Make informed decisions for your operation with information delivered right to your inbox.
Get the latest tools, innovations and science-based information for the Canadian beef industry, including seasonal production considerations and economic analyses.
The Beef Cattle Research Council (BCRC), in collaboration with Canfax Research Services and regional representatives, recently took a snapshot of production practices that have been adopted by cow-calf producers across the country, as well as performance measures of their herds.
The inaugural Canadian Cow-Calf Survey collected data from 600 producers across nine provinces on the 2022 breeding season through the 2023 weaned calf crop, as well as reasoning and rationale for some practices.
Survey results will be used to help the BCRC prioritize research and extension strategies funded by the research allocation of the Canadian Beef Cattle Check-Off to support producers with different types of herds and operations in various regions.
Sample of results
Weaning
About one-third (32.4%) of respondents use fence line separation, 12% use nose paddle or two-stage weaning, and 2% rely on natural weaning.
When the 50.8% of respondents who reported using traditional separation were asked about reasons, 58.7% indicated they sell their calves immediately after weaning, 21.1% cited a lack of time, labor or infrastructure to wean them differently, and 11.9% did not see any financial benefit from alternative methods.
Nationally, 60% of respondents sold calves at weaning, while 40% indicated that they have retained ownership of most of their calves after weaning in the last three years. Among the respondents who retained ownership, close to 60% reported that they retained ownership for more than 120 days.
Nationally, calf death loss within 24 hours of birth averaged 2.2% for cows and 3.7% for heifers in the 2023 calving season. For comparison, the reported losses in Ontario in 2016 was 3.0% for cows and 4.1% for heifers, and Western Canada in 2017 reported 2.7% in cows and 4.4% in heifers.1
Death loss between 24 hours and weaning averaged 2.5% for calves born to cows and 2.9% for calves born to heifers across Canada. For comparison, the reported losses in Ontario in 2016 was 5.3% for cows and 3.4% for heifers, and in 2017 Western Canada reported 2.5% in cows and 2.4% in heifers.1
Canadian producers employ varied approaches to resuscitate unresponsive newborn calves. Placing the calf in recovery position and rubbing vigorously are commonly practiced methods, with 37% of respondents indicating they always use these techniques. Poking straw or a finger in the nose was also commonly practiced with 30% respondents indicating they always use this technique.
Hanging a calf upside down to drain liquid from its lungs is a traditional technique, however, this only drains fluid from the calf ’s stomach, not its lungs. Holding a calf upside down or draping it over a gate or fence also causes the calf ’s stomach and intestines to compress the lungs and diaphragm, making it even harder for the calf to breathe. 66% of respondents reported never hanging calves upside down for a period of time. For comparison, more than 50% of Western Canadian cow-calf operations surveyed in 2017 reported hanging calves over a fence or gate as a resuscitation technique. 3
Open rates, along with calving interval, often relate to breeding season length, which varied regionally. Alberta and Saskatchewan producers reported shorter breeding season lengths for cows of 80 and 87 days respectively, while Quebec and Maritimes producers reported a 131-day breeding season.
Nationally, the average cow open rate was 7.4%, while the heifer open rate was 11% in the 2022 breeding season. The lowest open rates were reported in Quebec and the Maritimes with 4.1% in cows and 8.1% in heifers. The highest open rates were reported in Manitoba with 10.1% in cows and 13.2% in heifers.
Results showed that, on average, 69% of Canadian cow-calf producers lab test their feed occasionally or annually. For comparison, 60% of Western Canadian producers in 2017 and 34% of Ontario cow-calf producers in 2016 reported lab testing their feed occasionally or annually.1
Of producers who reported feed testing, nearly half (48.8%) used the lab results to develop rations on their own; more than a third (35.8%) of producers work with a nutritionist to use feed tests to develop rations; and 5.3% use the results with their extension specialist to create rations. Ten percent of respondents do not use feed test results.
Approximately 31% do not feed test. The majority (45.1%) cited the perception that their cattle appeared healthy, thus no need for testing. Other significant reasons included the lack of confidence in making or implementing plans based on feed test results (15.9%), the perceived high cost of testing (12.1%) and uncertainty about how to collect and send feed samples for analysis (9.9%).
Survey results showed that 38.2% of respondents tested their livestock’s drinking water one or more times in the past three years. Of those who never tested livestock’s drinking water, 20.5% of respondents see no need to test as their cattle appear healthy, 5.9% lack confidence in using test results and 5.1% are uncertain about sample collection and submission (5.1%).
On average nationally, 94% of respondents vaccinated their cattle. Vaccination rates of bulls, cows, replacement heifers and calves varied considerably by disease type and region. The greatest vaccine use in practice was for seven, eight, or nine-way Clostridial vaccine administered to calves, as reported by 84.7% of respondents. Vaccination for reproductive diseases was most prevalent among cows (69.3%) and replacement heifers (71.8%). Bovine Respiratory Disease vaccinations were highly adopted across all categories, with calves showing the highest rate at 73.4%. Scours vaccinations and Vibrio/Lepto were less common overall compared to other vaccines. Generally, vaccination rates are highest in Western Canada and lowest in Quebec and the Maritimes.
Of the 8.9% of respondents who did not vaccinate their breeding females for reproductive disease, 34.3% cited having a closed herd as their reason, while 28.6% are satisfied with their conception rates and saw no need to vaccinate. Other barriers included the lack of facilities (5.7%), lack of labor (5.7%), the expense of vaccination (2.9%) and inability to access a veterinarian to develop a herd health program (2.9%).
Additionally, 34.8% of respondents reported consulting with a veterinarian on their herd health program yearly, 37.2% two to five times per year, and 24.1% did not consult a veterinarian.
Remote drug delivery
Results showed 63.3% of respondents did not use a remote drug delivery device (RDDD) for treatment, while 14.5% used it fewer than five times a year, 9.8% used it five to ten times a year, and 6.5% used it 11 to 20 times a year. The adoption rate of remote drug delivery devices was higher in the prairie provinces, compared to the rest of the country.
For those who used an RDDD for treatment, treating foot rot, septic arthritis and lameness was most prominent, as reported by 94.4% of respondents. Pinkeye and eye infections were the next most common conditions treated with a RDDD at 49.1%.
The survey found that pain mitigation during castration was always used by 26.2% of respondents, while 20.4% use it depending on age and method. 53.4% of respondents do not use pain mitigation during castration with the primary reason (87% of respondents) being that calves are castrated before three months old. For comparison, in 2017, 72% of producers in Western Canada did not use pain mitigation during castration with the same primary reason.1
For those who dehorn calves, 47.3% of respondents always use some form of pain mitigation when dehorning, while 22.9% use it based on age and method. The majority (80.6%) of respondents had more than 75% of their calves born polled. For comparison, in 2017, 31% of producers in Western Canada always used some form of pain mitigation when dehorning, while 14% used it based on age and method.
The majority of respondents (79.2%) rely on paper records for their record-keeping. Nearly half of the respondents (47.8%) use spreadsheets, while 20.7% employ accounting software. Electronic cattle management software was utilized by 17.8% of respondents. A small percentage (4.7%) use other methods such as purebred association registry and cell phone apps. 1.2% of respondents do not keep records at all. The majority (85.9%) of those who keep records use them for on-farm decision making.
The BCRC’s Cow-Calf Production Indicators Calculator can be used by producers to compare 15 of their own production numbers with industry targets and regional benchmarks informed by this survey.
Noteworthy trends
More information on trends and substantial changes in production practices and performance measures over time will be available in the updated BCRC report, Adoption Rates of Recommended Practices by Cow-Calf Operators in Canada, which is expected in Spring 2025. The report, last published in 2019, will be a comprehensive literature review including results of the 2023 Canadian Cow-Calf Survey.
The inaugural Canadian Cow-Calf Survey amalgamated and replaced regional cow-calf production surveys conducted by various organizations between 2013-2017. The BCRC intends to repeat the national survey every five years.
Sharing or reprinting BCRC posts is welcome and encouraged. Please credit the Beef Cattle Research Council, provide the website address, www.BeefResearch.ca, and let us know you have chosen to share the article by emailing us at info@beefresearch.ca.
Your questions, comments and suggestions are welcome. Contact us directly or spark a public discussion by posting your thoughts below.
