Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-sxzjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T22:16:14.446Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Cattle systems in the hills and uplands

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2018

B. G. Lowman
Affiliation:
Edinburgh School of Agriculture, APAD, Bush Estate, Penicuik, Midlothian
A. J. Chalmers
Affiliation:
ADAS, Government Buildings, Kenton Bar, Newcastle-upon-Tyne
Get access

Abstract

The vital criterion in selecting a beef system is to ensure that feed requirements match supplies produced on the farm, with a minimum of conflict with other enterprises. Grass must form the basis of any system with emphasis given to grazing. In quantifying feed supplies, the ability of the suckler cow to store summer grazing, as body fat, must also be included.

Traditionally, enterprises have been evaluated on a Gross Margin basis. On combined beef/sheep units, such comparison must be carefully interpreted if misleading conclusions are to be avoided. Adequate supplies of autumn grazing arc key components for both enterprises. Failure to meet these, results in reduced individual performance or increased winter feed requirements. The grassland requirements of both enterprises must therefore be complementary.

May calving and selling calves store in the spring, prior to lambing, achieves these objectives. An important component of such a breeding enterprise is the tax-free, capital accumulation via the herd basis and beneficial effects on the cash flow. Where capital for investing into breeding stock is unavailable, the purchase of week-old calves in January, for sale at 330 kg the following spring or retained for grass finishing, can also integrate successfully with the ewe flock, minimizing dependence on conserved winter feed and accommodation.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © British Society of Animal Production 1985

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alien, D. M. and Kilkenny, J. B. 1984. Planned Beef Production, Granada, London.Google Scholar
Broadbent, P. J., Robinson, T. W. and Dolman, D. F. 1983. Developments in confinement systems for suckler cows. Proceedings of Suckler Cow Workers' Meeting, High Mowthorpe.Google Scholar
DHSS. 1984. Committee on Medical Aspects of Food Policy. “Diet and Cardiovascular disease.” H.M.S.O., London.Google Scholar
Eadie, J. 1967. The nutrition of grazing hill sheep; utilisation of hill pastures. H.F.R.O. 4th Report, pp. 3845.Google Scholar
Eadie, J. 1971. Hill pastoral resources for sheep production. Proc. Nuir. Soc. 30: 204210.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leaviir, D. 1985. Go for tight spring stocking. Livestock Farming. March, 39.Google Scholar
Lowman, B. G. and Prescott, J. H. D. 1981. Feeding strategy und grassland utilisation for the beef cow herd. Proc. of the 32nd Annual Meeting of E.A.A.P., Zagreb, Yugoslavia.Google Scholar
Lowman, B. G. 1985. Replacing hay or silage in winter rations for beef cattle. East of Scot. Coll. of Agric., Tech. Note. No. 377A.Google Scholar
Lowman, B. G. and Fisken, J. 1985. East of Scot. Coll. of Agric., Tech. Note. 368A/EM.Google Scholar
MAFF. 1979. Liscombe EHF Ann. Rep.Google Scholar
O'Neill, D. G. 1982. Profitable suckler cows. East of Scot. Coll. of Agric. Conf. Rep. 8-19.Google Scholar
Rutter, W., Black, W. J. M., Fitsimons, J. and Swift, G. 1984. A clean grazing system for sheep — its development and extension. Res. & Dev. in Agric. 1: 4147.Google Scholar
SAC. 1984. Suckler cows — management strategies. Scottish Agric. Coll. Leaflet.Google Scholar
Wright, I. A. and Russel, A. J. F. 1984. Partition of fat, composition and body condition score in mature cows. Anim. Prod. 38: 2333.Google Scholar