Economic analysis and stochastic simulation of alternative beef calving and feeding systems in western Canada

KhakbazanMohammad,; CarewRichard,; ScottShannon, L; ChiangPaul,; BlockHushton, C; RobinsClayton,; DurunnaObioha, N; HuangJohn,

doi:10.4141/cjas2013-185

Cited by 9 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the beef system that a producer would choose or adopt cannot solely be evaluated by the CDF analytical framework, as each individual producer may have different risk preferences. Therefore, as reported by Khakbazan et al (2014), the concept of SERF is a more preferred analytical technique.…”

Section: Distribution Function Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…3). Khakbazan et al (2014) assumed 98% calfweaning rate and also used different price data and reported that the LC system was a preferable option. Assuming a 98% weaning rate for both EC and LC in this study also indicated that the LC system resulted in higher returns than the EC system throughout the range of alternative return distributions analyzed in all sites (data not shown).…”

Section: Distribution Function Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The EC offers a shorter calving period (Adams et al 2001;McCartney et al 2004;Landblom et al 2005;Durunna et al 2014b) and provides greater weight gains to both steers and heifers at weaning compared with late (summer) calving (LC). However, LC has been associated with potentially higher net revenues from lower system costs and higher beef prices (Stockton et al 2007;Griffin et al 2012;Khakbazan et al 2014); it also offers a better match between cow nutritional requirements and available pasture (Story et al 2000;McCartney et al 2004;Anderson et al 2005;Reisenauer et al 2007;Hughes 2008Hughes , 2009Lardner et al 2011). Economic consequences of LC versus EC will emanate from differences in feed sources, infrastructure requirements, labour requirements, and marketing options (Wolfova´et al 2005;Reisenauer et al 2007;Winterholler et al 2008;Girardin 2011;Khakbazan et al 2014).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, LC has been associated with potentially higher net revenues from lower system costs and higher beef prices (Stockton et al 2007;Griffin et al 2012;Khakbazan et al 2014); it also offers a better match between cow nutritional requirements and available pasture (Story et al 2000;McCartney et al 2004;Anderson et al 2005;Reisenauer et al 2007;Hughes 2008Hughes , 2009Lardner et al 2011). Economic consequences of LC versus EC will emanate from differences in feed sources, infrastructure requirements, labour requirements, and marketing options (Wolfova´et al 2005;Reisenauer et al 2007;Winterholler et al 2008;Girardin 2011;Khakbazan et al 2014). Variation in these factors can introduce greater potential risk to both systems; therefore, weighing the economic risks and rewards in each system will provide valuable information to producers that may be considering changing their calving system.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This study focuses on the calving phase of a typical cowÁcalf system and assumes that calves are sold at weaning at a constant average age; therefore, backgrounding and finishing practices are not relevant in this study. However, the majority of the cited articles assume a full life cycle from birth to slaughter (Lardner et al 2011;Durunna et al 2014a, b;Khakbazan et al 2014).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

The effects of spring versus summer calving on beef cattle economic performance in western Canada

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

. 2015. The effects of spring versus summer calving on beef cattle economic performance in western Canada. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 95: 475Á486. The choice of calving date influences the net revenue of a calving operation as it affects the number of days that calves spend in each feeding phase and when they are subsequently marketed. These two factors determine the costs, revenue, and risk (variance) of each calving system for the calving phase of a beef system. The majority of cowÁcalf producers in western Canada have adopted early calving (EC) in spring due to management factors. However, late calving (LC) in the summer is an alternative beef calving system associated with higher returns due to lower system costs and higher beef prices. It may offer a better match between cow nutritional requirements and pasture availability. The objective of this study was to compare the revenues and risks for a traditional EC system and an alternative LC system at three sites in western Canada. Biological and economic data from three field experimental sites in western Canada (Brandon Research Centre in Manitoba, Western Beef Development Centre in Lanigan, Saskatchewan and Semi-Arid Prairie Agriculture Research Centre in Swift Current, Saskatchewan) were used to determine the costs and benefits of the alternative beef calving system. The results showed that even though the EC has higher cost than the LC, the EC is slightly better than LC in terms of higher net revenue potential, but it comes at a greater risk due to higher revenue variances. The EC system is usually more preferable for risk-neutral producers, whereas the LC system is more preferable for risk-averse producers. Les effets du veˆlage au printemps par rapport au veˆlage a`l'e´te´sur la performance e´conomique des bovins de boucherie dans l'ouest du Canada. Can. J. Anim. Sci. 95: 475Á486. Le choix de la date de veˆlage influence le revenu net d'un e´tablissement de veˆlage puisqu'il a un effet sur le nombre de jours que les veaux passent dans chaque phase d'alimentation ainsi que leur mise en marche´par la suite. Ces deux facteurs de´terminent les couˆts, le revenu et le risque (variance) de chaque syste`me pour la phase de veˆlage chez les bovins de boucherie. La majorite´des producteurs de vaches-veaux de l'ouest du Canada ont adopte´le veˆlage pre´coce (EC Á « early calving ») au printemps pour accommoder des facteurs de gestion. Par contre, le veˆlage tardif (LC Á « late calving ») a`l'e´te´est un syste`me alternatif de veˆlage des bovins associe´s a`des rendements plus e´leve´s imputable aux couˆts plus faibles et une hausse des prix du baeuf. Il pourrait offrir un meilleur accommodement entre les besoins nutritionnels des bovins et la disponibilite´des paˆturages. L'objectif de cette e´tude e´tait de comparer les revenus et les risques des syste`mes traditionnels EC et syste`mes alternatifs LC a`trois sites dans l'ouest du Canada. Les donne´es biologiques et e´conomiques de trois sites d'expe´riences sur le terrain dans l'ouest du Canada (le Centre de Recherche d...

show abstract

Section: Distribution Function Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Distribution Function Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The effects of spring versus summer calving on beef cattle economic performance in western Canada

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Greenhouse gas emission of Canadian cow-calf operations: A whole-farm assessment of 295 farms

Alemu

Amiro

Bittman

et al. 2017

Agricultural Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Risk and Returns of Spring and Fall Calving for Beef Cattle in Tennessee

Henry

Boyer

Griffith

et al. 2016

J. Agric. Appl. Econ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:We determined the profitability and risk for spring- and fall-calving beef cows in Tennessee. Simulation models were developed using 19 years of data and considered the seasonality of cattle prices and feed prices for least-cost feed rations to find a distribution of net returns for spring- and fall-calving seasons for two weaning months. Fall calving was more profitable than the spring calving for all feed rations and weaning months. Fall calving was also risk preferred over spring calving for all levels of risk aversion. Higher calf prices at weaning were the primary factor influencing the risk efficiency of fall calving.

show abstract

Economic analysis and stochastic simulation of alternative beef calving and feeding systems in western Canada

Cited by 9 publications

References 19 publications

The effects of spring versus summer calving on beef cattle economic performance in western Canada

The effects of spring versus summer calving on beef cattle economic performance in western Canada

Greenhouse gas emission of Canadian cow-calf operations: A whole-farm assessment of 295 farms

Risk and Returns of Spring and Fall Calving for Beef Cattle in Tennessee

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About