Most producers are familiar with withdrawal times for veterinary products such as antibiotics. Pesticides also have restrictions on how they can be used safely without leading to chemical residues in beef. The pesticide type, application rate, plant species targeted, weather conditions and numerous other factors can alter the guidelines for safe livestock feed production. Luckily, VBP+ has resources available to guide producers through the important information found on pesticide labels.

Date(s) are a starting point to track when a product was applied to a certain area. Product labels on herbicides and other pesticides will identify rest times without grazing in terms of the number of days. So, producers must know when a product was applied to calculate when grazing or harvest can occur.

The field identification or location column allows the producer to track pesticide use across multiple locations to optimize their use of the land available to them. Producers use different pesticides depending on the intended use (e.g. hay vs. grazing), pest type and plant species present. For operations with varied land profiles, keeping a record of the different products used in each location takes the pressure off a producer’s memory to ensure food safety.

Recording the product used directs the producer to the appropriate information to complete the subsequent columns. Writing down the brand name of the product helps readers verify the safety precautions documented in the final columns and reminds the producer where to find the details to fill them. The brand name is important because various companies may produce similar products with the same primary chemical agent that have different guidelines for use. With additional research, label guidelines can change over time, so this column should not be used as a reference point for future records.

Rate of application and acreage are important reminders for the producer. From a safety perspective, these columns prompt a calculation of the amount of pesticide needed according to the area being treated and the rate indicated on the product label. Ideally, producers will start looking at a pesticide use record before application to choose appropriate products and adjust their grazing and harvest plans according to withdrawal times. In turn, identifying the rate and acreage can help a producer plan how much product they need to purchase and account for costs ahead of time.

The last two columns of the record involve two commonly confused terms. The safe-to-harvest/graze time period refers to how long you must wait after application before either harvesting or grazing. This information comes directly from the product label and can vary depending on the type of feed treated and other factors. After recording the date of application and the safe-to-harvest/graze period, producers can calculate the date of harvest or turnout to plan accordingly for feeding needs.

The withdrawal period refers to the time before shipping that cattle must be removed from a pasture. For example, a product label might direct producers not to harvest treated grass as hay for 30 days after application and to remove cattle from a treated pasture at least three days before shipping. In this case, the safe-to-harvest period would be 30 days, while the withdrawal period would be three days.

Comments capture risk information. In the sample record, a producer has indicated that cattle won’t be turned out onto the pasture until the next year, well past the safe-to-graze period.

While this record template records key details on pesticide labels, there are a few other major considerations for beef producers concerning pesticide use. Last summer’s drought in Western Canada pushed many producers to work with neighbouring farmers to salvage crops. However, to prevent animal health and food safety hazards, livestock managers need to verify that the pesticides applied to a crop can be safely used on feed crops and adhere to safe-to-graze/harvest and withdrawal times. As well, much like using an animal health product off-label, adverse weather conditions such as drought can change grazing and harvest guidelines for a pesticide. While product labels cannot account for every variation in weather, producers can contact the product representative in their area to get recommendations on safe use.

Finally, beef producers know to expect the unexpected when cattle are involved. Sometimes fences break and mistakes are made, but producers can still maintain high standards for food safety. If cattle accidentally access treated feed outside of usage guidelines, producers can contact their veterinarian to reach out to the Canadian Global Food Animal Residue Avoidance Databank (CgFARAD). The veterinarian can then advise the producer as to how to proceed according to advice from CgFARAD on how the product’s behaviour in the animal’s body will differ from the situation described on the label. To help guide producers through this process, VBP+ also has a Toxin Exposure record available under the Producer Resources tab at www.verifiedbeef.ca.

Herbicides, fungicides and insecticides are important elements in a producer’s feed management tool kit. This record can help producers reap their benefits while optimizing animal performance and maintaining consumer confidence in Canadian beef as a safe and nutritious part of a healthy diet.

Emma Cross is a student at the University of Saskatchewan and works for Verified Beef Production Plus in communications. She also runs a purebred Hereford operation out of Tofield, Alberta, and is the current president of the Canadian Junior Hereford Association.

The post Choosing safe days to graze appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

While it is always a producer’s goal to avoid needing to treat cattle, creating a plan to address common diseases before they strike can shorten response time and improve treatment success. Both producer and vet can anticipate needs for veterinary prescriptions or extra-label drug use. Although the document itself cannot replace veterinary prescriptions, it makes treatment or routine protocols more efficient. As well, certain procedures are carried out yearly. Laying out a plan for these practices can help organize the purchase of necessary supplies and scheduling. Perhaps most importantly though, a herd health protocol is a key element of a vet-client-patient relationship (VCPR).

The Annual Vaccination Protocol section outlines the vaccinations that a producer normally gives every year. While these may seem routine, as products are updated and things get busy, updating vaccination protocols can be quickly forgotten. This section is an opportunity for producers to discuss how effective their vaccination protocol was over the past year and make any necessary changes well in advance.

Identifying the Class of Cattle and the Anticipated Time Frame for the vaccination in question helps the producer plan to pick up vaccines and other supplies, co-ordinate additional labour if needed and move cattle to handling systems. As well, this information helps the veterinarian choose the right product in conjunction with the reason for vaccination (Vaccination For). Listing product names will simplify the process of purchasing and picking up vaccines when the time comes. While this sample document has been compressed to show the major elements, the template normally would contain additional space under each category to accommodate more procedures and treatments.

The Annual Procedure Schedule outlines other practices performed yearly that might not typically be considered in the context of herd health. These include branding, weaning, preg-checking and more. Including these procedures in a herd health protocol can help producers as they schedule multiple practices, many of which occur at the same time. As well, for procedures that require veterinary products, such as pain control for castration, this section helps producers and veterinarians predict when supplies and prescriptions will be needed.

General Information is listed at the top of the herd health protocol to clarify details of the VCPR. The Dates the Protocol is Valid For section helps the producer distinguish between plans from year to year, since the protocol should be reviewed annually. Operation Information, Veterinary Clinic Information and Veterinarian Signature help document an established VCPR by clearly identifying both parties and showing the vet’s acknowledgement of their collaborative involvement. For producers certified under Verified Beef Production Plus or in other cases where a VCPR must be proven, this document is a useful tool to demonstrate what producers are already planning on their operations.

Treatment Protocols for Common Diseases on the Operation are planned sequences of treatments for animals diagnosed with familiar conditions. Like annual vaccinations, treating a case of a common disease may not seem to require much planning. However, reviewing this section of a herd health protocol with a veterinarian is a chance for a producer to put plans in writing for any new diseases that have recently emerged. As well, a detailed herd health protocol makes getting a prescription for a common disease easier and more efficiently since a veterinarian has already discussed the need with the producer.

Identifying the Common Disease, including the expected proportion of the herd requiring treatment and the Class of Cattle are two key pieces of information to help a producer monitor their herd. Next, product route and delivery are identified for First, Second and Third Treatments. This sequence lays out how a producer should respond to common diseases and can serve as a standard operating procedure of sorts for employees not directly involved in protocol development. Comments leaves room for additional details or notes to help successfully implement the plan.

As for other sections, basic logistical details help the producer integrate procedures into their yearly schedule and co-ordinate supply purchase and cattle movement. This information includes the Class of Cattle, Procedure and Date. Identifying the specific Product or Equipment Required in advance will make the process of ordering and picking up supplies more efficient, just as with vaccines. Finally, the Comments column allows the producer to identify which procedures occur at the same time. For example, the sample record identifies that dehorning calves at weaning is part of a pre-conditioning protocol, which would also encompass other practices included in later rows on a full document.

Ideally, a herd health protocol is completed well before any of the procedures contained within it are performed. While spring might be too late to plan for some practices, it is never too late to put down procedures in writing for later in the year, nor is it ever too early to start thinking about planning for next year.

The template for a herd health protocol may need to be adapted to the needs of each operation. As a starting point, an extended version of the sample record provided, as well as a blank version, are available on verifiedbeef.ca under the Producer Resources tab.

Emma Cross is a student at the University of Saskatchewan and works for Verified Beef Production Plus in communications. She also runs a purebred Hereford operation out of Tofield, Alberta, and is the current president of the Canadian Junior Hereford Association.

The post Planning for herd health appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

“It was almost like analysis paralysis,” says Higgins, who runs the Maritime Beef Council and raises cattle at Quispamsis, New Brunswick. “There were four or five different options. I knew that … getting started and investing the time to get the data put into any one of them was going to be time-consuming.”

The 2017 Maritime Beef Strategy identified better data management as a priority, with data flow necessary for premium programs that focus on sustainability, such as Verified Beef Production Plus and Prince Edward Island Certified Beef. However, many producers throughout the Atlantic Provinces were in the same boat as Higgins, bringing questions to the council about how to choose the right software for their operations.

To assist with providing recommendations, the Maritime Beef Council launched a two-year pilot project to collect producer analysis on several data management programs. About 30 producers participated in total, and each producer was assigned one of five software programs to test: BioTrack 360, Cattlemax, Herd Trax, Herdly and LivestockED.

Participants prioritized different metrics and features, depending on what was most valuable to their operations. “Not surprisingly, it varied between producers, and that largely depended on the amount of data that the producers themselves were capturing,” says Higgins. This had an impact on how they viewed the usefulness of each program.

Each program tested offers herd inventory reporting and records for breeding, calving and health treatments, as well as options for creating custom reports. More robust data analysis options are available with HerdTrax and BioTrack 360, and both programs allow people to share data along the value chain.

Overall, Cattlemax and Herdly were recommended for the average Maritime cow-calf producer (with a cow herd of 30-50 head), having received the highest scores in the pilot. Cattlemax offers all basic record-keeping metrics, with the entire program available for mobile as well as desktop, and it can import information from breed association registries. For those with mobile data or limited Wi-Fi access, printable record-keeping sheets are available to use chute-side before inputting the data once internet is available.

Participants found Herdly easy to use, with ample troubleshooting tools available, and the value of the program fit the price for small or mid-sized cow-calf programs. This was one of two software programs tested that synchronizes with the Canadian Livestock Tracking System for tracing animal movement, the other being HerdTrax. One drawback is that Herdly’s mobile application, while rated as excellent, is not available on Android devices.

For producers with larger herds or feeder components to their operations, HerdTrax was given good reviews, with participants finding value in the program’s ability to use progeny performance data to create maternal and terminal indices. However, those with smaller cow-calf herds found it offers more than what they require, with the price a little high for the number of features they actually used.

BioTrack 360 was the most expensive program tested, and while it has a strong genetic evaluation feature, participants found it hard to troubleshoot. None of the participants planned to continue using it after the pilot, noting that the value it offered didn’t correlate with its price and that other programs would better suit the average cow-calf producer in the region.

LivestockED was tested in the first year, and while producers said it was easy to use, they found it to be quite basic and wanted to try other programs to get better value for their investment. As such, this program wasn’t recommended by producers.

One of the pilot’s overall findings was that any method of data management required time and effort, and regardless of the program, “there is some time investment into getting it set up and to getting it set correctly to save you heartache down the road,” says Higgins.

The degree of ease in inputting data into the program was a major factor in whether or not the producer decided to continue with a specific program. Some producers indicated that they continued capturing data manually, especially for heat detecting and breeding, even if they later compiled it into a software program.

Producer feedback also highlighted the importance of starting small by adding a few animals and current data into the system, then inputting past information later. “It’s as complicated as you want to make it,” she says.

Several programs have a free trial period, and you can use that to begin simply and see if you like the program before spending the time required to transfer the entire herd and years of data into it. “Put a couple animals in — you don’t have to put them all in — see how easy it is to just do simple things like add a calf, do a vaccination run and those things that you would theoretically be doing in high volume,” she advises.

Among the challenges identified with these programs during the pilot were compatibility issues with scale heads and reader wands meant to automate the flow of data into the software.

“In theory, you should be able to plug that in and bounce it over into a data management software relatively easily, but there are definitely differences in ease of compatibility with some of those types of things,” says Higgins.

Difficulties arose for participants who register purebred cattle with national breed associations, as none of the tested programs had an interface that easily transferred data to a breed registry.

“Sometimes it felt like it was duplicating a lot of those efforts because you had to go through your breed registry process to register all over again after you had done all of the work to get it into your data management software,” she says.

As well, some producers ran into trouble in areas with limited internet and mobile data network access, prompting those participants to return to manual record-keeping methods.

At the project’s conclusion, 40 per cent of participants indicated they would continue to use the software program they tested, while 30 per cent said they wanted to try a different program that was part of the pilot. The other 30 per cent planned to return to their previous record-keeping methods, whether that be on paper or with a spreadsheet program.

The Maritime Beef Council will be sharing the results of the pilot through a two-page document, available in English and French on its website (maritimebeef.ca) and in hard copy at in-person events.

The post Taking the guesswork out of selecting a data management program for your cattle herd appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

The initial local group of mostly local shareholders has grown to over 200. The companies are governed by a board of eight members, which are elected by the shareholders. Brad Welter is the current president and has been for five years, following the leadership of Brad Wildemen, who still sits as a board member. Wildeman is well-known as a leader in the Canadian cattle industry.

As the company works on growing value through leadership in the sustainable production and processing of ag products (as per its corporate mission statement), Welter says they have emphasized self-sufficiency in growing and acquiring feed, expanding the grazing operation, and ensuring the right blend of cattle at the right time of year.

Synergies between the feedlot and ethanol plant can be great with the co-product of wet distillers grain (WDG) used in feedlot rations, and thin stillage added to the water bowls. Ethanol production is a complicated, multi-step process involving acquiring the wheat, milling, cooking, fermentation, distillation — when the WDG is captured — and then further refinement to get to the finished product. As ethanol is a fuel, it is directly affected by the energy sector. The challenges and low prices of oil had a significant impact on the ethanol division at Pound-Maker, and not in a positive way.

Yet, with their experience of making alcohol, Pound-Maker was able to make some changes and produce a grade that can be used for hand sanitizer during the COVID-19 pandemic. This is a moving target and the specifications are tightening up. And as Welter points out, the current level of demand for hand sanitizer is likely going to shrink, but there are opportunities for different grades of alcohol.

“We are looking outside of the cattle business to make the plant profitable,” he says.

The expansion of land to grow 30 per cent of the silage has been one part of the strategy towards sustainability, says Welter. They have also grown the grazing enterprise with 2,000 acres of additional marginal farmland as a way to spread out risk. The intensive grazing operation handles 2,500 head on 4,000 acres of subdivided paddocks. The size of the herds vary depending on the grazing cell. The grass is close to the main lot, which is an important advantage to minimize trucking costs, says Welter.

For the grazing enterprise, they start acquiring 450- to 500-pound cattle in February and lightly background until May 10. They then start going to grass at 650 to 700 pounds. The cattle are coming off grass in late September or early October, having gained about 250 pounds to come back to the lot at 950 pounds. They are then finished out to 1,500 pounds in February and March. They aim for 1.8 lbs./day gain on grass and 3.4 lbs./day gain on the finishing side.

The cattle going directly into the lot are purchased at a wide range of weights, from a number of different venues, including direct from producers and through the auction markets. They start out on a lower-energy backgrounding ration and transition up to the finishing ration.

Pound-Maker is part of the Verified Beef Production Plus (VBP+) program. They have a close relationship with JBS, where 100 per cent of their fat cattle go.

“Being part of the VBP+ has not resulted in changes to our operation, but it does make us more conscientious of what we are doing,” says Welter. “It is a good reminder and monitoring tool.”

Welter adds that VBP+ is the right thing for the beef industry to compete with the other proteins.

The Western Livestock Price Insurance Program (WLPIP) has been important for Pound-Maker and the industry. “It is one more tool to help mitigate risk. It allows us to cover the bottom but still be able to enjoy the upside. Our industry needs to be competitive with the U.S. and the rest of the world,” he says.

On the topic of carbon, Welter thinks there is more to do and learn how it fits with current agricultural practices. There are several ongoing projects that are looking at how to measure the carbon sequestration from various grazing and production methods.

Innovation is also on their strategic horizon. The company is always looking for small things to increase production. Of course, the ethanol plant in the ’90s was seen as extremely innovative at the time.

The company strives to bring value to their shareholders and be strong supporters of the community. Both the shareholders and employees are mostly from the area.

“We will always be involved in community development and support of recreation and leisure activities,” says Welter. “Fifty employees and their families are part of this community and it makes us proud to be part of Pound-Maker.”

The 200-plus shareholders have first right to deliver grain, either wheat for the ethanol plant or barley for the feedlot. Participation in a share-trading program is another option.

The corporate structure is progressive, with the privately traded Pound-Maker Investments encompassing 643,000 shares and owning the two operating companies, Pound-Maker Agventures and Pound-Maker Capital Corp. — the financing entity for customers feeding cattle at Pound-Maker Agventures.

Their community involvement extends further to that of research and extension through the University of Saskatchewan. They work closely with the U of S on different projects whether it be through hosting students or providing cattle for different research trials.

The philosophy of involvement also encompasses the wider industry, through participation and support of producers’ groups such as the Saskatchewan Cattlemen’s Association and the Saskatchewan Cattle Feeders Association.

Pound-Maker’s initial goals — to provide local farmers an alternative market for their grain, to provide employment and to enhance their community — continue to be the guiding force in day-to-day operations. Their impact on the cattle industry in Western Canada has been far-reaching and shows no signs of slowing.

Kelly Sidoryk ranches with her family just west of Lloydminster, Alta. She consults in a number of areas including succession planning and holistic management.

The post Finding synergy with farming, cattle and ethanol appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

Increasingly, producers are turning to certification programs like Verified Beef Production Plus (VBP+) and various European Union (EU) certifications to prove their production practices to consumers domestically and abroad. In addition to supporting public confidence, the programs offer another benefit, too: they provide some of the few opportunities in cattle production today for farmers and ranchers to capture a market premium.

“I like the idea of why VBP+ came about,” says Ike Wipf, cattle manager for the Rosetown Hutterite Colony in Rosetown, Sask., which calves out 300 head each year. “The VBP+ program lets me get the message out there that we are raising our animals well and raising a quality product. We don’t just raise beef cows to make money; what I care about is raising quality food.”

And, adds Endiang, Alta. cow-calf producer Stuart Somerville, the premiums available from certification are the key to success for some producers.

“Everyone’s in the same boat. We’re all looking for a leg up. The only competitive advantage that a small outfit like us has is we can go chasing premiums.”

VBP+ basics

The Verified Beef Production Plus (VBP+) certification program allows Canadian producers to showcase that their operation abides by the highest on-farm food safety, animal care, biosecurity and environmental stewardship standards. The voluntary program, developed by beef producers, requires a producer to maintain strict records of their production practices, complete a VBP+ course and open their operation to a third-party, on-farm audit.

For farms that already keep good records, the VBP+ program is not particularly time consuming or difficult.

“A lot of producers are closer than they think they would be towards meeting VBP+’s requirements. It doesn’t need to be an intimidating process. We’re trying to help producers be recognized for the good things they’re already doing,” says Melissa Downing, VBP+’s Alberta co-ordinator and a VBP+ certified cow-calf producer herself.

“It’s a course and an audit. There was nothing difficult about it,” says Wipf. “It’s not hard. It’s not complicated. It’s next to nothing for work.

“We already kept a record of every animal we raise. Every animal that goes through our system gets read by our RFID tag reader and when it’s vaccinated, that information goes right into our computer system. There wasn’t a thing other than our handling system that we had to change, and we got funding through the VBP+ program to do that,” he says.

Currently, Cargill in High River, Alta.; JBS Canada in Brooks; Atlantic Beef Products in P.E.I. and, just recently, Cargill in Guelph, Ont., have been audited by a third party to ensure they meet the requirements of the Canadian Roundtable for Sustainable Beef (CRSB) and are certified to the Canadian Beef Sustainability Framework. As such, they are eligible to supply product sourced from certified sustainable beef operations.

A beef operation that has been audited and certified by VBP+ is also certified sustainable under the framework. Cargill’s certified sustainable beef sourcing program provides credits averaging $18 per head per certified operation (based on payouts from 2019 – Q2, 2020). For example, if an animal moves from cow-calf producer to backgrounder to feedlot, each of those three producers will receive a credit upon the animal’s processing. These payments are calculated and distributed quarterly after animals have been harvested.

“This incentive is an example of how Cargill, as a processer, is rewarding producers who are participating in sustainability certification. It also exemplifies their commitment to their retailers who are seeking to supply certified sustainable beef to their customers,” says Shannon Argent, the VBP+ program’s business manager.

To qualify for Cargill’s program, the animal has to spend its entire life on certified operations. Producers also need to opt in to the program through BIXS, which tracks whether an animal comes from a certified operation and allows producers to share that information with buyers.

Premium domestic markets for EU certifications

There are several different EU certifications currently available. The most common stand-alone (and the base requirement of all EU certifications) certifies beef as free from growth-promoting enhancements; others include certification that the cattle were managed in specific ways, such as being fed specific rations.

Somerville completed his farm’s basic EU certification three years ago. He says the process, though somewhat administration-heavy, is not difficult.

“Your vet walks through the whole thing with you. He or she will become your best friend while you’re going through the process,” says Somerville. “But, the actual certification isn’t that much work. If you’re keeping basic records, you’ll be able to transfer them over without too much trouble. If you’re using RFID tags like we’re all supposed to be anyway, your life becomes a lot easier. It’s filling in a lot of blanks but very doable.”

Somerville has been finishing his own calf crop — typically about 200 head per year — for the past six or seven years. He says the market premium is key to his business model.

“We’re a smaller operation. We don’t have the same economies of scale that a bigger feedlot would have. So, we started looking around for areas that would have a premium. If you can find a market, there are premiums to EU certification of anywhere from $0.15-$0.25 per pound. We need that leg up.”

The premium is worth the effort, he adds.

“It’s certainly not more work than it is worth. The actual certification and cost to get professionals to look at (your program) — you pay that off very quickly. You lose some efficiency on your feed (from not using growth-promoting enhancements), but in our experience you still definitely come out ahead.”

Increasingly, the Rosetown Colony is feeding out its own calves. Last year, they fed 50 per cent of their cattle crop. This year, they managed 75 per cent. Next year, they’re aiming for 90 per cent. They buy all their bulls from Benchmark Angus; now that they’re EU-certified, all the animals they feed will be destined for Benchmark Angus’s processing arm, Ben’s Quality Meats in Picture Butte.

“What Ben’s Quality Meats does is process the very best quality for specialty buyers. There’s a chain of high-quality hotels; that’s where a lot of our beef goes,” says Wipf.

Interestingly, little to none of the EU-certified beef raised by either Somerville or the Rosetown Colony has actually sold into the EU. Instead, it’s selling to domestic customers who value the attributes the EU program ensures.

“As of now they don’t need to because they can sell all of it domestically,” says Wipf. “At the same time, a year from today, two years from today, they might want to ship to the EU. If they want to, they’d be ready to.”

While the premium is a big incentive, capturing an EU-certified premium market requires more than just cattle production skill, cautions Somerville.

“It takes some hunting to learn who’s who. You gotta start calling cattle buyers and finding out what they’re interested in, who they know, what they want. At the beginning, you’ll be on the horn a whole lot.”

Wipf agrees. In fact, he says there’s little reason to pursue EU certification without a buyer in place.

“I’d definitely recommend the VBP+ program. It’s good for the individual and good for the whole industry. EU certification? I guess if a person wants to, fine, but I don’t know if I’d go as far as recommending it. Unless you have a market, there’s no point.”

Wipf isn’t alone in seeing value in the VBP+ program. Downing reports that, in Alberta, there’s been a 30 per cent year-over-year increase in each of the last two years for the total number of producers being audited for the VBP+ program. To date, over half of the feedlot capacity is audited, as well as between 12 and 15 per cent of calves produced.

“The beef value chain is really incentivizing the VBP+ program, which is driving a lot of uptake in the program,” says Downing. “Some feedlots are very proactive in seeking out VBP+ calves.”

That’s a good thing for the whole industry, Wipf thinks.

“I do think (our industry) has to go in this direction. With all the veggie burgers out there and consumers not understanding anymore, we need to tell our story — that we care about the animals, we care about the environment, we’re raising a quality product — so the consumer can have confidence.”

Madeleine Baerg lives, loves and writes agriculture from her farm in B.C.’s Okanagan.

The post Beef producers share insights into certification programs appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

Since the 1900s, cattle ranching has been part of the land that Deer Creek Livestock operates on today, and that rich history played an integral role in the decision to purchase the ranch in 2011 from the Gilchrist family. The Deer Creek Livestock shareholder group credits the influence of Tom Gilchrist that led to some of their more notable environmental initiatives.

“We’re proud and honoured to be awarded the Environmental Stewardship Award. We couldn’t have done this without the knowledge Tom Gilchrist and his family gave us,” said Deer Creek shareholder Jeff Smith.

Each member of the shareholder group, which includes James Bekkering, Richard Visser, Gateway Livestock and the Turner family, bring a different skillset while they work collaboratively to set direction for the ranch and give guidance to the staff. The emphasis on environment is weaved through the fabric of the ranch and ingrained in their values, vision and promise to traditionally raise beef while caring for the land and water.

“We have over 100 different wildlife species on the ranch. We depend on the environment to operate, and with that, our customers depend on us to maintain this environment,” said Smith. “All of us as shareholders, as well as the staff, have the same drive, the same goals, the same vision.”

Hugh Vandersteen joined Deer Creek Livestock as Ranch Manager four years ago and hasn’t looked back. “I put my heart into it and I didn’t think I would fall in love with it the way I did. I learn something from the cattle pretty well every day,” said Vandersteen.

The ranch works closely with MULTISAR, who partner with landowners to conserve grassland species at risk, to assess soil conditions and monitor range health. They have completed 113 range health assessments and 16 tame pasture health assessments from 2008 to 2014, and implemented the use of hawk poles, converted to 18-inch high smooth bottom wire fence lines and installed solar fencing and watering sites. Cows and Fish, a group focused on riparian habitat management, has taken inventory of the riparian areas on the ranch in 1999, 2008 and 2014 to measure and benchmark riparian health. Deer Creek Livestock is also a Verified Beef Production Plus certified cattle operation.

Milk River runs directly through the ranch in southeastern Alberta. The solar panel watering systems pump water away from the river to keep cattle off the banks, and solar fencing is used to isolate grasslands and control grazing.

“We’re blessed with water and on dry years we can utilize it for the irrigation potential but that also means we have to protect it. We have to be stewards of the environment no matter what we do. We want to leave the land and where we live in a better place for the next generation,” said Bekkering. “I think the future looks good for us.”

The post Deer Creek Livestock honoured with Alberta Beef Environmental Stewardship Award appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

“As a post-secondary institution focused on agriculture, it is important for Olds College to raise our livestock using sustainable methods that support healthy animals, have minimal environmental impacts and offer transparency to the consumer,” said Stuart Cullum, Olds College president, in a release. “We are very proud that our practices meet the standard to be recognized as a Verified Beef Production Plus and CRSB Certified Operation.”

The VBP+ certification allows Olds College to participate in beef supply chains that source from certified operations. The college has a 500-head capacity feedlot and a 160-head cow-calf herd. Those operations support the college’s National Meat Training Centre and on-campus retail store. The college’s Technology Access Centre for Livestock Production also contributes research and development services to the Canadian Roundtable for Sustainable Beef.

The post Olds College gets Verified Beef status appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

The Chuikos, who run CJ Ranching near St. Walburg, Sask., lived in town with their two young children, Matt and Rylee, and managed calving by moving out to the cow herd. May camping can be chilly in north-western Saskatchewan and John recalls their daughter wearing baby socks on her hands to keep warm.

Still, it was an enjoyable experience, and soon Deanne’s parents joined in. John’s parents were in the home yard of the ranch. Originally John’s brother planned to take over the third-generation family operation, which sits on the northern edge of Saskatchewan’s parkland. John had pursued training as a welder and was working in the surrounding oil patch.

But when John’s family sat down, they started talking about a different strategy. Then John and Deanne decided to take over the place. They bought the home quarter and switched houses, with John’s parents moving to town and the younger couple moving to the ranch. By 2015, the younger couple were permanently on the home place.

“We knew communication was important and that we all needed to be on the same page,” John says of the family transition discussions.

John’s sister and her family also continued to live on the ranch until just recently. John and Deanne are grateful that their kids spent a lot of time with their cousins growing up. John’s dad is still involved and does as much as he wants to. This eased the transition as he can be relied on for help during busier times.

Paradigm shift

The Chuiko family had been rotational grazing and working on improving that end of the operation. Then a number of events happened which resulted in what John calls a paradigm shift.

The Chuikos learned of a holistic management conference in Russell, Man., and decided to attend. “I had been reading Don Campbell’s articles in the Cattlemen and was keen to learn more,” says John.

The conference resulted in significant changes for the couple. Gabe Brown, soil health guru from Bismarck, North Dakota, was one of the speakers and motivated them to expand their viewpoint. Deanne says the entire drive home they shared ideas and plans, and talked about how to learn more. A holistic management course was slated for North Battleford, Sask., a few weeks later and they signed up. Later they attended Steve Kenyon’s Greener Pastures workshop and also joined a local management group.

In John and Deanne’s opinion, it’s extremely important to keep learning and attending conferences. They were looking for help to make changes, and the decision-making tool aspect of holistic management was just what they needed.

They also knew that they wanted to rely less on John’s oilfield work and focus more at home. Their two kids were a bit older and Deanne could switch out of her part-time oilfield administration job and become more involved in the ranch.

Taking the holistic management course together was a game-changer for the couple.

“I was always a helper,” says Deanne. “But now I am fully involved and feel like an equal partner. We plan and make decisions together.”

John still sometimes has off-farm work so Deanne handles whatever she needs to, whether it’s moving fences and cattle or loading out.

They wanted to expand the number of cows, which they did through both ownership and custom animals. They spent a lot of time on financial planning and carried out the projections five years. The plan included cash flow, net worth and income and expenses. The Chuikos shared it all with their banker. That impressed their banker, and they continue to have a positive working relationship with the bank. They also monitor their financial plan every month.

“That helps give us the peace of mind on our path and through it all and where we are going,” John says.

The grazing strategy became much more intensive with daily moves. They put in over nine miles of single-strand, high-tensile electric fence for water alleys and bush paddocks. The perimeter fences are permanent. Strip grazing is done with step-in posts and turbo wire. John has also built a fencing system on their quad. Instead of gates they use PVC pipe to prop up the wire and create gates where they want them.

“The first year of more intensive grazing was a steep learning curve,” says John. He used past experience to calculate stocking rate. Grazing days were based on a 90-day plant recovery period.

“Surprisingly, we were very close to our calculations,” he laughs. “Grass grows grass, so it is important to leave some behind.”

Forage species are becoming more diverse.

“We get excited when we see beneficial species such as vetch and clover that we never planted. The planned grazing and recovery time are giving those plants the opportunity to flourish,” says Deanne. “The more we learn about soil health, the more we realize that we don’t know enough about it.”

“Going forward this is an important piece,” John adds. “We need to have the ability to adapt. Change is a constant.”

They are experimenting with high stock density and winter bale grazing for brush control, as that is an issue where they live. Bales are set out in groupings for 20-day moves in the winter. They buy hay locally, but with the dry start to last year’s growing season have expanded the area they are drawing from. The kids are paid to remove the net wrap as the cattle use the feed. Elk herds can be a problem in some areas, so in those cases they don’t set out bales ahead of time.

Calving starts May 10. In 2018, they completely switched their grazing starting point and order so cattle would be grazing paddocks at a different time of year and plant maturity than previous years. Cows are checked once a day. They aim to have all the cattle in one herd.

“One group is easier for us,” says John. “Less watering spots, less hassle, less everything.”

The Chuikos want cows that fit their operation. They focus on dollars per acre instead of dollars per head. Their gross profit shows that moderate-framed cows fit the bill for their operation.

The couple recently completed the Verified Beef Production Plus training as they see long-term benefits. “We had to tweak some things but excelled at the grazing component,” says Deanne.

People are important to the Chuikos. That includes their kids, parents, extended family and their community. As well as the holistic management group, the couple are involved with their kids’ activities, be it coaching or cheerleading.

“Nothing stays the same and there will always be curveballs. We have to make sure the grass part is working, the finances are working and our relationship is working,” says John.

Kelly Sidoryk ranches with her family west of Lloydminster, Alta. She consults in a number of areas including succession planning and holistic management.

The post A farm succession story that went a different way appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

Cargill recently announced that the CBSA pilot’s third quarter saw the production of more than one million pounds of beef sourced from certified sustainable producers. This is nearly double the initial volume produced in the pilot’s first quarter, which yielded 550,000 pounds of beef. The second quarter’s volume was more than 600,000 lbs.

To date, more than 2.2 million pounds of certified sustainable beef has been produced through the CBSA pilot, according to its website. The standards used to certify the beef comply with the framework established by the Canadian Roundtable for Sustainable Beef.

“Much of this increase is thanks to diligent efforts of the pilot partners to update their systems, records and processes to allow for chain-of-custody tracking that meets the Canadian Roundtable for Sustainable Beef’s standards,” said Gurneesh Bhandal, Cargill Protein Canada’s sustainability manager.

“We are also seeing organic growth. Steadily increasing retail and food-service demand is helping motivate producer participation, and more operations are registering to be audited by Verified Beef Production Plus (or Where Food Comes From, Inc.). It is this growth in certified operations that will increase the number of qualifying cattle and beef volume in the long term.”

There were 2.3 times more certified producers in the third quarter than the quarter before.

Emily Murray who manages the Cargill Meat Solutions sales of beef patties to McDonald’s in Canada and the U.S., says there is a clear need for more cow-calf operations within the chain.

In the third quarter they could have sourced 1.5 million more pounds of sustainable beef if every certified cow-calf operation had delivered to a certified feedlot. So there is room for more feedlots. However, had there been enough cow-calf units to fill the current capacity of certified feedlots, they would have generated 9.5 million more pounds. And even that would not have been enough to satisfy the present demand.

Jeffrey Fitzpatrick-Stilwell a senior manager with McDonald’s Canada told the recent Beef Industry Conference in London, Ont., that he would like to someday see all of the 70 million pounds they buy annually in Canada be a certified sustainable product.

Cargill is already in the process of auditing its Guelph, Ont. plant to open the pilot project up to producers in Eastern Canada.

The third-quarter credits to participating producers are $18.52 per head, down slightly from the $20.11 per head payments of the second quarter but well above the $10 per head paid out in the first quarter.

The credits paid each quarter are based on cattle weights, the amount of qualifying animals processed and demand from participating customers. Producer credits are made possible by partnering retailers, which currently include McDonald’s Canada, Loblaws, Original Joe’s, Swiss Chalet and Cactus Club.

The CBSA pilot was launched in 2017 to create a consistent supply chain of verified sustainable Canadian beef, targeting production standards from the cow-calf operation to processing. The pilot is continuing its efforts to increase awareness about the program through its presence at industry events and on social media platforms.

“There is strong interest from our retail and food-service customers and we have clear demand for beef from certified sustainable sources. Now we have the infrastructure established to help us deliver against this demand,” said Bhandal.

“This also demonstrates to producers that there is long-term value in the industry’s efforts on beef sustainability, because if we continue to see increased participation from producers, then we expect the momentum to keep growing, which helps us meeting our ultimate goal of building consumer trust in the Canadian beef industry.”

The fourth quarter of the pilot will see the launch of the Certified Sustainable Beef logo for Canadian beef product labelling, said Bhandal, as well as the partners exploring long-term incentives beyond the pilot’s first year.

The post CBSA pilot shows steady third-quarter growth appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.

McGladrie, a commercial cow-calf producer from Wetaskiwin, Alta., became involved in the CBSA pilot through the Verified Beef Production Plus (VBP+) program, a third-party auditing body for the pilot. “We as producers need to provide a transparent and accurate information base on the food we produce,” he said.

After selling 60 CBSA-eligible yearlings in early May, McGladrie learned that five head continued to a verified feedlot. However, the majority were sold to feeders not involved in VBP+ and the pilot. When he spoke to some of the buyers afterward, he learned that they didn’t have orders for cattle raised with verified sustainable standards.

McGladrie’s experience highlights the benefits and setbacks arising in the early days of the CBSA pilot. While he is encouraged thus far, he recognizes the importance of ensuring cattle continue through the program to meet consumer demand for sustainable beef. Overcoming this challenge is a priority for the pilot’s partnering organ­izations.

“We’re at a point now where producers recognize that… when the retailers say, ‘we want this type of product,’ they’re not just saying it for no reason,” said Melissa Downing, Alberta provincial co-ordinator for VBP+. “They’re saying it because they need to satisfy their customers’ request.” Downing believes this awareness has contributed to the number of producers now involved with VBP+ and the CBSA pilot. “We’re kind of at a tipping point where we realize that the failure to respond to that request means we lose market share.”

Early positive response from producers

The CBSA pilot was launched in October 2017, with partners VBP+, Beef InfoXchange System (BIXS) and Cargill working to create the first supply chain of verified sustainable beef in Canada. The pilot is open to all cow-calf producers, backgrounders and feedlots in Canada.

To become involved, producers first need to become registered with VBP+ or Where Food Comes From, the other auditing body involved with the pilot. Second, they need to become a member of BIXS. The third step is to upload their cattle through either BIXS or the Canadian Cattle Inspection Agency to the Canadian Livestock Tracking System, which requires a move-in report or age verification.

The goal is to establish a supply chain that provides enough beef to the partnering retailers, who plan to market a certified sustainable Canadian beef product. Quarterly credits are paid to participating producers, made possible by the companies funding the pilot — McDonald’s Canada, Loblaws and Cara Foods.

For many producers, VBP+ is an access point to the pilot. VBP+, which originated in 2003 as the Quality Starts Here initiative, allows cow-calf and feedlot producers to showcase their sustainable production practices by meeting certain criteria. Currently, about 800 operations across Canada meet the annual requirements to be registered with VBP+.

“It was originally designed to build consumer confidence and trust in our beef production system,” said Downing. Many producers are on the right track prior to being audited, and this is an extra step to gain market access. “It’s a way for producers to get verified, validate their production practices and demonstrate to consumers and to the rest of the industry that they’re doing a great job.”

Downing says VBP+ received an overwhelmingly positive response. “We have had a lot of people wanting to get signed up, people who maybe have known about Verified Beef for some time and have been following the principles but have never gone to the extra step of being audited, so we have quite a few producers who are now making that commitment,” she said.

BIXS has also received positive feedback during the pilot’s first months. “We’re getting tremendous uptake,” said Deborah Wilson, senior vice-president of BIXS. “Producers are signing on. They’re making more use of BIXS than we’ve ever seen before.”

While Wilson has found that communication and getting producers on board are the biggest challenges so far, she believes that the support of the retailers involved speaks volumes. “By just contributing back into the project to fund it and to send that financial credit out to producers has really spoken to the cattle industry. It has said that the retailers see value in doing this type of thing.”

Participating producers received $10 per head per owner in the first quarter of the pilot, and $20.11 in the second, with the third quarter ending in June. “We’ve successfully tracked quite a large (amount) of beef through both quarters,” said Virgil Lowe, business manager of VBP+.

“Everybody knows that trying to track something in the beef supply chain from birth to burger, as it were, is a complex job, no matter which way you slice it, and we’re learning a lot of interesting things about how to do that.”

This opportunity gives the industry a chance to share its message through the retailers. “The people who are selling beef…are coming to us and saying, ‘we need you to supply this,’” said Lowe. “I think if we can supply it, then we can help provide those people that talk to consumers with accurate information about beef production, and then they can take accurate information about beef production forward, which is a huge benefit for the beef industry.”

Like cow-calf producers, Canadian feeders are showing significant interest in the CBSA pilot. Downing said that she frequently hears producers say that they don’t believe feedlots would become involved in VBP+ or the pilot, but this isn’t the case. “We have quite a few feedlots that have been on the program for a number of years already, and we have had more join just in the last six months,” she said.

“We would need a lot more cow-calf operations registered with the Verified Beef program in order to fill the amount of pen capacity that we have at the feedlot level.”

Kasko Cattle of Coaldale, Alta., was one of the first feedlots in Alberta to become involved with the precursors to VBP+ in the early 2000s. “When VBP+ became available, we decided it was just kind of a natural thing to take us to the next level,” said Ryan Kasko, whose family-run custom feeding operation has four locations.

Food safety was one of his main motivations for becoming registered with VBP+. “It’s doing the right thing in your operation,” said Kasko. “We want to show our customers, the packing plants, that we care about food safety, and now with the VBP+ system, also care about animal welfare and our employees and kind of the whole gambit of our operation.”

Missed connections

As the pilot progresses, the organizations involved have heard from producers like McGladrie who find it difficult to keep their cattle in the program’s supply chain beyond the cow-calf operation. “That’s definitely our biggest challenge,” said Downing.

Lack of awareness may be part of the issue, as feedlots may not have had all the information when sourcing calves last fall. Also, the financial incentives weren’t announced until earlier this year and are being adjusted quarterly.

“An extra $20 per head for a feedlot is significant,” said Downing. “And every owner or feeder of that animal receives the same amount — cow-calf, backgrounder, finisher. They each received $20.11 per head for eligible cattle in the second quarter in the form of a cheque mailed directly back to them.”

McGladrie believes that marketing is key to meeting this challenge. While his yearlings were advertised through the Alberta VBP+ social media account prior to the sale, he would like to see more advertising from auction markets.

For example, McGladrie views being a part of a program such as VBP+ as a way to demonstrate his production practices and standards to potential buyers. He would like auction markets to promote this information. “I believe those of us as producers should want our animals represented more completely, and I believe the seller should represent them better, and then the buyers have a better choice.”

This gap is also experienced by the feeders in the program. Kasko noted that while they want to source calves from VBP+ registered operations, this has been difficult to achieve “We don’t get offered cattle that have gone through the program very often,” he said.

While Kasko said that feedlots need to let their buyers know that they want cattle raised with these standards, they don’t always know all the details on purchased calves. He’d like to see producers promote this information more actively. “Otherwise we just don’t know, and everyone wants to get paid a premium but we can’t do that if we don’t know what’s happened to the cattle.”

On the other hand, Wilson has heard from order buyers and auction markets that are actively sourcing cattle from registered operations. “The feedlots understand that if these cattle come out of a VBP+ operation, it’s an assurance for them that the cattle have received the appropriate vaccinations, that that operation is tracking its antibiotic usage and that the herd health aspect is right at the front of the minds of the feedlot owners and people purchasing cattle,” she said.

Getting more producers involved will also help to meet this challenge. “The more numbers we have, the greater chance we have of that connection happening,” said Wilson. She advised producers to work with auction markets to ensure they are aware of the pilot and that their cattle are being accurately represented. “Go into your auction market and have a discussion with them,” she said. “They’re an integral part of the industry and we need to utilize them.”

Wilson is currently looking into a system for creating a report on VBP+ calves that could be taken to an auction market, as well as a system for identifying these calves once they arrive at a feedlot. For the time being, she suggests making a screenshot of the My Account page on the BIXS website to share with the auction market and buyers.

To assist in increasing awareness, the VBP+ website features a list of Verified Beef operations, including those willing to share their information online, as well as a regional map. The provincial co-ordinators also promote the sale of eligible calves through social media and the VBP+ website. “We have a page on our website that has a listing spot where you can list cattle that are coming available, but it means that people need to actually be actively checking that page,” said Downing.

VBP+ plans to explore other methods to help connect cow-calf producers with feedlot operators. “The most effective thing, I think, is for more of the feedlots to be aware of the premium that’s being paid for these calves,” said Downing. “If we can start getting the demand more than pushing the supply, I think that’s more effective than trying to get the cow-calf guys to push to the feedlots.”

Naturally, there are aspects that can’t be controlled. “The program will be driven by market demand, so we can’t control and will never be able to control where calves are sold,” said Lowe. “What we can do is work to create a system that makes it as easy as possible for those buyers who are looking for calves with specific attributes, such as VBP+, to find them. We know that that’s an area of work that we’ve got to improve on.”

A promising beginning

What is unprecedented about this program, Downing explained, is the fact that the retailers are investing in a product that, up until July, was technically not yet available. “There’s no label that they can put on this yet,” she said. “They’re investing in the industry and trusting us to be able to come up with the volume that they’re going to need.”

For example, a retailer needs to have a certain amount of its beef raised sustainably before it can make a public claim about the product. “They don’t necessarily need 100 per cent, but they do need a certain per cent to make those claims,” said Downing. “Until we get to that level, they’re doing this just to help the industry build the supply. So it’s a win-win for everybody if we can do it, but we need to get as many people as possible on board.”

On July 11, McDonald’s Canada announced that due to the volume of beef going through the pilot and the partnership of the members of the Canadian Roundtable for Sustainable Beef, it will become the first Canadian company to source beef raised on verified sustainable ranches and farms. This will begin later this summer, beginning with its Angus line of products. John Betts, president and CEO of McDonald’s Canada, made the announcement at the Calgary Stampede’s International Agriculture Committee Reception, and explained that the company plans to source more than 20 million burgers from sustainable operations in the next 12 months.

To be at this stage is noteworthy in itself. Due to programs such as this, Wilson said, the Canadian beef industry is making great strides in areas that many see as challenging or simply not feasible. In her travels to the United States, Wilson has found that overall, the American beef industry would “give their eye teeth to have this program.” She added that she’s able to contradict arguments against traceability and sustainability based on the early success of the pilot.

For McGladrie, being part of this pilot is promising. “It’s got so much more opportunity to grow,” he said. He appreciates the education and guidance provided to him by VBP+ and BIXS, and is looking forward to further benefits. “It gives me faith that the system is functioning, but I would appreciate that it even has more to add to my operation.”

The post Smoothing the kinks in the sustainable beef supply chain appeared first on Canadian Cattlemen.