded calves were comfortable lying down at a time that we often say is the chronic part of the pain related to castration,” noted Eduarda Bortoluzzi, DVM, and assistant professor of animal welfare in the Department of Anatomy and Physiology, Kansas State University.

· While weight loss would be expected immediately after castration, calves receiving the treated bands gained a bit of weight the first week after castration, while those with conventional bands lost weight during the same time period – an indication that the lidocaine-banded calves returned to appetite more quickly.

· At the end of the study, the final bodyweight was an average of more than 3 pounds higher for the calves receiving the lidocaine-treated bands compared to those receiving conventional bands.

“In addition to weight gain, it’s also about doing the right thing for our animals and providing some type of analgesic relief during castration because we know it’s painful,” declared Bortoluzzi. “I would use it to decrease their stress during this period. We now have a type of analgesic that was not available before.”

In other news from Bovine Veterinarian:
New Veterinary Teaching And Research Hospital To Break Ground
Does Your Veterinary Business Culture Need To Change?

Less Meat, Better Health – Not So Fast

Mon, 18 Nov 2024 17:28:46 GMT

Dr. Peer Ederer , during his presentation at this year’s Henry C. Gardiner Global Food Systems Conference at Kansas State University (partially sponsored by Farm Journal), noted that when it comes to the relationship between meat and health, some scientists are “willfully manipulating the discourse.” And my previous column addressed a real-life example of the fallout when that occurs.

But in reality the tension goes much broader than just a single example. For instance, over 40% of U.S. adults are now categorized as obese – that’s up from ~15% in the mid-80s. It’s more than doubled in just the past forty years. The time frame is especially pertinent. That’s because it was during the late-70s and early-80s the push to reduce animal fat (i.e. eat less meat) began in earnest. And that all stemmed from the McGovern Council’s recommendations for a “heart healthy” diet.

In light of those recommendations, Gary Taubes describes the obesity trend this way (Why We Get Fat and What To Do About It):

As a nation, we were told to eat less fat and less saturated fat, which we did, or at least tried to do – saturated-fat consumption steadily declined over the years that followed, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture statistics – and yet, rather than getting leaner, we got fatter…

And, of course, there’s all sorts of health and productivity ramifications associated that occurrence.

Perhaps the most alarming (and/or dangerous) health trend occurring involves the ever-rising incidence of diabetes. The World Health Organization notes that, “In the past 3 decades the prevalence of type 2 diabetes has risen dramatically in countries of all income levels.”

Many of the detractors once again point to meat as the cause; “aha, it must be we’re eating too much meat – we should reduce our consumption even further.” Meanwhile, total meat consumption in the U.S. actually bottomed in 2014 at ~200 lb per capita – and last year’s level was roughly equal to that versus 20 years ago. But somehow, someway, meat still gets blamed

Given those trends, it’s clear that solving our weight and/or diabetes issues is far more complicated than simply eliminating meat from the diet. Once again, let’s turn to Gary Taubes. He points out that meat is not the culprit (see The Case Against Sugar) – emphases mine:

The Inuit, for instance, pastoral populations like the Masai in Kenya, or South Pacific Islanders like those on the New Zealand protectorate of Tokelau, consumed less fat, (and in some cases less meat) over the course of their relevant nutrition transitions [ as they became more affluent], and yet they, too experienced more obesity, diabetes, and heart disease (and cancer as well.) These populations are the counter-examples that suggest that this dietary-fat hypothesis is wrong.

Some readers may remember NBC’s prime time hit from the early 2000s called The Biggest Loser. At the start of the 8th season (2011) I wrote a column about the show. I noted that, “one of the key components of The Biggest Loser is the show’s emphasis upon the complexity of issues surrounding weight gain and obesity. After all, if it were simple there’d be no show.”

These are complex issues. Accordingly, the zealots who simply proclaim less-meat-equals-better-health are guilty of “willfully manipulating the discourse”; the pragmatic evidence doesn’t support that claim.

Nevil Speer is an independent consultant based in Bowling Green, KY. The views and opinions expressed herein do not reflect, nor are associated with in any manner, any client or business relationship. He can be reached at nevil.speer@turkeytrack.biz .

Your Next Reads: The Foundation of the Cattle Industry Is Grass

Beef It Up: Why Meat Matters